The Project Gutenberg Etext of Volume 1:
The History of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
by Edward Gibbon
Copyright laws are changing all over the world, be sure to check
the copyright laws for your country before posting these files!!
Please take a look at the important information in this header.
We encourage you to keep this file on your own disk, keeping an
electronic path open for the next readers. Do not remove this.
**Welcome To The World of Free Plain Vanilla Electronic Texts**
**Etexts Readable By Both Humans and By Computers, Since 1971**
*These Etexts Prepared By Hundreds of Volunteers and Donations*
Information on contacting Project Gutenberg to get Etexts, and
further information is included below. We need your donations.
The History of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
by Edward Gibbon
November, 1996 [Etext #731]
The History of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire: Vol 1
*****This file should be named 1dfre10.txt or 1dfre10.zip******
Corrected EDITIONS of our etexts get a new NUMBER, 1dfre11.txt.
VERSIONS based on separate sources get new LETTER, 1dfre10a.txt.
Etext by David Reed: Haradda@aol.com and davidr@inconnect.com.
We are now trying to release all our books one month in advance
of the official release dates, for time for better editing.
Please note: neither this list nor its contents are final till
midnight of the last day of the month of any such announcement.
The official release date of all Project Gutenberg Etexts is at
Midnight, Central Time, of the last day of the stated month. A
preliminary version may often be posted for suggestion, comment
and editing by those who wish to do so. To be sure you have an
up to date first edition [xxxxx10x.xxx] please check file sizes
in the first week of the next month. Since our ftp program has
a bug in it that scrambles the date [tried to fix and failed] a
look at the file size will have to do, but we will try to see a
new copy has at least one byte more or less.
Information about Project Gutenberg (one page)
We produce about two million dollars for each hour we work. The
fifty hours is one conservative estimate for how long it we take
to get any etext selected, entered, proofread, edited, copyright
searched and analyzed, the copyright letters written, etc. This
projected audience is one hundred million readers. If our value
per text is nominally estimated at one dollar then we produce $2
million dollars per hour this year as we release thirty-two text
files per month: or 400 more Etexts in 1996 for a total of 800.
If these reach just 10% of the computerized population, then the
total should reach 80 billion Etexts.
The Goal of Project Gutenberg is to Give Away One Trillion Etext
Files by the December 31, 2001. [10,000 x 100,000,000=Trillion]
This is ten thousand titles each to one hundred million readers,
which is only 10% of the present number of computer users. 2001
should have at least twice as many computer users as that, so it
will require us reaching less than 5% of the users in 2001.
We need your donations more than ever!
All donations should be made to "Project Gutenberg/BU": and are
tax deductible to the extent allowable by law. (BU = Benedictine
University). (Subscriptions to our paper newsletter go to BU.)
For these and other matters, please mail to:
Project Gutenberg
P. O. Box 2782
Champaign, IL 61825
When all other email fails try our Executive Director:
Michael S. Hart <hart@pobox.com>
We would prefer to send you this information by email
(Internet, Bitnet, Compuserve, ATTMAIL or MCImail).
******
If you have an FTP program (or emulator), please
FTP directly to the Project Gutenberg archives:
[Mac users, do NOT point and click. . .type]
ftp uiarchive.cso.uiuc.edu
login: anonymous
password: your@login
cd etext/etext90 through /etext96
or cd etext/articles [get suggest gut for more information]
dir [to see files]
get or mget [to get files. . .set bin for zip files]
GET INDEX?00.GUT
for a list of books
and
GET NEW GUT for general information
and
MGET GUT* for newsletters.
**Information prepared by the Project Gutenberg legal advisor**
(Three Pages)
***START**THE SMALL PRINT!**FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN ETEXTS**START***
Why is this "Small Print!" statement here? You know: lawyers.
They tell us you might sue us if there is something wrong with
your copy of this etext, even if you got it for free from
someone other than us, and even if what's wrong is not our
fault. So, among other things, this "Small Print!" statement
disclaims most of our liability to you. It also tells you how
you can distribute copies of this etext if you want to.
*BEFORE!* YOU USE OR READ THIS ETEXT
By using or reading any part of this PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
etext, you indicate that you understand, agree to and accept
this "Small Print!" statement. If you do not, you can receive
a refund of the money (if any) you paid for this etext by
sending a request within 30 days of receiving it to the person
you got it from. If you received this etext on a physical
medium (such as a disk), you must return it with your request.
ABOUT PROJECT GUTENBERG-TM ETEXTS
This PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etext, like most PROJECT GUTENBERG-
tm etexts, is a "public domain" work distributed by Professor
Michael S. Hart through the Project Gutenberg Association at
Benedictine University (the "Project"). Among other
things, this means that no one owns a United States copyright
on or for this work, so the Project (and you!) can copy and
distribute it in the United States without permission and
without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth
below, apply if you wish to copy and distribute this etext
under the Project's "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark.
To create these etexts, the Project expends considerable
efforts to identify, transcribe and proofread public domain
works. Despite these efforts, the Project's etexts and any
medium they may be on may contain "Defects". Among other
things, Defects may take the form of incomplete, inaccurate or
corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged
disk or other etext medium, a computer virus, or computer
codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.
LIMITED WARRANTY; DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES
But for the "Right of Replacement or Refund" described below,
[1] the Project (and any other party you may receive this
etext from as a PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etext) disclaims all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including
legal fees, and [2] YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE OR
UNDER STRICT LIABILITY, OR FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY OR CONTRACT,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE
OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
If you discover a Defect in this etext within 90 days of
receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any)
you paid for it by sending an explanatory note within that
time to the person you received it from. If you received it
on a physical medium, you must return it with your note, and
such person may choose to alternatively give you a replacement
copy. If you received it electronically, such person may
choose to alternatively give you a second opportunity to
receive it electronically.
THIS ETEXT IS OTHERWISE PROVIDED TO YOU "AS-IS". NO OTHER
WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARE MADE TO YOU AS
TO THE ETEXT OR ANY MEDIUM IT MAY BE ON, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A
PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Some states do not allow disclaimers of implied warranties or
the exclusion or limitation of consequential damages, so the
above disclaimers and exclusions may not apply to you, and you
may have other legal rights.
INDEMNITY
You will indemnify and hold the Project, its directors,
officers, members and agents harmless from all liability, cost
and expense, including legal fees, that arise directly or
indirectly from any of the following that you do or cause:
[1] distribution of this etext, [2] alteration, modification,
or addition to the etext, or [3] any Defect.
DISTRIBUTION UNDER "PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm"
You may distribute copies of this etext electronically, or by
disk, book or any other medium if you either delete this
"Small Print!" and all other references to Project Gutenberg,
or:
[1] Only give exact copies of it. Among other things, this
requires that you do not remove, alter or modify the
etext or this "small print!" statement. You may however,
if you wish, distribute this etext in machine readable
binary, compressed, mark-up, or proprietary form,
including any form resulting from conversion by word pro-
cessing or hypertext software, but only so long as
*EITHER*:
[*] The etext, when displayed, is clearly readable, and
does *not* contain characters other than those
intended by the author of the work, although tilde
(~), asterisk (*) and underline (_) characters may
be used to convey punctuation intended by the
author, and additional characters may be used to
indicate hypertext links; OR
[*] The etext may be readily converted by the reader at
no expense into plain ASCII, EBCDIC or equivalent
form by the program that displays the etext (as is
the case, for instance, with most word processors);
OR
[*] You provide, or agree to also provide on request at
no additional cost, fee or expense, a copy of the
etext in its original plain ASCII form (or in EBCDIC
or other equivalent proprietary form).
[2] Honor the etext refund and replacement provisions of this
"Small Print!" statement.
[3] Pay a trademark license fee to the Project of 20% of the
net profits you derive calculated using the method you
already use to calculate your applicable taxes. If you
don't derive profits, no royalty is due. Royalties are
payable to "Project Gutenberg Association / Benedictine
University" within the 60 days following each
date you prepare (or were legally required to prepare)
your annual (or equivalent periodic) tax return.
WHAT IF YOU *WANT* TO SEND MONEY EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO?
The Project gratefully accepts contributions in money, time,
scanning machines, OCR software, public domain etexts, royalty
free copyright licenses, and every other sort of contribution
you can think of. Money should be paid to "Project Gutenberg
Association / Benedictine University".
*END*THE SMALL PRINT! FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN ETEXTS*Ver.04.29.93*END*
The History of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
If you find any errors please feel free to notify me of them.
I want to make this the best etext edition possible for both
scholars and the general public. Haradda@aol.com and
davidr@inconnect.com are my email addresses for now. Please feel
free to send me your comments and I hope you enjoy this.
David Reed
History Of The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire
Edward Gibbon, Esq.
With notes by the Rev. H. H. Milman
Vol. 1
Introduction
Preface By The Editor.
The great work of Gibbon is indispensable to the student of
history. The literature of Europe offers no substitute for "The
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire." It has obtained undisputed
possession, as rightful occupant, of the vast period which it
comprehends. However some subjects, which it embraces, may have
undergone more complete investigation, on the general view of the
whole period, this history is the sole undisputed authority to
which all defer, and from which few appeal to the original
writers, or to more modern compilers. The inherent interest of
the subject, the inexhaustible labor employed upon it; the
immense condensation of matter; the luminous arrangement; the
general accuracy; the style, which, however monotonous from its
uniform stateliness, and sometimes wearisome from its elaborate
ar., is throughout vigorous, animated, often picturesque always
commands attention, always conveys its meaning with emphatic
energy, describes with singular breadth and fidelity, and
generalizes with unrivalled felicity of expression; all these
high qualifications have secured, and seem likely to secure, its
permanent place in historic literature.
This vast design of Gibbon, the magnificent whole into which
he has cast the decay and ruin of the ancient civilization, the
formation and birth of the new order of things, will of itself,
independent of the laborious execution of his immense plan,
render "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" an
unapproachable subject to the future historian: ^* in the
eloquent language of his recent French editor, M. Guizot: -
[Footnote * A considerable portion of this preface has already
appeared before us public in the Quarterly Review.]
"The gradual decline of the most extraordinary dominion
which has ever invaded and oppressed the world; the fall of that
immense empire, erected on the ruins of so many kingdoms,
republics, and states both barbarous and civilized; and forming
in its turn, by its dismemberment, a multitude of states,
republics, and kingdoms; the annihilation of the religion of
Greece and Rome; the birth and the progress of the two new
religions which have shared the most beautiful regions of the
earth; the decrepitude of the ancient world, the spectacle of its
expiring glory and degenerate manners; the infancy of the modern
world, the picture of its first progress, of the new direction
given to the mind and character of man - such a subject must
necessarily fix the attention and excite the interest of men, who
cannot behold with indifference those memorable epochs, during
which, in the fine language of Corneille -
'Un grand destin commence, un grand destin s'acheve.'"
This extent and harmony of design is unquestionably that which
distinguishes the work of Gibbon from all other great historical
compositions. He has first bridged the abyss between ancient and
modern times, and connected together the two great worlds of
history. The great advantage which the classical historians
possess over those of modern times is in unity of plan, of course
greatly facilitated by the narrower sphere to which their
researches were confined. Except Herodotus, the great historians
of Greece - we exclude the more modern compilers, like Diodorus
Siculus - limited themselves to a single period, or at 'east to
the contracted sphere of Grecian affairs. As far as the
Barbarians trespassed within the Grecian boundary, or were
necessarily mingled up with Grecian politics, they were admitted
into the pale of Grecian history; but to Thucydides and to
Xenophon, excepting in the Persian inroad of the latter, Greece
was the world. Natural unity confined their narrative almost to
chronological order, the episodes were of rare occurrence and
extremely brief. To the Roman historians the course was equally
clear and defined. Rome was their centre of unity; and the
uniformity with which the circle of the Roman dominion spread
around, the regularity with which their civil polity expanded,
forced, as it were, upon the Roman historian that plan which
Polybius announces as the subject of his history, the means and
the manner by which the whole world became subject to the Roman
sway. How different the complicated politics of the European
kingdoms! Every national history, to be complete, must, in a
certain sense, be the history of Europe; there is no knowing to
how remote a quarter it may be necessary to trace our most
domestic events; from a country, how apparently disconnected, may
originate the impulse which gives its direction to the whole
course of affairs.
In imitation of his classical models, Gibbon places Rome as
the cardinal point from which his inquiries diverge, and to which
they bear constant reference; yet how immeasurable the space over
which those inquiries range; how complicated, how confused, how
apparently inextricable the causes which tend to the decline of
the Roman empire! how countless the nations which swarm forth,
in mingling and indistinct hordes, constantly changing the
geographical limits - incessantly confounding the natural
boundaries! At first sight, the whole period, the whole state of
the world, seems to offer no more secure footing to an historical
adventurer than the chaos of Milton - to be in a state of
irreclaimable disorder, best described in the language of the
poet: -
- "A dark
Illimitable ocean, without bound,
Without dimension, where length, breadth, and height,
And time, and place, are lost: where eldest Night
And Chaos, ancestors of Nature, hold
Eternal anarchy, amidst the noise
Of endless wars, and by confusion stand."
We feel that the unity and harmony of narrative, which shall
comprehend this period of social disorganization, must be
ascribed entirely to the skill and luminous disposition of the
historian. It is in this sublime Gothic architecture of his
work, in which the boundless range, the infinite variety, the, at
first sight, incongruous gorgeousness of the separate parts,
nevertheless are all subordinate to one main and predominant
idea, that Gibbon is unrivalled. We cannot but admire the manner
in which he masses his materials, and arranges his facts in
successive groups, not according to chronological order, but to
their moral or political connection; the distinctness with which
he marks his periods of gradually increasing decay; and the skill
with which, though advancing on separate parallels of history, he
shows the common tendency of the slower or more rapid religious
or civil innovations. However these principles of composition
may demand more than ordinary attention on the part of the
reader, they can alone impress upon the memory the real course,
and the relative importance of the events. Whoever would justly
appreciate the superiority of Gibbon's lucid arrangement, should
attempt to make his way through the regular but wearisome annals
of Tillemont, or even the less ponderous volumes of Le Beau.
Both these writers adhere, almost entirely, to chronological
order; the consequence is, that we are twenty times called upon
to break off, and resume the thread of six or eight wars in
different parts of the empire; to suspend the operations of a
military expedition for a court intrigue; to hurry away from a
siege to a council; and the same page places us in the middle of
a campaign against the barbarians, and in the depths of the
Monophysite controversy. In Gibbon it is not always easy to bear
in mind the exact dates but the course of events is ever clear
and distinct; like a skilful general, though his troops advance
from the most remote and opposite quarters, they are constantly
bearing down and concentrating themselves on one point - that
which is still occupied by the name, and by the waning power of
Rome. Whether he traces the progress of hostile religions, or
leads from the shores of the Baltic, or the verge of the Chinese
empire, the successive hosts of barbarians - though one wave has
hardly burst and discharged itself, before another swells up and
approaches - all is made to flow in the same direction, and the
impression which each makes upon the tottering fabric of the
Roman greatness, connects their distant movements, and measures
the relative importance assigned to them in the panoramic
history. The more peaceful and didactic episodes on the
development of the Roman law, or even on the details of
ecclesiastical history, interpose themselves as resting-places or
divisions between the periods of barbaric invasion. In short,
though distracted first by the two capitals, and afterwards by
the formal partition of the empire, the extraordinary felicity of
arrangement maintains an order and a regular progression. As our
horizon expands to reveal to us the gathering tempests which are
forming far beyond the boundaries of the civilized world - as we
follow their successive approach to the trembling frontier - the
compressed and receding line is still distinctly visible; though
gradually dismembered and the broken fragments assuming the form
of regular states and kingdoms, the real relation of those
kingdoms to the empire is maintained and defined; and even when
the Roman dominion has shrunk into little more than the province
of Thrace - when the name of Rome, confined, in Italy, to the
walls of the city - yet it is still the memory, the shade of the
Roman greatness, which extends over the wide sphere into which
the historian expands his later narrative; the whole blends into
the unity, and is manifestly essential to the double catastrophe
of his tragic drama.
But the amplitude, the magnificence, or the harmony of
design, are, though imposing, yet unworthy claims on our
admiration, unless the details are filled up with correctness and
accuracy. No writer has been more severely tried on this point
than Gibbon. He has undergone the triple scrutiny of theological
zeal quickened by just resentment, of literary emulation, and of
that mean and invidious vanity which delights in detecting errors
in writers of established fame. On the result of the trial, we
may be permitted to summon competent witnesses before we deliver
our own judgment.
M. Guizot, in his preface, after stating that in France and
Germany, as well as in England, in the most enlightened countries
of Europe, Gibbon is constantly cited as an authority, thus
proceeds: -
"I have had occasion, during my labors, to consult the
writings of philosophers, who have treated on the finances of the
Roman empire; of scholars, who have investigated the chronology;
of theologians, who have searched the depths of ecclesiastical
history; of writers on law, who have studied with care the Roman
jurisprudence; of Orientalists, who have occupied themselves with
the Arabians and the Koran; of modern historians, who have
entered upon extensive researches touching the crusades and their
influence; each of these writers has remarked and pointed out, in
the 'History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,' some
negligences, some false or imperfect views some omissions, which
it is impossible not to suppose voluntary; they have rectified
some facts combated with advantage some assertions; but in
general they have taken the researches and the ideas of Gibbon,
as points of departure, or as proofs of the researches or of the
new opinions which they have advanced."
M. Guizot goes on to state his own impressions on reading
Gibbon's history, and no authority will have greater weight with
those to whom the extent and accuracy of his historical
researches are known: -
"After a first rapid perusal, which allowed me to feel
nothing but the interest of a narrative, always animated, and,
notwithstanding its extent and the variety of objects which it
makes to pass before the view, always perspicuous, I entered upon
a minute examination of the details of which it was composed; and
the opinion which I then formed was, I confess, singularly
severe. I discovered, in certain chapters, errors which appeared
to me sufficiently important and numerous to make me believe that
they had been written with extreme negligence; in others, I was
struck with a certain tinge of partiality and prejudice, which
imparted to the exposition of the facts that want of truth and
justice, which the English express by their happy term
misrepresentation. Some imperfect (tronquees) quotations; some
passages, omitted unintentionally or designedly cast a suspicion
on the honesty (bonne foi) of the author; and his violation of
the first law of history - increased to my eye by the prolonged
attention with which I occupied myself with every phrase, every
note, every reflection - caused me to form upon the whole work, a
judgment far too rigorous. After having finished my labors, I
allowed some time to elapse before I reviewed the whole. A
second attentive and regular perusal of the entire work, of the
notes of the author, and of those which I had thought it right to
subjoin, showed me how much I had exaggerated the importance of
the reproaches which Gibbon really deserved; I was struck with
the same errors, the same partiality on certain subjects; but I
had been far from doing adequate justice to the immensity of his
researches, the variety of his knowledge, and above all, to that
truly philosophical discrimination (justesse d'esprit) which
judges the past as it would judge the present; which does not
permit itself to be blinded by the clouds which time gathers
around the dead, and which prevent us from seeing that, under the
toga, as under the modern dress, in the senate as in our
councils, men were what they still are, and that events took
place eighteen centuries ago, as they take place in our days. I
then felt that his book, in spite of its faults, will always be a
noble work - and that we may correct his errors and combat his
prejudices, without ceasing to admit that few men have combined,
if we are not to say in so high a degree, at least in a manner so
complete, and so well regulated, the necessary qualifications for
a writer of history."
The present editor has followed the track of Gibbon through
many parts of his work; he has read his authorities with constant
reference to his pages, and must pronounce his deliberate
judgment, in terms of the highest admiration as to his general
accuracy. Many of his seeming errors are almost inevitable from
the close condensation of his matter. From the immense range of
his history, it was sometimes necessary to compress into a single
sentence, a whole vague and diffuse page of a Byzantine
chronicler. Perhaps something of importance may have thus
escaped, and his expressions may not quite contain the whole
substance of the passage from which they are taken. His limits,
at times, compel him to sketch; where that is the case, it is not
fair to expect the full details of the finished picture. At
times he can only deal with important results; and in his account
of a war, it sometimes requires great attention to discover that
the events which seem to be comprehended in a single campaign,
occupy several years. But this admirable skill in selecting and
giving prominence to the points which are of real weight and
importance - this distribution of light and shade - though
perhaps it may occasionally betray him into vague and imperfect
statements, is one of the highest excellencies of Gibbon's
historic manner. It is the more striking, when we pass from the
works of his chief authorities, where, after laboring through
long, minute, and wearisome descriptions of the accessary and
subordinate circumstances, a single unmarked and undistinguished
sentence, which we may overlook from the inattention of fatigue,
contains the great moral and political result.
Gibbon's method of arrangement, though on the whole most
favorable to the clear comprehension of the events, leads
likewise to apparent inaccuracy. That which we expect to find in
one part is reserved for another. The estimate which we are to
form, depends on the accurate balance of statements in remote
parts of the work; and we have sometimes to correct and modify
opinions, formed from one chapter by those of another. Yet, on
the other hand, it is astonishing how rarely we detect
contradiction; the mind of the author has already harmonized the
whole result to truth and probability; the general impression is
almost invariably the same. The quotations of Gibbon have
likewise been called in question; - I have, in general, been more
inclined to admire their exactitude, than to complain of their
indistinctness, or incompleteness. Where they are imperfect, it
is commonly from the study of brevity, and rather from the desire
of compressing the substance of his notes into pointed and
emphatic sentences, than from dishonesty, or uncandid suppression
of truth.
These observations apply more particularly to the accuracy
and fidelity of the historian as to his facts; his inferences, of
course, are more liable to exception. It is almost impossible to
trace the line between unfairness and unfaithfulness; between
intentional misrepresentation and undesigned false coloring. The
relative magnitude and importance of events must, in some
respect, depend upon the mind before which they are presented;
the estimate of character, on the habits and feelings of the
reader. Christians, like M. Guizot and ourselves, will see some
things, and some persons, in a different light from the historian
of the Decline and Fall. We may deplore the bias of his mind; we
may ourselves be on our guard against the danger of being misled,
and be anxious to warn less wary readers against the same perils;
but we must not confound this secret and unconscious departure
from truth, with the deliberate violation of that veracity which
is the only title of an historian to our confidence. Gibbon, it
may be fearlessly asserted, is rarely chargeable even with the
suppression of any material fact, which bears upon individual
character; he may, with apparently invidious hostility, enhance
the errors and crimes, and disparage the virtues of certain
persons; yet, in general, he leaves us the materials for forming
a fairer judgment; and if he is not exempt from his own
prejudices, perhaps we might write passions, yet it must be
candidly acknowledged, that his philosophical bigotry is not more
unjust than the theological partialities of those ecclesiastical
writers who were before in undisputed possession of this province
of history.
We are thus naturally led to that great misrepresentation
which pervades his history - his false estimate of the nature and
influence of Christianity.
But on this subject some preliminary caution is necessary,
lest that should be expected from a new edition, which it is
impossible that it should completely accomplish. We must first
be prepared with the only sound preservative against the false
impression likely to be produced by the perusal of Gibbon; and we
must see clearly the real cause of that false impression. The
former of these cautions will be briefly suggested in its proper
place, but it may be as well to state it, here, somewhat more at
length. The art of Gibbon, or at least the unfair impression
produced by his two memorable chapters, consists in his
confounding together, in one indistinguishable mass, the origin
and apostolic propagation of the new religion, with its later
progress. No argument for the divine authority of Christianity
has been urged with greater force, or traced with higher
eloquence, than that deduced from its primary development,
explicable on no other hypothesis than a heavenly origin, and
from its rapid extension through great part of the Roman empire.
But this argument - one, when confined within reasonable limits,
of unanswerable force - becomes more feeble and disputable in
proportion as it recedes from the birthplace, as it were, of the
religion. The further Christianity advanced, the more causes
purely human were enlisted in its favor; nor can it be doubted
that those developed with such artful exclusiveness by Gibbon did
concur most essentially to its establishment. It is in the
Christian dispensation, as in the material world. In both it is
as the great First Cause, that the Deity is most undeniably
manifest. When once launched in regular motion upon the bosom of
space, and endowed with all their properties and relations of
weight and mutual attraction, the heavenly bodies appear to
pursue their courses according to secondary laws, which account
for all their sublime regularity. So Christianity proclaims its
Divine Author chiefly in its first origin and development. When
it had once received its impulse from above - when it had once
been infused into the minds of its first teachers - when it had
gained full possession of the reason and affections of the
favored few - it might be - and to the Protestant, the rationa
Christian, it is impossible to define when it really was - left
to make its way by its native force, under the ordinary secret
agencies of all-ruling Providence. The main question, the divine
origin of the religion, was dexterously eluded, or speciously
conceded by Gibbon; his plan enabled him to commence his account,
in most parts, below the apostolic times; and it was only by the
strength of the dark coloring with which he brought out the
failings and the follies of the succeeding ages, that a shadow of
doubt and suspicion was thrown back upon the primitive period of
Christianity.
"The theologian," says Gibbon, "may indulge the pleasing
task of describing religion as she descended from heaven, arrayed
in her native purity; a more melancholy duty is imposed upon the
historian: - he must discover the inevitable mixture of error and
corruption which she contracted in a long residence upon earth
among a weak and degenerate race of beings." Divest this passage
of the latent sarcasm betrayed by the subsequent tone of the
whole disquisition, and it might commence a Christian history
written in the most Christian spirit of candor. But as the
historian, by seeming to respect, yet by dexterously confounding
the limits of the sacred land, contrived to insinuate that it was
an Utopia which had no existence but in the imagination of the
theologian - as he suggested rather than affirmed that the days
of Christian purity were a kind of poetic golden age; - so the
theologian, by venturing too far into the domain of the
historian, has been perpetually obliged to contest points on
which he had little chance of victory - to deny facts established
on unshaken evidence - and thence, to retire, if not with the
shame of defeat, yet with but doubtful and imperfect success.
Paley, with his intuitive sagacity, saw through the
difficulty of answering Gibbon by the ordinary arts of
controversy; his emphatic sentence, "Who can refute a sneer?"
contains as much truth as point. But full and pregnant as this
phrase is, it is not quite the whole truth; it is the tone in
which the progress of Christianity is traced, in comparison with
the rest of the splendid and prodigally ornamented work, which is
the radical defect in the "Decline and Fall." Christianity alone
receives no embellishment from the magic of Gibbon's language;
his imagination is dead to its moral dignity; it is kept down by
a general zone of jealous disparagement, or neutralized by a
painfully elaborate exposition of its darker and degenerate
periods. There are occasions, indeed, when its pure and exalted
humanity, when its manifestly beneficial influence, can compel
even him, as it were, to fairness, and kindle his unguarded
eloquence to its usual fervor; but, in general, he soon relapses
into a frigid apathy; affects an ostentatiously severe
impartiality; notes all the faults of Christians in every age
with bitter and almost malignant sarcasm; reluctantly, and with
exception and reservation, admits their claim to admiration.
This inextricable bias appears even to influence his manner of
composition. While all the other assailants of the Roman empire,
whether warlike or religious, the Goth, the Hun, the Arab, the
Tartar, Alaric and Attila, Mahomet, and Zengis, and Tamerlane,
are each introduced upon the scene almost with dramatic animation
- their progress related in a full, complete, and unbroken
narrative - the triumph of Christianity alone takes the form of a
cold and critical disquisition. The successes of barbarous
energy and brute force call forth all the consummate skill of
composition; while the moral triumphs of Christian benevolence -
the tranquil heroism of endurance, the blameless purity, the
contempt of guilty fame and of honors destructive to the human
race, which, had they assumed the proud name of philosophy, would
have been blazoned in his brightest words, because they own
religion as their principle - sink into narrow asceticism. The
glories of Christianity, in short, touch on no chord in the heart
of the writer; his imagination remains unkindled; his words,
though they maintain their stately and measured march, have
become cool, argumentative, and inanimate. Who would obscure one
hue of that gorgeous coloring in which Gibbon has invested the
dying forms of Paganism, or darken one paragraph in his splendid
view of the rise and progress of Mahometanism? But who would not
have wished that the same equal justice had been done to
Christianity; that its real character and deeply penetrating
influence had been traced with the same philosophical sagacity,
and represented with more sober, as would become its quiet
course, and perhaps less picturesque, but still with lively and
attractive, descriptiveness? He might have thrown aside, with
the same scorn, the mass of ecclesiastical fiction which envelops
the early history of the church, stripped off the legendary
romance, and brought out the facts in their primitive nakedness
and simplicity - if he had but allowed those facts the benefit of
the glowing eloquence which he denied to them alone. He might
have annihilated the whole fabric of post-apostolic miracles, if
he had left uninjured by sarcastic insinuation those of the New
Testament; he might have cashiered, with Dodwell, the whole host
of martyrs, which owe their existence to the prodigal invention
of later days, had he but bestowed fair room, and dwelt with his
ordinary energy on the sufferings of the genuine witnesses to the
truth of Christianity, the Polycarps, or the martyrs of Vienne.
And indeed, if, after all, the view of the early progress of
Christianity be melancholy and humiliating we must beware lest we
charge the whole of this on the infidelity of the historian. It
is idle, it is disingenuous, to deny or to dissemble the early
depravations of Christianity, its gradual but rapid departure
from its primitive simplicity and purity, still more, from its
spirit of universal love. It may be no unsalutary lesson to the
Christian world, that this silent, this unavoidable, perhaps, yet
fatal change shall have been drawn by an impartial, or even an
hostile hand. The Christianity of every age may take warning,
lest by its own narrow views, its want of wisdom, and its want of
charity, it give the same advantage to the future unfriendly
historian, and disparage the cause of true religion.
The design of the present edition is partly corrective,
partly supplementary: corrective, by notes, which point out (it
is hoped, in a perfectly candid and dispassionate spirit with no
desire but to establish the truth) such inaccuracies or
misstatements as may have been detected, particularly with regard
to Christianity; and which thus, with the previous caution, may
counteract to a considerable extent the unfair and unfavorable
impression created against rational religion: supplementary, by
adding such additional information as the editor's reading may
have been able to furnish, from original documents or books, not
accessible at the time when Gibbon wrote.
The work originated in the editor's habit of noting on the
margin of his copy of Gibbon references to such authors as had
discovered errors, or thrown new light on the subjects treated by
Gibbon. These had grown to some extent, and seemed to him likely
to be of use to others. The annotations of M. Guizot also
appeared to him worthy of being better known to the English
public than they were likely to be, as appended to the French
translation.
The chief works from which the editor has derived his
materials are, I. The French translation, with notes by M.
Guizot; 2d edition, Paris, 1828. The editor has translated almost
all the notes of M. Guizot. Where he has not altogether agreed
with him, his respect for the learning and judgment of that
writer has, in general, induced him to retain the statement from
which he has ventured to differ, with the grounds on which he
formed his own opinion. In the notes on Christianity, he has
retained all those of M. Guizot, with his own, from the
conviction, that on such a subject, to many, the authority of a
French statesman, a Protestant, and a rational and sincere
Christian, would appear more independent and unbiassed, and
therefore be more commanding, than that of an English clergyman.
The editor has not scrupled to transfer the notes of M.
Guizot to the present work. The well-known??eal for knowledge,
displayed in all the writings of that distinguished historian,
has led to the natural inference, that he would not be displeased
at the attempt to make them of use to the English readers of
Gibbon. The notes of M. Guizot are signed with the letter G.
II. The German translation, with the notes of Wenck.
Unfortunately this learned translator died, after having
completed only the first volume; the rest of the work was
executed by a very inferior hand.
The notes of Wenck are extremely valuable; many of them have
been adopted by M. Guizot; they are distinguished by the letter
W. ^*
[Footnote *: The editor regrets that he has not been able to find
the Italian translation, mentioned by Gibbon himself with some
respect. It is not in our great libraries, the Museum or the
Bodleian; and he has never found any bookseller in London who has
seen it.]
III. The new edition of Le Beau's "Histoire du Bas Empire,
with notes by M. St. Martin, and M. Brosset." That distinguished
Armenian scholar, M. St. Martin (now, unhappily, deceased) had
added much information from Oriental writers, particularly from
those of Armenia, as well as from more general sources. Many of
his observations have been found as applicable to the work of
Gibbon as to that of Le Beau.
IV. The editor has consulted the various answers made to
Gibbon on the first appearance of his work; he must confess, with
little profit. They were, in general, hastily compiled by
inferior and now forgotten writers, with the exception of Bishop
Watson, whose able apology is rather a general argument, than an
examination of misstatements. The name of Milner stands higher
with a certain class of readers, but will not carry much weight
with the severe investigator of history.
V. Some few classical works and fragments have come to
light, since the appearance of Gibbon's History, and have been
noticed in their respective places; and much use has been made,
in the latter volumes particularly, of the increase to our stores
of Oriental literature. The editor cannot, indeed, pretend to
have followed his author, in these gleanings, over the whole vast
field of his inquiries; he may have overlooked or may not have
been able to command some works, which might have thrown still
further light on these subjects; but he trusts that what he has
adduced will be of use to the student of historic truth.
The editor would further observe, that with regard to some
other objectionable passages, which do not involve misstatement
or inaccuracy, he has intentionally abstained from directing
particular attention towards them by any special protest.
The editor's notes are marked M.
A considerable part of the quotations (some of which in the
later editions had fallen into great confusion) have been
verified, and have been corrected by the latest and best editions
of the authors.
June, 1845.
In this new edition, the text and the notes have been
carefully revised, the latter by the editor.
Some additional notes have been subjoined, distinguished by
the signature M. 1845.
Preface Of The Author.
It is not my intention to detain the reader by expa??iating
on the variety or the importance of the subject, which I have
undertaken to treat; since the merit of the choice would serve to
render the weakness of the execution still more apparent, and
still less excusable. But as I have presumed to lay before the
public a first volume only ^1 of the History of the Decline and
Fall of the Roman Empire, it will, perhaps, be expected that I
should explain, in a few words, the nature and limits of my
general plan.
[Footnote 1: The first volume of the quarto, which contained the
sixteen first chapters.]
The memorable series of revolutions, which in the course of
about thirteen centuries gradually undermined, and at length
destroyed, the solid fabric of human greatness, may, with some
propriety, be divided into the three following periods:
I. The first of these periods may be traced from the age of
Trajan and the Antonines, when the Roman monarchy, having
attained its full strength and maturity, began to verge towards
its decline; and will extend to the subversion of the Western
Empire, by the barbarians of Germany and Scythia, the rude
ancestors of the most polished nations of modern Europe. This
extraordinary revolution, which subjected Rome to the power of a
Gothic conqueror, was completed about the beginning of the sixth
century.
II. The second period of the Decline and Fall of Rome may
be supposed to commence with the reign of Justinian, who, by his
laws, as well as by his victories, restored a transient splendor
to the Eastern Empire. It will comprehend the invasion of Italy
by the Lombards; the conquest of the Asiatic and African
provinces by the Arabs, who embraced the religion of Mahomet; the
revolt of the Roman people against the feeble princes of
Constantinople; and the elevation of Charlemagne, who, in the
year eight hundred, established the second, or German Empire of
the West
III. The last and longest of these periods includes about
six centuries and a half; from the revival of the Western Empire,
till the taking of Constantinople by the Turks, and the
extinction of a degenerate race of princes, who continued to
assume the titles of Caesar and Augustus, after their dominions
were contracted to the limits of a single city; in which the
language, as well as manners, of the ancient Romans, had been
long since forgotten. The writer who should undertake to relate
the events of this period, would find himself obliged to enter
into the general history of the Crusades, as far as they
contributed to the ruin of the Greek Empire; and he would
scarcely be able to restrain his curiosity from making some
inquiry into the state of the city of Rome, during the darkness
and confusion of the middle ages.
As I have ventured, perhaps too hastily, to commit to the
press a work which in every sense of the word, deserves the
epithet of imperfect. I consider myself as contracting an
engagement to finish, most probably in a second volume, ^2 the
first of these memorable periods; and to deliver to the Public
the complete History of the Decline and Fall of Rome, from the
age of the Antonines to the subversion of the Western Empire.
With regard to the subsequent periods, though I may entertain
some hopes, I dare not presume to give any assurances. The
execution of the extensive plan which I have described, would
connect the ancient and modern history of the world; but it would
require many years of health, of leisure, and of perseverance.
[Footnote 2: The Author, as it frequently happens, took an
inadequate measure of his growing work. The remainder of the
first period has filled two volumes in quarto, being the third,
fourth, fifth, and sixth volumes of the octavo edition.]
Bentinck Street, February 1, 1776.
P. S. The entire History, which is now published, of the
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire in the West, abundantly
discharges my engagements with the Public. Perhaps their
favorable opinion may encourage me to prosecute a work, which,
however laborious it may seem, is the most agreeable occupation
of my leisure hours.
Bentinck Street, March 1, 1781.
An Author easily persuades himself that the public opinion
is still favorable to his labors; and I have now embraced the
serious resolution of proceeding to the last period of my
original design, and of the Roman Empire, the taking of
Constantinople by the Turks, in the year one thousand four
hundred and fifty-three. The most patient Reader, who computes
that three ponderous ^3 volumes have been already employed on the
events of four centuries, may, perhaps, be alarmed at the long
prospect of nine hundred years. But it is not my intention to
expatiate with the same minuteness on the whole series of the
Byzantine history. At our entrance into this period, the reign
of Justinian, and the conquests of the Mahometans, will deserve
and detain our attention, and the last age of Constantinople (the
Crusades and the Turks) is connected with the revolutions of
Modern Europe. From the seventh to the eleventh century, the
obscure interval will be supplied by a concise narrative of such
facts as may still appear either interesting or important.
[Footnote 3: The first six volumes of the octavo edition.]
Bentinck Street, March 1, 1782.
Preface To The First Volume.
Diligence and accuracy are the only merits which an
historical writer may ascribe to himself; if any merit, indeed,
can be assumed from the performance of an indispensable duty. I
may therefore be allowed to say, that I have carefully examined
all the original materials that could illustrate the subject
which I had undertaken to treat. Should I ever complete the
extensive design which has been sketched out in the Preface, I
might perhaps conclude it with a critical account of the authors
consulted during the progress of the whole work; and however such
an attempt might incur the censure of ostentation, I am persuaded
that it would be susceptible of entertainment, as well as
information.
At present I shall content myself with a single observation.
The biographers, who, under the reigns of Diocletian and
Constantine, composed, or rather compiled, the lives of the
Emperors, from Hadrian to the sons of Carus, are usually
mentioned under the names of Aelius Spartianus, Julius
Capitolinus, Aelius Lampridius, Vulcatius Gallicanus, Trebellius
Pollio and Flavius Vopiscus. But there is so much perplexity in
the titles of the MSS., and so many disputes have arisen among
the critics (see Fabricius, Biblioth. Latin. l. iii. c. 6)
concerning their number, their names, and their respective
property, that for the most part I have quoted them without
distinction, under the general and well-known title of the
Augustan History.
Preface To The Fourth Volume Of The Original Quarto Edition.
I now discharge my promise, and complete my design, of writing
the History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, both in
the West and the East. The whole period extends from the age of
Trajan and the Antonines, to the taking of Constantinople by
Mahomet the Second; and includes a review of the Crusades, and
the state of Rome during the middle ages. Since the publication
of the first volume, twelve years have elapsed; twelve years,
according to my wish, "of health, of leisure, and of
perseverance." I may now congratulate my deliverance from a long
and laborious service, and my satisfaction will be pure and
perfect, if the public favor should be extended to the conclusion
of my work.
It was my first intention to have collected, under one view,
the numerous authors, of every age and language, from whom I have
derived the materials of this history; and I am still convinced
that the apparent ostentation would be more than compensated by
real use. If I have renounced this idea, if I have declined an
undertaking which had obtained the approbation of a
master-artist, ^* my excuse may be found in the extreme
difficulty of assigning a proper measure to such a catalogue. A
naked list of names and editions would not be satisfactory either
to myself or my readers: the characters of the principal Authors
of the Roman and Byzantine History have been occasionally
connected with the events which they describe; a more copious and
critical inquiry might indeed deserve, but it would demand, an
elaborate volume, which might swell by degrees into a general
library of historical writers. For the present, I shall content
myself with renewing my serious protestation, that I have always
endeavored to draw from the fountain-head; that my curiosity, as
well as a sense of duty, has always urged me to study the
originals; and that, if they have sometimes eluded my search, I
have carefully marked the secondary evidence, on whose faith a
passage or a fact were reduced to depend.
[Footnote *: See Dr. Robertson's Preface to his History of
America.]
I shall soon revisit the banks of the Lake of Lausanne, a
country which I have known and loved from my early youth. Under
a mild government, amidst a beauteous landscape, in a life of
leisure and independence, and among a people of easy and elegant
manners, I have enjoyed, and may again hope to enjoy, the varied
pleasures of retirement and society. But I shall ever glory in
the name and character of an Englishman: I am proud of my birth
in a free and enlightened country; and the approbation of that
country is the best and most honorable reward of my labors. Were
I ambitious of any other Patron than the Public, I would inscribe
this work to a Statesman, who, in a long, a stormy, and at length
an unfortunate administration, had many political opponents,
almost without a personal enemy; who has retained, in his fall
from power, many faithful and disinterested friends; and who,
under the pressure of severe infirmity, enjoys the lively vigor
of his mind, and the felicity of his incomparable temper. Lord
North will permit me to express the feelings of friendship in the
language of truth: but even truth and friendship should be
silent, if he still dispensed the favors of the crown.
In a remote solitude, vanity may still whisper in my ear,
that my readers, perhaps, may inquire whether, in the conclusion
of the present work, I am now taking an everlasting farewell.
They shall hear all that I know myself, and all that I could
reveal to the most intimate friend. The motives of action or
silence are now equally balanced; nor can I pronounce, in my most
secret thoughts, on which side the scale will preponderate. I
cannot dissemble that six quartos must have tried, and may have
exhausted, the indulgence of the Public; that, in the repetition
of similar attempts, a successful Author has much more to lose
than he can hope to gain; that I am now descending into the vale
of years; and that the most respectable of my countrymen, the men
whom I aspire to imitate, have resigned the pen of history about
the same period of their lives. Yet I consider that the annals
of ancient and modern times may afford many rich and interesting
subjects; that I am still possessed of health and leisure; that
by the practice of writing, some skill and facility must be
acquired; and that, in the ardent pursuit of truth and knowledge,
I am not conscious of decay. To an active mind, indolence is
more painful than labor; and the first months of my liberty will
be occupied and amused in the excursions of curiosity and taste.
By such temptations, I have been sometimes seduced from the rigid
duty even of a pleasing and voluntary task: but my time will now
be my own; and in the use or abuse of independence, I shall no
longer fear my own reproaches or those of my friends. I am
fairly entitled to a year of jubilee: next summer and the
following winter will rapidly pass away; and experience only can
determine whether I shall still prefer the freedom and variety of
study to the design and composition of a regular work, which
animates, while it confines, the daily application of the Author.
Caprice and accident may influence my choice; but the dexterity
of self-love will contrive to applaud either active industry or
philosophic repose.
Downing Street, May 1, 1788.
P. S. I shall embrace this opportunity of introducing two
verbal remarks, which have not conveniently offered themselves to
my notice. 1. As often as I use the definitions of beyond the
Alps, the Rhine, the Danube, &c., I generally suppose myself at
Rome, and afterwards at Constantinople; without observing whether
this relative geography may agree with the local, but variable,
situation of the reader, or the historian. 2. In proper names
of foreign, and especially of Oriental origin, it should be
always our aim to express, in our English version, a faithful
copy of the original. But this rule, which is founded on a just
regard to uniformity and truth, must often be relaxed; and the
exceptions will be limited or enlarged by the custom of the
language and the taste of the interpreter. Our alphabets may be
often defective; a harsh sound, an uncouth spelling, might offend
the ear or the eye of our countrymen; and some words, notoriously
corrupt, are fixed, and, as it were, naturalized in the vulgar
tongue. The prophet Mohammed can no longer be stripped of the
famous, though improper, appellation of Mahomet: the well-known
cities of Aleppo, Damascus, and Cairo, would almost be lost in
the strange descriptions of Haleb, Demashk, and Al Cahira: the
titles and offices of the Ottoman empire are fashioned by the
practice of three hundred years; and we are pleased to blend the
three Chinese monosyllables, Con-fu- tzee, in the respectable
name of Confucius, or even to adopt the Portuguese corruption of
Mandarin. But I would vary the use of Zoroaster and Zerdusht, as
I drew my information from Greece or Persia: since our connection
with India, the genuine Timour is restored to the throne of
Tamerlane: our most correct writers have retrenched the Al, the
superfluous article, from the Koran; and we escape an ambiguous
termination, by adopting Moslem instead of Musulman, in the
plural number. In these, and in a thousand examples, the shades
of distinction are often minute; and I can feel, where I cannot
explain, the motives of my choice.
Chapter I: The Extent Of The Empire In The Age Of The Antonines.
Anoninies.
Part I.
Introduction.
The Extent And Military Force Of The Empire In The Age Of The
Antonines.
In the second century of the Christian Aera, the empire of
Rome comprehended the fairest part of the earth, and the most
civilized portion of mankind. The frontiers of that extensive
monarchy were guarded by ancient renown and disciplined valor.
The gentle but powerful influence of laws and manners had
gradually cemented the union of the provinces. Their peaceful
inhabitants enjoyed and abused the advantages of wealth and
luxury. The image of a free constitution was preserved with
decent reverence: the Roman senate appeared to possess the
sovereign authority, and devolved on the emperors all the
executive powers of government. During a happy period of more
than fourscore years, the public administration was conducted by
the virtue and abilities of Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, and the two
Antonines. It is the design of this, and of the two succeeding
chapters, to describe the prosperous condition of their empire;
and after wards, from the death of Marcus Antoninus, to deduce
the most important circumstances of its decline and fall; a
revolution which will ever be remembered, and is still felt by
the nations of the earth.
The principal conquests of the Romans were achieved under
the republic; and the emperors, for the most part, were satisfied
with preserving those dominions which had been acquired by the
policy of the senate, the active emulations of the consuls, and
the martial enthusiasm of the people. The seven first centuries
were filled with a rapid succession of triumphs; but it was
reserved for Augustus to relinquish the ambitious design of
subduing the whole earth, and to introduce a spirit of moderation
into the public councils. Inclined to peace by his temper and
situation, it was easy for him to discover that Rome, in her
present exalted situation, had much less to hope than to fear
from the chance of arms; and that, in the prosecution of remote
wars, the undertaking became every day more difficult, the event
more doubtful, and the possession more precarious, and less
beneficial. The experience of Augustus added weight to these
salutary reflections, and effectually convinced him that, by the
prudent vigor of his counsels, it would be easy to secure every
concession which the safety or the dignity of Rome might require
from the most formidable barbarians. Instead of exposing his
person and his legions to the arrows of the Parthians, he
obtained, by an honorable treaty, the restitution of the
standards and prisoners which had been taken in the defeat of
Crassus. ^1
[Footnote 1: Dion Cassius, (l. liv. p. 736,) with the annotations
of Reimar, who has collected all that Roman vanity has left upon
the subject. The marble of Ancyra, on which Augustus recorded
his own exploits, asserted that he compelled the Parthians to
restore the ensigns of Crassus.]
His generals, in the early part of his reign, attempted the
reduction of Ethiopia and Arabia Felix. They marched near a
thousand miles to the south of the tropic; but the heat of the
climate soon repelled the invaders, and protected the un-warlike
natives of those sequestered regions. ^2 The northern countries
of Europe scarcely deserved the expense and labor of conquest.
The forests and morasses of Germany were filled with a hardy race
of barbarians, who despised life when it was separated from
freedom; and though, on the first attack, they seemed to yield to
the weight of the Roman power, they soon, by a signal act of
despair, regained their independence, and reminded Augustus of
the vicissitude of fortune. ^3 On the death of that emperor, his
testament was publicly read in the senate. He bequeathed, as a
valuable legacy to his successors, the advice of confining the
empire within those limits which nature seemed to have placed as
its permanent bulwarks and boundaries: on the west, the Atlantic
Ocean; the Rhine and Danube on the north; the Euphrates on the
east; and towards the south, the sandy deserts of Arabia and
Africa. ^4
[Footnote 2: Strabo, (l. xvi. p. 780,) Pliny the elder, (Hist.
Natur. l. vi. c. 32, 35, [28, 29,] and Dion Cassius, (l. liii. p.
723, and l. liv. p. 734,) have left us very curious details
concerning these wars. The Romans made themselves masters of
Mariaba, or Merab, a city of Arabia Felix, well known to the
Orientals. (See Abulfeda and the Nubian geography, p. 52) They
were arrived within three days' journey of the spice country, the
rich object of their invasion.
Note: It is the city of Merab that the Arabs say was the
residence of Belkis, queen of Saba, who desired to see Solomon.
A dam, by which the waters collected in its neighborhood were
kept back, having been swept away, the sudden inundation
destroyed this city, of which, nevertheless, vestiges remain. It
bordered on a country called Adramout, where a particular
aromatic plant grows: it is for this reason that we real in the
history of the Roman expedition, that they were arrived within
three days' journey of the spice country. - G. Compare
Malte-Brun, Geogr. Eng. trans. vol. ii. p. 215. The period of
this flood has been copiously discussed by Reiske, (Program. de
vetusta Epocha Arabum, ruptura cataractae Merabensis.) Add.
Johannsen, Hist. Yemanae, p. 282. Bonn, 1828; and see Gibbon,
note 16. to Chap. L. - M.
Note: Two, according to Strabo. The detailed account of
Strabo makes the invaders fail before Marsuabae: this cannot be
the same place as Mariaba. Ukert observes, that Aelius Gallus
would not have failed for want of water before Mariaba. (See M.
Guizot's note above.) "Either, therefore, they were different
places, or Strabo is mistaken." (Ukert, Geographic der Griechen
und Romer, vol. i. p. 181.) Strabo, indeed, mentions Mariaba
distinct from Marsuabae. Gibbon has followed Pliny in reckoning
Mariaba among the conquests of Gallus. There can be little doubt
that he is wrong, as Gallus did not approach the capital of
Sabaea. Compare the note of the Oxford editor of Strabo. - M.]
[Footnote 3: By the slaughter of Varus and his three legions.
See the first book of the Annals of Tacitus. Sueton. in August.
c. 23, and Velleius Paterculus, l. ii. c. 117, &c. Augustus did
not receive the melancholy news with all the temper and firmness
that might have been expected from his character.]
[Footnote 4: Tacit. Annal. l. ii. Dion Cassius, l. lvi. p. 833,
and the speech of Augustus himself, in Julian's Caesars. It
receives great light from the learned notes of his French
translator, M. Spanheim.]
Happily for the repose of mankind, the moderate system
recommended by the wisdom of Augustus, was adopted by the fears
and vices of his immediate successors. Engaged in the pursuit of
pleasure, or in the exercise of tyranny, the first Caesars seldom
showed themselves to the armies, or to the provinces; nor were
they disposed to suffer, that those triumphs which their
indolence neglected, should be usurped by the conduct and valor
of their lieutenants. The military fame of a subject was
considered as an insolent invasion of the Imperial prerogative;
and it became the duty, as well as interest, of every Roman
general, to guard the frontiers intrusted to his care, without
aspiring to conquests which might have proved no less fatal to
himself than to the vanquished barbarians. ^5
[Footnote 5: Germanicus, Suetonius Paulinus, and Agricola were
checked and recalled in the course of their victories. Corbulo
was put to death. Military merit, as it is admirably expressed by
Tacitus, was, in the strictest sense of the word, imperatoria
virtus.]
The only accession which the Roman empire received, during
the first century of the Christian Aera, was the province of
Britain. In this single instance, the successors of Caesar and
Augustus were persuaded to follow the example of the former,
rather than the precept of the latter. The proximity of its
situation to the coast of Gaul seemed to invite their arms; the
pleasing though doubtful intelligence of a pearl fishery,
attracted their avarice; ^6 and as Britain was viewed in the
light of a distinct and insulated world, the conquest scarcely
formed any exception to the general system of continental
measures. After a war of about forty years, undertaken by the
most stupid, ^7 maintained by the most dissolute, and terminated
by the most timid of all the emperors, the far greater part of
the island submitted to the Roman yoke. ^8 The various tribes of
Britain possessed valor without conduct, and the love of freedom
without the spirit of union. They took up arms with savage
fierceness; they laid them down, or turned them against each
other, with wild inconsistency; and while they fought singly,
they were successively subdued. Neither the fortitude of
Caractacus, nor the despair of Boadicea, nor the fanaticism of
the Druids, could avert the slavery of their country, or resist
the steady progress of the Imperial generals, who maintained the
national glory, when the throne was disgraced by the weakest, or
the most vicious of mankind. At the very time when Domitian,
confined to his palace, felt the terrors which he inspired, his
legions, under the command of the virtuous Agricola, defeated the
collected force of the Caledonians, at the foot of the Grampian
Hills; and his fleets, venturing to explore an unknown and
dangerous navigation, displayed the Roman arms round every part
of the island. The conquest of Britain was considered as already
achieved; and it was the design of Agricola to complete and
insure his success, by the easy reduction of Ireland, for which,
in his opinion, one legion and a few auxiliaries were sufficient.
^9 The western isle might be improved into a valuable possession,
and the Britons would wear their chains with the less reluctance,
if the prospect and example of freedom were on every side removed
from before their eyes.
[Footnote 6: Caesar himself conceals that ignoble motive; but it
is mentioned by Suetonius, c. 47. The British pearls proved,
however, of little value, on account of their dark and livid
color. Tacitus observes, with reason, (in Agricola, c. 12,) that
it was an inherent defect. "Ego facilius crediderim, naturam
margaritis deesse quam nobis avaritiam."]
[Footnote 7: Claudius, Nero, and Domitian. A hope is expressed
by Pomponius Mela, l. iii. c. 6, (he wrote under Claudius,) that,
by the success of the Roman arms, the island and its savage
inhabitants would soon be better known. It is amusing enough to
peruse such passages in the midst of London.]
[Footnote 8: See the admirable abridgment given by Tacitus, in
the life of Agricola, and copiously, though perhaps not
completely, illustrated by our own antiquarians, Camden and
Horsley.]
[Footnote 9: The Irish writers, jealous of their national honor,
are extremely provoked on this occasion, both with Tacitus and
with Agricola.]
But the superior merit of Agricola soon occasioned his
removal from the government of Britain; and forever disappointed
this rational, though extensive scheme of conquest. Before his
departure, the prudent general had provided for security as well
as for dominion. He had observed, that the island is almost
divided into two unequal parts by the opposite gulfs, or, as they
are now called, the Friths of Scotland. Across the narrow
interval of about forty miles, he had drawn a line of military
stations, which was afterwards fortified, in the reign of
Antoninus Pius, by a turf rampart, erected on foundations of
stone. ^10 This wall of Antoninus, at a small distance beyond the
modern cities of Edinburgh and Glasgow, was fixed as the limit of
the Roman province. The native Caledonians preserved, in the
northern extremity of the island, their wild independence, for
which they were not less indebted to their poverty than to their
valor. Their incursions were frequently repelled and chastised;
but their country was never subdued. ^11 The masters of the
fairest and most wealthy climates of the globe turned with
contempt from gloomy hills, assailed by the winter tempest, from
lakes concealed in a blue mist, and from cold and lonely heaths,
over which the deer of the forest were chased by a troop of naked
barbarians. ^12
[Footnote 10: See Horsley's Britannia Romana, l. i. c. 10.
Note: Agricola fortified the line from Dumbarton to
Edinburgh, consequently within Scotland. The emperor Hadrian,
during his residence in Britain, about the year 121, caused a
rampart of earth to be raised between Newcastle and Carlisle.
Antoninus Pius, having gained new victories over the Caledonians,
by the ability of his general, Lollius, Urbicus, caused a new
rampart of earth to be constructed between Edinburgh and
Dumbarton. Lastly, Septimius Severus caused a wall of stone to
be built parallel to the rampart of Hadrian, and on the same
locality. See John Warburton's Vallum Romanum, or the History
and Antiquities of the Roman Wall. London, 1754, 4to. - W. See
likewise a good note on the Roman wall in Lingard's History of
England, vol. i. p. 40, 4to edit - M.]
[Footnote 11: The poet Buchanan celebrates with elegance and
spirit (see his Sylvae, v.) the unviolated independence of his
native country. But, if the single testimony of Richard of
Cirencester was sufficient to create a Roman province of
Vespasiana to the north of the wall, that independence would be
reduced within very narrow limits.]
[Footnote 12: See Appian (in Prooem.) and the uniform imagery of
Ossian's Poems, which, according to every hypothesis, were
composed by a native Caledonian.]
Such was the state of the Roman frontiers, and such the
maxims of Imperial policy, from the death of Augustus to the
accession of Trajan. That virtuous and active prince had
received the education of a soldier, and possessed the talents of
a general. ^13 The peaceful system of his predecessors was
interrupted by scenes of war and conquest; and the legions, after
a long interval, beheld a military emperor at their head. The
first exploits of Trajan were against the Dacians, the most
warlike of men, who dwelt beyond the Danube, and who, during the
reign of Domitian, had insulted, with impunity, the Majesty of
Rome. ^14 To the strength and fierceness of barbarians they added
a contempt for life, which was derived from a warm persuasion of
the immortality and transmigration of the soul. ^15 Decebalus,
the Dacian king, approved himself a rival not unworthy of Trajan;
nor did he despair of his own and the public fortune, till, by
the confession of his enemies, he had exhausted every resource
both of valor and policy. ^16 This memorable war, with a very
short suspension of hostilities, lasted five years; and as the
emperor could exert, without control, the whole force of the
state, it was terminated by an absolute submission of the
barbarians. ^17 The new province of Dacia, which formed a second
exception to the precept of Augustus, was about thirteen hundred
miles in circumference. Its natural boundaries were the Niester,
the Teyss or Tibiscus, the Lower Danube, and the Euxine Sea. The
vestiges of a military road may still be traced from the banks of
the Danube to the neighborhood of Bender, a place famous in
modern history, and the actual frontier of the Turkish and
Russian empires. ^18
[Footnote 13: See Pliny's Panegyric, which seems founded on
facts.]
[Footnote 14: Dion Cassius, l. lxvii.]
[Footnote 15: Herodotus, l. iv. c. 94. Julian in the Caesars,
with Spanheims observations.]
[Footnote 16: Plin. Epist. viii. 9.]
[Footnote 17: Dion Cassius, l. lxviii. p. 1123, 1131. Julian in
Caesaribus Eutropius, viii. 2, 6. Aurelius Victor in Epitome.]
[Footnote 18: See a Memoir of M. d'Anville, on the Province of
Dacia, in the Academie des Inscriptions, tom. xxviii. p. 444 -
468.]
Trajan was ambitious of fame; and as long as mankind shall
continue to bestow more liberal applause on their destroyers than
on their benefactors, the thirst of military glory will ever be
the vice of the most exalted characters. The praises of
Alexander, transmitted by a succession of poets and historians,
had kindled a dangerous emulation in the mind of Trajan. Like
him, the Roman emperor undertook an expedition against the
nations of the East; but he lamented with a sigh, that his
advanced age scarcely left him any hopes of equalling the renown
of the son of Philip. ^19 Yet the success of Trajan, however
transient, was rapid and specious. The degenerate Parthians,
broken by intestine discord, fled before his arms. He descended
the River Tigris in triumph, from the mountains of Armenia to the
Persian Gulf. He enjoyed the honor of being the first, as he was
the last, of the Roman generals, who ever navigated that remote
sea. His fleets ravaged the coast of Arabia; and Trajan vainly
flattered himself that he was approaching towards the confines of
India. ^20 Every day the astonished senate received the
intelligence of new names and new nations, that acknowledged his
sway. They were informed that the kings of Bosphorus, Colchos,
Iberia, Albania, Osrhoene, and even the Parthian monarch himself,
had accepted their diadems from the hands of the emperor; that
the independent tribes of the Median and Carduchian hills had
implored his protection; and that the rich countries of Armenia,
Mesopotamia, and Assyria, were reduced into the state of
provinces. ^21 But the death of Trajan soon clouded the splendid
prospect; and it was justly to be dreaded, that so many distant
nations would throw off the unaccustomed yoke, when they were no
longer restrained by the powerful hand which had imposed it.
[Footnote 19: Trajan's sentiments are represented in a very just
and lively manner in the Caesars of Julian.]
[Footnote 20: Eutropius and Sextus Rufus have endeavored to
perpetuate the illusion. See a very sensible dissertation of M.
Freret in the Academie des Inscriptions, tom. xxi. p. 55.]
[Footnote 21: Dion Cassius, l. lxviii.; and the Abbreviators.]
Chapter I: The Extent Of The Empire In The Age Of The Antonines.
Part II.
It was an ancient tradition, that when the Capitol was
founded by one of the Roman kings, the god Terminus (who presided
over boundaries, and was represented, according to the fashion of
that age, by a large stone) alone, among all the inferior
deities, refused to yield his place to Jupiter himself. A
favorable inference was drawn from his obstinacy, which was
interpreted by the augurs as a sure presage that the boundaries
of the Roman power would never recede. ^22 During many ages, the
prediction, as it is usual, contributed to its own
accomplishment. But though Terminus had resisted the Majesty of
Jupiter, he submitted to the authority of the emperor Hadrian.
^23 The resignation of all the eastern conquests of Trajan was
the first measure of his reign. He restored to the Parthians the
election of an independent sovereign; withdrew the Roman
garrisons from the provinces of Armenia, Mesopotamia, and
Assyria; and, in compliance with the precept of Augustus, once
more established the Euphrates as the frontier of the empire. ^24
Censure, which arraigns the public actions and the private
motives of princes, has ascribed to envy, a conduct which might
be attributed to the prudence and moderation of Hadrian. The
various character of that emperor, capable, by turns, of the
meanest and the most generous sentiments, may afford some color
to the suspicion. It was, however, scarcely in his power to
place the superiority of his predecessor in a more conspicuous
light, than by thus confessing himself unequal to the task of
defending the conquests of Trajan.
[Footnote 22: Ovid. Fast. l. ii. ver. 667. See Livy, and
Dionysius of Halicarnassus, under the reign of Tarquin.]
[Footnote 23: St. Augustin is highly delighted with the proof of
the weakness of Terminus, and the vanity of the Augurs. See De
Civitate Dei, iv. 29.
Note *: The turn of Gibbon's sentence is Augustin's: "Plus
Hadrianum regem bominum, quam regem Deorum timuisse videatur." -
M]
[Footnote 24: See the Augustan History, p. 5, Jerome's Chronicle,
and all the Epitomizers. It is somewhat surprising, that this
memorable event should be omitted by Dion, or rather by
Xiphilin.]
The martial and ambitious of spirit Trajan formed a very
singular contrast with the moderation of his successor. The
restless activity of Hadrian was not less remarkable when
compared with the gentle repose of Antoninus Pius. The life of
the former was almost a perpetual journey; and as he possessed
the various talents of the soldier, the statesman, and the
scholar, he gratified his curiosity in the discharge of his duty.
Careless of the difference of seasons and of climates, he marched
on foot, and bare- headed, over the snows of Caledonia, and the
sultry plains of the Upper Egypt; nor was there a province of the
empire which, in the course of his reign, was not honored with
the presence of the monarch. ^25 But the tranquil life of
Antoninus Pius was spent in the bosom of Italy, and, during the
twenty-three years that he directed the public administration,
the longest journeys of that amiable prince extended no farther
than from his palace in Rome to the retirement of his Lanuvian
villa. ^26
[Footnote 25: Dion, l. lxix. p. 1158. Hist. August. p. 5, 8. If
all our historians were lost, medals, inscriptions, and other
monuments, would be sufficient to record the travels of Hadrian.
Note: The journeys of Hadrian are traced in a note on
Solvet's translation of Hegewisch, Essai sur l'Epoque de Histoire
Romaine la plus heureuse pour Genre Humain Paris, 1834, p. 123. -
M.]
[Footnote 26: See the Augustan History and the Epitomes.]
Notwithstanding this difference in their personal conduct,
the general system of Augustus was equally adopted and uniformly
pursued by Hadrian and by the two Antonines. They persisted in
the design of maintaining the dignity of the empire, without
attempting to enlarge its limits. By every honorable expedient
they invited the friendship of the barbarians; and endeavored to
convince mankind that the Roman power, raised above the
temptation of conquest, was actuated only by the love of order
and justice. During a long period of forty-three years, their
virtuous labors were crowned with success; and if we except a few
slight hostilities, that served to exercise the legions of the
frontier, the reigns of Hadrian and Antoninus Pius offer the fair
prospect of universal peace. ^27 The Roman name was revered among
the most remote nations of the earth. The fiercest barbarians
frequently submitted their differences to the arbitration of the
emperor; and we are informed by a contemporary historian that he
had seen ambassadors who were refused the honor which they came
to solicit of being admitted into the rank of subjects. ^28
[Footnote 27: We must, however, remember, that in the time of
Hadrian, a rebellion of the Jews raged with religious fury,
though only in a single province. Pausanias (l. viii. c. 43)
mentions two necessary and successful wars, conducted by the
generals of Pius: 1st. Against the wandering Moors, who were
driven into the solitudes of Atlas. 2d. Against the Brigantes
of Britain, who had invaded the Roman province. Both these wars
(with several other hostilities) are mentioned in the Augustan
History, p. 19.]
[Footnote 28: Appian of Alexandria, in the preface to his History
of the Roman Wars.]
Part II.
The terror of the Roman arms added weight and dignity to the
moderation of the emperors. They preserved peace by a constant
preparation for war; and while justice regulated their conduct,
they announced to the nations on their confines, that they were
as little disposed to endure, as to offer an injury. The military
strength, which it had been sufficient for Hadrian and the elder
Antoninus to display, was exerted against the Parthians and the
Germans by the emperor Marcus. The hostilities of the barbarians
provoked the resentment of that philosophic monarch, and, in the
prosecution of a just defence, Marcus and his generals obtained
many signal victories, both on the Euphrates and on the Danube.
^29 The military establishment of the Roman empire, which thus
assured either its tranquillity or success, will now become the
proper and important object of our attention.
[Footnote 29: Dion, l. lxxi. Hist. August. in Marco. The
Parthian victories gave birth to a crowd of contemptible
historians, whose memory has been rescued from oblivion and
exposed to ridicule, in a very lively piece of criticism of
Lucian.]
In the purer ages of the commonwealth, the use of arms was
reserved for those ranks of citizens who had a country to love, a
property to defend, and some share in enacting those laws, which
it was their interest as well as duty to maintain. But in
proportion as the public freedom was lost in extent of conquest,
war was gradually improved into an art, and degraded into a
trade. ^30 The legions themselves, even at the time when they
were recruited in the most distant provinces, were supposed to
consist of Roman citizens. That distinction was generally
considered, either as a legal qualification or as a proper
recompense for the soldier; but a more serious regard was paid to
the essential merit of age, strength, and military stature. ^31
In all levies, a just preference was given to the climates of the
North over those of the South: the race of men born to the
exercise of arms was sought for in the country rather than in
cities; and it was very reasonably presumed, that the hardy
occupations of smiths, carpenters, and huntsmen, would supply
more vigor and resolution than the sedentary trades which are
employed in the service of luxury. ^32 After every qualification
of property had been laid aside, the armies of the Roman emperors
were still commanded, for the most part, by officers of liberal
birth and education; but the common soldiers, like the mercenary
troops of modern Europe, were drawn from the meanest, and very
frequently from the most profligate, of mankind.
[Footnote 30: The poorest rank of soldiers possessed above forty
pounds sterling, (Dionys. Halicarn. iv. 17,) a very high
qualification at a time when money was so scarce, that an ounce
of silver was equivalent to seventy pounds weight of brass. The
populace, excluded by the ancient constitution, were
indiscriminately admitted by Marius. See Sallust. de Bell.
Jugurth. c. 91.
Note: On the uncertainty of all these estimates, and the
difficulty of fixing the relative value of brass and silver,
compare Niebuhr, vol. i. p. 473, &c. Eng. trans. p. 452.
According to Niebuhr, the relative disproportion in value,
between the two metals, arose, in a great degree from the
abundance of brass or copper. - M. Compare also Dureau 'de la
Malle Economie Politique des Romains especially L. l. c. ix. - M.
1845.]
[Footnote 31: Caesar formed his legion Alauda of Gauls and
strangers; but it was during the license of civil war; and after
the victory, he gave them the freedom of the city for their
reward.]
[Footnote 32: See Vegetius, de Re Militari, l. i. c. 2 - 7.]
That public virtue, which among the ancients was denominated
patriotism, is derived from a strong sense of our own interest in
the preservation and prosperity of the free government of which
we are members. Such a sentiment, which had rendered the legions
of the republic almost invincible, could make but a very feeble
impression on the mercenary servants of a despotic prince; and it
became necessary to supply that defect by other motives, of a
different, but not less forcible nature - honor and religion.
The peasant, or mechanic, imbibed the useful prejudice that he
was advanced to the more dignified profession of arms, in which
his rank and reputation would depend on his own valor; and that,
although the prowess of a private soldier must often escape the
notice of fame, his own behavior might sometimes confer glory or
disgrace on the company, the legion, or even the army, to whose
honors he was associated. On his first entrance into the
service, an oath was administered to him with every circumstance
of solemnity. He promised never to desert his standard, to
submit his own will to the commands of his leaders, and to
sacrifice his life for the safety of the emperor and the empire.
^33 The attachment of the Roman troops to their standards was
inspired by the united influence of religion and of honor. The
golden eagle, which glittered in the front of the legion, was the
object of their fondest devotion; nor was it esteemed less
impious than it was ignominious, to abandon that sacred ensign in
the hour of danger. ^34 These motives, which derived their
strength from the imagination, were enforced by fears and hopes
of a more substantial kind. Regular pay, occasional donatives,
and a stated recompense, after the appointed time of service,
alleviated the hardships of the military life, ^35 whilst, on the
other hand, it was impossible for cowardice or disobedience to
escape the severest punishment. The centurions were authorized
to chastise with blows, the generals had a right to punish with
death; and it was an inflexible maxim of Roman discipline, that a
good soldier should dread his officers far more than the enemy.
From such laudable arts did the valor of the Imperial troops
receive a degree of firmness and docility unattainable by the
impetuous and irregular passions of barbarians.
[Footnote 33: The oath of service and fidelity to the emperor was
annually renewed by the troops on the first of January.]
[Footnote 34: Tacitus calls the Roman eagles, Bellorum Deos.
They were placed in a chapel in the camp, and with the other
deities received the religious worship of the troops.
Note: See also Dio. Cass. xl. c. 18. - M.]
[Footnote 35: See Gronovius de Pecunia vetere, l. iii. p. 120,
&c. The emperor Domitian raised the annual stipend of the
legionaries to twelve pieces of gold, which, in his time, was
equivalent to about ten of our guineas. This pay, somewhat
higher than our own, had been, and was afterwards, gradually
increased, according to the progress of wealth and military
government. After twenty years' service, the veteran received
three thousand denarii, (about one hundred pounds sterling,) or a
proportionable allowance of land. The pay and advantages of the
guards were, in general, about double those of the legions.]
And yet so sensible were the Romans of the imperfection of
valor without skill and practice, that, in their language, the
name of an army was borrowed from the word which signified
exercise. ^36 Military exercises were the important and
unremitted object of their discipline. The recruits and young
soldiers were constantly trained, both in the morning and in the
evening, nor was age or knowledge allowed to excuse the veterans
from the daily repetition of what they had completely learnt.
Large sheds were erected in the winter- quarters of the troops,
that their useful labors might not receive any interruption from
the most tempestuous weather; and it was carefully observed, that
the arms destined to this imitation of war, should be of double
the weight which was required in real action. ^37 It is not the
purpose of this work to enter into any minute description of the
Roman exercises. We shall only remark, that they comprehended
whatever could add strength to the body, activity to the limbs,
or grace to the motions. The soldiers were diligently instructed
to march, to run, to leap, to swim, to carry heavy burdens, to
handle every species of arms that was used either for offence or
for defence, either in distant engagement or in a closer onset;
to form a variety of evolutions; and to move to the sound of
flutes in the Pyrrhic or martial dance. ^38 In the midst of
peace, the Roman troops familiarized themselves with the practice
of war; and it is prettily remarked by an ancient historian who
had fought against them, that the effusion of blood was the only
circumstance which distinguished a field of battle from a field
of exercise. ^39 It was the policy of the ablest generals, and
even of the emperors themselves, to encourage these military
studies by their presence and example; and we are informed that
Hadrian, as well as Trajan, frequently condescended to instruct
the unexperienced soldiers, to reward the diligent, and sometimes
to dispute with them the prize of superior strength or dexterity.
^40 Under the reigns of those princes, the science of tactics was
cultivated with success; and as long as the empire retained any
vigor, their military instructions were respected as the most
perfect model of Roman discipline.
[Footnote 36: Exercitus ab exercitando, Varro de Lingua Latina,
l. iv. Cicero in Tusculan. l. ii. 37. [15.] There is room for a
very interesting work, which should lay open the connection
between the languages and manners of nations.
Note I am not aware of the existence, at present, of such a
work; but the profound observations of the late William von
Humboldt, in the introduction to his posthumously published Essay
on the Language of the Island of Java, (uber die Kawi-sprache,
Berlin, 1836,) may cause regret that this task was not completed
by that accomplished and universal scholar. - M.]
[Footnote 37: Vegatius, l. ii. and the rest of his first book.]
[Footnote 38: The Pyrrhic dance is extremely well illustrated by
M. le Beau, in the Academie des Inscriptions, tom. xxxv. p. 262,
&c. That learned academician, in a series of memoirs, has
collected all the passages of the ancients that relate to the
Roman legion.]
[Footnote 39: Joseph. de Bell. Judaico, l. iii. c. 5. We are
indebted to this Jew for some very curious details of Roman
discipline.]
[Footnote 40: Plin. Panegyr. c. 13. Life of Hadrian, in the
Augustan History.]
Nine centuries of war had gradually introduced into the
service many alterations and improvements. The legions, as they
are described by Polybius, ^41 in the time of the Punic wars,
differed very materially from those which achieved the victories
of Caesar, or defended the monarchy of Hadrian and the Antonines.
The constitution of the Imperial legion may be described in a few
words. ^42 The heavy-armed infantry, which composed its principal
strength, ^43 was divided into ten cohorts, and fifty-five
companies, under the orders of a correspondent number of tribunes
and centurions. The first cohort, which always claimed the post
of honor and the custody of the eagle, was formed of eleven
hundred and five soldiers, the most approved for valor and
fidelity. The remaining nine cohorts consisted each of five
hundred and fifty-five; and the whole body of legionary infantry
amounted to six thousand one hundred men. Their arms were
uniform, and admirably adapted to the nature of their service: an
open helmet, with a lofty crest; a breastplate, or coat of mail;
greaves on their legs, and an ample buckler on their left arm.
The buckler was of an oblong and concave figure, four feet in
length, and two and a half in breadth, framed of a light wood,
covered with a bull's hide, and strongly guarded with plates of
brass. Besides a lighter spear, the legionary soldier grasped in
his right hand the formidable pilum, a ponderous javelin, whose
utmost length was about six feet, and which was terminated by a
massy triangular point of steel of eighteen inches. ^44 This
instrument was indeed much inferior to our modern fire-arms;
since it was exhausted by a single discharge, at the distance of
only ten or twelve paces. Yet when it was launched by a firm and
skilful hand, there was not any cavalry that durst venture within
its reach, nor any shield or corselet that could sustain the
impetuosity of its weight. As soon as the Roman had darted his
pilum, he drew his sword, and rushed forwards to close with the
enemy. His sword was a short well-tempered Spanish blade, that
carried a double edge, and was alike suited to the purpose of
striking or of pushing; but the soldier was always instructed to
prefer the latter use of his weapon, as his own body remained
less exposed, whilst he inflicted a more dangerous wound on his
adversary. ^45 The legion was usually drawn up eight deep; and
the regular distance of three feet was left between the files as
well as ranks. ^46 A body of troops, habituated to preserve this
open order, in a long front and a rapid charge, found themselves
prepared to execute every disposition which the circumstances of
war, or the skill of their leader, might suggest. The soldier
possessed a free space for his arms and motions, and sufficient
intervals were allowed, through which seasonable reenforcements
might be introduced to the relief of the exhausted combatants.
^47 The tactics of the Greeks and Macedonians were formed on very
different principles. The strength of the phalanx depended on
sixteen ranks of long pikes, wedged together in the closest
array. ^48 But it was soon discovered by reflection, as well as
by the event, that the strength of the phalanx was unable to
contend with the activity of the legion. ^49
[Footnote 41: See an admirable digression on the Roman
discipline, in the sixth book of his History.]
[Footnote 42: Vegetius de Re Militari, l. ii. c. 4, &c.
Considerable part of his very perplexed abridgment was taken from
the regulations of Trajan and Hadrian; and the legion, as he
describes it, cannot suit any other age of the Roman empire.]
[Footnote 43: Vegetius de Re Militari, l. ii. c. 1. In the purer
age of Caesar and Cicero, the word miles was almost confined to
the infantry. Under the lower empire, and the times of chivalry,
it was appropriated almost as exclusively to the men at arms, who
fought on horseback.]
[Footnote 44: In the time of Polybius and Dionysius of
Halicarnassus, (l. v. c. 45,) the steel point of the pilum seems
to have been much longer. In the time of Vegetius, it was
reduced to a foot, or even nine inches. I have chosen a medium.]
[Footnote 45: For the legionary arms, see Lipsius de Militia
Romana, l. iii. c. 2 - 7.]
[Footnote 46: See the beautiful comparison of Virgil, Georgic ii.
v. 279.]
[Footnote 47: M. Guichard, Memoires Militaires, tom. i. c. 4, and
Nouveaux Memoires, tom. i. p. 293 - 311, has treated the subject
like a scholar and an officer.]
[Footnote 48: See Arrian's Tactics. With the true partiality of
a Greek, Arrian rather chose to describe the phalanx, of which he
had read, than the legions which he had commanded.]
[Footnote 49: Polyb. l. xvii. (xviii. 9.)]
The cavalry, without which the force of the legion would
have remained imperfect, was divided into ten troops or
squadrons; the first, as the companion of the first cohort,
consisted of a hundred and thirty-two men; whilst each of the
other nine amounted only to sixty-six. The entire establishment
formed a regiment, if we may use the modern expression, of seven
hundred and twenty-six horse, naturally connected with its
respective legion, but occasionally separated to act in the line,
and to compose a part of the wings of the army. ^50 The cavalry
of the emperors was no longer composed, like that of the ancient
republic, of the noblest youths of Rome and Italy, who, by
performing their military service on horseback, prepared
themselves for the offices of senator and consul; and solicited,
by deeds of valor, the future suffrages of their countrymen. ^51
Since the alteration of manners and government, the most wealthy
of the equestrian order were engaged in the administration of
justice, and of the revenue; ^52 and whenever they embraced the
profession of arms, they were immediately intrusted with a troop
of horse, or a cohort of foot. ^53 Trajan and Hadrian formed
their cavalry from the same provinces, and the same class of
their subjects, which recruited the ranks of the legion. The
horses were bred, for the most part, in Spain or Cappadocia. The
Roman troopers despised the complete armor with which the cavalry
of the East was encumbered. Their more useful arms consisted in
a helmet, an oblong shield, light boots, and a coat of mail. A
javelin, and a long broad sword, were their principal weapons of
offence. The use of lances and of iron maces they seem to have
borrowed from the barbarians. ^54
[Footnote 50: Veget. de Re Militari, l. ii. c. 6. His positive
testimony, which might be supported by circumstantial evidence,
ought surely to silence those critics who refuse the Imperial
legion its proper body of cavalry.
Note: See also Joseph. B. J. iii. vi. 2. - M.]
[Footnote 51: See Livy almost throughout, particularly xlii. 61.]
[Footnote 52: Plin. Hist. Natur. xxxiii. 2. The true sense of
that very curious passage was first discovered and illustrated by
M. de Beaufort, Republique Romaine, l. ii. c. 2.]
[Footnote 53: As in the instance of Horace and Agricola. This
appears to have been a defect in the Roman discipline; which
Hadrian endeavored to remedy by ascertaining the legal age of a
tribune.
Note: These details are not altogether accurate. Although,
in the latter days of the republic, and under the first emperors,
the young Roman nobles obtained the command of a squadron or a
cohort with greater facility than in the former times, they never
obtained it without passing through a tolerably long military
service. Usually they served first in the praetorian cohort,
which was intrusted with the guard of the general: they were
received into the companionship (contubernium) of some superior
officer, and were there formed for duty. Thus Julius Caesar,
though sprung from a great family, served first as contubernalis
under the praetor, M. Thermus, and later under Servilius the
Isaurian. (Suet. Jul. 2, 5. Plut. in Par. p. 516. Ed. Froben.)
The example of Horace, which Gibbon adduces to prove that young
knights were made tribunes immediately on entering the service,
proves nothing. In the first place, Horace was not a knight; he
was the son of a freedman of Venusia, in Apulia, who exercised
the humble office of coactor exauctionum, (collector of payments
at auctions.) (Sat. i. vi. 45, or 86.) Moreover, when the poet
was made tribune, Brutus, whose army was nearly entirely composed
of Orientals, gave this title to all the Romans of consideration
who joined him. The emperors were still less difficult in their
choice; the number of tribunes was augmented; the title and
honors were conferred on persons whom they wished to attack to
the court. Augustus conferred on the sons of senators, sometimes
the tribunate, sometimes the command of a squadron. Claudius
gave to the knights who entered into the service, first the
command of a cohort of auxiliaries, later that of a squadron, and
at length, for the first time, the tribunate. (Suet in Claud.
with the notes of Ernesti.) The abuses that arose caused by the
edict of Hadrian, which fixed the age at which that honor could
be attained. (Spart. in Had. &c.) This edict was subsequently
obeyed; for the emperor Valerian, in a letter addressed to
Mulvius Gallinnus, praetorian praefect, excuses himself for
having violated it in favor of the young Probus afterwards
emperor, on whom he had conferred the tribunate at an earlier age
on account of his rare talents. (Vopisc. in Prob. iv.) - W. and
G. Agricola, though already invested with the title of tribune,
was contubernalis in Britain with Suetonius Paulinus. Tac. Agr.
v. - M.]
[Footnote 54: See Arrian's Tactics.]
The safety and honor of the empire was principally intrusted
to the legions, but the policy of Rome condescended to adopt
every useful instrument of war. Considerable levies were
regularly made among the provincials, who had not yet deserved
the honorable distinction of Romans. Many dependent princes and
communities, dispersed round the frontiers, were permitted, for a
while, to hold their freedom and security by the tenure of
military service. ^55 Even select troops of hostile barbarians
were frequently compelled or persuaded to consume their dangerous
valor in remote climates, and for the benefit of the state. ^56
All these were included under the general name of auxiliaries;
and howsoever they might vary according to the difference of
times and circumstances, their numbers were seldom much inferior
to those of the legions themselves. ^57 Among the auxiliaries,
the bravest and most faithful bands were placed under the command
of praefects and centurions, and severely trained in the arts of
Roman discipline; but the far greater part retained those arms,
to which the nature of their country, or their early habits of
life, more peculiarly adapted them. By this institution, each
legion, to whom a certain proportion of auxiliaries was allotted,
contained within itself every species of lighter troops, and of
missile weapons; and was capable of encountering every nation,
with the advantages of its respective arms and discipline. ^58
Nor was the legion destitute of what, in modern language, would
be styled a train of artillery. It consisted in ten military
engines of the largest, and fifty-five of a smaller size; but all
of which, either in an oblique or horizontal manner, discharged
stones and darts with irresistible violence. ^59
[Footnote 55: Such, in particular, was the state of the
Batavians. Tacit. Germania, c. 29.]
[Footnote 56: Marcus Antoninus obliged the vanquished Quadi and
Marcomanni to supply him with a large body of troops, which he
immediately sent into Britain. Dion Cassius, l. lxxi. (c. 16.)]
[Footnote 57: Tacit. Annal. iv. 5. Those who fix a regular
proportion of as many foot, and twice as many horse, confound the
auxiliaries of the emperors with the Italian allies of the
republic.]
[Footnote 58: Vegetius, ii. 2. Arrian, in his order of march and
battle against the Alani.]
[Footnote 59: The subject of the ancient machines is treated with
great knowledge and ingenuity by the Chevalier Folard, (Polybe,
tom. ii. p. 233- 290.) He prefers them in many respects to our
modern cannon and mortars. We may observe, that the use of them
in the field gradually became more prevalent, in proportion as
personal valor and military skill declined with the Roman empire.
When men were no longer found, their place was supplied by
machines. See Vegetius, ii. 25. Arrian.]
Chapter I: The Extent Of The Empire In The Age Of The Antonines.
Part III.
The camp of a Roman legion presented the appearance of a
fortified city. ^60 As soon as the space was marked out, the
pioneers carefully levelled the ground, and removed every
impediment that might interrupt its perfect regularity. Its form
was an exact quadrangle; and we may calculate, that a square of
about seven hundred yards was sufficient for the encampment of
twenty thousand Romans; though a similar number of our own troops
would expose to the enemy a front of more than treble that
extent. In the midst of the camp, the praetorium, or general's
quarters, rose above the others; the cavalry, the infantry, and
the auxiliaries occupied their respective stations; the streets
were broad and perfectly straight, and a vacant space of two
hundred feet was left on all sides between the tents and the
rampart. The rampart itself was usually twelve feet high, armed
with a line of strong and intricate palisades, and defended by a
ditch of twelve feet in depth as well as in breadth. This
important labor was performed by the hands of the legionaries
themselves; to whom the use of the spade and the pickaxe was no
less familiar than that of the sword or pilum. Active valor may
often be the present of nature; but such patient diligence can be
the fruit only of habit and discipline. ^61
[Footnote 60: Vegetius finishes his second book, and the
description of the legion, with the following emphatic words: -
"Universa quae ix quoque belli genere necessaria esse creduntur,
secum Jegio debet ubique portare, ut in quovis loco fixerit
castra, arma'am faciat civitatem."]
[Footnote 61: For the Roman Castrametation, see Polybius, l. vi.
with Lipsius de Militia Romana, Joseph. de Bell. Jud. l. iii. c.
5. Vegetius, i. 21 - 25, iii. 9, and Memoires de Guichard, tom.
i. c. 1.]
Whenever the trumpet gave the signal of departure, the camp
was almost instantly broke up, and the troops fell into their
ranks without delay or confusion. Besides their arms, which the
legendaries scarcely considered as an encumbrance, they were
laden with their kitchen furniture, the instruments of
fortification, and the provision of many days. ^62 Under this
weight, which would oppress the delicacy of a modern soldier,
they were trained by a regular step to advance, in about six
hours, near twenty miles. ^63 On the appearance of an enemy, they
threw aside their baggage, and by easy and rapid evolutions
converted the column of march into an order of battle. ^64 The
slingers and archers skirmished in the front; the auxiliaries
formed the first line, and were seconded or sustained by the
strength of the legions; the cavalry covered the flanks, and the
military engines were placed in the rear.
[Footnote 62: Cicero in Tusculan. ii. 37, [15.] - Joseph. de
Bell. Jud. l. iii. 5, Frontinus, iv. 1.]
[Footnote 63: Vegetius, i. 9. See Memoires de l'Academie des
Inscriptions, tom. xxv. p. 187.]
[Footnote 64: See those evolutions admirably well explained by M.
Guichard Nouveaux Memoires, tom. i. p. 141 - 234.]
Such were the arts of war, by which the Roman emperors
defended their extensive conquests, and preserved a military
spirit, at a time when every other virtue was oppressed by luxury
and despotism. If, in the consideration of their armies, we pass
from their discipline to their numbers, we shall not find it easy
to define them with any tolerable accuracy. We may compute,
however, that the legion, which was itself a body of six thousand
eight hundred and thirty-one Romans, might, with its attendant
auxiliaries, amount to about twelve thousand five hundred men.
The peace establishment of Hadrian and his successors was
composed of no less than thirty of these formidable brigades; and
most probably formed a standing force of three hundred and
seventy-five thousand men. Instead of being confined within the
walls of fortified cities, which the Romans considered as the
refuge of weakness or pusillanimity, the legions were encamped on
the banks of the great rivers, and along the frontiers of the
barbarians. As their stations, for the most part, remained fixed
and permanent, we may venture to describe the distribution of the
troops. Three legions were sufficient for Britain. The principal
strength lay upon the Rhine and Danube, and consisted of sixteen
legions, in the following proportions: two in the Lower, and
three in the Upper Germany; one in Rhaetia, one in Noricum, four
in Pannonia, three in Maesia, and two in Dacia. The defence of
the Euphrates was intrusted to eight legions, six of whom were
planted in Syria, and the other two in Cappadocia. With regard
to Egypt, Africa, and Spain, as they were far removed from any
important scene of war, a single legion maintained the domestic
tranquillity of each of those great provinces. Even Italy was
not left destitute of a military force. Above twenty thousand
chosen soldiers, distinguished by the titles of City Cohorts and
Praetorian Guards, watched over the safety of the monarch and the
capital. As the authors of almost every revolution that
distracted the empire, the Praetorians will, very soon, and very
loudly, demand our attention; but, in their arms and
institutions, we cannot find any circumstance which discriminated
them from the legions, unless it were a more splendid appearance,
and a less rigid discipline. ^65
[Footnote 65: Tacitus (Annal. iv. 5) has given us a state of the
legions under Tiberius; and Dion Cassius (l. lv. p. 794) under
Alexander Severus. I have endeavored to fix on the proper medium
between these two periods. See likewise Lipsius de Magnitudine
Romana, l. i. c. 4, 5.]
The navy maintained by the emperors might seem inadequate to
their greatness; but it was fully sufficient for every useful
purpose of government. The ambition of the Romans was confined
to the land; nor was that warlike people ever actuated by the
enterprising spirit which had prompted the navigators of Tyre, of
Carthage, and even of Marseilles, to enlarge the bounds of the
world, and to explore the most remote coasts of the ocean. To
the Romans the ocean remained an object of terror rather than of
curiosity; ^66 the whole extent of the Mediterranean, after the
destruction of Carthage, and the extirpation of the pirates, was
included within their provinces. The policy of the emperors was
directed only to preserve the peaceful dominion of that sea, and
to protect the commerce of their subjects. With these moderate
views, Augustus stationed two permanent fleets in the most
convenient ports of Italy, the one at Ravenna, on the Adriatic,
the other at Misenum, in the Bay of Naples. Experience seems at
length to have convinced the ancients, that as soon as their
galleys exceeded two, or at the most three ranks of oars, they
were suited rather for vain pomp than for real service. Augustus
himself, in the victory of Actium, had seen the superiority of
his own light frigates (they were called Liburnians) over the
lofty but unwieldy castles of his rival. ^67 Of these Liburnians
he composed the two fleets of Ravenna and Misenum, destined to
command, the one the eastern, the other the western division of
the Mediterranean; and to each of the squadrons he attached a
body of several thousand marines. Besides these two ports, which
may be considered as the principal seats of the Roman navy, a
very considerable force was stationed at Frejus, on the coast of
Provence, and the Euxine was guarded by forty ships, and three
thousand soldiers. To all these we add the fleet which preserved
the communication between Gaul and Britain, and a great number of
vessels constantly maintained on the Rhine and Danube, to harass
the country, or to intercept the passage of the barbarians. ^68
If we review this general state of the Imperial forces; of the
cavalry as well as infantry; of the legions, the auxiliaries, the
guards, and the navy; the most liberal computation will not allow
us to fix the entire establishment by sea and by land at more
than four hundred and fifty thousand men: a military power,
which, however formidable it may seem, was equalled by a monarch
of the last century, whose kingdom was confined within a single
province of the Roman empire. ^69
[Footnote 66: The Romans tried to disguise, by the pretence of
religious awe their ignorance and terror. See Tacit. Germania,
c. 34.]
[Footnote 67: Plutarch, in Marc. Anton. [c. 67.] And yet, if we
may credit Orosius, these monstrous castles were no more than ten
feet above the water, vi. 19.]
[Footnote 68: See Lipsius, de Magnitud. Rom. l. i. c. 5. The
sixteen last chapters of Vegetius relate to naval affairs.]
[Footnote 69: Voltaire, Siecle de Louis XIV. c. 29. It must,
however, be remembered, that France still feels that
extraordinary effort.]
We have attempted to explain the spirit which moderated, and
the strength which supported, the power of Hadrian and the
Antonines. We shall now endeavor, with clearness and precision,
to describe the provinces once united under their sway, but, at
present, divided into so many independent and hostile states.
Spain, the western extremity of the empire, of Europe, and
of the ancient world, has, in every age, invariably preserved the
same natural limits; the Pyrenaean Mountains, the Mediterranean,
and the Atlantic Ocean. That great peninsula, at present so
unequally divided between two sovereigns, was distributed by
Augustus into three provinces, Lusitania, Baetica, and
Tarraconensis. The kingdom of Portugal now fills the place of
the warlike country of the Lusitanians; and the loss sustained by
the former on the side of the East, is compensated by an
accession of territory towards the North. The confines of Grenada
and Andalusia correspond with those of ancient Baetica. The
remainder of Spain, Gallicia, and the Asturias, Biscay, and
Navarre, Leon, and the two Castiles, Murcia, Valencia, Catalonia,
and Arragon, all contributed to form the third and most
considerable of the Roman governments, which, from the name of
its capital, was styled the province of Tarragona. ^70 Of the
native barbarians, the Celtiberians were the most powerful, as
the Cantabrians and Asturians proved the most obstinate.
Confident in the strength of their mountains, they were the last
who submitted to the arms of Rome, and the first who threw off
the yoke of the Arabs.
[Footnote 70: See Strabo, l. ii. It is natural enough to
suppose, that Arragon is derived from Tarraconensis, and several
moderns who have written in Latin use those words as synonymous.
It is, however, certain, that the Arragon, a little stream which
falls from the Pyrenees into the Ebro, first gave its name to a
country, and gradually to a kingdom. See d'Anville, Geographie
du Moyen Age, p. 181.]
Ancient Gaul, as it contained the whole country between the
Pyrenees, the Alps, the Rhine, and the Ocean, was of greater
extent than modern France. To the dominions of that powerful
monarchy, with its recent acquisitions of Alsace and Lorraine, we
must add the duchy of Savoy, the cantons of Switzerland, the four
electorates of the Rhine, and the territories of Liege,
Luxemburgh, Hainault, Flanders, and Brabant. When Augustus gave
laws to the conquests of his father, he introduced a division of
Gaul, equally adapted to the progress of the legions, to the
course of the rivers, and to the principal national distinctions,
which had comprehended above a hundred independent states. ^71
The sea-coast of the Mediterranean, Languedoc, Provence, and
Dauphine, received their provincial appellation from the colony
of Narbonne. The government of Aquitaine was extended from the
Pyrenees to the Loire. The country between the Loire and the
Seine was styled the Celtic Gaul, and soon borrowed a new
denomination from the celebrated colony of Lugdunum, or Lyons.
The Belgic lay beyond the Seine, and in more ancient times had
been bounded only by the Rhine; but a little before the age of
Caesar, the Germans, abusing their superiority of valor, had
occupied a considerable portion of the Belgic territory. The
Roman conquerors very eagerly embraced so flattering a
circumstance, and the Gallic frontier of the Rhine, from Basil to
Leyden, received the pompous names of the Upper and the Lower
Germany. ^72 Such, under the reign of the Antonines, were the six
provinces of Gaul; the Narbonnese, Aquitaine, the Celtic, or
Lyonnese, the Belgic, and the two Germanies.
[Footnote 71: One hundred and fifteen cities appear in the
Notitia of Gaul; and it is well known that this appellation was
applied not only to the capital town, but to the whole territory
of each state. But Plutarch and Appian increase the number of
tribes to three or four hundred.]
[Footnote 72: D'Anville. Notice de l'Ancienne Gaule.]
We have already had occasion to mention the conquest of
Britain, and to fix the boundary of the Roman Province in this
island. It comprehended all England, Wales, and the Lowlands of
Scotland, as far as the Friths of Dumbarton and Edinburgh.
Before Britain lost her freedom, the country was irregularly
divided between thirty tribes of barbarians, of whom the most
considerable were the Belgae in the West, the Brigantes in the
North, the Silures in South Wales, and the Iceni in Norfolk and
Suffolk. ^73 As far as we can either trace or credit the
resemblance of manners and language, Spain, Gaul, and Britain
were peopled by the same hardy race of savages. Before they
yielded to the Roman arms, they often disputed the field, and
often renewed the contest. After their submission, they
constituted the western division of the European provinces, which
extended from the columns of Hercules to the wall of Antoninus,
and from the mouth of the Tagus to the sources of the Rhine and
Danube.
[Footnote 73: Whittaker's History of Manchester, vol. i. c. 3.]
Before the Roman conquest, the country which is now called
Lombardy, was not considered as a part of Italy. It had been
occupied by a powerful colony of Gauls, who, settling themselves
along the banks of the Po, from Piedmont to Romagna, carried
their arms and diffused their name from the Alps to the Apennine.
The Ligurians dwelt on the rocky coast which now forms the
republic of Genoa. Venice was yet unborn; but the territories of
that state, which lie to the east of the Adige, were inhabited by
the Venetians. ^74 The middle part of the peninsula, that now
composes the duchy of Tuscany and the ecclesiastical state, was
the ancient seat of the Etruscans and Umbrians; to the former of
whom Italy was indebted for the first rudiments of civilized
life. ^75 The Tyber rolled at the foot of the seven hills of
Rome, and the country of the Sabines, the Latins, and the Volsci,
from that river to the frontiers of Naples, was the theatre of
her infant victories. On that celebrated ground the first
consuls deserved triumphs, their successors adorned villas, and
their posterity have erected convents. ^76 Capua and Campania
possessed the immediate territory of Naples; the rest of the
kingdom was inhabited by many warlike nations, the Marsi, the
Samnites, the Apulians, and the Lucanians; and the sea-coasts had
been covered by the flourishing colonies of the Greeks. We may
remark, that when Augustus divided Italy into eleven regions, the
little province of Istria was annexed to that seat of Roman
sovereignty. ^77
[Footnote 74: The Italian Veneti, though often confounded with
the Gauls, were more probably of Illyrian origin. See M. Freret,
Memoires de l'Academie des Inscriptions, tom. xviii.
Note: Or Liburnian, according to Niebuhr. Vol. i. p. 172. -
M.]
[Footnote 75: See Maffei Verona illustrata, l. i.
Note: Add Niebuhr, vol. i., and Otfried Muller, die
Etrusker, which contains much that is known, and much that is
conjectured, about this remarkable people. Also Micali, Storia
degli antichi popoli Italiani. Florence, 1832 - M.]
[Footnote 76: The first contrast was observed by the ancients.
See Florus, i. 11. The second must strike every modern
traveller.]
[Footnote 77: Pliny (Hist. Natur. l. iii.) follows the division
of Italy by Augustus.]
The European provinces of Rome were protected by the course
of the Rhine and the Danube. The latter of those mighty streams,
which rises at the distance of only thirty miles from the former,
flows above thirteen hundred miles, for the most part to the
south-east, collects the tribute of sixty navigable rivers, and
is, at length, through six mouths, received into the Euxine,
which appears scarcely equal to such an accession of waters. ^78
The provinces of the Danube soon acquired the general appellation
of Illyricum, or the Illyrian frontier, ^79 and were esteemed the
most warlike of the empire; but they deserve to be more
particularly considered under the names of Rhaetia, Noricum,
Pannonia, Dalmatia, Dacia, Maesia, Thrace, Macedonia, and Greece.
[Footnote 78: Tournefort, Voyages en Grece et Asie Mineure,
lettre xviii.]
[Footnote 79: The name of Illyricum originally belonged to the
sea-coast of the Adriatic, and was gradually extended by the
Romans from the Alps to the Euxine Sea. See Severini Pannonia,
l. i. c. 3.]
The province of Rhaetia, which soon extinguished the name of
the Vindelicians, extended from the summit of the Alps to the
banks of the Danube; from its source, as far as its conflux with
the Inn. The greatest part of the flat country is subject to the
elector of Bavaria; the city of Augsburg is protected by the
constitution of the German empire; the Grisons are safe in their
mountains, and the country of Tirol is ranked among the numerous
provinces of the house of Austria.
The wide extent of territory which is included between the
Inn, the Danube, and the Save, - Austria, Styria, Carinthia,
Carniola, the Lower Hungary, and Sclavonia, - was known to the
ancients under the names of Noricum and Pannonia. In their
original state of independence, their fierce inhabitants were
intimately connected. Under the Roman government they were
frequently united, and they still remain the patrimony of a
single family. They now contain the residence of a German prince,
who styles himself Emperor of the Romans, and form the centre, as
well as strength, of the Austrian power. It may not be improper
to observe, that if we except Bohemia, Moravia, the northern
skirts of Austria, and a part of Hungary between the Teyss and
the Danube, all the other dominions of the House of Austria were
comprised within the limits of the Roman Empire.
Dalmatia, to which the name of Illyricum more properly
belonged, was a long, but narrow tract, between the Save and the
Adriatic. The best part of the sea-coast, which still retains
its ancient appellation, is a province of the Venetian state, and
the seat of the little republic of Ragusa. The inland parts have
assumed the Sclavonian names of Croatia and Bosnia; the former
obeys an Austrian governor, the latter a Turkish pacha; but the
whole country is still infested by tribes of barbarians, whose
savage independence irregularly marks the doubtful limit of the
Christian and Mahometan power. ^80
[Footnote 80: A Venetian traveller, the Abbate Fortis, has lately
given us some account of those very obscure countries. But the
geography and antiquities of the western Illyricum can be
expected only from the munificence of the emperor, its
sovereign.]
After the Danube had received the waters of the Teyss and
the Save, it acquired, at least among the Greeks, the name of
Ister. ^81 It formerly divided Maesia and Dacia, the latter of
which, as we have already seen, was a conquest of Trajan, and the
only province beyond the river. If we inquire into the present
state of those countries, we shall find that, on the left hand of
the Danube, Temeswar and Transylvania have been annexed, after
many revolutions, to the crown of Hungary; whilst the
principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia acknowledge the
supremacy of the Ottoman Porte. On the right hand of the Danube,
Maesia, which, during the middle ages, was broken into the
barbarian kingdoms of Servia and Bulgaria, is again united in
Turkish slavery.
[Footnote 81: The Save rises near the confines of Istria, and was
considered by the more early Greeks as the principal stream of
the Danube.]
The appellation of Roumelia, which is still bestowed by the
Turks on the extensive countries of Thrace, Macedonia, and
Greece, preserves the memory of their ancient state under the
Roman empire. In the time of the Antonines, the martial regions
of Thrace, from the mountains of Haemus and Rhodope, to the
Bosphorus and the Hellespont, had assumed the form of a province.
Notwithstanding the change of masters and of religion, the new
city of Rome, founded by Constantine on the banks of the
Bosphorus, has ever since remained the capital of a great
monarchy. The kingdom of Macedonia, which, under the reign of
Alexander, gave laws to Asia, derived more solid advantages from
the policy of the two Philips; and with its dependencies of
Epirus and Thessaly, extended from the Aegean to the Ionian Sea.
When we reflect on the fame of Thebes and Argos, of Sparta and
Athens, we can scarcely persuade ourselves, that so many immortal
republics of ancient Greece were lost in a single province of the
Roman empire, which, from the superior influence of the Achaean
league, was usually denominated the province of Achaia.
Such was the state of Europe under the Roman emperors. The
provinces of Asia, without excepting the transient conquests of
Trajan, are all comprehended within the limits of the Turkish
power. But, instead of following the arbitrary divisions of
despotism and ignorance, it will be safer for us, as well as more
agreeable, to observe the indelible characters of nature. The
name of Asia Minor is attributed with some propriety to the
peninsula, which, confined betwixt the Euxine and the
Mediterranean, advances from the Euphrates towards Europe. The
most extensive and flourishing district, westward of Mount Taurus
and the River Halys, was dignified by the Romans with the
exclusive title of Asia. The jurisdiction of that province
extended over the ancient monarchies of Troy, Lydia, and Phrygia,
the maritime countries of the Pamphylians, Lycians, and Carians,
and the Grecian colonies of Ionia, which equalled in arts, though
not in arms, the glory of their parent. The kingdoms of Bithynia
and Pontus possessed the northern side of the peninsula from
Constantinople to Trebizond. On the opposite side, the province
of Cilicia was terminated by the mountains of Syria: the inland
country, separated from the Roman Asia by the River Halys, and
from Armenia by the Euphrates, had once formed the independent
kingdom of Cappadocia. In this place we may observe, that the
northern shores of the Euxine, beyond Trebizond in Asia, and
beyond the Danube in Europe, acknowledged the sovereignty of the
emperors, and received at their hands either tributary princes or
Roman garrisons. Budzak, Crim Tartary, Circassia, and Mingrelia,
are the modern appellations of those savage countries. ^82
[Footnote 82: See the Periplus of Arrian. He examined the coasts
of the Euxine, when he was governor of Cappadocia.]
Under the successors of Alexander, Syria was the seat of the
Seleucidae, who reigned over Upper Asia, till the successful
revolt of the Parthians confined their dominions between the
Euphrates and the Mediterranean. When Syria became subject to
the Romans, it formed the eastern frontier of their empire: nor
did that province, in its utmost latitude, know any other bounds
than the mountains of Cappadocia to the north, and towards the
south, the confines of Egypt, and the Red Sea. Phoenicia and
Palestine were sometimes annexed to, and sometimes separated
from, the jurisdiction of Syria. The former of these was a
narrow and rocky coast; the latter was a territory scarcely
superior to Wales, either in fertility or extent. ^* Yet
Phoenicia and Palestine will forever live in the memory of
mankind; since America, as well as Europe, has received letters
from the one, and religion from the other. ^83 A sandy desert,
alike destitute of wood and water, skirts along the doubtful
confine of Syria, from the Euphrates to the Red Sea. The
wandering life of the Arabs was inseparably connected with their
independence; and wherever, on some spots less barren than the
rest, they ventured to for many settled habitations, they soon
became subjects to the Roman empire. ^84
[Footnote *: This comparison is exaggerated, with the intention,
no doubt, of attacking the authority of the Bible, which boasts
of the fertility of Palestine. Gibbon's only authorities were
that of Strabo (l. xvi. 1104) and the present state of the
country. But Strabo only speaks of the neighborhood of
Jerusalem, which he calls barren and arid to the extent of sixty
stadia round the city: in other parts he gives a favorable
testimony to the fertility of many parts of Palestine: thus he
says, "Near Jericho there is a grove of palms, and a country of a
hundred stadia, full of springs, and well peopled." Moreover,
Strabo had never seen Palestine; he spoke only after reports,
which may be as inaccurate as those according to which he has
composed that description of Germany, in which Gluverius has
detected so many errors. (Gluv. Germ. iii. 1.) Finally, his
testimony is contradicted and refuted by that of other ancient
authors, and by medals. Tacitus says, in speaking of Palestine,
"The inhabitants are healthy and robust; the rains moderate; the
soil fertile." (Hist. v. 6.) Ammianus Macellinus says also, "The
last of the Syrias is Palestine, a country of considerable
extent, abounding in clean and well-cultivated land, and
containing some fine cities, none of which yields to the other;
but, as it were, being on a parallel, are rivals." - xiv. 8. See
also the historian Josephus, Hist. vi. 1. Procopius of Caeserea,
who lived in the sixth century, says that Chosroes, king of
Persia, had a great desire to make himself master of Palestine,
on account of its extraordinary fertility, its opulence, and the
great number of its inhabitants. The Saracens thought the same,
and were afraid that Omar. when he went to Jerusalem, charmed
with the fertility of the soil and the purity of the air, would
never return to Medina. (Ockley, Hist. of Sarac. i. 232.) The
importance attached by the Romans to the conquest of Palestine,
and the obstacles they encountered, prove also the richness and
population of the country. Vespasian and Titus caused medals to
be struck with trophies, in which Palestine is represented by a
female under a palm-tree, to signify the richness of he country,
with this legend: Judea capta. Other medals also indicate this
fertility; for instance, that of Herod holding a bunch of grapes,
and that of the young Agrippa displaying fruit. As to the
present state of he country, one perceives that it is not fair to
draw any inference against its ancient fertility: the disasters
through which it has passed, the government to which it is
subject, the disposition of the inhabitants, explain sufficiently
the wild and uncultivated appearance of the land, where,
nevertheless, fertile and cultivated districts are still found,
according to the testimony of travellers; among others, of Shaw,
Maundrel, La Rocque, &c. - G. The Abbe Guenee, in his Lettres de
quelques Juifs a Mons. de Voltaire, has exhausted the subject of
the fertility of Palestine; for Voltaire had likewise indulged in
sarcasm on this subject. Gibbon was assailed on this point, not,
indeed, by Mr. Davis, who, he slyly insinuates,was prevented by
his patriotism as a Welshman from resenting the comparison with
Wales, but by other writers. In his Vindication, he first
established the correctness of his measurement of Palestine,
which he estimates as 7600 square English miles, while Wales is
about 7011. As to fertility, he proceeds in the following
dexterously composed and splendid passage: "The emperor Frederick
II., the enemy and the victim of the clergy, is accused of
saying, after his return from his crusade, that the God of the
Jews would have despised his promised land, if he had once seen
the fruitful realms of Sicily and Naples." (See Giannone, Istor.
Civ. del R. di Napoli, ii. 245.) This raillery, which malice has,
perhaps, falsely imputed to Frederick, is inconsistent with truth
and piety; yet it must be confessed that the soil of Palestine
does not contain that inexhaustible, and, as it were, spontaneous
principle of fertility, which, under the most unfavorable
circumstances, has covered with rich harvests the banks of the
Nile, the fields of Sicily, or the plains of Poland. The Jordan
is the only navigable river of Palestine: a considerable part of
the narrow space is occupied, or rather lost, in the Dead Sea
whose horrid aspect inspires every sensation of disgust, and
countenances every tale of horror. The districts which border on
Arabia partake of the sandy quality of the adjacent desert. The
face of the country, except the sea- coast, and the valley of the
Jordan, is covered with mountains, which appear, for the most
part, as naked and barren rocks; and in the neighborhood of
Jerusalem, there is a real scarcity of the two elements of earth
and water. (See Maundrel's Travels, p. 65, and Reland's Palestin.
i. 238, 395.) These disadvantages, which now operate in their
fullest extent, were formerly corrected by the labors of a
numerous people, and the active protection of a wise government.
The hills were clothed with rich beds of artificial mould, the
rain was collected in vast cisterns, a supply of fresh water was
conveyed by pipes and aqueducts to the dry lands. The breed of
cattle was encouraged in those parts which were not adapted for
tillage, and almost every spot was compelled to yield some
production for the use of the inhabitants.
Pater ispe colendi
Haud facilem esse viam voluit, primusque par artem
Movit agros; curis acuens mortalia corda,
Nec torpere gravi passus sua Regna veterno.
Gibbon, Misc. Works, iv. 540.
But Gibbon has here eluded the question about the land "flowing
with milk and honey." He is describing Judaea only, without
comprehending Galilee, or the rich pastures beyond the Jordan,
even now proverbial for their flocks and herds. (See
Burckhardt's Travels, and Hist of Jews, i. 178.) The following is
believed to be a fair statement: "The extraordinary fertility of
the whole country must be taken into the account. No part was
waste; very little was occupied by unprofitable wood; the more
fertile hills were cultivated in artificial terraces, others were
hung with orchards of fruit trees the more rocky and barren
districts were covered with vineyards." Even in the present day,
the wars and misgovernment of ages have not exhausted the natural
richness of the soil. "Galilee," says Malte Brun, "would be a
paradise were it inhabited by an industrious people under an
enlightened government. No land could be less dependent on
foreign importation; it bore within itself every thing that could
be necessary for the subsistence and comfort of a simple
agricultural people. The climate was healthy, the seasons
regular; the former rains, which fell about October, after the
vintage, prepared the ground for the seed; that latter, which
prevailed during March and the beginning of April, made it grow
rapidly. Directly the rains ceased, the grain ripened with still
greater rapidity, and was gathered in before the end of May. The
summer months were dry and very hot, but the nights cool and
refreshed by copious dews. In September, the vintage was
gathered. Grain of all kinds, wheat, barley, millet, zea, and
other sorts, grew in abundance; the wheat commonly yielded thirty
for one. Besides the vine and the olive, the almond, the date,
figs of many kinds, the orange, the pomegranate, and many other
fruit trees, flourished in the greatest luxuriance. Great
quantity of honey was collected. The balm-tree, which produced
the opobalsamum,a great object of trade, was probably introduced
from Arabia, in the time of Solomon. It flourished about Jericho
and in Gilead." - Milman's Hist. of Jews. i. 177. - M.]
[Footnote 83: The progress of religion is well known. The use of
letter was introduced among the savages of Europe about fifteen
hundred years before Christ; and the Europeans carried them to
America about fifteen centuries after the Christian Aera. But in
a period of three thousand years, the Phoenician alphabet
received considerable alterations, as it passed through the hands
of the Greeks and Romans.]
[Footnote 84: Dion Cassius, lib. lxviii. p. 1131.]
The geographers of antiquity have frequently hesitated to
what portion of the globe they should ascribe Egypt. ^85 By its
situation that celebrated kingdom is included within the immense
peninsula of Africa; but it is accessible only on the side of
Asia, whose revolutions, in almost every period of history, Egypt
has humbly obeyed. A Roman praefect was seated on the splendid
throne of the Ptolemies; and the iron sceptre of the Mamelukes is
now in the hands of a Turkish pacha. The Nile flows down the
country, above five hundred miles from the tropic of Cancer to
the Mediterranean, and marks on either side of the extent of
fertility by the measure of its inundations. Cyrene, situate
towards the west, and along the sea-coast, was first a Greek
colony, afterwards a province of Egypt, and is now lost in the
desert of Barca. ^*
[Footnote 85: Ptolemy and Strabo, with the modern geographers,
fix the Isthmus of Suez as the boundary of Asia and Africa.
Dionysius, Mela, Pliny, Sallust, Hirtius, and Solinus, have
preferred for that purpose the western branch of the Nile, or
even the great Catabathmus, or descent, which last would assign
to Asia, not only Egypt, but part of Libya.]
[Footnote *: The French editor has a long and unnecessary note on
the History of Cyrene. For the present state of that coast and
country, the volume of Captain Beechey is full of interesting
details. Egypt, now an independent and improving kingdom,
appears, under the enterprising rule of Mahommed Ali, likely to
revenge its former oppression upon the decrepit power of the
Turkish empire. - M. - This note was written in 1838. The future
destiny of Egypt is an important problem, only to be solved by
time. This observation will also apply to the new French colony
in Algiers. - M. 1845.]
From Cyrene to the ocean, the coast of Africa extends above
fifteen hundred miles; yet so closely is it pressed between the
Mediterranean and the Sahara, or sandy desert, that its breadth
seldom exceeds fourscore or a hundred miles. The eastern
division was considered by the Romans as the more peculiar and
proper province of Africa. Till the arrival of the Phoenician
colonies, that fertile country was inhabited by the Libyans, the
most savage of mankind. Under the immediate jurisdiction of
Carthage, it became the centre of commerce and empire; but the
republic of Carthage is now degenerated into the feeble and
disorderly states of Tripoli and Tunis. The military government
of Algiers oppresses the wide extent of Numidia, as it was once
united under Massinissa and Jugurtha; but in the time of
Augustus, the limits of Numidia were contracted; and, at least,
two thirds of the country acquiesced in the name of Mauritania,
with the epithet of Caesariensis. The genuine Mauritania, or
country of the Moors, which, from the ancient city of Tingi, or
Tangier, was distinguished by the appellation of Tingitana, is
represented by the modern kingdom of Fez. Salle, on the Ocean,
so infamous at present for its piratical depredations, was
noticed by the Romans, as the extreme object of their power, and
almost of their geography. A city of their foundation may still
be discovered near Mequinez, the residence of the barbarian whom
we condescend to style the Emperor of Morocco; but it does not
appear, that his more southern dominions, Morocco itself, and
Segelmessa, were ever comprehended within the Roman province. The
western parts of Africa are intersected by the branches of Mount
Atlas, a name so idly celebrated by the fancy of poets; ^86 but
which is now diffused over the immense ocean that rolls between
the ancient and the new continent. ^87
[Footnote 86: The long range, moderate height, and gentle
declivity of Mount Atlas, (see Shaw's Travels, p. 5,) are very
unlike a solitary mountain which rears its head into the clouds,
and seems to support the heavens. The peak of Teneriff, on the
contrary, rises a league and a half above the surface of the sea;
and, as it was frequently visited by the Phoenicians, might
engage the notice of the Greek poets. See Buffon, Histoire
Naturelle, tom. i. p. 312. Histoire des Voyages, tom. ii.]
[Footnote 87: M. de Voltaire, tom. xiv. p. 297, unsupported by
either fact or probability, has generously bestowed the Canary
Islands on the Roman empire.]
Having now finished the circuit of the Roman empire, we may
observe, that Africa is divided from Spain by a narrow strait of
about twelve miles, through which the Atlantic flows into the
Mediterranean. The columns of Hercules, so famous among the
ancients, were two mountains which seemed to have been torn
asunder by some convulsion of the elements; and at the foot of
the European mountain, the fortress of Gibraltar is now seated.
The whole extent of the Mediterranean Sea, its coasts and its
islands, were comprised within the Roman dominion. Of the larger
islands, the two Baleares, which derive their name of Majorca and
Minorca from their respective size, are subject at present, the
former to Spain, the latter to Great Britain. ^* It is easier to
deplore the fate, than to describe the actual condition, of
Corsica. ^! Two Italian sovereigns assume a regal title from
Sardinia and Sicily. Crete, or Candia, with Cyprus, and most of
the smaller islands of Greece and Asia, have been subdued by the
Turkish arms, whilst the little rock of Malta defies their power,
and has emerged, under the government of its military Order, into
fame and opulence. ^!!
[Footnote *: Minorca was lost to Great Britain in 1782. Ann.
Register for that year. - M.]
[Footnote !: The gallant struggles of the Corsicans for their
independence, under Paoli, were brought to a close in the year
1769. This volume was published in 1776. See Botta, Storia
d'Italia, vol. xiv. - M.]
[Footnote !!: Malta, it need scarcely be said, is now in the
possession of the English. We have not, however, thought it
necessary to notice every change in the political state of the
world, since the time of Gibbon. - M]
This long enumeration of provinces, whose broken fragments
have formed so many powerful kingdoms, might almost induce us to
forgive the vanity or ignorance of the ancients. Dazzled with
the extensive sway, the irresistible strength, and the real or
affected moderation of the emperors, they permitted themselves to
despise, and sometimes to forget, the outlying countries which
had been left in the enjoyment of a barbarous independence; and
they gradually usurped the license of confounding the Roman
monarchy with the globe of the earth. ^88 But the temper, as well
as knowledge, of a modern historian, require a more sober and
accurate language. He may impress a juster image of the
greatness of Rome, by observing that the empire was above two
thousand miles in breadth, from the wall of Antoninus and the
northern limits of Dacia, to Mount Atlas and the tropic of
Cancer; that it extended in length more than three thousand miles
from the Western Ocean to the Euphrates; that it was situated in
the finest part of the Temperate Zone, between the twenty-fourth
and fifty-sixth degrees of northern latitude; and that it was
supposed to contain above sixteen hundred thousand square miles,
for the most part of fertile and well-cultivated land. ^89
[Footnote 88: Bergier, Hist. des Grands Chemins, l. iii. c. 1, 2,
3, 4, a very useful collection.]
[Footnote 89: See Templeman's Survey of the Globe; but I distrust
both the Doctor's learning and his maps.]
Chapter II: The Internal Prosperity In The Age Of The Antonines.
Part I.
Of The Union And Internal Prosperity Of The Roman Empire, In The
Age Of The Antonines.
It is not alone by the rapidity, or extent of conquest, that
we should estimate the greatness of Rome. The sovereign of the
Russian deserts commands a larger portion of the globe. In the
seventh summer after his passage of the Hellespont, Alexander
erected the Macedonian trophies on the banks of the Hyphasis. ^1
Within less than a century, the irresistible Zingis, and the
Mogul princes of his race, spread their cruel devastations and
transient empire from the Sea of China, to the confines of Egypt
and Germany. ^2 But the firm edifice of Roman power was raised
and preserved by the wisdom of ages. The obedient provinces of
Trajan and the Antonines were united by laws, and adorned by
arts. They might occasionally suffer from the partial abuse of
delegated authority; but the general principle of government was
wise, simple, and beneficent. They enjoyed the religion of their
ancestors, whilst in civil honors and advantages they were
exalted, by just degrees, to an equality with their conquerors.
[Footnote 1: They were erected about the midway between Lahor and
Delhi. The conquests of Alexander in Hindostan were confined to
the Punjab, a country watered by the five great streams of the
Indus.
Note: The Hyphasis is one of the five rivers which join the
Indus or the Sind, after having traversed the province of the
Pendj-ab - a name which in Persian, signifies five rivers. * * *
G. The five rivers were, 1. The Hydaspes, now the Chelum,
Behni, or Bedusta, (Sanscrit, Vitastha, Arrow-swift.) 2. The
Acesines, the Chenab, (Sanscrit, Chandrabhaga, Moon-gift.) 3.
Hydraotes, the Ravey, or Iraoty, (Sanscrit, Iravati.) 4.
Hyphasis, the Beyah, (Sanscrit, Vepasa, Fetterless.) 5. The
Satadru, (Sanscrit, the Hundred Streamed,) the Sutledj, known
first to the Greeks in the time of Ptolemy. Rennel. Vincent,
Commerce of Anc. book 2. Lassen, Pentapotam. Ind. Wilson's
Sanscrit Dict., and the valuable memoir of Lieut. Burnes, Journal
of London Geogr. Society, vol. iii. p. 2, with the travels of
that very able writer. Compare Gibbon's own note, c. lxv. note
25. - M substit. for G.]
[Footnote 2: See M. de Guignes, Histoire des Huns, l. xv. xvi.
and xvii.]
I. The policy of the emperors and the senate, as far as it
concerned religion, was happily seconded by the reflections of
the enlightened, and by the habits of the superstitious, part of
their subjects. The various modes of worship, which prevailed in
the Roman world, were all considered by the people, as equally
true; by the philosopher, as equally false; and by the
magistrate, as equally useful. And thus toleration produced not
only mutual indulgence, but even religious concord.
The superstition of the people was not imbittered by any
mixture of theological rancor; nor was it confined by the chains
of any speculative system. The devout polytheist, though fondly
attached to his national rites, admitted with implicit faith the
different religions of the earth. ^3 Fear, gratitude, and
curiosity, a dream or an omen, a singular disorder, or a distant
journey, perpetually disposed him to multiply the articles of his
belief, and to enlarge the list of his protectors. The thin
texture of the Pagan mythology was interwoven with various but
not discordant materials. As soon as it was allowed that sages
and heroes, who had lived or who had died for the benefit of
their country, were exalted to a state of power and immortality,
it was universally confessed, that they deserved, if not the
adoration, at least the reverence, of all mankind. The deities
of a thousand groves and a thousand streams possessed, in peace,
their local and respective influence; nor could the Romans who
deprecated the wrath of the Tiber, deride the Egyptian who
presented his offering to the beneficent genius of the Nile. The
visible powers of nature, the planets, and the elements were the
same throughout the universe. The invisible governors of the
moral world were inevitably cast in a similar mould of fiction
and allegory. Every virtue, and even vice, acquired its divine
representative; every art and profession its patron, whose
attributes, in the most distant ages and countries, were
uniformly derived from the character of their peculiar votaries.
A republic of gods of such opposite tempers and interests
required, in every system, the moderating hand of a supreme
magistrate, who, by the progress of knowledge and flattery, was
gradually invested with the sublime perfections of an Eternal
Parent, and an Omnipotent Monarch. ^4 Such was the mild spirit of
antiquity, that the nations were less attentive to the
difference, than to the resemblance, of their religious worship.
The Greek, the Roman, and the Barbarian, as they met before their
respective altars, easily persuaded themselves, that under
various names, and with various ceremonies, they adored the same
deities. ^5 The elegant mythology of Homer gave a beautiful, and
almost a regular form, to the polytheism of the ancient world.
[Footnote 3: There is not any writer who describes in so lively a
manner as Herodotus the true genius of polytheism. The best
commentary may be found in Mr. Hume's Natural History of
Religion; and the best contrast in Bossuet's Universal History.
Some obscure traces of an intolerant spirit appear in the conduct
of the Egyptians, (see Juvenal, Sat. xv.;) and the Christians, as
well as Jews, who lived under the Roman empire, formed a very
important exception; so important indeed, that the discussion
will require a distinct chapter of this work.
Note: M. Constant, in his very learned and eloquent work,
"Sur la Religion," with the two additional volumes, "Du
Polytheisme Romain," has considered the whole history of
polytheism in a tone of philosophy, which, without subscribing to
all his opinions, we may be permitted to admire. "The boasted
tolerance of polytheism did not rest upon the respect due from
society to the freedom of individual opinion. The polytheistic
nations, tolerant as they were towards each other, as separate
states, were not the less ignorant of the eternal principle, the
only basis of enlightened toleration, that every one has a right
to worship God in the manner which seems to him the best.
Citizens, on the contrary, were bound to conform to the religion
of the state; they had not the liberty to adopt a foreign
religion, though that religion might be legally recognized in
their own city, for the strangers who were its votaries." - Sur
la Religion, v. 184. Du. Polyth. Rom. ii. 308. At this time,
the growing religious indifference, and the general
administration of the empire by Romans, who, being strangers,
would do no more than protect, not enlist themselves in the cause
of the local superstitions, had introduced great laxity. But
intolerance was clearly the theory both of the Greek and Roman
law. The subject is more fully considered in another place. -
M.]
[Footnote 4: The rights, powers, and pretensions of the sovereign
of Olympus are very clearly described in the xvth book of the
Iliad; in the Greek original, I mean; for Mr. Pope, without
perceiving it, has improved the theology of Homer.
Note: There is a curious coincidence between Gibbon's
expressions and those of the newly-recovered "De Republica" of
Cicero, though the argument is rather the converse, lib. i. c.
36. "Sive haec ad utilitatem vitae constitute sint a principibus
rerum publicarum, ut rex putaretur unus esse in coelo, qui nutu,
ut ait Homerus, totum Olympum converteret, idemque et rex et
patos haberetur omnium." - M.]
[Footnote 5: See, for instance, Caesar de Bell. Gall. vi. 17.
Within a century or two, the Gauls themselves applied to their
gods the names of Mercury, Mars, Apollo, &c.]
The philosophers of Greece deduced their morals from the
nature of man, rather than from that of God. They meditated,
however, on the Divine Nature, as a very curious and important
speculation; and in the profound inquiry, they displayed the
strength and weakness of the human understanding. ^6 Of the four
most celebrated schools, the Stoics and the Platonists endeavored
to reconcile the jaring interests of reason and piety. They have
left us the most sublime proofs of the existence and perfections
of the first cause; but, as it was impossible for them to
conceive the creation of matter, the workman in the Stoic
philosophy was not sufficiently distinguished from the work;
whilst, on the contrary, the spiritual God of Plato and his
disciples resembled an idea, rather than a substance. The
opinions of the Academics and Epicureans were of a less religious
cast; but whilst the modest science of the former induced them to
doubt, the positive ignorance of the latter urged them to deny,
the providence of a Supreme Ruler. The spirit of inquiry,
prompted by emulation, and supported by freedom, had divided the
public teachers of philosophy into a variety of contending sects;
but the ingenious youth, who, from every part, resorted to
Athens, and the other seats of learning in the Roman empire, were
alike instructed in every school to reject and to despise the
religion of the multitude. How, indeed, was it possible that a
philosopher should accept, as divine truths, the idle tales of
the poets, and the incoherent traditions of antiquity; or that he
should adore, as gods, those imperfect beings whom he must have
despised, as men? Against such unworthy adversaries, Cicero
condescended to employ the arms of reason and eloquence; but the
satire of Lucian was a much more adequate, as well as more
efficacious, weapon. We may be well assured, that a writer,
conversant with the world, would never have ventured to expose
the gods of his country to public ridicule, had they not already
been the objects of secret contempt among the polished and
enlightened orders of society. ^7
[Footnote 6: The admirable work of Cicero de Natura Deorum is the
best clew we have to guide us through the dark and profound
abyss. He represents with candor, and confutes with subtlety,
the opinions of the philosophers.]
[Footnote 7: I do not pretend to assert, that, in this
irreligious age, the natural terrors of superstition, dreams,
omens, apparitions, &c., had lost their efficacy.]
Notwithstanding the fashionable irreligion which prevailed
in the age of the Antonines, both the interest of the priests and
the credulity of the people were sufficiently respected. In
their writings and conversation, the philosophers of antiquity
asserted the independent dignity of reason; but they resigned
their actions to the commands of law and of custom. Viewing,
with a smile of pity and indulgence, the various errors of the
vulgar, they diligently practised the ceremonies of their
fathers, devoutly frequented the temples of the gods; and
sometimes condescending to act a part on the theatre of
superstition, they concealed the sentiments of an atheist under
the sacerdotal robes. Reasoners of such a temper were scarcely
inclined to wrangle about their respective modes of faith, or of
worship. It was indifferent to them what shape the folly of the
multitude might choose to assume; and they approached with the
same inward contempt, and the same external reverence, the altars
of the Libyan, the Olympian, or the Capitoline Jupiter. ^8
[Footnote 8: Socrates, Epicurus, Cicero, and Plutarch always
inculcated a decent reverence for the religion of their own
country, and of mankind. The devotion of Epicurus was assiduous
and exemplary. Diogen. Laert. x. 10.]
It is not easy to conceive from what motives a spirit of
persecution could introduce itself into the Roman councils. The
magistrates could not be actuated by a blind, though honest
bigotry, since the magistrates were themselves philosophers; and
the schools of Athens had given laws to the senate. They could
not be impelled by ambition or avarice, as the temporal and
ecclesiastical powers were united in the same hands. The
pontiffs were chosen among the most illustrious of the senators;
and the office of Supreme Pontiff was constantly exercised by the
emperors themselves. They knew and valued the advantages of
religion, as it is connected with civil government. They
encouraged the public festivals which humanize the manners of the
people. They managed the arts of divination as a convenient
instrument of policy; and they respected, as the firmest bond of
society, the useful persuasion, that, either in this or in a
future life, the crime of perjury is most assuredly punished by
the avenging gods. ^9 But whilst they acknowledged the general
advantages of religion, they were convinced that the various
modes of worship contributed alike to the same salutary purposes;
and that, in every country, the form of superstition, which had
received the sanction of time and experience, was the best
adapted to the climate, and to its inhabitants. Avarice and
taste very frequently despoiled the vanquished nations of the
elegant statues of their gods, and the rich ornaments of their
temples; ^10 but, in the exercise of the religion which they
derived from their ancestors, they uniformly experienced the
indulgence, and even protection, of the Roman conquerors. The
province of Gaul seems, and indeed only seems, an exception to
this universal toleration. Under the specious pretext of
abolishing human sacrifices, the emperors Tiberius and Claudius
suppressed the dangerous power of the Druids: ^11 but the priests
themselves, their gods and their altars, subsisted in peaceful
obscurity till the final destruction of Paganism. ^12
[Footnote 9: Polybius, l. vi. c. 53, 54. Juvenal, Sat. xiii.
laments that in his time this apprehension had lost much of its
effect.]
[Footnote 10: See the fate of Syracuse, Tarentum, Ambracia,
Corinth, &c., the conduct of Verres, in Cicero, (Actio ii. Orat.
4,) and the usual practice of governors, in the viiith Satire of
Juvenal.]
[Footnote 11: Seuton. in Claud. - Plin. Hist. Nat. xxx. 1.]
[Footnote 12: Pelloutier, Histoire des Celtes, tom. vi. p. 230 -
252.]
Rome, the capital of a great monarchy, was incessantly
filled with subjects and strangers from every part of the world,
^13 who all introduced and enjoyed the favorite superstitions of
their native country. ^14 Every city in the empire was justified
in maintaining the purity of its ancient ceremonies; and the
Roman senate, using the common privilege, sometimes interposed,
to check this inundation of foreign rites. ^* The Egyptian
superstition, of all the most contemptible and abject, was
frequently prohibited: the temples of Serapis and Isis
demolished, and their worshippers banished from Rome and Italy.
^15 But the zeal of fanaticism prevailed over the cold and feeble
efforts of policy. The exiles returned, the proselytes
multiplied, the temples were restored with increasing splendor,
and Isis and Serapis at length assumed their place among the
Roman Deities. ^16 Nor was this indulgence a departure from the
old maxims of government. In the purest ages of the
commonwealth, Cybele and Aesculapius had been invited by solemn
embassies; ^17 and it was customary to tempt the protectors of
besieged cities, by the promise of more distinguished honors than
they possessed in their native country. ^18 Rome gradually became
the common temple of her subjects; and the freedom of the city
was bestowed on all the gods of mankind. ^19
[Footnote 13: Seneca, Consolat. ad Helviam, p. 74. Edit., Lips.]
[Footnote 14: Dionysius Halicarn. Antiquitat. Roman. l. ii. (vol.
i. p. 275, edit. Reiske.)]
[Footnote *: Yet the worship of foreign gods at Rome was only
guarantied to the natives of those countries from whence they
came. The Romans administered the priestly offices only to the
gods of their fathers. Gibbon, throughout the whole preceding
sketch of the opinions of the Romans and their subjects, has
shown through what causes they were free from religious hatred
and its consequences. But, on the other hand the internal state
of these religions, the infidelity and hypocrisy of the upper
orders, the indifference towards all religion, in even the better
part of the common people, during the last days of the republic,
and under the Caesars, and the corrupting principles of the
philosophers, had exercised a very pernicious influence on the
manners, and even on the constitution. - W.]
[Footnote 15: In the year of Rome 701, the temple of Isis and
Serapis was demolished by the order of the Senate, (Dion Cassius,
l. xl. p. 252,) and even by the hands of the consul, (Valerius
Maximus, l. 3.) ^! After the death of Caesar it was restored at
the public expense, (Dion. l. xlvii. p. 501.) When Augustus was
in Egypt, he revered the majesty of Serapis, (Dion, l. li. p.
647;) but in the Pomaerium of Rome, and a mile round it, he
prohibited the worship of the Egyptian gods, (Dion, l. liii. p.
679; l. liv. p. 735.) They remained, however, very fashionable
under his reign (Ovid. de Art. Amand. l. i.) and that of his
successor, till the justice of Tiberius was provoked to some acts
of severity. (See Tacit. Annal. ii. 85. Joseph. Antiquit. l.
xviii. c. 3.)
Note: See, in the pictures from the walls of Pompeii, the
representation of an Isiac temple and worship. Vestiges of
Egyptian worship have been traced in Gaul, and, I am informed,
recently in Britain, in excavations at York. - M.]
[Footnote !: Gibbon here blends into one, two events, distant a
hundred and sixty-six years from each other. It was in the year
of Rome 535, that the senate having ordered the destruction of
the temples of Isis and Serapis, the workman would lend his hand;
and the consul, L. Paulus himself (Valer. Max. 1, 3) seized the
axe, to give the first blow. Gibbon attribute this circumstance
to the second demolition, which took place in the year 701 and
which he considers as the first. - W.]
[Footnote 16: Tertullian in Apologetic. c. 6, p. 74. Edit.
Havercamp. I am inclined to attribute their establishment to the
devotion of the Flavian family.]
[Footnote 17: See Livy, l. xi. [Suppl.] and xxix.]
[Footnote 18: Macrob. Saturnalia, l. iii. c. 9. He gives us a
form of evocation.]
[Footnote 19: Minutius Faelix in Octavio, p. 54. Arnobius, l.
vi. p. 115.]
II. The narrow policy of preserving, without any foreign
mixture, the pure blood of the ancient citizens, had checked the
fortune, and hastened the ruin, of Athens and Sparta. The
aspiring genius of Rome sacrificed vanity to ambition, and deemed
it more prudent, as well as honorable, to adopt virtue and merit
for her own wheresoever they were found, among slaves or
strangers, enemies or barbarians. ^20 During the most flourishing
aera of the Athenian commonwealth, the number of citizens
gradually decreased from about thirty ^21 to twenty-one thousand.
^22 If, on the contrary, we study the growth of the Roman
republic, we may discover, that, notwithstanding the incessant
demands of wars and colonies, the citizens, who, in the first
census of Servius Tullius, amounted to no more than eighty-three
thousand, were multiplied, before the commencement of the social
war, to the number of four hundred and sixty-three thousand men,
able to bear arms in the service of their country. ^23 When the
allies of Rome claimed an equal share of honors and privileges,
the senate indeed preferred the chance of arms to an ignominious
concession. The Samnites and the Lucanians paid the severe
penalty of their rashness; but the rest of the Italian states, as
they successively returned to their duty, were admitted into the
bosom of the republic, ^24 and soon contributed to the ruin of
public freedom. Under a democratical government, the citizens
exercise the powers of sovereignty; and those powers will be
first abused, and afterwards lost, if they are committed to an
unwieldy multitude. But when the popular assemblies had been
suppressed by the administration of the emperors, the conquerors
were distinguished from the vanquished nations, only as the first
and most honorable order of subjects; and their increase, however
rapid, was no longer exposed to the same dangers. Yet the wisest
princes, who adopted the maxims of Augustus, guarded with the
strictest care the dignity of the Roman name, and diffused the
freedom of the city with a prudent liberality. ^25
[Footnote 20: Tacit. Annal. xi. 24. The Orbis Romanus of the
learned Spanheim is a complete history of the progressive
admission of Latium, Italy, and the provinces, to the freedom of
Rome.
Note: Democratic states, observes Denina, (delle Revoluz. d'
Italia, l. ii. c. l., are most jealous of communication the
privileges of citizenship; monarchies or oligarchies willingly
multiply the numbers of their free subjects. The most remarkable
accessions to the strength of Rome, by the aggregation of
conquered and foreign nations, took place under the regal and
patrician - we may add, the Imperial government. - M.]
[Footnote 21: Herodotus, v. 97. It should seem, however, that he
followed a large and popular estimation.]
[Footnote 22: Athenaeus, Deipnosophist. l. vi. p. 272. Edit.
Casaubon. Meursius de Fortuna Attica, c. 4.
Note: On the number of citizens in Athens, compare Boeckh,
Public Economy of Athens, (English Tr.,) p. 45, et seq. Fynes
Clinton, Essay in Fasti Hel lenici, vol. i. 381. - M.]
[Footnote 23: See a very accurate collection of the numbers of
each Lustrum in M. de Beaufort, Republique Romaine, l. iv. c. 4.
Note: All these questions are placed in an entirely new
point of view by Nicbuhr, (Romische Geschichte, vol. i. p. 464.)
He rejects the census of Servius fullius as unhistoric, (vol. ii.
p. 78, et seq.,) and he establishes the principle that the census
comprehended all the confederate cities which had the right of
Isopolity. - M.]
[Footnote 24: Appian. de Bell. Civil. l. i. Velleius Paterculus,
l. ii. c. 15, 16, 17.]
[Footnote 25: Maecenas had advised him to declare, by one edict,
all his subjects citizens. But we may justly suspect that the
historian Dion was the author of a counsel so much adapted to the
practice of his own age, and so little to that of Augustus.]
Chapter II: The Internal Prosperity In The Age Of The Antonines.
Part II.
Till the privileges of Romans had been progressively
extended to all the inhabitants of the empire, an important
distinction was preserved between Italy and the provinces. The
former was esteemed the centre of public unity, and the firm
basis of the constitution. Italy claimed the birth, or at least
the residence, of the emperors and the senate. ^26 The estates of
the Italians were exempt from taxes, their persons from the
arbitrary jurisdiction of governors. Their municipal
corporations, formed after the perfect model of the capital, ^*
were intrusted, under the immediate eye of the supreme power,
with the execution of the laws. From the foot of the Alps to the
extremity of Calabria, all the natives of Italy were born
citizens of Rome. Their partial distinctions were obliterated,
and they insensibly coalesced into one great nation, united by
language, manners, and civil institutions, and equal to the
weight of a powerful empire. The republic gloried in her
generous policy, and was frequently rewarded by the merit and
services of her adopted sons. Had she always confined the
distinction of Romans to the ancient families within the walls of
the city, that immortal name would have been deprived of some of
its noblest ornaments. Virgil was a native of Mantua; Horace was
inclined to doubt whether he should call himself an Apulian or a
Lucanian; it was in Padua that an historian was found worthy to
record the majestic series of Roman victories. The patriot
family of the Catos emerged from Tusculum; and the little town of
Arpinum claimed the double honor of producing Marius and Cicero,
the former of whom deserved, after Romulus and Camillus, to be
styled the Third Founder of Rome; and the latter, after saving
his country from the designs of Catiline, enabled her to contend
with Athens for the palm of eloquence. ^27
[Footnote 26: The senators were obliged to have one third of
their own landed property in Italy. See Plin. l. vi. ep. 19.
The qualification was reduced by Marcus to one fourth. Since the
reign of Trajan, Italy had sunk nearer to the level of the
provinces.]
[Footnote *: It may be doubted whether the municipal government
of the cities was not the old Italian constitution rather than a
transcript from that of Rome. The free government of the cities,
observes Savigny, was the leading characteristic of Italy.
Geschichte des Romischen Rechts, i. p. G. - M.]
[Footnote 27: The first part of the Verona Illustrata of the
Marquis Maffei gives the clearest and most comprehensive view of
the state of Italy under the Caesars.
Note: Compare Denina, Revol. d' Italia, l. ii. c. 6, p. 100,
4 to edit.]
The provinces of the empire (as they have been described in
the preceding chapter) were destitute of any public force, or
constitutional freedom. In Etruria, in Greece, ^28 and in Gaul,
^29 it was the first care of the senate to dissolve those
dangerous confederacies, which taught mankind that, as the Roman
arms prevailed by division, they might be resisted by union.
Those princes, whom the ostentation of gratitude or generosity
permitted for a while to hold a precarious sceptre, were
dismissed from their thrones, as soon as they had per formed
their appointed task of fashioning to the yoke the vanquished
nations. The free states and cities which had embraced the cause
of Rome were rewarded with a nominal alliance, and insensibly
sunk into real servitude. The public authority was every where
exercised by the ministers of the senate and of the emperors, and
that authority was absolute, and without control. ^! But the same
salutary maxims of government, which had secured the peace and
obedience of Italy were extended to the most distant conquests.
A nation of Romans was gradually formed in the provinces, by the
double expedient of introducing colonies, and of admitting the
most faithful and deserving of the provincials to the freedom of
Rome.
[Footnote 28: See Pausanias, l. vii. The Romans condescended to
restore the names of those assemblies, when they could no longer
be dangerous.]
[Footnote 29: They are frequently mentioned by Caesar. The Abbe
Dubos attempts, with very little success, to prove that the
assemblies of Gaul were continued under the emperors. Histoire
de l'Etablissement de la Monarchie Francoise, l. i. c. 4.]
[Footnote !: This is, perhaps, rather overstated. Most cities
retained the choice of their municipal officers: some retained
valuable privileges; Athens, for instance, in form was still a
confederate city. (Tac. Ann. ii. 53.) These privileges, indeed,
depended entirely on the arbitrary will of the emperor, who
revoked or restored them according to his caprice. See Walther
Geschichte les Romischen Rechts, i. 324 - an admirable summary of
the Roman constitutional history. - M.]
"Wheresoever the Roman conquers, he inhabits," is a very
just observation of Seneca, ^30 confirmed by history and
experience. The natives of Italy, allured by pleasure or by
interest, hastened to enjoy the advantages of victory; and we may
remark, that, about forty years after the reduction of Asia,
eighty thousand Romans were massacred in one day, by the cruel
orders of Mithridates. ^31 These voluntary exiles were engaged,
for the most part, in the occupations of commerce, agriculture,
and the farm of the revenue. But after the legions were rendered
permanent by the emperors, the provinces were peopled by a race
of soldiers; and the veterans, whether they received the reward
of their service in land or in money, usually settled with their
families in the country, where they had honorably spent their
youth. Throughout the empire, but more particularly in the
western parts, the most fertile districts, and the most
convenient situations, were reserved for the establishment of
colonies; some of which were of a civil, and others of a military
nature. In their manners and internal policy, the colonies
formed a perfect representation of their great parent; and they
were soon endeared to the natives by the ties of friendship and
alliance, they effectually diffused a reverence for the Roman
name, and a desire, which was seldom disappointed, of sharing, in
due time, its honors and advantages. ^32 The municipal cities
insensibly equalled the rank and splendor of the colonies; and in
the reign of Hadrian, it was disputed which was the preferable
condition, of those societies which had issued from, or those
which had been received into, the bosom of Rome. ^33 The right of
Latium, as it was called, ^* conferred on the cities to which it
had been granted, a more partial favor. The magistrates only, at
the expiration of their office, assumed the quality of Roman
citizens; but as those offices were annual, in a few years they
circulated round the principal families. ^34 Those of the
provincials who were permitted to bear arms in the legions; ^35
those who exercised any civil employment; all, in a word, who
performed any public service, or displayed any personal talents,
were rewarded with a present, whose value was continually
diminished by the increasing liberality of the emperors. Yet
even, in the age of the Antonines, when the freedom of the city
had been bestowed on the greater number of their subjects, it was
still accompanied with very solid advantages. The bulk of the
people acquired, with that title, the benefit of the Roman laws,
particularly in the interesting articles of marriage, testaments,
and inheritances; and the road of fortune was open to those whose
pretensions were seconded by favor or merit. The grandsons of
the Gauls, who had besieged Julius Caesar in Alcsia, commanded
legions, governed provinces, and were admitted into the senate of
Rome. ^36 Their ambition, instead of disturbing the tranquillity
of the state, was intimately connected with its safety and
greatness.
[Footnote 30: Seneca in Consolat. ad Helviam, c. 6.]
[Footnote 31: Memnon apud Photium, (c. 33,) [c. 224, p. 231, ed
Bekker.] Valer. Maxim. ix. 2. Plutarch and Dion Cassius swell
the massacre to 150,000 citizens; but I should esteem the smaller
number to be more than sufficient.]
[Footnote 32: Twenty-five colonies were settled in Spain, (see
Plin. Hist. Nat. iii. 3, 4; iv. 35;) and nine in Britain, of
which London, Colchester, Lincoln, Chester, Gloucester, and Bath
still remain considerable cities. (See Richard of Cirencester, p.
36, and Whittaker's History of Manchester, l. i. c. 3.)]
[Footnote 33: Aul. Gel. Noctes Atticae, xvi 13. The Emperor
Hadrian expressed his surprise, that the cities of Utica, Gades,
and Italica, which already enjoyed the rights of Municipia,
should solicit the title of colonies. Their example, however,
became fashionable, and the empire was filled with honorary
colonies. See Spanheim, de Usu Numismatum Dissertat. xiii.]
[Footnote *: The right of Latium conferred an exemption from the
government of the Roman praefect. Strabo states this distinctly,
l. iv. p. 295, edit. Caesar's. See also Walther, p. 233. - M]
[Footnote 34: Spanheim, Orbis Roman. c. 8, p. 62.]
[Footnote 35: Aristid. in Romae Encomio. tom. i. p. 218, edit.
Jebb.]
[Footnote 36: Tacit. Annal. xi. 23, 24. Hist. iv. 74.]
So sensible were the Romans of the influence of language
over national manners, that it was their most serious care to
extend, with the progress of their arms, the use of the Latin
tongue. ^37 The ancient dialects of Italy, the Sabine, the
Etruscan, and the Venetian, sunk into oblivion; but in the
provinces, the east was less docile than the west to the voice of
its victorious preceptors. This obvious difference marked the
two portions of the empire with a distinction of colors, which,
though it was in some degree concealed during the meridian
splendor of prosperity, became gradually more visible, as the
shades of night descended upon the Roman world. The western
countries were civilized by the same hands which subdued them.
As soon as the barbarians were reconciled to obedience, their
minds were open to any new impressions of knowledge and
politeness. The language of Virgil and Cicero, though with some
inevitable mixture of corruption, was so universally adopted in
Africa, Spain, Gaul Britain, and Pannonia, ^38 that the faint
traces of the Punic or Celtic idioms were preserved only in the
mountains, or among the peasants. ^39 Education and study
insensibly inspired the natives of those countries with the
sentiments of Romans; and Italy gave fashions, as well as laws,
to her Latin provincials. They solicited with more ardor, and
obtained with more facility, the freedom and honors of the state;
supported the national dignity in letters ^40 and in arms; and at
length, in the person of Trajan, produced an emperor whom the
Scipios would not have disowned for their countryman. The
situation of the Greeks was very different from that of the
barbarians. The former had been long since civilized and
corrupted. They had too much taste to relinquish their language,
and too much vanity to adopt any foreign institutions. Still
preserving the prejudices, after they had lost the virtues, of
their ancestors, they affected to despise the unpolished manners
of the Roman conquerors, whilst they were compelled to respect
their superior wisdom and power. ^41 Nor was the influence of the
Grecian language and sentiments confined to the narrow limits of
that once celebrated country. Their empire, by the progress of
colonies and conquest, had been diffused from the Adriatic to the
Euphrates and the Nile. Asia was covered with Greek cities, and
the long reign of the Macedonian kings had introduced a silent
revolution into Syria and Egypt. In their pompous courts, those
princes united the elegance of Athens with the luxury of the
East, and the example of the court was imitated, at an humble
distance, by the higher ranks of their subjects. Such was the
general division of the Roman empire into the Latin and Greek
languages. To these we may add a third distinction for the body
of the natives in Syria, and especially in Egypt, the use of
their ancient dialects, by secluding them from the commerce of
mankind, checked the improvements of those barbarians. ^42 The
slothful effeminacy of the former exposed them to the contempt,
the sullen ferociousness of the latter excited the aversion, of
the conquerors. ^43 Those nations had submitted to the Roman
power, but they seldom desired or deserved the freedom of the
city: and it was remarked, that more than two hundred and thirty
years elapsed after the ruin of the Ptolemies, before an Egyptian
was admitted into the senate of Rome. ^44
[Footnote 37: See Plin. Hist. Natur. iii. 5. Augustin. de
Civitate Dei, xix 7 Lipsius de Pronunciatione Linguae Latinae, c.
3.]
[Footnote 38: Apuleius and Augustin will answer for Africa;
Strabo for Spain and Gaul; Tacitus, in the life of Agricola, for
Britain; and Velleius Paterculus, for Pannonia. To them we may
add the language of the Inscriptions.
Note: Mr. Hallam contests this assertion as regards Britain.
"Nor did the Romans ever establish their language - I know not
whether they wished to do so - in this island, as we perceive by
that stubborn British tongue which has survived two conquests."
In his note, Mr. Hallam examines the passage from Tacitus (Agric.
xxi.) to which Gibbon refers. It merely asserts the progress of
Latin studies among the higher orders. (Midd. Ages, iii. 314.)
Probably it was a kind of court language, and that of public
affairs and prevailed in the Roman colonies. - M.]
[Footnote 39: The Celtic was preserved in the mountains of Wales,
Cornwall, and Armorica. We may observe, that Apuleius reproaches
an African youth, who lived among the populace, with the use of
the Punic; whilst he had almost forgot Greek, and neither could
nor would speak Latin, (Apolog. p. 596.) The greater part of St.
Austin's congregations were strangers to the Punic.]
[Footnote 40: Spain alone produced Columella, the Senecas, Lucan,
Martial, and Quintilian.]
[Footnote 41: There is not, I believe, from Dionysius to Libanus,
a single Greek critic who mentions Virgil or Horace. They seem
ignorant that the Romans had any good writers.]
[Footnote 42: The curious reader may see in Dupin, (Bibliotheque
Ecclesiastique, tom. xix. p. 1, c. 8,) how much the use of the
Syriac and Egyptian languages was still preserved.]
[Footnote 43: See Juvenal, Sat. iii. and xv. Ammian. Marcellin.
xxii. 16.]
[Footnote 44: Dion Cassius, l. lxxvii. p. 1275. The first
instance happened under the reign of Septimius Severus.]
It is a just though trite observation, that victorious Rome
was herself subdued by the arts of Greece. Those immortal
writers who still command the admiration of modern Europe, soon
became the favorite object of study and imitation in Italy and
the western provinces. But the elegant amusements of the Romans
were not suffered to interfere with their sound maxims of policy.
Whilst they acknowledged the charms of the Greek, they asserted
the dignity of the Latin tongue, and the exclusive use of the
latter was inflexibly maintained in the administration of civil
as well as military government. ^45 The two languages exercised
at the same time their separate jurisdiction throughout the
empire: the former, as the natural idiom of science; the latter,
as the legal dialect of public transactions. Those who united
letters with business were equally conversant with both; and it
was almost impossible, in any province, to find a Roman subject,
of a liberal education, who was at once a stranger to the Greek
and to the Latin language.
[Footnote 45: See Valerius Maximus, l. ii. c. 2, n. 2. The
emperor Claudius disfranchised an eminent Grecian for not
understanding Latin. He was probably in some public office.
Suetonius in Claud. c. 16.
Note: Causes seem to have been pleaded, even in the senate,
in both languages. Val. Max. loc. cit. Dion. l. lvii. c. 15. -
M]
It was by such institutions that the nations of the empire
insensibly melted away into the Roman name and people. But there
still remained, in the centre of every province and of every
family, an unhappy condition of men who endured the weight,
without sharing the benefits, of society. In the free states of
antiquity, the domestic slaves were exposed to the wanton rigor
of despotism. The perfect settlement of the Roman empire was
preceded by ages of violence and rapine. The slaves consisted,
for the most part, of barbarian captives, ^* taken in thousands
by the chance of war, purchased at a vile price, ^46 accustomed
to a life of independence, and impatient to break and to revenge
their fetters. Against such internal enemies, whose desperate
insurrections had more than once reduced the republic to the
brink of destruction, ^47 the most severe ^* regulations, ^48 and
the most cruel treatment, seemed almost justified by the great
law of self-preservation. But when the principal nations of
Europe, Asia, and Africa were united under the laws of one
sovereign, the source of foreign supplies flowed with much less
abundance, and the Romans were reduced to the milder but more
tedious method of propagation. ^* In their numerous families, and
particularly in their country estates, they encouraged the
marriage of their slaves. ^! The sentiments of nature, the habits
of education, and the possession of a dependent species of
property, contributed to alleviate the hardships of servitude.
^49 The existence of a slave became an object of greater value,
and though his happiness still depended on the temper and
circumstances of the master, the humanity of the latter, instead
of being restrained by fear, was encouraged by the sense of his
own interest. The progress of manners was accelerated by the
virtue or policy of the emperors; and by the edicts of Hadrian
and the Antonines, the protection of the laws was extended to the
most abject part of mankind. The jurisdiction of life and death
over the slaves, a power long exercised and often abused, was
taken out of private hands, and reserved to the magistrates
alone. The subterraneous prisons were abolished; and, upon a
just complaint of intolerable treatment, the injured slave
obtained either his deliverance, or a less cruel master. ^50
[Footnote *: It was this which rendered the wars so sanguinary,
and the battles so obstinate. The immortal Robertson, in an
excellent discourse on the state of the world at the period of
the establishment of Christianity, has traced a picture of the
melancholy effects of slavery, in which we find all the depth of
his views and the strength of his mind. I shall oppose
successively some passages to the reflections of Gibbon. The
reader will see, not without interest, the truths which Gibbon
appears to have mistaken or voluntarily neglected, developed by
one of the best of modern historians. It is important to call
them to mind here, in order to establish the facts and their
consequences with accuracy. I shall more than once have occasion
to employ, for this purpose, the discourse of Robertson.
"Captives taken in war were, in all probability, the first
persons subjected to perpetual servitude; and, when the
necessities or luxury of mankind increased the demand for slaves,
every new war recruited their number, by reducing the vanquished
to that wretched condition. Hence proceeded the fierce and
desperate spirit with which wars were carried on among ancient
nations. While chains and slavery were the certain lot of the
conquered, battles were fought, and towns defended with a rage
and obstinacy which nothing but horror at such a fate could have
inspired; but, putting an end to the cruel institution of
slavery, Christianity extended its mild influences to the
practice of war, and that barbarous art, softened by its humane
spirit, ceased to be so destructive. Secure, in every event, of
personal liberty, the resistance of the vanquished became less
obstinate, and the triumph of the victor less cruel. Thus
humanity was introduced into the exercise of war, with which it
appears to be almost incompatible; and it is to the merciful
maxims of Christianity, much more than to any other cause, that
we must ascribe the little ferocity and bloodshed which accompany
modern victories." - G.]
[Footnote 46: In the camp of Lucullus, an ox sold for a drachma,
and a slave for four drachmae, or about three shillings.
Plutarch. in Lucull. p. 580.
Note: Above 100,000 prisoners were taken in the Jewish war.
- G. Hist. of Jews, iii. 71. According to a tradition preserved
by S. Jerom, after the insurrection in the time of Hadrian, they
were sold as cheap as horse. Ibid. 124. Compare Blair on Roman
Slavery, p. 19. - M., and Dureau de la blalle, Economie Politique
des Romains, l. i. c. 15. But I cannot think that this writer
has made out his case as to the common price of an agricultural
slave being from 2000 to 2500 francs, (80l. to 100l.) He has
overlooked the passages which show the ordinary prices, (i. e.
Hor. Sat. ii. vii. 45,) and argued from extraordinary and
exceptional cases. - M. 1845.]
[Footnote 47: Diodorus Siculus in Eclog. Hist. l. xxxiv. and
xxxvi. Florus, iii. 19, 20.]
[Footnote *: The following is the example: we shall see whether
the word "severe" is here in its place. "At the time in which L.
Domitius was praetor in Sicily, a slave killed a wild boar of
extraordinary size. The praetor, struck by the dexterity and
courage of the man, desired to see him. The poor wretch, highly
gratified with the distinction, came to present himself before
the praetor, in hopes, no doubt, of praise and reward; but
Domitius, on learning that he had only a javelin to attack and
kill the boar, ordered him to be instantly crucified, under the
barbarous pretext that the law prohibited the use of this weapon,
as of all others, to slaves." Perhaps the cruelty of Domitius is
less astonishing than the indifference with which the Roman
orator relates this circumstance, which affects him so little
that he thus expresses himself: "Durum hoc fortasse videatur,
neque ego in ullam partem disputo." "This may appear harsh, nor
do I give any opinion on the subject." And it is the same orator
who exclaims in the same oration, "Facinus est cruciare civem
Romanum; scelus verberare; prope parricidium necare: quid dicam
in crucem tollere?" "It is a crime to imprison a Roman citizen;
wickedness to scourge; next to parricide to put to death, what
shall I call it to crucify?"
In general, this passage of Gibbon on slavery, is full, not
only of blamable indifference, but of an exaggeration of
impartiality which resembles dishonesty. He endeavors to
extenuate all that is appalling in the condition and treatment of
the slaves; he would make us consider those cruelties as possibly
"justified by necessity." He then describes, with minute
accuracy, the slightest mitigations of their deplorable
condition; he attributes to the virtue or the policy of the
emperors the progressive amelioration in the lot of the slaves;
and he passes over in silence the most influential cause, that
which, after rendering the slaves less miserable, has contributed
at length entirely to enfranchise them from their sufferings and
their chains, - Christianity. It would be easy to accumulate the
most frightful, the most agonizing details, of the manner in
which the Romans treated their slaves; whole works have been
devoted to the description. I content myself with referring to
them. Some reflections of Robertson, taken from the discourse
already quoted, will make us feel that Gibbon, in tracing the
mitigation of the condition of the slaves, up to a period little
later than that which witnessed the establishment of Christianity
in the world, could not have avoided the acknowledgment of the
influence of that beneficent cause, if he had not already
determined not to speak of it.
"Upon establishing despotic government in the Roman empire,
domestic tyranny rose, in a short time, to an astonishing height.
In that rank soil, every vice, which power nourishes in the
great, or oppression engenders in the mean, thrived and grew up
apace. * * * It is not the authority of any single detached
precept in the gospel, but the spirit and genius of the Christian
religion, more powerful than any particular command. which hath
abolished the practice of slavery throughout the world. The
temper which Christianity inspired was mild and gentle; and the
doctrines it taught added such dignity and lustre to human
nature, as rescued it from the dishonorable servitude into which
it was sunk."
It is in vain, then, that Gibbon pretends to attribute
solely to the desire of keeping up the number of slaves, the
milder conduct which the Romans began to adopt in their favor at
the time of the emperors. This cause had hitherto acted in an
opposite direction; how came it on a sudden to have a different
influence? "The masters," he says, "encouraged the marriage of
their slaves; * * * the sentiments of nature, the habits of
education, contributed to alleviate the hardships of servitude."
The children of slaves were the property of their master, who
could dispose of or alienate them like the rest of his property.
Is it in such a situation, with such notions, that the sentiments
of nature unfold themselves, or habits of education become mild
and peaceful? We must not attribute to causes inadequate or
altogether without force, effects which require to explain them a
reference to more influential causes; and even if these slighter
causes had in effect a manifest influence, we must not forget
that they are themselves the effect of a primary, a higher, and
more extensive cause, which, in giving to the mind and to the
character a more disinterested and more humane bias, disposed men
to second or themselves to advance, by their conduct, and by the
change of manners, the happy results which it tended to produce.
- G.
I have retained the whole of M. Guizot's note, though, in
his zeal for the invaluable blessings of freedom and
Christianity, he has done Gibbon injustice. The condition of the
slaves was undoubtedly improved under the emperors. What a great
authority has said, "The condition of a slave is better under an
arbitrary than under a free government," (Smith's Wealth of
Nations, iv. 7,) is, I believe, supported by the history of all
ages and nations. The protecting edicts of Hadrian and the
Antonines are historical facts, and can as little be attributed
to the influence of Christianity, as the milder language of
heathen writers, of Seneca, (particularly Ep. 47,) of Pliny, and
of Plutarch. The latter influence of Christianity is admitted by
Gibbon himself. The subject of Roman slavery has recently been
investigated with great diligence in a very modest but valuable
volume, by Wm. Blair, Esq., Edin. 1833. May we be permitted.
while on the subject, to refer to the most splendid passage
extant of Mr. Pitt's eloquence, the description of the Roman
slave-dealer. on the shores of Britain, condemning the island to
irreclaimable barbarism, as a perpetual and prolific nursery of
slaves? Speeches, vol. ii. p. 80.
Gibbon, it should be added, was one of the first and most
consistent opponents of the African slave-trade. (See Hist. ch.
xxv. and Letters to Lor Sheffield, Misc. Works) - M.]
[Footnote 48: See a remarkable instance of severity in Cicero in
Verrem, v. 3.]
[Footnote *: An active slave-trade, which was carried on in many
quarters, particularly the Euxine, the eastern provinces, the
coast of Africa, and British must be taken into the account.
Blair, 23 - 32. - M.]
[Footnote !: The Romans, as well in the first ages of the
republic as later, allowed to their slaves a kind of marriage,
(contubernium: ) notwithstanding this, luxury made a greater
number of slaves in demand. The increase in their population was
not sufficient, and recourse was had to the purchase of slaves,
which was made even in the provinces of the East subject to the
Romans. It is, moreover, known that slavery is a state little
favorable to population. (See Hume's Essay, and Malthus on
population, i. 334. - G.) The testimony of Appian (B.C. l. i. c.
7) is decisive in favor of the rapid multiplication of the
agricultural slaves; it is confirmed by the numbers engaged in
the servile wars. Compare also Blair, p. 119; likewise Columella
l. viii. - M.]
[Footnote 49: See in Gruter, and the other collectors, a great
number of inscriptions addressed by slaves to their wives,
children, fellow-servants, masters, &c. They are all most
probably of the Imperial age.]
[Footnote 50: See the Augustan History, and a Dissertation of M.
de Burigny, in the xxxvth volume of the Academy of Inscriptions,
upon the Roman slaves.]
Hope, the best comfort of our imperfect condition, was not
denied to the Roman slave; and if he had any opportunity of
rendering himself either useful or agreeable, he might very
naturally expect that the diligence and fidelity of a few years
would be rewarded with the inestimable gift of freedom. The
benevolence of the master was so frequently prompted by the
meaner suggestions of vanity and avarice, that the laws found it
more necessary to restrain than to encourage a profuse and
undistinguishing liberality, which might degenerate into a very
dangerous abuse. ^51 It was a maxim of ancient jurisprudence,
that a slave had not any country of his own; he acquired with his
liberty an admission into the political society of which his
patron was a member. The consequences of this maxim would have
prostituted the privileges of the Roman city to a mean and
promiscuous multitude. Some seasonable exceptions were therefore
provided; and the honorable distinction was confined to such
slaves only as, for just causes, and with the approbation of the
magistrate, should receive a solemn and legal manumission. Even
these chosen freedmen obtained no more than the private rights of
citizens, and were rigorously excluded from civil or military
honors. Whatever might be the merit or fortune of their sons,
they likewise were esteemed unworthy of a seat in the senate; nor
were the traces of a servile origin allowed to be completely
obliterated till the third or fourth generation. ^52 Without
destroying the distinction of ranks, a distant prospect of
freedom and honors was presented, even to those whom pride and
prejudice almost disdained to number among the human species.
[Footnote 51: See another Dissertation of M. de Burigny, in the
xxxviith volume, on the Roman freedmen.]
[Footnote 52: Spanheim, Orbis Roman. l. i. c. 16, p. 124, &c.]
It was once proposed to discriminate the slaves by a
peculiar habit; but it was justly apprehended that there might be
some danger in acquainting them with their own numbers. ^53
Without interpreting, in their utmost strictness, the liberal
appellations of legions and myriads, ^54 we may venture to
pronounce, that the proportion of slaves, who were valued as
property, was more considerable than that of servants, who can be
computed only as an expense. ^55 The youths of a promising genius
were instructed in the arts and sciences, and their price was
ascertained by the degree of their skill and talents. ^56 Almost
every profession, either liberal ^57 or mechanical, might be
found in the household of an opulent senator. The ministers of
pomp and sensuality were multiplied beyond the conception of
modern luxury. ^58 It was more for the interest of the merchant
or manufacturer to purchase, than to hire his workmen; and in the
country, slaves were employed as the cheapest and most laborious
instruments of agriculture. To confirm the general observation,
and to display the multitude of slaves, we might allege a variety
of particular instances. It was discovered, on a very melancholy
occasion, that four hundred slaves were maintained in a single
palace of Rome. ^59 The same number of four hundred belonged to
an estate which an African widow, of a very private condition,
resigned to her son, whilst she reserved for herself a much
larger share of her property. ^60 A freedman, under the name of
Augustus, though his fortune had suffered great losses in the
civil wars, left behind him three thousand six hundred yoke of
oxen, two hundred and fifty thousand head of smaller cattle, and
what was almost included in the description of cattle, four
thousand one hundred and sixteen slaves. ^61
[Footnote 53: Seneca de Clementia, l. i. c. 24. The original is
much stronger, "Quantum periculum immineret si servi nostri
numerare nos coepissent."]
[Footnote 54: See Pliny (Hist. Natur. l. xxxiii.) and Athenaeus
(Deipnosophist. l. vi. p. 272.) The latter boldly asserts, that
he knew very many Romans who possessed, not for use, but
ostentation, ten and even twenty thousand slaves.]
[Footnote 55: In Paris there are not more than 43,000 domestics
of every sort, and not a twelfth part of the inhabitants.
Messange, Recherches sui la Population, p. 186.]
[Footnote 56: A learned slave sold for many hundred pounds
sterling: Atticus always bred and taught them himself. Cornel.
Nepos in Vit. c. 13, [on the prices of slaves. Blair, 149.] -
M.]
[Footnote 57: Many of the Roman physicians were slaves. See Dr.
Middleton's Dissertation and Defence.]
[Footnote 58: Their ranks and offices are very copiously
enumerated by Pignorius de Servis.]
[Footnote 59: Tacit. Annal. xiv. 43. They were all executed for
not preventing their master's murder.
Note: The remarkable speech of Cassius shows the proud
feelings of the Roman aristocracy on this subject. - M]
[Footnote 60: Apuleius in Apolog. p. 548. edit. Delphin]
[Footnote 61: Plin. Hist. Natur. l. xxxiii. 47.]
The number of subjects who acknowledged the laws of Rome, of
citizens, of provincials, and of slaves, cannot now be fixed with
such a degree of accuracy, as the importance of the object would
deserve. We are informed, that when the Emperor Claudius
exercised the office of censor, he took an account of six
millions nine hundred and forty-five thousand Roman citizens,
who, with the proportion of women and children, must have
amounted to about twenty millions of souls. The multitude of
subjects of an inferior rank was uncertain and fluctuating. But,
after weighing with attention every circumstance which could
influence the balance, it seems probable that there existed, in
the time of Claudius, about twice as many provincials as there
were citizens, of either sex, and of every age; and that the
slaves were at least equal in number to the free inhabitants of
the Roman world. ^* The total amount of this imperfect
calculation would rise to about one hundred and twenty millions
of persons; a degree of population which possibly exceeds that of
modern Europe, ^62 and forms the most numerous society that has
ever been united under the same system of government.
[Footnote *: According to Robertson, there were twice as many
slaves as free citizens. - G. Mr. Blair (p. 15) estimates three
slaves to one freeman, between the conquest of Greece, B.C. 146,
and the reign of Alexander Severus, A. D. 222, 235. The
proportion was probably larger in Italy than in the provinces. -
M. On the other hand, Zumpt, in his Dissertation quoted below,
(p. 86,) asserts it to be a gross error in Gibbon to reckon the
number of slaves equal to that of the free population. The
luxury and magnificence of the great, (he observes,) at the
commencement of the empire, must not be taken as the groundwork
of calculations for the whole Roman world. The agricultural
laborer, and the artisan, in Spain, Gaul, Britain, Syria, and
Egypt, maintained himself, as in the present day, by his own
labor and that of his household, without possessing a single
slave." The latter part of my note was intended to suggest this
consideration. Yet so completely was slavery rooted in the
social system, both in the east and the west, that in the great
diffusion of wealth at this time, every one, I doubt not, who
could afford a domestic slave, kept one; and generally, the
number of slaves was in proportion to the wealth. I do not
believe that the cultivation of the soil by slaves was confined
to Italy; the holders of large estates in the provinces would
probably, either from choice or necessity, adopt the same mode of
cultivation. The latifundia, says Pliny, had ruined Italy, and
had begun to ruin the provinces. Slaves were no doubt employed
in agricultural labor to a great extent in Sicily, and were the
estates of those six enormous landholders who were said to have
possessed the whole province of Africa, cultivated altogether by
free coloni? Whatever may have been the case in the rural
districts, in the towns and cities the household duties were
almost entirely discharged by slaves, and vast numbers belonged
to the public establishments. I do not, however, differ so far
from Zumpt, and from M. Dureau de la Malle, as to adopt the
higher and bolder estimate of Robertson and Mr. Blair, rather
than the more cautious suggestions of Gibbon. I would reduce
rather than increase the proportion of the slave population. The
very ingenious and elaborate calculations of the French writer,
by which he deduces the amount of the population from the produce
and consumption of corn in Italy, appear to me neither precise
nor satisfactory bases for such complicated political arithmetic.
I am least satisfied with his views as to the population of the
city of Rome; but this point will be more fitly reserved for a
note on the thirty-first chapter of Gibbon. The work, however,
of M. Dureau de la Malle is very curious and full on some of the
minuter points of Roman statistics. - M. 1845.]
[Footnote 62: Compute twenty millions in France, twenty-two in
Germany, four in Hungary, ten in Italy with its islands, eight in
Great Britain and Ireland, eight in Spain and Portugal, ten or
twelve in the European Russia, six in Poland, six in Greece and
Turkey, four in Sweden, three in Denmark and Norway, four in the
Low Countries. The whole would amount to one hundred and five,
or one hundred and seven millions. See Voltaire, de l'Histoire
Generale.
Note: The present population of Europe is estimated at
227,700,000. Malts Bran, Geogr. Trans edit. 1832 See details in
the different volumes Another authority, (Almanach de Gotha,)
quoted in a recent English publication, gives the following
details: -
France, 32,897,521
Germany, (including Hungary, Prussian and Austrian
Poland,) 56,136,213
Italy, 20,548,616
Great Britain and Ireland, 24,062,947
Spain and Portugal, 13,953,959 3,144,000
Russia, including Poland, 44,220,600
Cracow, 128,480
Turkey, (including Pachalic of Dschesair,)
9,545,300
Greece, 637,700
Ionian Islands, 208,100
Sweden and Norway, 3,914,963
Denmark, 2,012,998
Belgium, 3,533,538
Holland, 2,444,550
Switzerland, 985,000
Total, 219,344,116
Since the publication of my first annotated edition of
Gibbon, the subject of the population of the Roman empire has
been investigated by two writers of great industry and learning;
Mons. Dureau de la Malle, in his Economie Politique des Romains,
liv. ii. c. 1. to 8, and M. Zumpt, in a dissertation printed in
the Transactions of the Berlin Academy, 1840. M. Dureau de la
Malle confines his inquiry almost entirely to the city of Rome,
and Roman Italy. Zumpt examines at greater length the axiom,
which he supposes to have been assumed by Gibbon as
unquestionable, "that Italy and the Roman world was never so
populous as in the time of the Antonines." Though this probably
was Gibbon's opinion, he has not stated it so peremptorily as
asserted by Mr. Zumpt. It had before been expressly laid down by
Hume, and his statement was controverted by Wallace and by
Malthus. Gibbon says (p. 84) that there is no reason to believe
the country (of Italy) less populous in the age of the Antonines,
than in that of Romulus; and Zumpt acknowledges that we have no
satisfactory knowledge of the state of Italy at that early age.
Zumpt, in my opinion with some reason, takes the period just
before the first Punic war, as that in which Roman Italy (all
south of the Rubicon) was most populous. From that time, the
numbers began to diminish, at first from the enormous waste of
life out of the free population in the foreign, and afterwards in
the civil wars; from the cultivation of the soil by slaves;
towards the close of the republic, from the repugnance to
marriage, which resisted alike the dread of legal punishment and
the offer of legal immunity and privilege; and from the depravity
of manners, which interfered with the procreation, the birth, and
the rearing of children. The arguments and the authorities of
Zumpt are equally conclusive as to the decline of population in
Greece. Still the details, which he himself adduces as to the
prosperity and populousness of Asia Minor, and the whole of the
Roman East, with the advancement of the European provinces,
especially Gaul, Spain, and Britain, in civilization, and
therefore in populousness, (for I have no confidence in the vast
numbers sometimes assigned to the barbarous inhabitants of these
countries,) may, I think, fairly compensate for any deduction to
be made from Gibbon's general estimate on account of Greece and
Italy. Gibbon himself acknowledges his own estimate to be vague
and conjectural; and I may venture to recommend the dissertation
of Zumpt as deserving respectful consideration. - M 1815.]
Chapter II: The Internal Prosperity In The Age Of The Antonines.
Part III.
Domestic peace and union were the natural consequences of
the moderate and comprehensive policy embraced by the Romans. If
we turn our eyes towards the monarchies of Asia, we shall behold
despotism in the centre, and weakness in the extremities; the
collection of the revenue, or the administration of justice,
enforced by the presence of an army; hostile barbarians
established in the heart of the country, hereditary satraps
usurping the dominion of the provinces, and subjects inclined to
rebellion, though incapable of freedom. But the obedience of the
Roman world was uniform, voluntary, and permanent. The vanquished
nations, blended into one great people, resigned the hope, nay,
even the wish, of resuming their independence, and scarcely
considered their own existence as distinct from the existence of
Rome. The established authority of the emperors pervaded without
an effort the wide extent of their dominions, and was exercised
with the same facility on the banks of the Thames, or of the
Nile, as on those of the Tyber. The legions were destined to
serve against the public enemy, and the civil magistrate seldom
required the aid of a military force. ^63 In this state of
general security, the leisure, as well as opulence, both of the
prince and people, were devoted to improve and to adorn the Roman
empire.
[Footnote 63: Joseph. de Bell. Judaico, l. ii. c. 16. The
oration of Agrippa, or rather of the historian, is a fine picture
of the Roman empire.]
Among the innumerable monuments of architecture constructed
by the Romans, how many have escaped the notice of history, how
few have resisted the ravages of time and barbarism! And yet,
even the majestic ruins that are still scattered over Italy and
the provinces, would be sufficient to prove that those countries
were once the seat of a polite and powerful empire. Their
greatness alone, or their beauty, might deserve our attention:
but they are rendered more interesting, by two important
circumstances, which connect the agreeable history of the arts
with the more useful history of human manners. Many of those
works were erected at private expense, and almost all were
intended for public benefit.
It is natural to suppose that the greatest number, as well
as the most considerable of the Roman edifices, were raised by
the emperors, who possessed so unbounded a command both of men
and money. Augustus was accustomed to boast that he had found
his capital of brick, and that he had left it of marble. ^64 The
strict economy of Vespasian was the source of his magnificence.
The works of Trajan bear the stamp of his genius. The public
monuments with which Hadrian adorned every province of the
empire, were executed not only by his orders, but under his
immediate inspection. He was himself an artist; and he loved the
arts, as they conduced to the glory of the monarch. They were
encouraged by the Antonines, as they contributed to the happiness
of the people. But if the emperors were the first, they were not
the only architects of their dominions. Their example was
universally imitated by their principal subjects, who were not
afraid of declaring to the world that they had spirit to
conceive, and wealth to accomplish, the noblest undertakings.
Scarcely had the proud structure of the Coliseum been dedicated
at Rome, before the edifices, of a smaller scale indeed, but of
the same design and materials, were erected for the use, and at
the expense, of the cities of Capua and Verona. ^65 The
inscription of the stupendous bridge of Alcantara attests that it
was thrown over the Tagus by the contribution of a few Lusitanian
communities. When Pliny was intrusted with the government of
Bithynia and Pontus, provinces by no means the richest or most
considerable of the empire, he found the cities within his
jurisdiction striving with each other in every useful and
ornamental work, that might deserve the curiosity of strangers,
or the gratitude of their citizens. It was the duty of the
proconsul to supply their deficiencies, to direct their taste,
and sometimes to moderate their emulation. ^66 The opulent
senators of Rome and the provinces esteemed it an honor, and
almost an obligation, to adorn the splendor of their age and
country; and the influence of fashion very frequently supplied
the want of taste or generosity. Among a crowd of these private
benefactors, we may select Herodes Atticus, an Athenian citizen,
who lived in the age of the Antonines. Whatever might be the
motive of his conduct, his magnificence would have been worthy of
the greatest kings.
[Footnote 64: Sueton. in August. c. 28. Augustus built in Rome
the temple and forum of Mars the Avenger; the temple of Jupiter
Tonans in the Capitol; that of Apollo Palatine, with public
libraries; the portico and basilica of Caius and Lucius; the
porticos of Livia and Octavia; and the theatre of Marcellus. The
example of the sovereign was imitated by his ministers and
generals; and his friend Agrippa left behind him the immortal
monument of the Pantheon.]
[See Theatre Of Marcellus: Augustus built in Rome the theatre of
Marcellus.]
[Footnote 65: See Maffei, Veroni Illustrata, l. iv. p. 68.]
[Footnote 66: See the xth book of Pliny's Epistles. He mentions
the following works carried on at the expense of the cities. At
Nicomedia, a new forum, an aqueduct, and a canal, left unfinished
by a king; at Nice, a gymnasium, and a theatre, which had already
cost near ninety thousand pounds; baths at Prusa and
Claudiopolis, and an aqueduct of sixteen miles in length for the
use of Sinope.]
The family of Herod, at least after it had been favored by
fortune, was lineally descended from Cimon and Miltiades, Theseus
and Cecrops, Aeacus and Jupiter. But the posterity of so many
gods and heroes was fallen into the most abject state. His
grandfather had suffered by the hands of justice, and Julius
Atticus, his father, must have ended his life in poverty and
contempt, had he not discovered an immense treasure buried under
an old house, the last remains of his patrimony. According to
the rigor of the law, the emperor might have asserted his claim,
and the prudent Atticus prevented, by a frank confession, the
officiousness of informers. But the equitable Nerva, who then
filled the throne, refused to accept any part of it, and
commanded him to use, without scruple, the present of fortune.
The cautious Athenian still insisted, that the treasure was too
considerable for a subject, and that he knew not how to use it.
Abuse it then, replied the monarch, with a good- natured
peevishness; for it is your own. ^67 Many will be of opinion,
that Atticus literally obeyed the emperor's last instructions;
since he expended the greatest part of his fortune, which was
much increased by an advantageous marriage, in the service of the
public. He had obtained for his son Herod the prefecture of the
free cities of Asia; and the young magistrate, observing that the
town of Troas was indifferently supplied with water, obtained
from the munificence of Hadrian three hundred myriads of drachms,
(about a hundred thousand pounds,) for the construction of a new
aqueduct. But in the execution of the work, the charge amounted
to more than double the estimate, and the officers of the revenue
began to murmur, till the generous Atticus silenced their
complaints, by requesting that he might be permitted to take upon
himself the whole additional expense. ^68
[Footnote 67: Hadrian afterwards made a very equitable
regulation, which divided all treasure-trove between the right of
property and that of discovery. Hist. August. p. 9.]
[Footnote 68: Philostrat. in Vit. Sophist. l. ii. p. 548.]
The ablest preceptors of Greece and Asia had been invited by
liberal rewards to direct the education of young Herod. Their
pupil soon became a celebrated orator, according to the useless
rhetoric of that age, which, confining itself to the schools,
disdained to visit either the Forum or the Senate.
He was honored with the consulship at Rome: but the greatest
part of his life was spent in a philosophic retirement at Athens,
and his adjacent villas; perpetually surrounded by sophists, who
acknowledged, without reluctance, the superiority of a rich and
generous rival. ^69 The monuments of his genius have perished;
some considerable ruins still preserve the fame of his taste and
munificence: modern travellers have measured the remains of the
stadium which he constructed at Athens. It was six hundred feet
in length, built entirely of white marble, capable of admitting
the whole body of the people, and finished in four years, whilst
Herod was president of the Athenian games. To the memory of his
wife Regilla he dedicated a theatre, scarcely to be paralleled in
the empire: no wood except cedar, very curiously carved, was
employed in any part of the building. The Odeum, ^* designed by
Pericles for musical performances, and the rehearsal of new
tragedies, had been a trophy of the victory of the arts over
barbaric greatness; as the timbers employed in the construction
consisted chiefly of the masts of the Persian vessels.
Notwithstanding the repairs bestowed on that ancient edifice by a
king of Cappadocia, it was again fallen to decay. Herod restored
its ancient beauty and magnificence. Nor was the liberality of
that illustrious citizen confined to the walls of Athens. The
most splendid ornaments bestowed on the temple of Neptune in the
Isthmus, a theatre at Corinth, a stadium at Delphi, a bath at
Thermopylae, and an aqueduct at Canusium in Italy, were
insufficient to exhaust his treasures. The people of Epirus,
Thessaly, Euboea, Boeotia, and Peloponnesus, experienced his
favors; and many inscriptions of the cities of Greece and Asia
gratefully style Herodes Atticus their patron and benefactor. ^70
[Footnote 69: Aulus Gellius, in Noct. Attic. i. 2, ix. 2, xviii.
10, xix. 12. Phil ostrat. p. 564.]
[Footnote *: The Odeum served for the rehearsal of new comedies
as well as tragedies; they were read or repeated, before
representation, without music or decorations, &c. No piece could
be represented in the theatre if it had not been previously
approved by judges for this purpose. The king of Cappadocia who
restored the Odeum, which had been burnt by Sylla, was
Araobarzanes. See Martini, Dissertation on the Odeons of the
Ancients, Leipsic. 1767, p. 10 - 91. - W.]
[Footnote 70: See Philostrat. l. ii. p. 548, 560. Pausanias, l.
i. and vii. 10. The life of Herodes, in the xxxth volume of the
Memoirs of the Academy of Inscriptions.]
In the commonwealths of Athens and Rome, the modest
simplicity of private houses announced the equal condition of
freedom; whilst the sovereignty of the people was represented in
the majestic edifices designed to the public use; ^71 nor was
this republican spirit totally extinguished by the introduction
of wealth and monarchy. It was in works of national honor and
benefit, that the most virtuous of the emperors affected to
display their magnificence. The golden palace of Nero excited a
just indignation, but the vast extent of ground which had been
usurped by his selfish luxury was more nobly filled under the
succeeding reigns by the Coliseum, the baths of Titus, the
Claudian portico, and the temples dedicated to the goddess of
Peace, and to the genius of Rome. ^72 These monuments of
architecture, the property of the Roman people, were adorned with
the most beautiful productions of Grecian painting and sculpture;
and in the temple of Peace, a very curious library was open to
the curiosity of the learned. ^* At a small distance from thence
was situated the Forum of Trajan. It was surrounded by a lofty
portico, in the form of a quadrangle, into which four triumphal
arches opened a noble and spacious entrance: in the centre arose
a column of marble, whose height, of one hundred and ten feet,
denoted the elevation of the hill that had been cut away. This
column, which still subsists in its ancient beauty, exhibited an
exact representation of the Dacian victories of its founder. The
veteran soldier contemplated the story of his own campaigns, and
by an easy illusion of national vanity, the peaceful citizen
associated himself to the honors of the triumph. All the other
quarters of the capital, and all the provinces of the empire,
were embellished by the same liberal spirit of public
magnificence, and were filled with amphi theatres, theatres,
temples, porticoes, triumphal arches, baths and aqueducts, all
variously conducive to the health, the devotion, and the
pleasures of the meanest citizen. The last mentioned of those
edifices deserve our peculiar attention. The boldness of the
enterprise, the solidity of the execution, and the uses to which
they were subservient, rank the aqueducts among the noblest
monuments of Roman genius and power. The aqueducts of the
capital claim a just preeminence; but the curious traveller, who,
without the light of history, should examine those of Spoleto, of
Metz, or of Segovia, would very naturally conclude that those
provincial towns had formerly been the residence of some potent
monarch. The solitudes of Asia and Africa were once covered with
flourishing cities, whose populousness, and even whose existence,
was derived from such artificial supplies of a perennial stream
of fresh water. ^73
[Footnote 71: It is particularly remarked of Athens by
Dicaearchus, de Statu Graeciae, p. 8, inter Geographos Minores,
edit. Hudson.]
[Footnote 72: Donatus de Roma Vetere, l. iii. c. 4, 5, 6.
Nardini Roma Antica, l. iii. 11, 12, 13, and a Ms. description of
ancient Rome, by Bernardus Oricellarius, or Rucellai, of which I
obtained a copy from the library of the Canon Ricardi at
Florence. Two celebrated pictures of Timanthes and of Protogenes
are mentioned by Pliny, as in the Temple of Peace; and the
Laocoon was found in the baths of Titus.]
[Footnote *: The Emperor Vespasian, who had caused the Temple of
Peace to be built, transported to it the greatest part of the
pictures, statues, and other works of art which had escaped the
civil tumults. It was there that every day the artists and the
learned of Rome assembled; and it is on the site of this temple
that a multitude of antiques have been dug up. See notes of
Reimar on Dion Cassius, lxvi. c. 15, p. 1083. - W.]
[Footnote 73: Montfaucon l'Antiquite Expliquee, tom. iv. p. 2, l.
i. c. 9. Fabretti has composed a very learned treatise on the
aqueducts of Rome.]
We have computed the inhabitants, and contemplated the
public works, of the Roman empire. The observation of the number
and greatness of its cities will serve to confirm the former, and
to multiply the latter. It may not be unpleasing to collect a
few scattered instances relative to that subject without
forgetting, however, that from the vanity of nations and the
poverty of language, the vague appellation of city has been
indifferently bestowed on Rome and upon Laurentum.
I. Ancient Italy is said to have contained eleven hundred
and ninety- seven cities; and for whatsoever aera of antiquity
the expression might be intended, ^74 there is not any reason to
believe the country less populous in the age of the Antonines,
than in that of Romulus. The petty states of Latium were
contained within the metropolis of the empire, by whose superior
influence they had been attracted. ^* Those parts of Italy which
have so long languished under the lazy tyranny of priests and
viceroys, had been afflicted only by the more tolerable
calamities of war; and the first symptoms of decay which they
experienced, were amply compensated by the rapid improvements of
the Cisalpine Gaul. The splendor of Verona may be traced in its
remains: yet Verona was less celebrated than Aquileia or Padua,
Milan or Ravenna. II. The spirit of improvement had passed the
Alps, and been felt even in the woods of Britain, which were
gradually cleared away to open a free space for convenient and
elegant habitations. York was the seat of government; London was
already enriched by commerce; and Bath was celebrated for the
salutary effects of its medicinal waters. Gaul could boast of
her twelve hundred cities; ^75 and though, in the northern parts,
many of them, without excepting Paris itself, were little more
than the rude and imperfect townships of a rising people, the
southern provinces imitated the wealth and elegance of Italy. ^76
Many were the cities of Gaul, Marseilles, Arles, Nismes,
Narbonne, Thoulouse, Bourdeaux, Autun, Vienna, Lyons, Langres,
and Treves, whose ancient condition might sustain an equal, and
perhaps advantageous comparison with their present state. With
regard to Spain, that country flourished as a province, and has
declined as a kingdom. Exhausted by the abuse of her strength,
by America, and by superstition, her pride might possibly be
confounded, if we required such a list of three hundred and sixty
cities, as Pliny has exhibited under the reign of Vespasian. ^77
III. Three hundred African cities had once acknowledged the
authority of Carthage, ^78 nor is it likely that their numbers
diminished under the administration of the emperors: Carthage
itself rose with new splendor from its ashes; and that capital,
as well as Capua and Corinth, soon recovered all the advantages
which can be separated from independent sovereignty. IV. The
provinces of the East present the contrast of Roman magnificence
with Turkish barbarism. The ruins of antiquity scattered over
uncultivated fields, and ascribed, by ignorance to the power of
magic, scarcely afford a shelter to the oppressed peasant or
wandering Arab. Under the reign of the Caesars, the proper Asia
alone contained five hundred populous cities, ^79 enriched with
all the gifts of nature, and adorned with all the refinements of
art. Eleven cities of Asia had once disputed the honor of
dedicating a temple of Tiberius, and their respective merits were
examined by the senate. ^80 Four of them were immediately
rejected as unequal to the burden; and among these was Laodicea,
whose splendor is still displayed in its ruins. ^81 Laodicea
collected a very considerable revenue from its flocks of sheep,
celebrated for the fineness of their wool, and had received, a
little before the contest, a legacy of above four hundred
thousand pounds by the testament of a generous citizen. ^82 If
such was the poverty of Laodicea, what must have been the wealth
of those cities, whose claim appeared preferable, and
particularly of Pergamus, of Smyrna, and of Ephesus, who so long
disputed with each other the titular primacy of Asia? ^83 The
capitals of Syria and Egypt held a still superior rank in the
empire; Antioch and Alexandria looked down with disdain on a
crowd of dependent cities, ^84 and yielded, with reluctance, to
the majesty of Rome itself.
[Footnote 74: Aelian. Hist. Var. lib. ix. c. 16. He lived in the
time of Alexander Severus. See Fabricius, Biblioth. Graeca, l.
iv. c. 21.]
[Footnote *: This may in some degree account for the difficulty
started by Livy, as to the incredibly numerous armies raised by
the small states around Rome where, in his time, a scanty stock
of free soldiers among a larger population of Roman slaves broke
the solitude. Vix seminario exiguo militum relicto servitia
Romana ab solitudine vindicant, Liv. vi. vii. Compare Appian Bel
Civ. i. 7. - M. subst. for G.]
[Footnote 75: Joseph. de Bell. Jud. ii. 16. The number, however,
is mentioned, and should be received with a degree of latitude.
Note: Without doubt no reliance can be placed on this
passage of Josephus. The historian makes Agrippa give advice to
the Jews, as to the power of the Romans; and the speech is full
of declamation which can furnish no conclusions to history.
While enumerating the nations subject to the Romans, he speaks of
the Gauls as submitting to 1200 soldiers, (which is false, as
there were eight legions in Gaul, Tac. iv. 5,) while there are
nearly twelve hundred cities. - G. Josephus (infra) places these
eight legions on the Rhine, as Tacitus does. - M.]
[Footnote 76: Plin. Hist. Natur. iii. 5.]
[Footnote 77: Plin. Hist. Natur. iii. 3, 4, iv. 35. The list
seems authentic and accurate; the division of the provinces, and
the different condition of the cities, are minutely
distinguished.]
[Footnote 78: Strabon. Geograph. l. xvii. p. 1189.]
[Footnote 79: Joseph. de Bell. Jud. ii. 16. Philostrat. in Vit.
Sophist. l. ii. p. 548, edit. Olear.]
[Footnote 80: Tacit. Annal. iv. 55. I have taken some pains in
consulting and comparing modern travellers, with regard to the
fate of those eleven cities of Asia. Seven or eight are totally
destroyed: Hypaepe, Tralles, Laodicea, Hium, Halicarnassus,
Miletus, Ephesus, and we may add Sardes. Of the remaining three,
Pergamus is a straggling village of two or three thousand
inhabitants; Magnesia, under the name of Guzelhissar, a town of
some consequence; and Smyrna, a great city, peopled by a hundred
thousand souls. But even at Smyrna, while the Franks have
maintained a commerce, the Turks have ruined the arts.]
[Footnote 81: See a very exact and pleasing description of the
ruins of Laodicea, in Chandler's Travels through Asia Minor, p.
225, &c.]
[Footnote 82: Strabo, l. xii. p. 866. He had studied at
Tralles.]
[Footnote 83: See a Dissertation of M. de Boze, Mem. de
l'Academie, tom. xviii. Aristides pronounced an oration, which
is still extant, to recommend concord to the rival cities.]
[Footnote 84: The inhabitants of Egypt, exclusive of Alexandria,
amounted to seven millions and a half, (Joseph. de Bell. Jud.
ii. 16.) Under the military government of the Mamelukes, Syria
was supposed to contain sixty thousand villages, (Histoire de
Timur Bec, l. v. c. 20.)]
Chapter II: The Internal Prosperity In The Age Of The Antonines.
Part IV.
All these cities were connected with each other, and with
the capital, by the public highways, which, issuing from the
Forum of Rome, traversed Italy, pervaded the provinces, and were
terminated only by the frontiers of the empire. If we carefully
trace the distance from the wall of Antoninus to Rome, and from
thence to Jerusalem, it will be found that the great chain of
communication, from the north-west to the south-east point of the
empire, was drawn out to the length if four thousand and eighty
Roman miles. ^85 The public roads were accurately divided by
mile-stones, and ran in a direct line from one city to another,
with very little respect for the obstacles either of nature or
private property. Mountains were perforated, and bold arches
thrown over the broadest and most rapid streams. ^86 The middle
part of the road was raised into a terrace which commanded the
adjacent country, consisted of several strata of sand, gravel,
and cement, and was paved with large stones, or, in some places
near the capital, with granite. ^87 Such was the solid
construction of the Roman highways, whose firmness has not
entirely yielded to the effort of fifteen centuries. They united
the subjects of the most distant provinces by an easy and
familiar intercourse; out their primary object had been to
facilitate the marches of the legions; nor was any country
considered as completely subdued, till it had been rendered, in
all its parts, pervious to the arms and authority of the
conqueror. The advantage of receiving the earliest intelligence,
and of conveying their orders with celerity, induced the emperors
to establish, throughout their extensive dominions, the regular
institution of posts. ^88 Houses were every where erected at the
distance only of five or six miles; each of them was constantly
provided with forty horses, and by the help of these relays, it
was easy to travel a hundred miles in a day along the Roman
roads. ^89 ^* The use of posts was allowed to those who claimed
it by an Imperial mandate; but though originally intended for the
public service, it was sometimes indulged to the business or
conveniency of private citizens. ^90 Nor was the communication of
the Roman empire less free and open by sea than it was by land.
The provinces surrounded and enclosed the Mediterranean: and
Italy, in the shape of an immense promontory, advanced into the
midst of that great lake. The coasts of Italy are, in general,
destitute of safe harbors; but human industry had corrected the
deficiencies of nature; and the artificial port of Ostia, in
particular, situate at the mouth of the Tyber, and formed by the
emperor Claudius, was a useful monument of Roman greatness. ^91
From this port, which was only sixteen miles from the capital, a
favorable breeze frequently carried vessels in seven days to the
columns of Hercules, and in nine or ten, to Alexandria in Egypt.
^92
[See Remains Of Claudian Aquaduct]
[Footnote 85: The following Itinerary may serve to convey some
idea of the direction of the road, and of the distance between
the principal towns. I. From the wall of Antoninus to York, 222
Roman miles. II. London, 227. III. Rhutupiae or Sandwich, 67.
IV. The navigation to Boulogne, 45. V. Rheims, 174. VI.
Lyons, 330. VII. Milan, 324. VIII. Rome, 426. IX.
Brundusium, 360. X. The navigation to Dyrrachium, 40. XI.
Byzantium, 711. XII. Ancyra, 283. XIII. Tarsus, 301. XIV.
Antioch, 141. XV. Tyre, 252. XVI. Jerusalem, 168. In all 4080
Roman, or 3740 English miles. See the Itineraries published by
Wesseling, his annotations; Gale and Stukeley for Britain, and M.
d'Anville for Gaul and Italy.]
[Footnote 86: Montfaucon, l'Antiquite Expliquee, (tom. 4, p. 2,
l. i. c. 5,) has described the bridges of Narni, Alcantara,
Nismes, &c.]
[Footnote 87: Bergier, Histoire des grands Chemins de l'Empire
Romain, l. ii. c. l. l - 28.]
[Footnote 88: Procopius in Hist. Arcana, c. 30. Bergier, Hist.
des grands Chemins, l. iv. Codex Theodosian. l. viii. tit. v.
vol. ii. p. 506 - 563 with Godefroy's learned commentary.]
[Footnote 89: In the time of Theodosius, Caesarius, a magistrate
of high rank, went post from Antioch to Constantinople. He began
his journey at night, was in Cappadocia (165 miles from Antioch)
the ensuing evening, and arrived at Constantinople the sixth day
about noon. The whole distance was 725 Roman, or 665 English
miles. See Libanius, Orat. xxii., and the Itineria, p. 572 -
581.
Note: A courier is mentioned in Walpole's Travels, ii. 335,
who was to travel from Aleppo to Constantinople, more than 700
miles, in eight days, an unusually short journey. - M.]
[Footnote *: Posts for the conveyance of intelligence were
established by Augustus. Suet. Aug. 49. The couriers travelled
with amazing speed. Blair on Roman Slavery, note, p. 261. It is
probable that the posts, from the time of Augustus, were confined
to the public service, and supplied by impressment Nerva, as it
appears from a coin of his reign, made an important change; "he
established posts upon all the public roads of Italy, and made
the service chargeable upon his own exchequer. * * Hadrian,
perceiving the advantage of this improvement, extended it to all
the provinces of the empire." Cardwell on Coins, p. 220. - M.]
[Footnote 90: Pliny, though a favorite and a minister, made an
apology for granting post-horses to his wife on the most urgent
business. Epist. x. 121, 122.]
[Footnote 91: Bergier, Hist. des grands Chemins, l. iv. c. 49.]
[Footnote 92: Plin. Hist. Natur. xix. i. [In Prooem.]
Note: Pliny says Puteoli, which seems to have been the usual
landing place from the East. See the voyages of St. Paul, Acts
xxviii. 13, and of Josephus, Vita, c. 3 - M.]
Whatever evils either reason or declamation have imputed to
extensive empire, the power of Rome was attended with some
beneficial consequences to mankind; and the same freedom of
intercourse which extended the vices, diffused likewise the
improvements, of social life. In the more remote ages of
antiquity, the world was unequally divided. The East was in the
immemorial possession of arts and luxury; whilst the West was
inhabited by rude and warlike barbarians, who either disdained
agriculture, or to whom it was totally unknown. Under the
protection of an established government, the productions of
happier climates, and the industry of more civilized nations,
were gradually introduced into the western countries of Europe;
and the natives were encouraged, by an open and profitable
commerce, to multiply the former, as well as to improve the
latter. It would be almost impossible to enumerate all the
articles, either of the animal or the vegetable reign, which were
successively imported into Europe from Asia and Egypt: ^93 but it
will not be unworthy of the dignity, and much less of the
utility, of an historical work, slightly to touch on a few of the
principal heads. 1. Almost all the flowers, the herbs, and the
fruits, that grow in our European gardens, are of foreign
extraction, which, in many cases, is betrayed even by their
names: the apple was a native of Italy, and when the Romans had
tasted the richer flavor of the apricot, the peach, the
pomegranate, the citron, and the orange, they contented
themselves with applying to all these new fruits the common
denomination of apple, discriminating them from each other by the
additional epithet of their country. 2. In the time of Homer,
the vine grew wild in the island of Sicily, and most probably in
the adjacent continent; but it was not improved by the skill, nor
did it afford a liquor grateful to the taste, of the savage
inhabitants. ^94 A thousand years afterwards, Italy could boast,
that of the fourscore most generous and celebrated wines, more
than two thirds were produced from her soil. ^95 The blessing was
soon communicated to the Narbonnese province of Gaul; but so
intense was the cold to the north of the Cevennes, that, in the
time of Strabo, it was thought impossible to ripen the grapes in
those parts of Gaul. ^96 This difficulty, however, was gradually
vanquished; and there is some reason to believe, that the
vineyards of Burgundy are as old as the age of the Antonines. ^97
3. The olive, in the western world, followed the progress of
peace, of which it was considered as the symbol. Two centuries
after the foundation of Rome, both Italy and Africa were
strangers to that useful plant: it was naturalized in those
countries; and at length carried into the heart of Spain and
Gaul. The timid errors of the ancients, that it required a
certain degree of heat, and could only flourish in the
neighborhood of the sea, were insensibly exploded by industry and
experience. ^98 4. The cultivation of flax was transported from
Egypt to Gaul, and enriched the whole country, however it might
impoverish the particular lands on which it was sown. ^99 5. The
use of artificial grasses became familiar to the farmers both of
Italy and the provinces, particularly the Lucerne, which derived
its name and origin from Media. ^100 The assured supply of
wholesome and plentiful food for the cattle during winter,
multiplied the number of the docks and herds, which in their turn
contributed to the fertility of the soil. To all these
improvements may be added an assiduous attention to mines and
fisheries, which, by employing a multitude of laborious hands,
serve to increase the pleasures of the rich and the subsistence
of the poor. The elegant treatise of Columella describes the
advanced state of the Spanish husbandry under the reign of
Tiberius; and it may be observed, that those famines, which so
frequently afflicted the infant republic, were seldom or never
experienced by the extensive empire of Rome. The accidental
scarcity, in any single province, was immediately relieved by the
plenty of its more fortunate neighbors.
[Footnote 93: It is not improbable that the Greeks and
Phoenicians introduced some new arts and productions into the
neighborhood of Marseilles and Gades.]
[Footnote 94: See Homer, Odyss. l. ix. v. 358.]
[Footnote 95: Plin. Hist. Natur. l. xiv.]
[Footnote 96: Strab. Geograph. l. iv. p. 269. The intense cold
of a Gallic winter was almost proverbial among the ancients.
Note: Strabo only says that the grape does not ripen.
Attempts had been made in the time of Augustus to naturalize the
vine in the north of Gaul; but the cold was too great. Diod.
Sic. edit. Rhodom. p. 304. - W. Diodorus (lib. v. 26) gives a
curious picture of the Italian traders bartering, with the
savages of Gaul, a cask of wine for a slave. - M.
It appears from the newly discovered treatise of Cicero de
Republica, that there was a law of the republic prohibiting the
culture of the vine and olive beyond the Alps, in order to keep
up the value of those in Italy. Nos justissimi homines, qui
transalpinas gentes oleam et vitem serere non sinimus, quo pluris
sint nostra oliveta nostraeque vineae. Lib. iii. 9. The
restrictive law of Domitian was veiled under the decent pretext
of encouraging the cultivation of grain. Suet. Dom. vii. It was
repealed by Probus Vopis Strobus, 18. - M.]
[Footnote 97: In the beginning of the fourth century, the orator
Eumenius (Panegyr. Veter. viii. 6, edit. Delphin.) speaks of the
vines in the territory of Autun, which were decayed through age,
and the first plantation of which was totally unknown. The Pagus
Arebrignus is supposed by M. d'Anville to be the district of
Beaune, celebrated, even at present for one of the first growths
of Burgundy.
Note: This is proved by a passage of Pliny the Elder, where
he speaks of a certain kind of grape (vitis picata. vinum
picatum) which grows naturally to the district of Vienne, and had
recently been transplanted into the country of the Arverni,
(Auvergne,) of the Helvii, (the Vivarias.) and the Burgundy and
Franche Compte. Pliny wrote A.D. 77. Hist. Nat. xiv. 1. - W.]
[Footnote 98: Plin. Hist. Natur. l. xv.]
[Footnote 99: Plin. Hist. Natur. l. xix.]
[Footnote 100: See the agreeable Essays on Agriculture by Mr.
Harte, in which he has collected all that the ancients and
moderns have said of Lucerne.]
Agriculture is the foundation of manufactures; since the
productions of nature are the materials of art. Under the Roman
empire, the labor of an industrious and ingenious people was
variously, but incessantly, employed in the service of the rich.
In their dress, their table, their houses, and their furniture,
the favorites of fortune united every refinement of conveniency,
of elegance, and of splendor, whatever could soothe their pride
or gratify their sensuality. Such refinements, under the odious
name of luxury, have been severely arraigned by the moralists of
every age; and it might perhaps be more conducive to the virtue,
as well as happiness, of mankind, if all possessed the
necessaries, and none the superfluities, of life. But in the
present imperfect condition of society, luxury, though it may
proceed from vice or folly, seems to be the only means that can
correct the unequal distribution of property. The diligent
mechanic, and the skilful artist, who have obtained no share in
the division of the earth, receive a voluntary tax from the
possessors of land; and the latter are prompted, by a sense of
interest, to improve those estates, with whose produce they may
purchase additional pleasures. This operation, the particular
effects of which are felt in every society, acted with much more
diffusive energy in the Roman world. The provinces would soon
have been exhausted of their wealth, if the manufactures and
commerce of luxury had not insensibly restored to the industrious
subjects the sums which were exacted from them by the arms and
authority of Rome. As long as the circulation was confined
within the bounds of the empire, it impressed the political
machine with a new degree of activity, and its consequences,
sometimes beneficial, could never become pernicious.
But it is no easy task to confine luxury within the limits
of an empire. The most remote countries of the ancient world were
ransacked to supply the pomp and delicacy of Rome. The forests
of Scythia afforded some valuable furs. Amber was brought over
land from the shores of the Baltic to the Danube; and the
barbarians were astonished at the price which they received in
exchange for so useless a commodity. ^101 There was a
considerable demand for Babylonian carpets, and other
manufactures of the East; but the most important and unpopular
branch of foreign trade was carried on with Arabia and India.
Every year, about the time of the summer solstice, a fleet of a
hundred and twenty vessels sailed from Myos-hormos, a port of
Egypt, on the Red Sea. By the periodical assistance of the
monsoons, they traversed the ocean in about forty days. The
coast of Malabar, or the island of Ceylon, ^102 was the usual
term of their navigation, and it was in those markets that the
merchants from the more remote countries of Asia expected their
arrival. The return of the fleet of Egypt was fixed to the months
of December or January; and as soon as their rich cargo had been
transported on the backs of camels, from the Red Sea to the Nile,
and had descended that river as far as Alexandria, it was poured,
without delay, into the capital of the empire. ^103 The objects
of oriental traffic were splendid and trifling; silk, a pound of
which was esteemed not inferior in value to a pound of gold; ^104
precious stones, among which the pearl claimed the first rank
after the diamond; ^105 and a variety of aromatics, that were
consumed in religious worship and the pomp of funerals. The
labor and risk of the voyage was rewarded with almost incredible
profit; but the profit was made upon Roman subjects, and a few
individuals were enriched at the expense of the public. As the
natives of Arabia and India were contented with the productions
and manufactures of their own country, silver, on the side of the
Romans, was the principal, if not the only ^* instrument of
commerce. It was a complaint worthy of the gravity of the
senate, that, in the purchase of female ornaments, the wealth of
the state was irrecoverably given away to foreign and hostile
nations. ^106 The annual loss is computed, by a writer of an
inquisitive but censorious temper, at upwards of eight hundred
thousand pounds sterling. ^107 Such was the style of discontent,
brooding over the dark prospect of approaching poverty. And yet,
if we compare the proportion between gold and silver, as it stood
in the time of Pliny, and as it was fixed in the reign of
Constantine, we shall discover within that period a very
considerable increase. ^108 There is not the least reason to
suppose that gold was become more scarce; it is therefore evident
that silver was grown more common; that whatever might be the
amount of the Indian and Arabian exports, they were far from
exhausting the wealth of the Roman world; and that the produce of
the mines abundantly supplied the demands of commerce.
[Footnote 101: Tacit. Germania, c. 45. Plin. Hist. Nat. xxxvii.
13. The latter observed, with some humor, that even fashion had
not yet found out the use of amber. Nero sent a Roman knight to
purchase great quantities on the spot where it was produced, the
coast of modern Prussia.]
[Footnote 102: Called Taprobana by the Romans, and Serindib by
the Arabs. It was discovered under the reign of Claudius, and
gradually became the principal mart of the East.]
[Footnote 103: Plin. Hist. Natur. l. vi. Strabo, l. xvii.]
[Footnote 104: Hist. August. p. 224. A silk garment was
considered as an ornament to a woman, but as a disgrace to a
man.]
[Footnote 105: The two great pearl fisheries were the same as at
present, Ormuz and Cape Comorin. As well as we can compare
ancient with modern geography, Rome was supplied with diamonds
from the mine of Jumelpur, in Bengal, which is described in the
Voyages de Tavernier, tom. ii. p. 281.]
[Footnote *: Certainly not the only one. The Indians were not so
contented with regard to foreign productions. Arrian has a long
list of European wares, which they received in exchange for their
own; Italian and other wines, brass, tin, lead, coral,
chrysolith, storax, glass, dresses of one or many colors, zones,
&c. See Periplus Maris Erythraei in Hudson, Geogr. Min. i. p.
27. - W. The German translator observes that Gibbon has confined
the use of aromatics to religious worship and funerals. His
error seems the omission of other spices, of which the Romans
must have consumed great quantities in their cookery. Wenck,
however, admits that silver was the chief article of exchange. -
M.
In 1787, a peasant (near Nellore in the Carnatic) struck, in
digging, on the remains of a Hindu temple; he found, also, a pot
which contained Roman coins and medals of the second century,
mostly Trajans, Adrians, and Faustinas, all of gold, many of them
fresh and beautiful, others defaced or perforated, as if they had
been worn as ornaments. (Asiatic Researches, ii. 19.) - M.]
[Footnote 106: Tacit. Annal. iii. 53. In a speech of Tiberius.]
[Footnote 107: Plin. Hist. Natur. xii. 18. In another place he
computes half that sum; Quingenties H. S. for India exclusive of
Arabia.]
[Footnote 108: The proportion, which was 1 to 10, and 12 1/2,
rose to 14 2/5, the legal regulation of Constantine. See
Arbuthnot's Tables of ancient Coins, c. 5.]
Notwithstanding the propensity of mankind to exalt the past,
and to depreciate the present, the tranquil and prosperous state
of the empire was warmly felt, and honestly confessed, by the
provincials as well as Romans. "They acknowledged that the true
principles of social life, laws, agriculture, and science, which
had been first invented by the wisdom of Athens, were now firmly
established by the power of Rome, under whose auspicious
influence the fiercest barbarians were united by an equal
government and common language. They affirm, that with the
improvement of arts, the human species were visibly multiplied.
They celebrate the increasing splendor of the cities, the
beautiful face of the country, cultivated and adorned like an
immense garden; and the long festival of peace which was enjoyed
by so many nations, forgetful of the ancient animosities, and
delivered from the apprehension of future danger." ^109 Whatever
suspicions may be suggested by the air of rhetoric and
declamation, which seems to prevail in these passages, the
substance of them is perfectly agreeable to historic truth.
[Footnote 109: Among many other passages, see Pliny, (Hist.
Natur. iii. 5.) Aristides, (de Urbe Roma,) and Tertullian, (de
Anima, c. 30.)]
It was scarcely possible that the eyes of contemporaries
should discover in the public felicity the latent causes of decay
and corruption. This long peace, and the uniform government of
the Romans, introduced a slow and secret poison into the vitals
of the empire. The minds of men were gradually reduced to the
same level, the fire of genius was extinguished, and even the
military spirit evaporated. The natives of Europe were brave and
robust. Spain, Gaul, Britain, and Illyricum supplied the legions
with excellent soldiers, and constituted the real strength of the
monarchy. Their personal valor remained, but they no longer
possessed that public courage which is nourished by the love of
independence, the sense of national honor, the presence of
danger, and the habit of command. They received laws and
governors from the will of their sovereign, and trusted for their
defence to a mercenary army. The posterity of their boldest
leaders was contented with the rank of citizens and subjects.
The most aspiring spirits resorted to the court or standard of
the emperors; and the deserted provinces, deprived of political
strength or union, insensibly sunk into the languid indifference
of private life.
The love of letters, almost inseparable from peace and
refinement, was fashionable among the subjects of Hadrian and the
Antonines, who were themselves men of learning and curiosity. It
was diffused over the whole extent of their empire; the most
northern tribes of Britons had acquired a taste for rhetoric;
Homer as well as Virgil were transcribed and studied on the banks
of the Rhine and Danube; and the most liberal rewards sought out
the faintest glimmerings of literary merit. ^110 The sciences of
physic and astronomy were successfully cultivated by the Greeks;
the observations of Ptolemy and the writings of Galen are studied
by those who have improved their discoveries and corrected their
errors; but if we except the inimitable Lucian, this age of
indolence passed away without having produced a single writer of
original genius, or who excelled in the arts of elegant
composition. ^! The authority of Plato and Aristotle, of Zeno and
Epicurus, still reigned in the schools; and their systems,
transmitted with blind deference from one generation of disciples
to another, precluded every generous attempt to exercise the
powers, or enlarge the limits, of the human mind. The beauties
of the poets and orators, instead of kindling a fire like their
own, inspired only cold and servile mitations: or if any ventured
to deviate from those models, they deviated at the same time from
good sense and propriety. On the revival of letters, the
youthful vigor of the imagination, after a long repose, national
emulation, a new religion, new languages, and a new world, called
forth the genius of Europe. But the provincials of Rome, trained
by a uniform artificial foreign education, were engaged in a very
unequal competition with those bold ancients, who, by expressing
their genuine feelings in their native tongue, had already
occupied every place of honor. The name of Poet was almost
forgotten; that of Orator was usurped by the sophists. A cloud
of critics, of compilers, of commentators, darkened the face of
learning, and the decline of genius was soon followed by the
corruption of taste.
[Footnote 110: Herodes Atticus gave the sophist Polemo above
eight thousand pounds for three declamations. See Philostrat. l.
i. p. 538. The Antonines founded a school at Athens, in which
professors of grammar, rhetoric, politics, and the four great
sects of philosophy were maintained at the public expense for the
instruction of youth. The salary of a philosopher was ten
thousand drachmae, between three and four hundred pounds a year.
Similar establishments were formed in the other great cities of
the empire. See Lucian in Eunuch. tom. ii. p. 352, edit. Reitz.
Philostrat. l. ii. p. 566. Hist. August. p. 21. Dion Cassius,
l. lxxi. p. 1195. Juvenal himself, in a morose satire, which in
every line betrays his own disappointment and envy, is obliged,
however, to say, -
" - O Juvenes, circumspicit et stimulat vos.
Materiamque sibi Ducis indulgentia quaerit." - Satir. vii.
20.
Note: Vespasian first gave a salary to professors: he
assigned to each professor of rhetoric, Greek and Roman, centena
sestertia. (Sueton. in Vesp. 18. Hadrian and the Antonines,
though still liberal, were less profuse. - G. from W. Suetonius
wrote annua centena L. 807, 5, 10. - M.]
[Footnote !: This judgment is rather severe: besides the
physicians, astronomers, and grammarians, among whom there were
some very distinguished men, there were still, under Hadrian,
Suetonius, Florus, Plutarch; under the Antonines, Arrian,
Pausanias, Appian, Marcus Aurelius himself, Sextus Empiricus, &c.
Jurisprudence gained much by the labors of Salvius Julianus,
Julius Celsus, Sex. Pomponius, Caius, and others. - G. from W.
Yet where, among these, is the writer of original genius, unless,
perhaps Plutarch? or even of a style really elegant? - M.]
The sublime Longinus, who, in somewhat a later period, and
in the court of a Syrian queen, preserved the spirit of ancient
Athens, observes and laments this degeneracy of his
contemporaries, which debased their sentiments, enervated their
courage, and depressed their talents. "In the same manner," says
he, "as some children always remain pygmies, whose infant limbs
have been too closely confined, thus our tender minds, fettered
by the prejudices and habits of a just servitude, are unable to
expand themselves, or to attain that well-proportioned greatness
which we admire in the ancients; who, living under a popular
government, wrote with the same freedom as they acted." ^111 This
diminutive stature of mankind, if we pursue the metaphor, was
daily sinking below the old standard, and the Roman world was
indeed peopled by a race of pygmies; when the fierce giants of
the north broke in, and mended the puny breed. They restored a
manly spirit of freedom; and after the revolution of ten
centuries, freedom became the happy parent of taste and science.
[Footnote 111: Longin. de Sublim. c. 44, p. 229, edit. Toll.
Here, too, we may say of Longinus, "his own example strengthens
all his laws." Instead of proposing his sentiments with a manly
boldness, he insinuates them with the most guarded caution; puts
them into the mouth of a friend, and as far as we can collect
from a corrupted text, makes a show of refuting them himself.]
Chapter III: The Constitution In The Age Of The Antonines.
Part I.
Of The Constitution Of The Roman Empire, In The Age Of The
Antonines.
The obvious definition of a monarchy seems to be that of a
state, in which a single person, by whatsoever name he may be
distinguished, is intrusted with the execution of the laws, the
management of the revenue, and the command of the army. But,
unless public liberty is protected by intrepid and vigilant
guardians, the authority of so formidable a magistrate will soon
degenerate into despotism. The influence of the clergy, in an
age of superstition, might be usefully employed to assert the
rights of mankind; but so intimate is the connection between the
throne and the altar, that the banner of the church has very
seldom been seen on the side of the people. ^* A martial nobility
and stubborn commons, possessed of arms, tenacious of property,
and collected into constitutional assemblies, form the only
balance capable of preserving a free constitution against
enterprises of an aspiring prince.
[Footnote *: Often enough in the ages of superstition, but not in
the interest of the people or the state, but in that of the
church to which all others were subordinate. Yet the power of
the pope has often been of great service in repressing the
excesses of sovereigns, and in softening manners. - W. The
history of the Italian republics proves the error of Gibbon, and
the justice of his German translator's comment. - M.]
Every barrier of the Roman constitution had been levelled by
the vast ambition of the dictator; every fence had been
extirpated by the cruel hand of the triumvir. After the victory
of Actium, the fate of the Roman world depended on the will of
Octavianus, surnamed Caesar, by his uncle's adoption, and
afterwards Augustus, by the flattery of the senate. The
conqueror was at the head of forty-four veteran legions, ^1
conscious of their own strength, and of the weakness of the
constitution, habituated, during twenty years' civil war, to
every act of blood and violence, and passionately devoted to the
house of Caesar, from whence alone they had received, and
expected the most lavish rewards. The provinces, long oppressed
by the ministers of the republic, sighed for the government of a
single person, who would be the master, not the accomplice, of
those petty tyrants. The people of Rome, viewing, with a secret
pleasure, the humiliation of the aristocracy, demanded only bread
and public shows; and were supplied with both by the liberal hand
of Augustus. The rich and polite Italians, who had almost
universally embraced the philosophy of Epicurus, enjoyed the
present blessings of ease and tranquillity, and suffered not the
pleasing dream to be interrupted by the memory of their old
tumultuous freedom. With its power, the senate had lost its
dignity; many of the most noble families were extinct. The
republicans of spirit and ability had perished in the field of
battle, or in the proscription . The door of the assembly had
been designedly left open, for a mixed multitude of more than a
thousand persons, who reflected disgrace upon their rank, instead
of deriving honor from it. ^2
[Footnote 1: Orosius, vi. 18.
Note: Dion says twenty-five, (or three,) (lv. 23.) The
united triumvirs had but forty-three. (Appian. Bell. Civ. iv.
3.) The testimony of Orosius is of little value when more certain
may be had. - W. But all the legions, doubtless, submitted to
Augustus after the battle of Actium. - M.]
[Footnote 2: Julius Caesar introduced soldiers, strangers, and
half- barbarians into the senate (Sueton. in Caesar. c. 77, 80.)
The abuse became still more scandalous after his death.]
The reformation of the senate was one of the first steps in
which Augustus laid aside the tyrant, and professed himself the
father of his country. He was elected censor; and, in concert
with his faithful Agrippa, he examined the list of the senators,
expelled a few members, ^* whose vices or whose obstinacy
required a public example, persuaded near two hundred to prevent
the shame of an expulsion by a voluntary retreat, raised the
qualification of a senator to about ten thousand pounds, created
a sufficient number of patrician families, and accepted for
himself the honorable title of Prince of the Senate, ^! which had
always been bestowed, by the censors, on the citizen the most
eminent for his honors and services. ^3 But whilst he thus
restored the dignity, he destroyed the independence, of the
senate. The principles of a free constitution are irrecoverably
lost, when the legislative power is nominated by the executive.
[Footnote *: Of these Dion and Suetonius knew nothing. - W. Dion
says the contrary. - M.]
[Footnote !: But Augustus, then Octavius, was censor, and in
virtue of that office, even according to the constitution of the
free republic, could reform the senate, expel unworthy members,
name the Princeps Senatus, &c. That was called, as is well known,
Senatum legere. It was customary, during the free republic, for
the censor to be named Princeps Senatus, (S. Liv. l. xxvii. c.
11, l. xl. c. 51;) and Dion expressly says, that this was done
according to ancient usage. He was empowered by a decree of the
senate to admit a number of families among the patricians.
Finally, the senate was not the legislative power. - W]
[Footnote 3: Dion Cassius, l. liii. p. 693. Suetonius in August.
c. 35.]
Before an assembly thus modelled and prepared, Augustus
pronounced a studied oration, which displayed his patriotism, and
disguised his ambition. "He lamented, yet excused, his past
conduct. Filial piety had required at his hands the revenge of
his father's murder; the humanity of his own nature had sometimes
given way to the stern laws of necessity, and to a forced
connection with two unworthy colleagues: as long as Antony lived,
the republic forbade him to abandon her to a degenerate Roman,
and a barbarian queen. He was now at liberty to satisfy his duty
and his inclination. He solemnly restored the senate and people
to all their ancient rights; and wished only to mingle with the
crowd of his fellow-citizens, and to share the blessings which he
had obtained for his country." ^4
[Footnote 4: Dion (l. liii. p. 698) gives us a prolix and bombast
speech on this great occasion. I have borrowed from Suetonius
and Tacitus the general language of Augustus.]
It would require the pen of Tacitus (if Tacitus had assisted
at this assembly) to describe the various emotions of the senate,
those that were suppressed, and those that were affected. It was
dangerous to trust the sincerity of Augustus; to seem to distrust
it was still more dangerous. The respective advantages of
monarchy and a republic have often divided speculative inquirers;
the present greatness of the Roman state, the corruption of
manners, and the license of the soldiers, supplied new arguments
to the advocates of monarchy; and these general views of
government were again warped by the hopes and fears of each
individual. Amidst this confusion of sentiments, the answer of
the senate was unanimous and decisive. They refused to accept the
resignation of Augustus; they conjured him not to desert the
republic, which he had saved. After a decent resistance, the
crafty tyrant submitted to the orders of the senate; and
consented to receive the government of the provinces, and the
general command of the Roman armies, under the well-known names
of Proconsul and Imperator. ^5 But he would receive them only for
ten years. Even before the expiration of that period, he hope
that the wounds of civil discord would be completely healed, and
that the republic, restored to its pristine health and vigor,
would no longer require the dangerous interposition of so
extraordinary a magistrate. The memory of this comedy, repeated
several times during the life of Augustus, was preserved to the
last ages of the empire, by the peculiar pomp with which the
perpetual monarchs of Rome always solemnized the tenth years of
their reign. ^6
[Footnote 5: Imperator (from which we have derived Emperor)
signified under her republic no more than general, and was
emphatically bestowed by the soldiers, when on the field of
battle they proclaimed their victorious leader worthy of that
title. When the Roman emperors assumed it in that sense, they
placed it after their name, and marked how often they had taken
it.]
[Footnote 6: Dion. l. liii. p. 703, &c.]
Without any violation of the principles of the constitution,
the general of the Roman armies might receive and exercise an
authority almost despotic over the soldiers, the enemies, and the
subjects of the republic. With regard to the soldiers, the
jealousy of freedom had, even from the earliest ages of Rome,
given way to the hopes of conquest, and a just sense of military
discipline. The dictator, or consul, had a right to command the
service of the Roman youth; and to punish an obstinate or
cowardly disobedience by the most severe and ignominious
penalties, by striking the offender out of the list of citizens,
by confiscating his property, and by selling his person into
slavery. ^7 The most sacred rights of freedom, confirmed by the
Porcian and Sempronian laws, were suspended by the military
engagement. In his camp the general exercise an absolute power
of life and death; his jurisdiction was not confined by any forms
of trial, or rules of proceeding, and the execution of the
sentence was immediate and without appeal. ^8 The choice of the
enemies of Rome was regularly decided by the legislative
authority. The most important resolutions of peace and war were
seriously debated in the senate, and solemnly ratified by the
people. But when the arms of the legions were carried to a great
distance from Italy, the general assumed the liberty of directing
them against whatever people, and in whatever manner, they judged
most advantageous for the public service. It was from the
success, not from the justice, of their enterprises, that they
expected the honors of a triumph. In the use of victory,
especially after they were no longer controlled by the
commissioners of the senate, they exercised the most unbounded
despotism. When Pompey commanded in the East, he rewarded his
soldiers and allies, dethroned princes, divided kingdoms, founded
colonies, and distributed the treasures of Mithridates. On his
return to Rome, he obtained, by a single act of the senate and
people, the universal ratification of all his proceedings. ^9
Such was the power over the soldiers, and over the enemies of
Rome, which was either granted to, or assumed by, the generals of
the republic. They were, at the same time, the governors, or
rather monarchs, of the conquered provinces, united the civil
with the military character, administered justice as well as the
finances, and exercised both the executive and legislative power
of the state.
[Footnote 7: Livy Epitom. l. xiv. [c. 27.] Valer. Maxim. vi. 3.]
[Footnote 8: See, in the viiith book of Livy, the conduct of
Manlius Torquatus and Papirius Cursor. They violated the laws of
nature and humanity, but they asserted those of military
discipline; and the people, who abhorred the action, was obliged
to respect the principle.]
[Footnote 9: By the lavish but unconstrained suffrages of the
people, Pompey had obtained a military command scarcely inferior
to that of Augustus. Among the extraordinary acts of power
executed by the former we may remark the foundation of
twenty-nine cities, and the distribution of three or four
millions sterling to his troops. The ratification of his acts
met with some opposition and delays in the senate See Plutarch,
Appian, Dion Cassius, and the first book of the epistles to
Atticus.]
From what has already been observed in the first chapter of
this work, some notion may be formed of the armies and provinces
thus intrusted to the ruling hand of Augustus. But as it was
impossible that he could personally command the regions of so
many distant frontiers, he was indulged by the senate, as Pompey
had already been, in the permission of devolving the execution of
his great office on a sufficient number of lieutenants. In rank
and authority these officers seemed not inferior to the ancient
proconsuls; but their station was dependent and precarious. They
received and held their commissions at the will of a superior, to
whose auspicious influence the merit of their action was legally
attributed. ^10 They were the representatives of the emperor.
The emperor alone was the general of the republic, and his
jurisdiction, civil as well as military, extended over all the
conquests of Rome. It was some satisfaction, however, to the
senate, that he always delegated his power to the members of
their body. The imperial lieutenants were of consular or
praetorian dignity; the legions were commanded by senators, and
the praefecture of Egypt was the only important trust committed
to a Roman knight.
[Footnote 10: Under the commonwealth, a triumph could only be
claimed by the general, who was authorized to take the Auspices
in the name of the people. By an exact consequence, drawn from
this principle of policy and religion, the triumph was reserved
to the emperor; and his most successful lieutenants were
satisfied with some marks of distinction, which, under the name
of triumphal honors, were invented in their favor.]
Within six days after Augustus had been compelled to accept
so very liberal a grant, he resolved to gratify the pride of the
senate by an easy sacrifice. He represented to them, that they
had enlarged his powers, even beyond that degree which might be
required by the melancholy condition of the times. They had not
permitted him to refuse the laborious command of the armies and
the frontiers; but he must insist on being allowed to restore the
more peaceful and secure provinces to the mild administration of
the civil magistrate. In the division of the provinces, Augustus
provided for his own power and for the dignity of the republic.
The proconsuls of the senate, particularly those of Asia, Greece,
and Africa, enjoyed a more honorable character than the
lieutenants of the emperor, who commanded in Gaul or Syria. The
former were attended by lictors, the latter by soldiers. ^* A law
was passed, that wherever the emperor was present, his
extraordinary commission should supersede the ordinary
jurisdiction of the governor; a custom was introduced, that the
new conquests belonged to the imperial portion; and it was soon
discovered that the authority of the Prtnce, the favorite epithet
of Augustus, was the same in every part of the empire.
[Footnote *: This distinction is without foundation. The
lieutenants of the emperor, who were called Propraetors, whether
they had been praetors or consuls, were attended by six lictors;
those who had the right of the sword, (of life and death over the
soldiers. - M.) bore the military habit (paludamentum) and the
sword. The provincial governors commissioned by the senate, who,
whether they had been consuls or not, were called Pronconsuls,
had twelve lictors when they had been consuls, and six only when
they had but been praetors. The provinces of Africa and Asia
were only given to ex- consuls. See, on the Organization of the
Provinces, Dion, liii. 12, 16 Strabo, xvii 840.- W]
In return for this imaginary concession, Augustus obtained
an important privilege, which rendered him master of Rome and
Italy. By a dangerous exception to the ancient maxims, he was
authorized to preserve his military command, supported by a
numerous body of guards, even in time of peace, and in the heart
of the capital. His command, indeed, was confined to those
citizens who were engaged in the service by the military oath;
but such was the propensity of the Romans to servitude, that the
oath was voluntarily taken by the magistrates, the senators, and
the equestrian order, till the homage of flattery was insensibly
converted into an annual and solemn protestation of fidelity.
Although Augustus considered a military force as the firmest
foundation, he wisely rejected it, as a very odious instrument of
government. It was more agreeable to his temper, as well as to
his policy, to reign under the venerable names of ancient
magistracy, and artfully to collect, in his own person, all the
scattered rays of civil jurisdiction. With this view, he
permitted the senate to confer upon him, for his life, the powers
of the consular ^11 and tribunitian offices, ^12 which were, in
the same manner, continued to all his successors. The consuls
had succeeded to the kings of Rome, and represented the dignity
of the state. They superintended the ceremonies of religion,
levied and commanded the legions, gave audience to foreign
ambassadors, and presided in the assemblies both of the senate
and people. The general control of the finances was intrusted to
their care; and though they seldom had leisure to administer
justice in person, they were considered as the supreme guardians
of law, equity, and the public peace. Such was their ordinary
jurisdiction; but whenever the senate empowered the first
magistrate to consult the safety of the commonwealth, he was
raised by that decree above the laws, and exercised, in the
defence of liberty, a temporary despotism. ^13 The character of
the tribunes was, in every respect, different from that of the
consuls. The appearance of the former was modest and humble; but
their persons were sacred and inviolable. Their force was suited
rather for opposition than for action. They were instituted to
defend the oppressed, to pardon offences, to arraign the enemies
of the people, and, when they judged it necessary, to stop, by a
single word, the whole machine of government. As long as the
republic subsisted, the dangerous influence, which either the
consul or the tribune might derive from their respective
jurisdiction, was diminished by several important restrictions.
Their authority expired with the year in which they were elected;
the former office was divided between two, the latter among ten
persons; and, as both in their private and public interest they
were averse to each other, their mutual conflicts contributed,
for the most part, to strengthen rather than to destroy the
balance of the constitution. ^* But when the consular and
tribunitian powers were united, when they were vested for life in
a single person, when the general of the army was, at the same
time, the minister of the senate and the representative of the
Roman people, it was impossible to resist the exercise, nor was
it easy to define the limits, of his imperial prerogative.
[Footnote 11: Cicero (de Legibus, iii. 3) gives the consular
office the name of egia potestas; and Polybius (l. vi. c. 3)
observes three powers in the Roman constitution. The monarchical
was represented and exercised by the consuls.]
[Footnote 12: As the tribunitian power (distinct from the annual
office) was first invented by the dictator Caesar, (Dion, l.
xliv. p. 384,) we may easily conceive, that it was given as a
reward for having so nobly asserted, by arms, the sacred rights
of the tribunes and people. See his own Commentaries, de Bell.
Civil. l. i.]
[Footnote 13: Augustus exercised nine annual consulships without
interruption. He then most artfully refused the magistracy, as
well as the dictatorship, absented himself from Rome, and waited
till the fatal effects of tumult and faction forced the senate to
invest him with a perpetual consulship. Augustus, as well as his
successors, affected, however, to conceal so invidious a title.]
[Footnote *: The note of M. Guizot on the tribunitian power
applies to the French translation rather than to the original.
The former has, maintenir la balance toujours egale, which
implies much more than Gibbon's general expression. The note
belongs rather to the history of the Republic than that of the
Empire. - M]
To these accumulated honors, the policy of Augustus soon
added the splendid as well as important dignities of supreme
pontiff, and of censor. By the former he acquired the management
of the religion, and by the latter a legal inspection over the
manners and fortunes, of the Roman people. If so many distinct
and independent powers did not exactly unite with each other, the
complaisance of the senate was prepared to supply every
deficiency by the most ample and extraordinary concessions. The
emperors, as the first ministers of the republic, were exempted
from the obligation and penalty of many inconvenient laws: they
were authorized to convoke the senate, to make several motions in
the same day, to recommend candidates for the honors of the
state, to enlarge the bounds of the city, to employ the revenue
at their discretion, to declare peace and war, to ratify
treaties; and by a most comprehensive clause, they were empowered
to execute whatsoever they should judge advantageous to the
empire, and agreeable to the majesty of things private or public,
human of divine. ^14
[Footnote 14: See a fragment of a Decree of the Senate,
conferring on the emperor Vespasian all the powers granted to his
predecessors, Augustus, Tiberius, and Claudius. This curious and
important monument is published in Gruter's Inscriptions, No.
ccxlii.
Note: It is also in the editions of Tacitus by Ryck, (Annal.
p. 420, 421,) and Ernesti, (Excurs. ad lib. iv. 6;) but this
fragment contains so many inconsistencies, both in matter and
form, that its authenticity may be doubted - W.]
When all the various powers of executive government were
committed to the Imperial magistrate, the ordinary magistrates of
the commonwealth languished in obscurity, without vigor, and
almost without business. The names and forms of the ancient
administration were preserved by Augustus with the most anxious
care. The usual number of consuls, praetors, and tribunes, ^15
were annually invested with their respective ensigns of office,
and continued to discharge some of their least important
functions. Those honors still attracted the vain ambition of the
Romans; and the emperors themselves, though invested for life
with the powers of the consul ship, frequently aspired to the
title of that annual dignity, which they condescended to share
with the most illustrious of their fellow-citizens. ^16 In the
election of these magistrates, the people, during the reign of
Augustus, were permitted to expose all the inconveniences of a
wild democracy. That artful prince, instead of discovering the
least symptom of impatience, humbly solicited their suffrages for
himself or his friends, and scrupulously practised all the duties
of an ordinary candidate. ^17 But we may venture to ascribe to
his councils the first measure of the succeeding reign, by which
the elections were transferred to the senate. ^18 The assemblies
of the people were forever abolished, and the emperors were
delivered from a dangerous multitude, who, without restoring
liberty, might have disturbed, and perhaps endangered, the
established government.
[Footnote 15: Two consuls were created on the Calends of January;
but in the course of the year others were substituted in their
places, till the annual number seems to have amounted to no less
than twelve. The praetors were usually sixteen or eighteen,
(Lipsius in Excurs. D. ad Tacit. Annal. l. i.) I have not
mentioned the Aediles or Quaestors Officers of the police or
revenue easily adapt themselves to any form of government. In
the time of Nero, the tribunes legally possessed the right of
intercession, though it might be dangerous to exercise it (Tacit.
Annal. xvi. 26.) In the time of Trajan, it was doubtful whether
the tribuneship was an office or a name, (Plin. Epist. i. 23.)]
[Footnote 16: The tyrants themselves were ambitious of the
consulship. The virtuous princes were moderate in the pursuit,
and exact in the discharge of it. Trajan revived the ancient
oath, and swore before the consul's tribunal that he would
observe the laws, (Plin. Panegyric c. 64.)]
[Footnote 17: Quoties Magistratuum Comitiis interesset. Tribus
cum candidatis suis circunbat: supplicabatque more solemni.
Ferebat et ipse suffragium in tribubus, ut unus e populo.
Suetonius in August c. 56.]
[Footnote 18: Tum primum Comitia e campo ad patres translata
sunt. Tacit. Annal. i. 15. The word primum seems to allude to
some faint and unsuccessful efforts which were made towards
restoring them to the people.
Note: The emperor Caligula made the attempt: he rest red the
Comitia to the people, but, in a short time, took them away
again. Suet. in Caio. c. 16. Dion. lix. 9, 20. Nevertheless, at
the time of Dion, they preserved still the form of the Comitia.
Dion. lviii. 20. - W.]
By declaring themselves the protectors of the people, Marius
and Caesar had subverted the constitution of their country. But
as soon as the senate had been humbled and disarmed, such an
assembly, consisting of five or six hundred persons, was found a
much more tractable and useful instrument of dominion. It was on
the dignity of the senate that Augustus and his successors
founded their new empire; and they affected, on every occasion,
to adopt the language and principles of Patricians. In the
administration of their own powers, they frequently consulted the
great national council, and seemed to refer to its decision the
most important concerns of peace and war. Rome, Italy, and the
internal provinces, were subject to the immediate jurisdiction of
the senate. With regard to civil objects, it was the supreme
court of appeal; with regard to criminal matters, a tribunal,
constituted for the trial of all offences that were committed by
men in any public station, or that affected the peace and majesty
of the Roman people. The exercise of the judicial power became
the most frequent and serious occupation of the senate; and the
important causes that were pleaded before them afforded a last
refuge to the spirit of ancient eloquence. As a council of
state, and as a court of justice, the senate possessed very
considerable prerogatives; but in its legislative capacity, in
which it was supposed virtually to represent the people, the
rights of sovereignty were acknowledged to reside in that
assembly. Every power was derived from their authority, every
law was ratified by their sanction. Their regular meetings were
held on three stated days in every month, the Calends, the Nones,
and the Ides. The debates were conducted with decent freedom;
and the emperors themselves, who gloried in the name of senators,
sat, voted, and divided with their equals.
To resume, in a few words, the system of the Imperial
government; as it was instituted by Augustus, and maintained by
those princes who understood their own interest and that of the
people, it may be defined an absolute monarchy disguised by the
forms of a commonwealth. The masters of the Roman world
surrounded their throne with darkness, concealed their
irresistible strength, and humbly professed themselves the
accountable ministers of the senate, whose supreme decrees they
dictated and obeyed. ^19
[Footnote 19: Dion Cassius (l. liii. p. 703 - 714) has given a
very loose and partial sketch of the Imperial system. To
illustrate and often to correct him, I have meditated Tacitus,
examined Suetonius, and consulted the following moderns: the Abbe
de la Bleterie, in the Memoires de l'Academie des Inscriptions,
tom. xix. xxi. xxiv. xxv. xxvii. Beaufort Republique Romaine,
tom. i. p. 255 - 275. The Dissertations of Noodt aad Gronovius
de lege Regia, printed at Leyden, in the year 1731 Gravina de
Imperio Romano, p. 479 - 544 of his Opuscula. Maffei, Verona
Illustrata, p. i. p. 245, &c.]
The face of the court corresponded with the forms of the
administration. The emperors, if we except those tyrants whose
capricious folly violated every law of nature and decency,
disdained that pomp and ceremony which might offend their
countrymen, but could add nothing to their real power. In all
the offices of life, they affected to confound themselves with
their subjects, and maintained with them an equal intercourse of
visits and entertainments. Their habit, their palace, their
table, were suited only to the rank of an opulent senator. Their
family, however numerous or splendid, was composed entirely of
their domestic slaves and freedmen. ^20 Augustus or Trajan would
have blushed at employing the meanest of the Romans in those
menial offices, which, in the household and bedchamber of a
limited monarch, are so eagerly solicited by the proudest nobles
of Britain.
[Footnote 20: A weak prince will always be governed by his
domestics. The power of slaves aggravated the shame of the
Romans; and the senate paid court to a Pallas or a Narcissus.
There is a chance that a modern favorite may be a gentleman.]
The deification of the emperors ^21 is the only instance in
which they departed from their accustomed prudence and modesty.
The Asiatic Greeks were the first inventors, the successors of
Alexander the first objects, of this servile and impious mode of
adulation. ^* It was easily transferred from the kings to the
governors of Asia; and the Roman magistrates very frequently were
adored as provincial deities, with the pomp of altars and
temples, of festivals and sacrifices. ^22 It was natural that the
emperors should not refuse what the proconsuls had accepted; and
the divine honors which both the one and the other received from
the provinces, attested rather the despotism than the servitude
of Rome. But the conquerors soon imitated the vanquished nations
in the arts of flattery; and the imperious spirit of the first
Caesar too easily consented to assume, during his lifetime, a
place among the tutelar deities of Rome. The milder temper of
his successor declined so dangerous an ambition, which was never
afterwards revived, except by the madness of Caligula and
Domitian. Augustus permitted indeed some of the provincial
cities to erect temples to his honor, on condition that they
should associate the worship of Rome with that of the sovereign;
he tolerated private superstition, of which he might be the
object; ^23 but he contented himself with being revered by the
senate and the people in his human character, and wisely left to
his successor the care of his public deification. A regular
custom was introduced, that on the decease of every emperor who
had neither lived nor died like a tyrant, the senate by a solemn
decree should place him in the number of the gods: and the
ceremonies of his apotheosis were blended with those of his
funeral. ^! This legal, and, as it should seem, injudicious
profanation, so abhorrent to our stricter principles, was
received with a very faint murmur, ^24 by the easy nature of
Polytheism; but it was received as an institution, not of
religion, but of policy. We should disgrace the virtues of the
Antonines by comparing them with the vices of Hercules or
Jupiter. Even the characters of Caesar or Augustus were far
superior to those of the popular deities. But it was the
misfortune of the former to live in an enlightened age, and their
actions were too faithfully recorded to admit of such a mixture
of fable and mystery, as the devotion of the vulgar requires. As
soon as their divinity was established by law, it sunk into
oblivion, without contributing either to their own fame, or to
the dignity of succeeding princes.
[Footnote 21: See a treatise of Vandale de Consecratione
Principium. It would be easier for me to copy, than it has been
to verify, the quotations of that learned Dutchman.]
[Footnote *: This is inaccurate. The successors of Alexander
were not the first deified sovereigns; the Egyptians had deified
and worshipped many of their kings; the Olympus of the Greeks was
peopled with divinities who had reigned on earth; finally,
Romulus himself had received the honors of an apotheosis (Tit.
Liv. i. 16) a long time before Alexander and his successors. It
is also an inaccuracy to confound the honors offered in the
provinces to the Roman governors, by temples and altars, with the
true apotheosis of the emperors; it was not a religious worship,
for it had neither priests nor sacrifices. Augustus was severely
blamed for having permitted himself to be worshipped as a god in
the provinces, (Tac. Ann. i. 10: ) he would not have incurred
that blame if he had only done what the governors were accustomed
to do. - G. from W. M. Guizot has been guilty of a still greater
inaccuracy in confounding the deification of the living with the
apotheosis of the dead emperors. The nature of the king-worship
of Egypt is still very obscure; the hero-worship of the Greeks
very different from the adoration of the "praesens numen" in the
reigning sovereign. - M.]
[Footnote 22: See a dissertation of the Abbe Mongault in the
first volume of the Academy of Inscriptions.]
[Footnote 23: Jurandasque tuum per nomen ponimus aras, says
Horace to the emperor himself, and Horace was well acquainted
with the court of Augustus.
Note: The good princes were not those who alone obtained the
honors of an apotheosis: it was conferred on many tyrants. See
an excellent treatise of Schaepflin, de Consecratione Imperatorum
Romanorum, in his Commentationes historicae et criticae. Bale,
1741, p. 184. - W.]
[Footnote !: The curious satire in the works of Seneca, is the
strongest remonstrance of profaned religion. - M.]
[Footnote 24: See Cicero in Philippic. i. 6. Julian in
Caesaribus. Inque Deum templis jurabit Roma per umbras, is the
indignant expression of Lucan; but it is a patriotic rather than
a devout indignation.]
In the consideration of the Imperial government, we have
frequently mentioned the artful founder, under his well-known
title of Augustus, which was not, however, conferred upon him
till the edifice was almost completed. The obscure name of
Octavianus he derived from a mean family, in the little town of
Aricia. ^! It was stained with the blood of the proscription; and
he was desirous, had it been possible, to erase all memory of his
former life. The illustrious surname of Caesar he had assumed, as
the adopted son of the dictator: but he had too much good sense,
either to hope to be confounded, or to wish to be compared with
that extraordinary man. It was proposed in the senate to dignify
their minister with a new appellation; and after a serious
discussion, that of Augustus was chosen, among several others, as
being the most expressive of the character of peace and sanctity,
which he uniformly affected. ^25 Augustus was therefore a
personal, Caesar a family distinction. The former should
naturally have expired with the prince on whom it was bestowed;
and however the latter was diffused by adoption and female
alliance, Nero was the last prince who could allege any
hereditary claim to the honors of the Julian line. But, at the
time of his death, the practice of a century had inseparably
connected those appellations with the Imperial dignity, and they
have been preserved by a long succession of emperors, Romans,
Greeks, Franks, and Germans, from the fall of the republic to the
present time. A distinction was, however, soon introduced. The
sacred title of Augustus was always reserved for the monarch,
whilst the name of Caesar was more freely communicated to his
relations; and, from the reign of Hadrian, at least, was
appropriated to the second person in the state, who was
considered as the presumptive heir of the empire. ^*
[Footnote !: Octavius was not of an obscure family, but of a
considerable one of the equestrian order. His father, C.
Octavius, who possessed great property, had been praetor,
governor of Macedonia, adorned with the title of Imperator, and
was on the point of becoming consul when he died. His mother
Attia, was daughter of M. Attius Balbus, who had also been
praetor. M. Anthony reproached Octavius with having been born in
Aricia, which, nevertheless, was a considerable municipal city:
he was vigorously refuted by Cicero. Philip. iii. c. 6. - W.
Gibbon probably meant that the family had but recently emerged
into notice. - M.]
[Footnote 25: Dion. Cassius, l. liii. p. 710, with the curious
Annotations of Reimar.]
[Footnote *: The princes who by their birth or their adoption
belonged to the family of the Caesars, took the name of Caesar.
After the death of Nero, this name designated the Imperial
dignity itself, and afterwards the appointed successor. The time
at which it was employed in the latter sense, cannot be fixed
with certainty. Bach (Hist. Jurisprud. Rom. 304) affirms from
Tacitus, H. i. 15, and Suetonius, Galba, 17, that Galba conferred
on Piso Lucinianus the title of Caesar, and from that time the
term had this meaning: but these two historians simply say that
he appointed Piso his successor, and do not mention the word
Caesar. Aurelius Victor (in Traj. 348, ed. Artzen) says that
Hadrian first received this title on his adoption; but as the
adoption of Hadrian is still doubtful, and besides this, as
Trajan, on his death-bed, was not likely to have created a new
title for his successor, it is more probable that Aelius Verus
was the first who was called Caesar when adopted by Hadrian.
Spart. in Aelio Vero, 102.- W.]
Chapter III: The Constitution In The Age Of The Antonines.
Part II.
The tender respect of Augustus for a free constitution which
he had destroyed, can only be explained by an attentive
consideration of the character of that subtle tyrant. A cool
head, an unfeeling heart, and a cowardly disposition, prompted
him at the age of nineteen to assume the mask of hypocrisy, which
he never afterwards laid aside. With the same hand, and probably
with the same temper, he signed the proscription of Cicero, and
the pardon of Cinna. His virtues, and even his vices, were
artificial; and according to the various dictates of his
interest, he was at first the enemy, and at last the father, of
the Roman world. ^26 When he framed the artful system of the
Imperial authority, his moderation was inspired by his fears. He
wished to deceive the people by an image of civil liberty, and
the armies by an image of civil government.
[Footnote 26: As Octavianus advanced to the banquet of the
Caesars, his color changed like that of the chameleon; pale at
first, then red, afterwards black, he at last assumed the mild
livery of Venus and the Graces, (Caesars, p. 309.) This image,
employed by Julian in his ingenious fiction, is just and elegant;
but when he considers this change of character as real and
ascribes it to the power of philosophy, he does too much honor to
philosophy and to Octavianus.]
I. The death of Caesar was ever before his eyes. He had
lavished wealth and honors on his adherents; but the most favored
friends of his uncle were in the number of the conspirators. The
fidelity of the legions might defend his authority against open
rebellion; but their vigilance could not secure his person from
the dagger of a determined republican; and the Romans, who
revered the memory of Brutus, ^27 would applaud the imitation of
his virtue. Caesar had provoked his fate, as much as by the
ostentation of his power, as by his power itself. The consul or
the tribune might have reigned in peace. The title of king had
armed the Romans against his life. Augustus was sensible that
mankind is governed by names; nor was he deceived in his
expectation, that the senate and people would submit to slavery,
provided they were respectfully assured that they still enjoyed
their ancient freedom. A feeble senate and enervated people
cheerfully acquiesced in the pleasing illusion, as long as it was
supported by the virtue, or even by the prudence, of the
successors of Augustus. It was a motive of self-preservation,
not a principle of liberty, that animated the conspirators
against Caligula, Nero, and Domitian. They attacked the person
of the tyrant, without aiming their blow at the authority of the
emperor.
[Footnote 27: Two centuries after the establishment of monarchy,
the emperor Marcus Antoninus recommends the character of Brutus
as a perfect model of Roman virtue.
Note: In a very ingenious essay, Gibbon has ventured to call
in question the preeminent virtue of Brutus. Misc Works, iv. 95.
- M.]
There appears, indeed, one memorable occasion, in which the
senate, after seventy years of patience, made an ineffectual
attempt to re-assume its long-forgotten rights. When the throne
was vacant by the murder of Caligula, the consuls convoked that
assembly in the Capitol, condemned the memory of the Caesars,
gave the watchword liberty to the few cohorts who faintly adhered
to their standard, and during eight-and-forty hours acted as the
independent chiefs of a free commonwealth. But while they
deliberated, the praetorian guards had resolved. The stupid
Claudius, brother of Germanicus, was already in their camp,
invested with the Imperial purple, and prepared to support his
election by arms. The dream of liberty was at an end; and the
senate awoke to all the horrors of inevitable servitude.
Deserted by the people, and threatened by a military force, that
feeble assembly was compelled to ratify the choice of the
praetorians, and to embrace the benefit of an amnesty, which
Claudius had the prudence to offer, and the generosity to
observe. ^28
[See The Capitol: When the throne was vacant by the murder of
Caligula, the consuls convoked that assembly in the Capitol.]
[Footnote 28: It is much to be regretted that we have lost the
part of Tacitus which treated of that transaction. We are forced
to content ourselves with the popular rumors of Josephus, and the
imperfect hints of Dion and Suetonius.]
II. The insolence of the armies inspired Augustus with
fears of a still more alarming nature. The despair of the
citizens could only attempt, what the power of the soldiers was,
at any time, able to execute. How precarious was his own
authority over men whom he had taught to violate every social
duty! He had heard their seditious clamors; he dreaded their
calmer moments of reflection. One revolution had been purchased
by immense rewards; but a second revolution might double those
rewards. The troops professed the fondest attachment to the
house of Caesar; but the attachments of the multitude are
capricious and inconstant. Augustus summoned to his aid whatever
remained in those fierce minds of Roman prejudices; enforced the
rigor of discipline by the sanction of law; and, interposing the
majesty of the senate between the emperor and the army, boldly
claimed their allegiance, as the first magistrate of the
republic.
During a long period of two hundred and twenty years from
the establishment of this artful system to the death of Commodus,
the dangers inherent to a military government were, in a great
measure, suspended. The soldiers were seldom roused to that
fatal sense of their own strength, and of the weakness of the
civil authority, which was, before and afterwards, productive of
such dreadful calamities. Caligula and Domitian were
assassinated in their palace by their own domestics: ^* the
convulsions which agitated Rome on the death of the former, were
confined to the walls of the city. But Nero involved the whole
empire in his ruin. In the space of eighteen months, four
princes perished by the sword; and the Roman world was shaken by
the fury of the contending armies. Excepting only this short,
though violent eruption of military license, the two centuries
from Augustus ^29 to Commodus passed away unstained with civil
blood, and undisturbed by revolutions. The emperor was elected
by the authority of the senate, and the consent of the soldiers.
^30 The legions respected their oath of fidelity; and it requires
a minute inspection of the Roman annals to discover three
inconsiderable rebellions, which were all suppressed in a few
months, and without even the hazard of a battle. ^31
[Footnote *: Caligula perished by a conspiracy formed by the
officers of the praetorian troops, and Domitian would not,
perhaps, have been assassinated without the participation of the
two chiefs of that guard in his death. - W.]
[Footnote 29: Augustus restored the ancient severity of
discipline. After the civil wars, he dropped the endearing name
of Fellow-Soldiers, and called them only Soldiers, (Sueton. in
August. c. 25.) See the use Tiberius made of the Senate in the
mutiny of the Pannonian legions, (Tacit. Annal. i.)]
[Footnote 30: These words seem to have been the constitutional
language. See Tacit. Annal. xiii. 4.
Note: This panegyric on the soldiery is rather too liberal.
Claudius was obliged to purchase their consent to his coronation:
the presents which he made, and those which the praetorians
received on other occasions, considerably embarrassed the
finances. Moreover, this formidable guard favored, in general,
the cruelties of the tyrants. The distant revolts were more
frequent than Gibbon thinks: already, under Tiberius, the legions
of Germany would have seditiously constrained Germanicus to
assume the Imperial purple. On the revolt of Claudius Civilis,
under Vespasian, the legions of Gaul murdered their general, and
offered their assistance to the Gauls who were in insurrection.
Julius Sabinus made himself be proclaimed emperor, &c. The wars,
the merit, and the severe discipline of Trajan, Hadrian, and the
two Antonines, established, for some time, a greater degree of
subordination. - W]
[Footnote 31: The first was Camillus Scribonianus, who took up
arms in Dalmatia against Claudius, and was deserted by his own
troops in five days, the second, L. Antonius, in Germany, who
rebelled against Domitian; and the third, Avidius Cassius, in the
reign of M. Antoninus. The two last reigned but a few months,
and were cut off by their own adherents. We may observe, that
both Camillus and Cassius colored their ambition with the design
of restoring the republic; a task, said Cassius peculiarly
reserved for his name and family.]
In elective monarchies, the vacancy of the throne is a
moment big with danger and mischief. The Roman emperors,
desirous to spare the legions that interval of suspense, and the
temptation of an irregular choice, invested their designed
successor with so large a share of present power, as should
enable him, after their decease, to assume the remainder, without
suffering the empire to perceive the change of masters. Thus
Augustus, after all his fairer prospects had been snatched from
him by untimely deaths, rested his last hopes on Tiberius,
obtained for his adopted son the censorial and tribunitian
powers, and dictated a law, by which the future prince was
invested with an authority equal to his own, over the provinces
and the armies. ^32 Thus Vespasian subdued the generous mind of
his eldest son. Titus was adored by the eastern legions, which,
under his command, had recently achieved the conquest of Judaea.
His power was dreaded, and, as his virtues were clouded by the
intemperance of youth, his designs were suspected. Instead of
listening to such unworthy suspicions, the prudent monarch
associated Titus to the full powers of the Imperial dignity; and
the grateful son ever approved himself the humble and faithful
minister of so indulgent a father. ^33
[Footnote 32: Velleius Paterculus, l. ii. c. 121. Sueton. in
Tiber. c. 26.]
[Footnote 33: Sueton. in Tit. c. 6. Plin. in Praefat. Hist.
Natur.]
The good sense of Vespasian engaged him indeed to embrace
every measure that might confirm his recent and precarious
elevation. The military oath, and the fidelity of the troops,
had been consecrated, by the habits of a hundred years, to the
name and family of the Caesars; and although that family had been
continued only by the fictitious rite of adoption, the Romans
still revered, in the person of Nero, the grandson of Germanicus,
and the lineal successor of Augustus. It was not without
reluctance and remorse, that the praetorian guards had been
persuaded to abandon the cause of the tyrant. ^34 The rapid
downfall of Galba, Otho, and Vitellus, taught the armies to
consider the emperors as the creatures of their will, and the
instruments of their license. The birth of Vespasian was mean:
his grandfather had been a private soldier, his father a petty
officer of the revenue; ^35 his own merit had raised him, in an
advanced age, to the empire; but his merit was rather useful than
shining, and his virtues were disgraced by a strict and even
sordid parsimony. Such a prince consulted his true interest by
the association of a son, whose more splendid and amiable
character might turn the public attention from the obscure
origin, to the future glories, of the Flavian house. Under the
mild administration of Titus, the Roman world enjoyed a transient
felicity, and his beloved memory served to protect, above fifteen
years, the vices of his brother Domitian.
[Footnote 34: This idea is frequently and strongly inculcated by
Tacitus. See Hist. i. 5, 16, ii. 76.]
[Footnote 35: The emperor Vespasian, with his usual good sense,
laughed at the genealogists, who deduced his family from Flavius,
the founder of Reate, (his native country,) and one of the
companions of Hercules Suet in Vespasian, c. 12.]
Nerva had scarcely accepted the purple from the assassins of
Domitian, before he discovered that his feeble age was unable to
stem the torrent of public disorders, which had multiplied under
the long tyranny of his predecessor. His mild disposition was
respected by the good; but the degenerate Romans required a more
vigorous character, whose justice should strike terror into the
guilty. Though he had several relations, he fixed his choice on
a stranger. He adopted Trajan, then about forty years of age,
and who commanded a powerful army in the Lower Germany; and
immediately, by a decree of the senate, declared him his
colleague and successor in the empire. ^36 It is sincerely to be
lamented, that whilst we are fatigued with the disgustful
relation of Nero's crimes and follies, we are reduced to collect
the actions of Trajan from the glimmerings of an abridgment, or
the doubtful light of a panegyric. There remains, however, one
panegyric far removed beyond the suspicion of flattery. Above
two hundred and fifty years after the death of Trajan, the
senate, in pouring out the customary acclamations on the
accession of a new emperor, wished that he might surpass the
felicity of Augustus, and the virtue of Trajan. ^37
[Footnote 36: Dion, l. lxviii. p. 1121. Plin. Secund. in
Panegyric.]
[Footnote 37: Felicior Augusto, Melior Trajano. Eutrop. viii.
5.]
We may readily believe, that the father of his country
hesitated whether he ought to intrust the various and doubtful
character of his kinsman Hadrian with sovereign power. In his
last moments the arts of the empress Plotina either fixed the
irresolution of Trajan, or boldly supposed a fictitious adoption;
^38 the truth of which could not be safely disputed, and Hadrian
was peaceably acknowledged as his lawful successor. Under his
reign, as has been already mentioned, the empire flourished in
peace and prosperity. He encouraged the arts, reformed the laws,
asserted military discipline, and visited all his provinces in
person. His vast and active genius was equally suited to the
most enlarged views, and the minute details of civil policy. But
the ruling passions of his soul were curiosity and vanity. As
they prevailed, and as they were attracted by different objects,
Hadrian was, by turns, an excellent prince, a ridiculous sophist,
and a jealous tyrant. The general tenor of his conduct deserved
praise for its equity and moderation. Yet in the first days of
his reign, he put to death four consular senators, his personal
enemies, and men who had been judged worthy of empire; and the
tediousness of a painful illness rendered him, at last, peevish
and cruel. The senate doubted whether they should pronounce him a
god or a tyrant; and the honors decreed to his memory were
granted to the prayers of the pious Antoninus. ^39
[Footnote 38: Dion (l. lxix. p. 1249) affirms the whole to have
been a fiction, on the authority of his father, who, being
governor of the province where Trajan died, had very good
opportunities of sifting this mysterious transaction. Yet
Dodwell (Praelect. Camden. xvii.) has maintained that Hadrian was
called to the certain hope of the empire, during the lifetime of
Trajan.]
[Footnote 39: Dion, (l. lxx. p. 1171.) Aurel. Victor.]
The caprice of Hadrian influenced his choice of a successor.
After revolving in his mind several men of distinguished merit,
whom he esteemed and hated, he adopted Aelius Verus a gay and
voluptuous nobleman, recommended by uncommon beauty to the lover
of Antinous. ^40 But whilst Hadrian was delighting himself with
his own applause, and the acclamations of the soldiers, whose
consent had been secured by an immense donative, the new Caesar
^41 was ravished from his embraces by an untimely death. He left
only one son. Hadrian commended the boy to the gratitude of the
Antonines. He was adopted by Pius; and, on the accession of
Marcus, was invested with an equal share of sovereign power.
Among the many vices of this younger Verus, he possessed one
virtue; a dutiful reverence for his wiser colleague, to whom he
willingly abandoned the ruder cares of empire. The philosophic
emperor dissembled his follies, lamented his early death, and
cast a decent veil over his memory.
[Footnote 40: The deification of Antinous, his medals, his
statues, temples, city, oracles, and constellation, are well
known, and still dishonor the memory of Hadrian. Yet we may
remark, that of the first fifteen emperors, Claudius was the only
one whose taste in love was entirely correct. For the honors of
Antinous, see Spanheim, Commentaire sui les Caesars de Julien, p.
80.]
[Footnote 41: Hist. August. p. 13. Aurelius Victor in Epitom.]
As soon as Hadrian's passion was either gratified or
disappointed, he resolved to deserve the thanks of posterity, by
placing the most exalted merit on the Roman throne. His
discerning eye easily discovered a senator about fifty years of
age, clameless in all the offices of life; and a youth of about
seventeen, whose riper years opened a fair prospect of every
virtue: the elder of these was declared the son and successor of
Hadrian, on condition, however, that he himself should
immediately adopt the younger. The two Antonines (for it is of
them that we are now peaking,) governed the Roman world forty-two
years, with the same invariable spirit of wisdom and virtue.
Although Pius had two sons, ^42 he preferred the welfare of Rome
to the interest of his family, gave his daughter Faustina, in
marriage to young Marcus, obtained from the senate the
tribunitian and proconsular powers, and, with a noble disdain, or
rather ignorance of jealousy, associated him to all the labors of
government. Marcus, on the other hand, revered the character of
his benefactor, loved him as a parent, obeyed him as his
sovereign, ^43 and, after he was no more, regulated his own
administration by the example and maxims of his predecessor.
Their united reigns are possibly the only period of history in
which the happiness of a great people was the sole object of
government.
[Footnote 42: Without the help of medals and inscriptions, we
should be ignorant of this fact, so honorable to the memory of
Pius.
Note: Gibbon attributes to Antoninus Pius a merit which he
either did not possess, or was not in a situation to display.
1. He was adopted only on the condition that he would adopt, in
his turn, Marcus Aurelius and L. Verus.
2. His two sons died children, and one of them, M. Galerius,
alone, appears to have survived, for a few years, his father's
coronation. Gibbon is also mistaken when he says (note 42) that
"without the help of medals and inscriptions, we should be
ignorant that Antoninus had two sons."
Capitolinus says expressly, (c. 1,) Filii mares duo,
duae-foeminae; we only owe their names to he medals. Pagi. Cont.
Baron, i. 33, edit Paris. - W.]
[Footnote 43: During the twenty-three years of Pius's reign,
Marcus was only two nights absent from the palace, and even those
were at different times. Hist. August. p. 25.]
Titus Antoninus Pius has been justly denominated a second
Numa. The same love of religion, justice, and peace, was the
distinguishing characteristic of both princes. But the situation
of the latter opened a much larger field for the exercise of
those virtues. Numa could only prevent a few neighboring
villages from plundering each other's harvests. Antoninus
diffused order and tranquillity over the greatest part of the
earth. His reign is marked by the rare advantage of furnishing
very few materials for history; which is, indeed, little more
than the register of the crimes, follies, and misfortunes of
mankind. In private life, he was an amiable, as well as a good
man. The native simplicity of his virtue was a stranger to
vanity or affectation. He enjoyed with moderation the
conveniences of his fortune, and the innocent pleasures of
society; ^44 and the benevolence of his soul displayed itself in
a cheerful serenity of temper.
[Footnote 44: He was fond of the theatre, and not insensible to
the charms of the fair sex. Marcus Antoninus, i. 16. Hist.
August. p. 20, 21. Julian in Caesar.]
The virtue of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus was of severer and
more laborious kind. ^45 It was the well-earned harvest of many a
learned conference, of many a patient lecture, and many a
midnight lucubration. At the age of twelve years he embraced the
rigid system of the Stoics, which taught him to submit his body
to his mind, his passions to his reason; to consider virtue as
the only good, vice as the only evil, all things external as
things indifferent. ^46 His meditations, composed in the tumult
of the camp, are still extant; and he even condescended to give
lessons of philosophy, in a more public manner than was perhaps
consistent with the modesty of sage, or the dignity of an
emperor. ^47 But his life was the noblest commentary on the
precepts of Zeno. He was severe to himself, indulgent to the
imperfections of others, just and beneficent to all mankind. He
regretted that Avidius Cassius, who excited a rebellion in Syria,
had disappointed him, by a voluntary death, ^* of the pleasure of
converting an enemy into a friend;; and he justified the
sincerity of that sentiment, by moderating the zeal of the senate
against the adherents of the traitor. ^48 War he detested, as the
disgrace and calamity of human nature; ^!! but when the necessity
of a just defence called upon him to take up arms, he readily
exposed his person to eight winter campaigns, on the frozen banks
of the Danube, the severity of which was at last fatal to the
weakness of his constitution. His memory was revered by a
grateful posterity, and above a century after his death, many
persons preserved the image of Marcus Antoninus among those of
their household gods. ^49
[Footnote 45: The enemies of Marcus charged him with hypocrisy,
and with a want of that simplicity which distinguished Pius and
even Verus. (Hist. August. 6, 34.) This suspicions, unjust as it
was, may serve to account for the superior applause bestowed upon
personal qualifications, in preference to the social virtues.
Even Marcus Antoninus has been called a hypocrite; but the
wildest scepticism never insinuated that Caesar might probably be
a coward, or Tully a fool. Wit and valor are qualifications more
easily ascertained than humanity or the love of justice.]
[Footnote 46: Tacitus has characterized, in a few words, the
principles of the portico: Doctores sapientiae secutus est, qui
sola bona quae honesta, main tantum quae turpia; potentiam,
nobilitatem, aeteraque extra... bonis neque malis adnumerant.
Tacit. Hist. iv. 5.]
[Footnote 47: Before he went on the second expedition against the
Germans, he read lectures of philosophy to the Roman people,
during three days. He had already done the same in the cities of
Greece and Asia. Hist. August. in Cassio, c. 3.]
[Footnote *: Cassius was murdered by his own partisans. Vulcat.
Gallic. in Cassio, c. 7. Dion, lxxi. c. 27. - W.]
[Footnote 48: Dion, l. lxxi. p. 1190. Hist. August. in Avid.
Cassio.
Note: See one of the newly discovered passages of Dion
Cassius. Marcus wrote to the senate, who urged the execution of
the partisans of Cassius, in these words: "I entreat and beseech
you to preserve my reign unstained by senatorial blood. None of
your order must perish either by your desire or mine." Mai.
Fragm. Vatican. ii. p. 224. - M.]
[Footnote !!: Marcus would not accept the services of any of the
barbarian allies who crowded to his standard in the war against
Avidius Cassius. "Barbarians," he said, with wise but vain
sagacity, "must not become acquainted with the dissensions of the
Roman people." Mai. Fragm Vatican l. 224. - M.]
[Footnote 49: Hist. August. in Marc. Antonin. c. 18.]
If a man were called to fix the period in the history of the
world, during which the condition of the human race was most
happy and prosperous, he would, without hesitation, name that
which elapsed from the death of Domitian to the accession of
Commodus. The vast extent of the Roman empire was governed by
absolute power, under the guidance of virtue and wisdom. The
armies were restrained by the firm but gentle hand of four
successive emperors, whose characters and authority commanded
involuntary respect. The forms of the civil administration were
carefully preserved by Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, and the Antonines,
who delighted in the image of liberty, and were pleased with
considering themselves as the accountable ministers of the laws.
Such princes deserved the honor of restoring the republic, had
the Romans of their days been capable of enjoying a rational
freedom.
The labors of these monarchs were overpaid by the immense
reward that inseparably waited on their success; by the honest
pride of virtue, and by the exquisite delight of beholding the
general happiness of which they were the authors. A just but
melancholy reflection imbittered, however, the noblest of human
enjoyments. They must often have recollected the instability of
a happiness which depended on the character of single man. The
fatal moment was perhaps approaching, when some licentious youth,
or some jealous tyrant, would abuse, to the destruction, that
absolute power, which they had exerted for the benefit of their
people. The ideal restraints of the senate and the laws might
serve to display the virtues, but could never correct the vices,
of the emperor. The military force was a blind and irresistible
instrument of oppression; and the corruption of Roman manners
would always supply flatterers eager to applaud, and ministers
prepared to serve, the fear or the avarice, the lust or the
cruelty, of their master.
These gloomy apprehensions had been already justified by the
experience of the Romans. The annals of the emperors exhibit a
strong and various picture of human nature, which we should
vainly seek among the mixed and doubtful characters of modern
history. In the conduct of those monarchs we may trace the
utmost lines of vice and virtue; the most exalted perfection, and
the meanest degeneracy of our own species. The golden age of
Trajan and the Antonines had been preceded by an age of iron. It
is almost superfluous to enumerate the unworthy successors of
Augustus. Their unparalleled vices, and the splendid theatre on
which they were acted, have saved them from oblivion. The dark,
unrelenting Tiberius, the furious Caligula, the feeble Claudius,
the profligate and cruel Nero, the beastly Vitellius, ^50 and the
timid, inhuman Domitian, are condemned to everlasting infamy.
During fourscore years (excepting only the short and doubtful
respite of Vespasian's reign) ^51 Rome groaned beneath an
unremitting tyranny, which exterminated the ancient families of
the republic, and was fatal to almost every virtue and every
talent that arose in that unhappy period.
[Footnote 50: Vitellius consumed in mere eating at least six
millions of our money in about seven months. It is not easy to
express his vices with dignity, or even decency. Tacitus fairly
calls him a hog, but it is by substituting for a coarse word a
very fine image. "At Vitellius, umbraculis hortorum abditus, ut
ignava animalia, quibus si cibum suggeras, jacent torpentque,
praeterita, instantia, futura, pari oblivione dimiserat. Atque
illum nemore Aricino desidem et marcentum," &c. Tacit. Hist.
iii. 36, ii. 95. Sueton. in Vitell. c. 13. Dion. Cassius, l xv.
p. 1062.]
[Footnote 51: The execution of Helvidius Priscus, and of the
virtuous Eponina, disgraced the reign of Vespasian.]
Under the reign of these monsters, the slavery of the Romans
was accompanied with two peculiar circumstances, the one
occasioned by their former liberty, the other by their extensive
conquests, which rendered their condition more completely
wretched than that of the victims of tyranny in any other age or
country. From these causes were derived, 1. The exquisite
sensibility of the sufferers; and, 2. The impossibility of
escaping from the hand of the oppressor.
I. When Persia was governed by the descendants of Sefi, a
race of princes whose wanton cruelty often stained their divan,
their table, and their bed, with the blood of their favorites,
there is a saying recorded of a young nobleman, that he never
departed from the sultan's presence, without satisfying himself
whether his head was still on his shoulders. The experience of
every day might almost justify the scepticism of Rustan. ^52 Yet
the fatal sword, suspended above him by a single thread, seems
not to have disturbed the slumbers, or interrupted the
tranquillity, of the Persian. The monarch's frown, he well knew,
could level him with the dust; but the stroke of lightning or
apoplexy might be equally fatal; and it was the part of a wise
man to forget the inevitable calamities of human life in the
enjoyment of the fleeting hour. He was dignified with the
appellation of the king's slave; had, perhaps, been purchased
from obscure parents, in a country which he had never known; and
was trained up from his infancy in the severe discipline of the
seraglio. ^53 His name, his wealth,his honors, were the gift of a
master, who might, without injustice, resume what he had
bestowed. Rustan's knowledge, if he possessed any, could only
serve to confirm his habits by prejudices. His language afforded
not words for any form of government, except absolute monarchy.
The history of the East informed him, that such had ever been the
condition of mankind. ^54 The Koran, and the interpreters of that
divine book, inculcated to him, that the sultan was the
descendant of the prophet, and the vicegerent of heaven; that
patience was the first virtue of a Mussulman, and unlimited
obedience the great duty of a subject.
[Footnote 52: Voyage de Chardin en Perse, vol. iii. p. 293.]
[Footnote 53: The practice of raising slaves to the great offices
of state is still more common among the Turks than among the
Persians. The miserable countries of Georgia and Circassia
supply rulers to the greatest part of the East.]
[Footnote 54: Chardin says, that European travellers have
diffused among the Persians some ideas of the freedom and
mildness of our governments. They have done them a very ill
office.]
The minds of the Romans were very differently prepared for
slavery. Oppressed beneath the weight of their own corruption and
of military violence, they for a long while preserved the
sentiments, or at least the ideas, of their free-born ancestors.
The education of Helvidius and Thrasea, of Tacitus and Pliny, was
the same as that of Cato and Cicero. From Grecian philosophy,
they had imbibed the justest and most liberal notions of the
dignity of human nature, and the origin of civil society. The
history of their own country had taught them to revere a free, a
virtuous, and a victorious commonwealth; to abhor the successful
crimes of Caesar and Augustus; and inwardly to despise those
tyrants whom they adored with the most abject flattery. As
magistrates and senators they were admitted into the great
council, which had once dictated laws to the earth, whose
authority was so often prostituted to the vilest purposes of
tyranny. Tiberius, and those emperors who adopted his maxims,
attempted to disguise their murders by the formalities of
justice, and perhaps enjoyed a secret pleasure in rendering the
senate their accomplice as well as their victim. By this
assembly, the last of the Romans were condemned for imaginary
crimes and real virtues. Their infamous accusers assumed the
language of independent patriots, who arraigned a dangerous
citizen before the tribunal of his country; and the public
service was rewarded by riches and honors. ^55 The servile judges
professed to assert the majesty of the commonwealth, violated in
the person of its first magistrate, ^56 whose clemency they most
applauded when they trembled the most at his inexorable and
impending cruelty. ^57 The tyrant beheld their baseness with just
contempt, and encountered their secret sentiments of detestation
with sincere and avowed hatred for the whole body of the senate.
[Footnote 55: They alleged the example of Scipio and Cato,
(Tacit. Annal. iii. 66.) Marcellus Epirus and Crispus Vibius had
acquired two millions and a half under Nero. Their wealth, which
aggravated their crimes, protected them under Vespasian. See
Tacit. Hist. iv. 43. Dialog. de Orator. c. 8. For one
accusation, Regulus, the just object of Pliny's satire, received
from the senate the consular ornaments, and a present of sixty
thousand pounds.]
[Footnote 56: The crime of majesty was formerly a treasonable
offence against the Roman people. As tribunes of the people,
Augustus and Tiberius applied tit to their own persons, and
extended it to an infinite latitude.
Note: It was Tiberius, not Augustus, who first took in this
sense the words crimen laesae majestatis. Bachii Trajanus, 27. -
W.]
[Footnote 57: After the virtuous and unfortunate widow of
Germanicus had been put to death, Tiberius received the thanks of
the senate for his clemency. she had not been publicly strangled;
nor was the body drawn with a hook to the Gemoniae, where those
of common male factors were exposed. See Tacit. Annal. vi. 25.
Sueton. in Tiberio c. 53.]
II. The division of Europe into a number of independent
states, connected, however, with each other by the general
resemblance of religion, language, and manners, is productive of
the most beneficial consequences to the liberty of mankind. A
modern tyrant, who should find no resistance either in his own
breast, or in his people, would soon experience a gentle restrain
form the example of his equals, the dread of present censure,d
the advice of his allies, and the apprehension of his enemies.
The object of his displeasure, escaping from the narrow limits of
his dominions, would easily obtain, in a happier climate, a
secure refuge, a new fortune adequate to his merit, the freedom
of complaint, and perhaps the means of revenge. But the empire
of the Romans filled the world, and when the empire fell into the
hands of a single person, he wold became a safe and dreary prison
for his enemies. The slave of Imperial despotism, whether he was
condemned to drags his gilded chain in rome and the senate, or to
were out a life of exile on the barren rock of Seriphus, or the
frozen bank of the Danube, expected his fate in silent despair.
^58 To resist was fatal, and it was impossible to fly. On every
side he was encompassed with a vast extent of sea and land, which
he could never hope to traverse without being discovered, seized,
and restored to his irritated master. Beyond the frontiers, his
anxious view could discover nothing, except the ocean,
inhospitable deserts, hostile tribes of barbarians, of fierce
manners and unknown language, or dependent kings, who would
gladly purchase the emperor's protection by the sacrifice of an
obnoxious fugitive. ^59 "Wherever you are," said Cicero to the
exiled Marcellus, "remember that you are equally within the power
of the conqueror." ^60
[Footnote 58: Seriphus was a small rocky island in the Aegean
Sea, the inhabitants of which were despised for their ignorance
and obscurity. The place of Ovid's exile is well known, by his
just, but unmanly lamentations. It should seem, that he only
received an order to leave rome in so many days, and to transport
himself to Tomi. Guards and jailers were unnecessary.]
[Footnote 59: Under Tiberius, a Roman knight attempted to fly to
the Parthians. He was stopped in the straits of Sicily; but so
little danger did there appear in the example, that the most
jealous of tyrants disdained to punish it. Tacit. Annal. vi.
14.]
[Footnote 60: Cicero ad Familiares, iv. 7.]
Chapter IV: The Cruelty, Follies And Murder Of Commodus.
Part I.
The Cruelty, Follies, And Murder Of Commodus - Election Of
Pertinax - His Attempts To Reform The State - His Assassination
By The Praetorian Guards.
The mildness of Marcus, which the rigid discipline of the
Stoics was unable to eradicate, formed, at the same time, the
most amiable, and the only defective part of his character. His
excellent understanding was often deceived by the unsuspecting
goodness of his heart. Artful men, who study the passions of
princes, and conceal their own, approached his person in the
disguise of philosophic sanctity, and acquired riches and honors
by affecting to despise them. ^1 His excessive indulgence to his
brother, ^* his wife, and his son, exceeded the bounds of private
virtue, and became a public injury, by the example and
consequences of their vices.
[Footnote 1: See the complaints of Avidius Cassius, Hist. August.
p. 45. These are, it is true, the complaints of faction; but even
faction exaggerates, rather than invents.]
[Footnote *: His brother by adoption, and his colleague, L.
Verus. Marcus Aurelius had no other brother. - W.]
Faustina, the daughter of Pius and the wife of Marcus, has
been as much celebrated for her gallantries as for her beauty.
The grave simplicity of the philosopher was ill calculated to
engage her wanton levity, or to fix that unbounded passion for
variety, which often discovered personal merit in the meanest of
mankind. ^2 The Cupid of the ancients was, in general, a very
sensual deity; and the amours of an empress, as they exact on her
side the plainest advances, are seldom susceptible of much
sentimental delicacy. Marcus was the only man in the empire who
seemed ignorant or insensible of the irregularities of Faustina;
which, according to the prejudices of every age, reflected some
disgrace on the injured husband. He promoted several of her
lovers to posts of honor and profit, ^3 and during a connection
of thirty years, invariably gave her proofs of the most tender
confidence, and of a respect which ended not with her life. In
his Meditations, he thanks the gods, who had bestowed on him a
wife so faithful, so gentle, and of such a wonderful simplicity
of manners. ^4 The obsequious senate, at his earnest request,
declared her a goddess. She was represented in her temples, with
the attributes of Juno, Venus, and Ceres; and it was decreed,
that, on the day of their nuptials, the youth of either sex
should pay their vows before the altar of their chaste patroness.
^5
[Footnote 2: Faustinam satis constat apud Cajetam conditiones
sibi et nauticas et gladiatorias, elegisse. Hist. August. p. 30.
Lampridius explains the sort of merit which Faustina chose, and
the conditions which she exacted. Hist. August. p. 102.]
[Footnote 3: Hist. August. p. 34.]
[Footnote 4: Meditat. l. i. The world has laughed at the
credulity of Marcus but Madam Dacier assures us, (and we may
credit a lady,) that the husband will always be deceived, if the
wife condescends to dissemble.]
[Footnote 5: Dion Cassius, l. lxxi. [c. 31,] p. 1195. Hist.
August. p. 33. Commentaire de Spanheim sur les Caesars de Julien,
p. 289. The deification of Faustina is the only defect which
Julian's criticism is able to discover in the all-accomplished
character of Marcus.]
The monstrous vices of the son have cast a shade on the
purity of the father's virtues. It has been objected to Marcus,
that he sacrificed the happiness of millions to a fond partiality
for a worthless boy; and that he chose a successor in his own
family, rather than in the republic. Nothing however, was
neglected by the anxious father, and by the men of virtue and
learning whom he summoned to his assistance, to expand the narrow
mind of young Commodus, to correct his growing vices, and to
render him worthy of the throne for which he was designed. But
the power of instruction is seldom of much efficacy, except in
those happy dispositions where it is almost superfluous. The
distasteful lesson of a grave philosopher was, in a moment,
obliterated by the whisper of a profligate favorite; and Marcus
himself blasted the fruits of this labored education, by
admitting his son, at the age of fourteen or fifteen, to a full
participation of the Imperial power. He lived but four years
afterwards: but he lived long enough to repent a rash measure,
which raised the impetuous youth above the restraint of reason
and authority.
Most of the crimes which disturb the internal peace of
society, are produced by the restraints which the necessary but
unequal laws of property have imposed on the appetites of
mankind, by confining to a few the possession of those objects
that are coveted by many. Of all our passions and appetites, the
love of power is of the most imperious and unsociable nature,
since the pride of one man requires the submission of the
multitude. In the tumult of civil discord, the laws of society
lose their force, and their place is seldom supplied by those of
humanity. The ardor of contention, the pride of victory, the
despair of success, the memory of past injuries, and the fear of
future dangers, all contribute to inflame the mind, and to
silence the voice of pity. From such motives almost every page
of history has been stained with civil blood; but these motives
will not account for the unprovoked cruelties of Commodus, who
had nothing to wish and every thing to enjoy. The beloved son of
Marcus succeeded to his father, amidst the acclamations of the
senate and armies; ^6 and when he ascended the throne, the happy
youth saw round him neither competitor to remove, nor enemies to
punish. In this calm, elevated station, it was surely natural
that he should prefer the love of mankind to their detestation,
the mild glories of his five predecessors to the ignominious fate
of Nero and Domitian.
[Footnote 6: Commodus was the first Porphyrogenitus, (born since
his father's accession to the throne.) By a new strain of
flattery, the Egyptian medals date by the years of his life; as
if they were synonymous to those of his reign. Tillemont, Hist.
des Empereurs, tom. ii. p. 752.]
Yet Commodus was not, as he has been represented, a tiger
born with an insatiate thirst of human blood, and capable, from
his infancy, of the most inhuman actions. ^7 Nature had formed
him of a weak rather than a wicked disposition. His simplicity
and timidity rendered him the slave of his attendants, who
gradually corrupted his mind. His cruelty, which at first obeyed
the dictates of others, degenerated into habit, and at length
became the ruling passion of his soul. ^8
[Footnote 7: Hist. August. p. 46.]
[Footnote 8: Dion Cassius, l. lxxii. p. 1203.]
Upon the death of his father, Commodus found himself
embarrassed with the command of a great army, and the conduct of
a difficult war against the Quadi and Marcomanni. ^9 The servile
and profligate youths whom Marcus had banished, soon regained
their station and influence about the new emperor. They
exaggerated the hardships and dangers of a campaign in the wild
countries beyond the Danube; and they assured the indolent prince
that the terror of his name, and the arms of his lieutenants,
would be sufficient to complete the conquest of the dismayed
barbarians, or to impose such conditions as were more
advantageous than any conquest. By a dexterous application to
his sensual appetites, they compared the tranquillity, the
splendor, the refined pleasures of Rome, with the tumult of a
Pannonian camp, which afforded neither leisure nor materials for
luxury. ^10 Commodus listened to the pleasing advice; but whilst
he hesitated between his own inclination and the awe which he
still retained for his father's counsellors, the summer
insensibly elapsed, and his triumphal entry into the capital was
deferred till the autumn. His graceful person, ^11 popular
address, and imagined virtues, attracted the public favor; the
honorable peace which he had recently granted to the barbarians,
diffused a universal joy; ^12 his impatience to revisit Rome was
fondly ascribed to the love of his country; and his dissolute
course of amusements was faintly condemned in a prince of
nineteen years of age.
[Footnote 9: According to Tertullian, Apolog. c. 25,) he died at
Sirmium. But the situation of Vindobona, or Vienna, where both
the Victors place his death, is better adapted to the operations
of the war against the Marcomanni and Quadi.]
[Footnote 10: Herodian, l. i. p. 12.]
[Footnote 11: Herodian, l. i. p. 16.]
[Footnote 12: This universal joy is well described (from the
medals as well as historians) by Mr. Wotton, Hist. of Rome, p.
192, 193.]
During the three first years of his reign, the forms, and
even the spirit, of the old administration, were maintained by
those faithful counsellors, to whom Marcus had recommended his
son, and for whose wisdom and integrity Commodus still
entertained a reluctant esteem. The young prince and his
profligate favorites revelled in all the license of sovereign
power; but his hands were yet unstained with blood; and he had
even displayed a generosity of sentiment, which might perhaps
have ripened into solid virtue. ^13 A fatal incident decided his
fluctuating character.
[Footnote 13: Manilius, the confidential secretary of Avidius
Cassius, was discovered after he had lain concealed several
years. The emperor nobly relieved the public anxiety by refusing
to see him, and burning his papers without opening them. Dion
Cassius, l. lxxii. p. 1209.]
One evening, as the emperor was returning to the palace,
through a dark and narrow portico in the amphitheatre, ^14 an
assassin, who waited his passage, rushed upon him with a drawn
sword, loudly exclaiming, "The senate sends you this." The menace
prevented the deed; the assassin was seized by the guards, and
immediately revealed the authors of the conspiracy. It had been
formed, not in the state, but within the walls of the palace.
Lucilla, the emperor's sister, and widow of Lucius Verus,
impatient of the second rank, and jealous of the reigning
empress, had armed the murderer against her brother's life. She
had not ventured to communicate the black design to her second
husband, Claudius Pompeiarus, a senator of distinguished merit
and unshaken loyalty; but among the crowd of her lovers (for she
imitated the manners of Faustina) she found men of desperate
fortunes and wild ambition, who were prepared to serve her more
violent, as well as her tender passions. The conspirators
experienced the rigor of justice, and the abandoned princess was
punished, first with exile, and afterwards with death. ^15
[Footnote 14: See Maffei degli Amphitheatri, p. 126.]
[Footnote 15: Dion, l. lxxi. p. 1205 Herodian, l. i. p. 16 Hist.
August p. 46.]
But the words of the assassin sunk deep into the mind of
Commodus, and left an indelible impression of fear and hatred
against the whole body of the senate. ^* Those whom he had
dreaded as importunate ministers, he now suspected as secret
enemies. The Delators, a race of men discouraged, and almost
extinguished, under the former reigns, again became formidable,
as soon as they discovered that the emperor was desirous of
finding disaffection and treason in the senate. That assembly,
whom Marcus had ever considered as the great council of the
nation, was composed of the most distinguished of the Romans; and
distinction of every kind soon became criminal. The possession
of wealth stimulated the diligence of the informers; rigid virtue
implied a tacit censure of the irregularities of Commodus;
important services implied a dangerous superiority of merit; and
the friendship of the father always insured the aversion of the
son. Suspicion was equivalent to proof; trial to condemnation.
The execution of a considerable senator was attended with the
death of all who might lament or revenge his fate; and when
Commodus had once tasted human blood, he became incapable of pity
or remorse.
[Footnote *: The conspirators were senators, even the assassin
himself. Herod. 81. - G.]
Of these innocent victims of tyranny, none died more
lamented than the two brothers of the Quintilian family, Maximus
and Condianus; whose fraternal love has saved their names from
oblivion, and endeared their memory to posterity. Their studies
and their occupations, their pursuits and their pleasures, were
still the same. In the enjoyment of a great estate, they never
admitted the idea of a separate interest: some fragments are now
extant of a treatise which they composed in common; ^* and in
every action of life it was observed that their two bodies were
animated by one soul. The Antonines, who valued their virtues,
and delighted in their union, raised them, in the same year, to
the consulship; and Marcus afterwards intrusted to their joint
care the civil administration of Greece, and a great military
command, in which they obtained a signal victory over the
Germans. The kind cruelty of Commodus united them in death. ^16
[Footnote *: This work was on agriculture, and is often quoted by
later writers. See P. Needham, Proleg. ad Geoponic. Camb. 1704.
- W.]
[Footnote 16: In a note upon the Augustan History, Casaubon has
collected a number of particulars concerning these celebrated
brothers. See p. 96 of his learned commentary.]
The tyrant's rage, after having shed the noblest blood of
the senate, at length recoiled on the principal instrument of his
cruelty. Whilst Commodus was immersed in blood and luxury, he
devolved the detail of the public business on Perennis, a servile
and ambitious minister, who had obtained his post by the murder
of his predecessor, but who possessed a considerable share of
vigor and ability. By acts of extortion, and the forfeited
estates of the nobles sacrificed to his avarice, he had
accumulated an immense treasure. The Praetorian guards were under
his immediate command; and his son, who already discovered a
military genius, was at the head of the Illyrian legions.
Perennis aspired to the empire; or what, in the eyes of Commodus,
amounted to the same crime, he was capable of aspiring to it, had
he not been prevented, surprised, and put to death. The fall of
a minister is a very trifling incident in the general history of
the empire; but it was hastened by an extraordinary circumstance,
which proved how much the nerves of discipline were already
relaxed. The legions of Britain, discontented with the
administration of Perennis, formed a deputation of fifteen
hundred select men, with instructions to march to Rome, and lay
their complaints before the emperor. These military petitioners,
by their own determined behaviour, by inflaming the divisions of
the guards, by exaggerating the strength of the British army, and
by alarming the fears of Commodus, exacted and obtained the
minister's death, as the only redress of their grievances. ^17
This presumption of a distant army, and their discovery of the
weakness of government, was a sure presage of the most dreadful
convulsions.
[Footnote 17: Dion, l. lxxii. p. 1210. Herodian, l. i. p. 22.
Hist. August. p. 48. Dion gives a much less odious character of
Perennis, than the other historians. His moderation is almost a
pledge of his veracity.
Note: Gibbon praises Dion for the moderation with which he
speaks of Perennis: he follows, nevertheless, in his own
narrative, Herodian and Lampridius. Dion speaks of Perennis not
only with moderation, but with admiration; he represents him as a
great man, virtuous in his life, and blameless in his death:
perhaps he may be suspected of partiality; but it is singular
that Gibbon, having adopted, from Herodian and Lampridius, their
judgment on this minister, follows Dion's improbable account of
his death. What likelihood, in fact, that fifteen hundred men
should have traversed Gaul and Italy, and have arrived at Rome
without any understanding with the Praetorians, or without
detection or opposition from Perennis, the Praetorian praefect?
Gibbon, foreseeing, perhaps, this difficulty, has added, that the
military deputation inflamed the divisions of the guards; but
Dion says expressly that they did not reach Rome, but that the
emperor went out to meet them: he even reproaches him for not
having opposed them with the guards, who were superior in number.
Herodian relates that Commodus, having learned, from a soldier,
the ambitious designs of Perennis and his son, caused them to be
attacked and massacred by night. - G. from W. Dion's narrative
is remarkably circumstantial, and his authority higher than
either of the other writers. He hints that Cleander, a new
favorite, had already undermined the influence of Perennis. - M.]
The negligence of the public administration was betrayed,
soon afterwards, by a new disorder, which arose from the smallest
beginnings. A spirit of desertion began to prevail among the
troops: and the deserters, instead of seeking their safety in
flight or concealment, infested the highways. Maternus, a
private soldier, of a daring boldness above his station,
collected these bands of robbers into a little army, set open the
prisons, invited the slaves to assert their freedom, and
plundered with impunity the rich and defenceless cities of Gaul
and Spain. The governors of the provinces, who had long been the
spectators, and perhaps the partners, of his depredations, were,
at length, roused from their supine indolence by the threatening
commands of the emperor. Maternus found that he was encompassed,
and foresaw that he must be overpowered. A great effort of
despair was his last resource. He ordered his followers to
disperse, to pass the Alps in small parties and various
disguises, and to assemble at Rome, during the licentious tumult
of the festival of Cybele. ^18 To murder Commodus, and to ascend
the vacant throne, was the ambition of no vulgar robber. His
measures were so ably concerted that his concealed troops already
filled the streets of Rome. The envy of an accomplice discovered
and ruined this singular enterprise, in a moment when it was ripe
for execution. ^19
[Footnote 18: During the second Punic war, the Romans imported
from Asia the worship of the mother of the gods. Her festival,
the Megalesia, began on the fourth of April, and lasted six days.
The streets were crowded with mad processions, the theatres with
spectators, and the public tables with unbidden guests. Order
and police were suspended, and pleasure was the only serious
business of the city. See Ovid. de Fastis, l. iv. 189, &c.]
[Footnote 19: Herodian, l. i. p. 23, 23.]
Suspicious princes often promote the last of mankind, from a
vain persuasion, that those who have no dependence, except on
their favor, will have no attachment, except to the person of
their benefactor. Cleander, the successor of Perennis, was a
Phrygian by birth; of a nation over whose stubborn, but servile
temper, blows only could prevail. ^20 He had been sent from his
native country to Rome, in the capacity of a slave. As a slave
he entered the Imperial palace, rendered himself useful to his
master's passions, and rapidly ascended to the most exalted
station which a subject could enjoy. His influence over the mind
of Commodus was much greater than that of his predecessor; for
Cleander was devoid of any ability or virtue which could inspire
the emperor with envy or distrust. Avarice was the reigning
passion of his soul, and the great principle of his
administration. The rank of Consul, of Patrician, of Senator, was
exposed to public sale; and it would have been considered as
disaffection, if any one had refused to purchase these empty and
disgraceful honors with the greatest part of his fortune. ^21 In
the lucrative provincial employments, the minister shared with
the governor the spoils of the people. The execution of the laws
was penal and arbitrary. A wealthy criminal might obtain, not
only the reversal of the sentence by which he was justly
condemned, but might likewise inflict whatever punishment he
pleased on the accuser, the witnesses, and the judge.
[Footnote 20: Cicero pro Flacco, c. 27.]
[Footnote 21: One of these dear-bought promotions occasioned a
current... that Julius Solon was banished into the senate.]
By these means, Cleander, in the space of three years, had
accumulated more wealth than had ever yet been possessed by any
freedman. ^22 Commodus was perfectly satisfied with the
magnificent presents which the artful courtier laid at his feet
in the most seasonable moments. To divert the public envy,
Cleander, under the emperor's name, erected baths, porticos, and
places of exercise, for the use of the people. ^23 He flattered
himself that the Romans, dazzled and amused by this apparent
liberality, would be less affected by the bloody scenes which
were daily exhibited; that they would forget the death of
Byrrhus, a senator to whose superior merit the late emperor had
granted one of his daughters; and that they would forgive the
execution of Arrius Antoninus, the last representative of the
name and virtues of the Antonines. The former, with more
integrity than prudence, had attempted to disclose, to his
brother-in-law, the true character of Cleander. An equitable
sentence pronounced by the latter, when proconsul of Asia,
against a worthless creature of the favorite, proved fatal to
him. ^24 After the fall of Perennis, the terrors of Commodus had,
for a short time, assumed the appearance of a return to virtue.
He repealed the most odious of his acts; loaded his memory with
the public execration, and ascribed to the pernicious counsels of
that wicked minister all the errors of his inexperienced youth.
But his repentance lasted only thirty days; and, under Cleander's
tyranny, the administration of Perennis was often regretted.
[Footnote 22: Dion (l. lxxii. p. 12, 13) observes, that no
freedman had possessed riches equal to those of Cleander. The
fortune of Pallas amounted, however, to upwards of five and
twenty hundred thousand pounds; Ter millies.]
[Footnote 23: Dion, l. lxxii. p. 12, 13. Herodian, l. i. p. 29.
Hist. August. p. 52. These baths were situated near the Porta
Capena. See Nardini Roma Antica, p. 79.]
[Footnote 24: Hist. August. p. 79.]
Chapter IV: The Cruelty, Follies And Murder Of Commodus.
Part II.
Pestilence and famine contributed to fill up the measure of
the calamities of Rome. ^25 The first could be only imputed to
the just indignation of the gods; but a monopoly of corn,
supported by the riches and power of the minister, was considered
as the immediate cause of the second. The popular discontent,
after it had long circulated in whispers, broke out in the
assembled circus. The people quitted their favorite amusements
for the more delicious pleasure of revenge, rushed in crowds
towards a palace in the suburbs, one of the emperor's
retirements, and demanded, with angry clamors, the head of the
public enemy. Cleander, who commanded the Praetorian guards, ^26
ordered a body of cavalry to sally forth, and disperse the
seditious multitude. The multitude fled with precipitation
towards the city; several were slain, and many more were trampled
to death; but when the cavalry entered the streets, their pursuit
was checked by a shower of stones and darts from the roofs and
windows of the houses. The foot guards, ^27 who had been long
jealous of the prerogatives and insolence of the Praetorian
cavalry, embraced the party of the people. The tumult became a
regular engagement, and threatened a general massacre. The
Praetorians, at length, gave way, oppressed with numbers; and the
tide of popular fury returned with redoubled violence against the
gates of the palace, where Commodus lay, dissolved in luxury, and
alone unconscious of the civil war. It was death to approach his
person with the unwelcome news. He would have perished in this
supine security, had not two women, his eldest sister Fadilla,
and Marcia, the most favored of his concubines, ventured to break
into his presence. Bathed in tears, and with dishevelled hair,
they threw themselves at his feet; and with all the pressing
eloquence of fear, discovered to the affrighted emperor the
crimes of the minister, the rage of the people, and the impending
ruin, which, in a few minutes, would burst over his palace and
person. Commodus started from his dream of pleasure, and
commanded that the head of Cleander should be thrown out to the
people. The desired spectacle instantly appeased the tumult; and
the son of Marcus might even yet have regained the affection and
confidence of his subjects. ^28
[Footnote 25: Herodian, l. i. p. 28. Dion, l. lxxii. p. 1215.
The latter says that two thousand persons died every day at Rome,
during a considerable length of time.]
[Footnote 26: Tuneque primum tres praefecti praetorio fuere:
inter quos libertinus. From some remains of modesty, Cleander
declined the title, whilst he assumed the powers, of Praetorian
praefect. As the other freedmen were styled, from their several
departments, a rationibus, ab epistolis, Cleander called himself
a pugione, as intrusted with the defence of his master's person.
Salmasius and Casaubon seem to have talked very idly upon this
passage.
Note: M. Guizot denies that Lampridius means Cleander as
praefect a pugione. The Libertinus seems to me to mean him. -
M.]
[Footnote 27: Herodian, l. i. p. 31. It is doubtful whether he
means the Praetorian infantry, or the cohortes urbanae, a body of
six thousand men, but whose rank and discipline were not equal to
their numbers. Neither Tillemont nor Wotton choose to decide this
question.]
[Footnote 28: Dion Cassius, l. lxxii. p. 1215. Herodian, l. i.
p. 32. Hist. August. p. 48.]
But every sentiment of virtue and humanity was extinct in
the mind of Commodus. Whilst he thus abandoned the reins of
empire to these unworthy favorites, he valued nothing in
sovereign power, except the unbounded license of indulging his
sensual appetites. His hours were spent in a seraglio of three
hundred beautiful women, and as many boys, of every rank, and of
every province; and, wherever the arts of seduction proved
ineffectual, the brutal lover had recourse to violence. The
ancient historians ^29 have expatiated on these abandoned scenes
of prostitution, which scorned every restraint of nature or
modesty; but it would not be easy to translate their too faithful
descriptions into the decency of modern language. The intervals
of lust were filled up with the basest amusements. The influence
of a polite age, and the labor of an attentive education, had
never been able to infuse into his rude and brutish mind the
least tincture of learning; and he was the first of the Roman
emperors totally devoid of taste for the pleasures of the
understanding. Nero himself excelled, or affected to excel, in
the elegant arts of music and poetry: nor should we despise his
pursuits, had he not converted the pleasing relaxation of a
leisure hour into the serious business and ambition of his life.
But Commodus, from his earliest infancy, discovered an aversion
to whatever was rational or liberal, and a fond attachment to the
amusements of the populace; the sports of the circus and
amphitheatre, the combats of gladiators, and the hunting of wild
beasts. The masters in every branch of learning, whom Marcus
provided for his son, were heard with inattention and disgust;
whilst the Moors and Parthians, who taught him to dart the
javelin and to shoot with the bow, found a disciple who delighted
in his application, and soon equalled the most skilful of his
instructors in the steadiness of the eye and the dexterity of the
hand.
[Footnote 29: Sororibus suis constupratis. Ipsas concubinas suas
sub oculis ...stuprari jubebat. Nec irruentium in se juvenum
carebat infamia, omni parte corporis atque ore in sexum utrumque
pollutus. Hist. Aug. p. 47.]
The servile crowd, whose fortune depended on their master's
vices, applauded these ignoble pursuits. The perfidious voice of
flattery reminded him, that by exploits of the same nature, by
the defeat of the Nemaean lion, and the slaughter of the wild
boar of Erymanthus, the Grecian Hercules had acquired a place
among the gods, and an immortal memory among men. They only
forgot to observe, that, in the first ages of society, when the
fiercer animals often dispute with man the possession of an
unsettled country, a successful war against those savages is one
of the most innocent and beneficial labors of heroism. In the
civilized state of the Roman empire, the wild beasts had long
since retired from the face of man, and the neighborhood of
populous cities. To surprise them in their solitary haunts, and
to transport them to Rome, that they might be slain in pomp by
the hand of an emperor, was an enterprise equally ridiculous for
the prince and oppressive for the people. ^30 Ignorant of these
distinctions, Commodus eagerly embraced the glorious resemblance,
and styled himself (as we still read on his medals ^31) the Roman
Hercules. ^* The club and the lion's hide were placed by the side
of the throne, amongst the ensigns of sovereignty; and statues
were erected, in which Commodus was represented in the character,
and with the attributes, of the god, whose valor and dexterity he
endeavored to emulate in the daily course of his ferocious
amusements. ^32
[Footnote 30: The African lions, when pressed by hunger, infested
the open villages and cultivated country; and they infested them
with impunity. The royal beast was reserved for the pleasures of
the emperor and the capital; and the unfortunate peasant who
killed one of them though in his own defence, incurred a very
heavy penalty. This extraordinary game-law was mitigated by
Honorius, and finally repealed by Justinian. Codex Theodos. tom.
v. p. 92, et Comment Gothofred.]
[Footnote 31: Spanheim de Numismat. Dissertat. xii. tom. ii. p.
493.]
[Footnote *: Commodus placed his own head on the colossal statue
of Hercules with the inscription, Lucius Commodus Hercules. The
wits of Rome, according to a new fragment of Dion, published an
epigram, of which, like many other ancient jests, the point is
not very clear. It seems to be a protest of the god against being
confounded with the emperor. Mai Fragm. Vatican. ii. 225. - M.]
[Footnote 32: Dion, l. lxxii. p. 1216. Hist. August. p. 49.]
Elated with these praises, which gradually extinguished the
innate sense of shame, Commodus resolved to exhibit before the
eyes of the Roman people those exercises, which till then he had
decently confined within the walls of his palace, and to the
presence of a few favorites. On the appointed day, the various
motives of flattery, fear, and curiosity, attracted to the
amphitheatre an innumerable multitude of spectators; and some
degree of applause was deservedly bestowed on the uncommon skill
of the Imperial performer. Whether he aimed at the head or heart
of the animal, the wound was alike certain and mortal. With
arrows whose point was shaped into the form of crescent, Commodus
often intercepted the rapid career, and cut asunder the long,
bony neck of the ostrich. ^33 A panther was let loose; and the
archer waited till he had leaped upon a trembling malefactor. In
the same instant the shaft flew, the beast dropped dead, and the
man remained unhurt. The dens of the amphitheatre disgorged at
once a hundred lions: a hundred darts from the unerring hand of
Commodus laid them dead as they run raging round the Arena.
Neither the huge bulk of the elephant, nor the scaly hide of the
rhinoceros, could defend them from his stroke. Aethiopia and
India yielded their most extraordinary productions; and several
animals were slain in the amphitheatre, which had been seen only
in the representations of art, or perhaps of fancy. ^34 In all
these exhibitions, the securest precautions were used to protect
the person of the Roman Hercules from the desperate spring of any
savage, who might possibly disregard the dignity of the emperor
and the sanctity of the god. ^35
[Footnote 33: The ostrich's neck is three feet long, and composed
of seventeen vertebrae. See Buffon, Hist. Naturelle.]
[Footnote 34: Commodus killed a camelopardalis or Giraffe, (Dion,
l. lxxii. p. 1211,) the tallest, the most gentle, and the most
useless of the large quadrupeds. This singular animal, a native
only of the interior parts of Africa, has not been seen in Europe
since the revival of letters; and though M. de Buffon (Hist.
Naturelle, tom. xiii.) has endeavored to describe, he has not
ventured to delineate, the Giraffe.
Note: The naturalists of our days have been more fortunate.
London probably now contains more specimens of this animal than
have been seen in Europe since the fall of the Roman empire,
unless in the pleasure gardens of the emperor Frederic II., in
Sicily, which possessed several. Frederic's collections of wild
beasts were exhibited, for the popular amusement, in many parts
of Italy. Raumer, Geschichte der Hohenstaufen, v. iii. p. 571.
Gibbon, moreover, is mistaken; as a giraffe was presented to
Lorenzo de Medici, either by the sultan of Egypt or the king of
Tunis. Contemporary authorities are quoted in the old work,
Gesner de Quadrupedibum p. 162. - M.]
[Footnote 35: Herodian, l. i. p. 37. Hist. August. p. 50.]
But the meanest of the populace were affected with shame and
indignation when they beheld their sovereign enter the lists as a
gladiator, and glory in a profession which the laws and manners
of the Romans had branded with the justest note of infamy. ^36 He
chose the habit and arms of the Secutor, whose combat with the
Retiarius formed one of the most lively scenes in the bloody
sports of the amphitheatre. The Secutor was armed with a helmet,
sword, and buckler; his naked antagonist had only a large net and
a trident; with the one he endeavored to entangle, with the other
to despatch his enemy. If he missed the first throw, he was
obliged to fly from the pursuit of the Secutor, till he had
prepared his net for a second cast. ^37 The emperor fought in
this character seven hundred and thirty-five several times.
These glorious achievements were carefully recorded in the public
acts of the empire; and that he might omit no circumstance of
infamy, he received from the common fund of gladiators a stipend
so exorbitant that it became a new and most ignominious tax upon
the Roman people. ^38 It may be easily supposed, that in these
engagements the master of the world was always successful; in the
amphitheatre, his victories were not often sanguinary; but when
he exercised his skill in the school of gladiators, or his own
palace, his wretched antagonists were frequently honored with a
mortal wound from the hand of Commodus, and obliged to seal their
flattery with their blood. ^39 He now disdained the appellation
of Hercules. The name of Paulus, a celebrated Secutor, was the
only one which delighted his ear. It was inscribed on his
colossal statues, and repeated in the redoubled acclamations ^40
of the mournful and applauding senate. ^41 Claudius Pompeianus,
the virtuous husband of Lucilla, was the only senator who
asserted the honor of his rank. As a father, he permitted his
sons to consult their safety by attending the amphitheatre. As a
Roman, he declared, that his own life was in the emperor's hands,
but that he would never behold the son of Marcus prostituting his
person and dignity. Notwithstanding his manly resolution
Pompeianus escaped the resentment of the tyrant, and, with his
honor, had the good fortune to preserve his life. ^42
[Footnote 36: The virtuous and even the wise princes forbade the
senators and knights to embrace this scandalous profession, under
pain of infamy, or, what was more dreaded by those profligate
wretches, of exile. The tyrants allured them to dishonor by
threats and rewards. Nero once produced in the arena forty
senators and sixty knights. See Lipsius, Saturnalia, l. ii. c.
2. He has happily corrected a passage of Suetonius in Nerone, c.
12.]
[Footnote 37: Lipsius, l. ii. c. 7, 8. Juvenal, in the eighth
satire, gives a picturesque description of this combat.]
[Footnote 38: Hist. August. p. 50. Dion, l. lxxii. p. 1220. He
received, for each time, decies, about 8000l. sterling.]
[Footnote 39: Victor tells us, that Commodus only allowed his
antagonists a ...weapon, dreading most probably the consequences
of their despair.]
[Footnote 40: They were obliged to repeat, six hundred and
twenty-six times, Paolus first of the Secutors, &c.]
[Footnote 41: Dion, l. lxxii. p. 1221. He speaks of his own
baseness and danger.]
[Footnote 42: He mixed, however, some prudence with his courage,
and passed the greatest part of his time in a country retirement;
alleging his advanced age, and the weakness of his eyes. "I
never saw him in the senate," says Dion, "except during the short
reign of Pertinax." All his infirmities had suddenly left him,
and they returned as suddenly upon the murder of that excellent
prince. Dion, l. lxxiii. p. 1227.]
Commodus had now attained the summit of vice and infamy.
Amidst the acclamations of a flattering court, he was unable to
disguise from himself, that he had deserved the contempt and
hatred of every man of sense and virtue in his empire. His
ferocious spirit was irritated by the consciousness of that
hatred, by the envy of every kind of merit, by the just
apprehension of danger, and by the habit of slaughter, which he
contracted in his daily amusements. History has preserved a long
list of consular senators sacrificed to his wanton suspicion,
which sought out, with peculiar anxiety, those unfortunate
persons connected, however remotely, with the family of the
Antonines, without sparing even the ministers of his crimes or
pleasures. ^43 His cruelty proved at last fatal to himself. He
had shed with impunity the noblest blood of Rome: he perished as
soon as he was dreaded by his own domestics. Marcia, his
favorite concubine, Eclectus, his chamberlain, and Laetus, his
Praetorian praefect, alarmed by the fate of their companions and
predecessors, resolved to prevent the destruction which every
hour hung over their heads, either from the mad caprice of the
tyrant, ^* or the sudden indignation of the people. Marcia
seized the occasion of presenting a draught of wine to her lover,
after he had fatigued himself with hunting some wild beasts.
Commodus retired to sleep; but whilst he was laboring with the
effects of poison and drunkenness, a robust youth, by profession
a wrestler, entered his chamber, and strangled him without
resistance. The body was secretly conveyed out of the palace,
before the least suspicion was entertained in the city, or even
in the court, of the emperor's death. Such was the fate of the
son of Marcus, and so easy was it to destroy a hated tyrant, who,
by the artificial powers of government, had oppressed, during
thirteen years, so many millions of subjects, each of whom was
equal to their master in personal strength and personal
abilities. ^44
[Footnote 43: The prefects were changed almost hourly or daily;
and the caprice of Commodus was often fatal to his most favored
chamberlains. Hist. August. p. 46, 51.]
[Footnote *: Commodus had already resolved to massacre them the
following night they determined o anticipate his design. Herod.
i. 17. - W.]
[Footnote 44: Dion, l. lxxii. p. 1222. Herodian, l. i. p. 43.
Hist. August. p. 52.]
The measures of he conspirators were conducted with the
deliberate coolness and celerity which the greatness of the
occasion required. They resolved instantly to fill the vacant
throne with an emperor whose character would justify and maintain
the action that had been committed. They fixed on Pertinax,
praefect of the city, an ancient senator of consular rank, whose
conspicuous merit had broke through the obscurity of his birth,
and raised him to the first honors of the state. He had
successively governed most of the provinces of the empire; and in
all his great employments, military as well as civil, he had
uniformly distinguished himself by the firmness, the prudence,
and the integrity of his conduct. ^45 He now remained almost
alone of the friends and ministers of Marcus; and when, at a late
hour of the night, he was awakened with the news, that the
chamberlain and the praefect were at his door, he received them
with intrepid resignation, and desired they would execute their
master's orders. Instead of death, they offered him the throne
of the Roman world. During some moments he distrusted their
intentions and assurances. Convinced at length of the death of
Commodus, he accepted the purple with a sincere reluctance, the
natural effect of his knowledge both of the duties and of the
dangers of the supreme rank. ^46
[Footnote 45: Pertinax was a native of Alba Pompeia, in Piedmont,
and son of a timber merchant. The order of his employments (it
is marked by Capitolinus) well deserves to be set down, as
expressive of the form of government and manners of the age. 1.
He was a centurion. 2. Praefect of a cohort in Syria, in the
Parthian war, and in Britain. 3. He obtained an Ala, or squadron
of horse, in Maesia. 4. He was commissary of provisions on the
Aemilian way. 5. He commanded the fleet upon the Rhine. 6. He
was procurator of Dacia, with a salary of about 1600l. a year.
7. He commanded the veterans of a legion. 8. He obtained the
rank of senator. 9. Of praetor. 10. With the command of the
first legion in Rhaetia and Noricum. 11. He was consul about the
year 175. 12. He attended Marcus into the East. 13. He commanded
an army on the Danube. 14. He was consular legate of Maesia.
15. Of Dacia. 16. Of Syria. 17. Of Britain. 18. He had the
care of the public provisions at Rome. 19. He was proconsul of
Africa. 20. Praefect of the city. Herodian (l. i. p. 48) does
justice to his disinterested spirit; but Capitolinus, who
collected every popular rumor, charges him with a great fortune
acquired by bribery and corruption.]
[Footnote 46: Julian, in the Caesars, taxes him with being
accessory to the death of Commodus.]
Laetus conducted without delay his new emperor to the camp
of the Praetorians, diffusing at the same time through the city a
seasonable report that Commodus died suddenly of an apoplexy; and
that the virtuous Pertinax had already succeeded to the throne.
The guards were rather surprised than pleased with the suspicious
death of a prince, whose indulgence and liberality they alone had
experienced; but the emergency of the occasion, the authority of
their praefect, the reputation of Pertinax, and the clamors of
the people, obliged them to stifle their secret discontents, to
accept the donative promised by the new emperor, to swear
allegiance to him, and with joyful acclamations and laurels in
their hands to conduct him to the senate house, that the military
consent might be ratified by the civil authority.
This important night was now far spent; with the dawn of
day, and the commencement of the new year, the senators expected
a summons to attend an ignominious ceremony. ^* In spite of all
remonstrances, even of those of his creatures who yet preserved
any regard for prudence or decency, Commodus had resolved to pass
the night in the gladiators' school, and from thence to take
possession of the consulship, in the habit and with the
attendance of that infamous crew. On a sudden, before the break
of day, the senate was called together in the temple of Concord,
to meet the guards, and to ratify the election of a new emperor.
For a few minutes they sat in silent suspense, doubtful of their
unexpected deliverance, and suspicious of the cruel artifices of
Commodus: but when at length they were assured that the tyrant
was no more, they resigned themselves to all the transports of
joy and indignation. Pertinax, who modestly represented the
meanness of his extraction, and pointed out several noble
senators more deserving than himself of the empire, was
constrained by their dutiful violence to ascend the throne, and
received all the titles of Imperial power, confirmed by the most
sincere vows of fidelity. The memory of Commodus was branded
with eternal infamy. The names of tyrant, of gladiator, of
public enemy resounded in every corner of the house. They
decreed in tumultuous votes, ^* that his honors should be
reversed, his titles erased from the public monuments, his
statues thrown down, his body dragged with a hook into the
stripping room of the gladiators, to satiate the public fury; and
they expressed some indignation against those officious servants
who had already presumed to screen his remains from the justice
of the senate. But Pertinax could not refuse those last rites to
the memory of Marcus, and the tears of his first protector
Claudius Pompeianus, who lamented the cruel fate of his
brother-in- law, and lamented still more that he had deserved it.
^47
[Footnote *: The senate always assembled at the beginning of the
year, on the night of the 1st January, (see Savaron on Sid.
Apoll. viii. 6,) and this happened the present year, as usual,
without any particular order. - G from W.]
[Footnote *: What Gibbon improperly calls, both here and in the
note, tumultuous decrees, were no more than the applauses and
acclamations which recur so often in the history of the emperors.
The custom passed from the theatre to the forum, from the forum
to the senate. Applauses on the adoption of the Imperial decrees
were first introduced under Trajan. (Plin. jun. Panegyr. 75.)
One senator read the form of the decree, and all the rest
answered by acclamations, accompanied with a kind of chant or
rhythm. These were some of the acclamations addressed to
Pertinax, and against the memory of Commodus. Hosti patriae
honores detrahantur. Parricidae honores detrahantur. Ut salvi
simus, Jupiter, optime, maxime, serva nobis Pertinacem. This
custom prevailed not only in the councils of state, but in all
the meetings of the senate. However inconsistent it may appear
with the solemnity of a religious assembly, the early Christians
adopted and introduced it into their synods, notwithstanding the
opposition of some of the Fathers, particularly of St.
Chrysostom. See the Coll. of Franc. Bern. Ferrarius de veterum
acclamatione in Graevii Thesaur. Antiq. Rom. i. 6. - W.
This note is rather hypercritical, as regards Gibbon, but
appears to be worthy of preservation. - M.]
[Footnote 47: Capitolinus gives us the particulars of these
tumultuary votes, which were moved by one senator, and repeated,
or rather chanted by the whole body. Hist. August. p. 52.]
These effusions of impotent rage against a dead emperor,
whom the senate had flattered when alive with the most abject
servility, betrayed a just but ungenerous spirit of revenge.
The legality of these decrees was, however, supported by the
principles of the Imperial constitution. To censure, to depose,
or to punish with death, the first magistrate of the republic,
who had abused his delegated trust, was the ancient and undoubted
prerogative of the Roman senate; ^48 but the feeble assembly was
obliged to content itself with inflicting on a fallen tyrant that
public justice, from which, during his life and reign, he had
been shielded by the strong arm of military despotism. ^*
[Footnote 48: The senate condemned Nero to be put to death more
majorum. Sueton. c. 49.]
[Footnote *: No particular law assigned this right to the senate:
it was deduced from the ancient principles of the republic.
Gibbon appears to infer, from the passage of Suetonius, that the
senate, according to its ancient right, punished Nero with death.
The words, however, more majerum refer not to the decree of the
senate, but to the kind of death, which was taken from an old law
of Romulus. (See Victor. Epit. Ed. Artzen p. 484, n. 7. - W.]
Pertinax found a nobler way of condemning his predecessor's
memory; by the contrast of his own virtues with the vices of
Commodus. On the day of his accession, he resigned over to his
wife and son his whole private fortune; that they might have no
pretence to solicit favors at the expense of the state. He
refused to flatter the vanity of the former with the title of
Augusta; or to corrupt the inexperienced youth of the latter by
the rank of Caesar. Accurately distinguishing between the duties
of a parent and those of a sovereign, he educated his son with a
severe simplicity, which, while it gave him no assured prospect
of the throne, might in time have rendered him worthy of it. In
public, the behavior of Pertinax was grave and affable. He lived
with the virtuous part of the senate, (and, in a private station,
he had been acquainted with the true character of each
individual,) without either pride or jealousy; considered them as
friends and companions, with whom he had shared the danger of the
tyranny, and with whom he wished to enjoy the security of the
present time. He very frequently invited them to familiar
entertainments, the frugality of which was ridiculed by those who
remembered and regretted the luxurious prodigality of Commodus.
^49
[Footnote 49: Dion (l. lxxiii. p. 1223) speaks of these
entertainments, as a senator who had supped with the emperor;
Capitolinus, (Hist. August. p. 58,) like a slave, who had
received his intelligence from one the scullions.]
To heal, as far as I was possible, the wounds inflicted by
the hand of tyranny, was the pleasing, but melancholy, task of
Pertinax. The innocent victims, who yet survived, were recalled
from exile, released from prison, and restored to the full
possession of their honors and fortunes. The unburied bodies of
murdered senators (for the cruelty of Commodus endeavored to
extend itself beyond death) were deposited in the sepulchres of
their ancestors; their memory was justified and every consolation
was bestowed on their ruined and afflicted families. Among these
consolations, one of the most grateful was the punishment of the
Delators; the common enemies of their master, of virtue, and of
their country. Yet even in the inquisition of these legal
assassins, Pertinax proceeded with a steady temper, which gave
every thing to justice, and nothing to popular prejudice and
resentment.
The finances of the state demanded the most vigilant care of
the emperor. Though every measure of injustice and extortion had
been adopted, which could collect the property of the subject
into the coffers of the prince, the rapaciousness of Commodus had
been so very inadequate to his extravagance, that, upon his
death, no more than eight thousand pounds were found in the
exhausted treasury, ^50 to defray the current expenses of
government, and to discharge the pressing demand of a liberal
donative, which the new emperor had been obliged to promise to
the Praetorian guards. Yet under these distressed circumstances,
Pertinax had the generous firmness to remit all the oppressive
taxes invented by Commodus, and to cancel all the unjust claims
of the treasury; declaring, in a decree of the senate, "that he
was better satisfied to administer a poor republic with
innocence, than to acquire riches by the ways of tyranny and
dishonor. "Economy and industry he considered as the pure and
genuine sources of wealth; and from them he soon derived a
copious supply for the public necessities. The expense of the
household was immediately reduced to one half. All the
instruments of luxury Pertinax exposed to public auction, ^51
gold and silver plate, chariots of a singular construction, a
superfluous wardrobe of silk and embroidery, and a great number
of beautiful slaves of both sexes; excepting only, with attentive
humanity, those who were born in a state of freedom, and had been
ravished from the arms of their weeping parents. At the same
time that he obliged the worthless favorites of the tyrant to
resign a part of their ill- gotten wealth, he satisfied the just
creditors of the state, and unexpectedly discharged the long
arrears of honest services. He removed the oppressive
restrictions which had been laid upon commerce, and granted all
the uncultivated lands in Italy and the provinces to those who
would improve them; with an exemption from tribute during the
term of ten years. ^52
[Footnote 50: Decies. The blameless economy of Pius left his
successors a treasure of vicies septies millies, above two and
twenty millions sterling. Dion, l. lxxiii. p. 1231.]
[Footnote 51: Besides the design of converting these useless
ornaments into money, Dion (l. lxxiii. p. 1229) assigns two
secret motives of Pertinax. He wished to expose the vices of
Commodus, and to discover by the purchasers those who most
resembled him.]
[Footnote 52: Though Capitolinus has picked up many idle tales of
the private life of Pertinax, he joins with Dion and Herodian in
admiring his public conduct.]
Such a uniform conduct had already secured to Pertinax the
noblest reward of a sovereign, the love and esteem of his people.
Those who remembered the virtues of Marcus were happy to
contemplate in their new emperor the features of that bright
original; and flattered themselves, that they should long enjoy
the benign influence of his administration. A hasty zeal to
reform the corrupted state, accompanied with less prudence than
might have been expected from the years and experience of
Pertinax, proved fatal to himself and to his country. His honest
indiscretion united against him the servile crowd, who found
their private benefit in the public disorders, and who preferred
the favor of a tyrant to the inexorable equality of the laws. ^53
[Footnote 53: Leges, rem surdam, inexorabilem esse. T. Liv. ii.
3.]
Amidst the general joy, the sullen and angry countenance of
the Praetorian guards betrayed their inward dissatisfaction.
They had reluctantly submitted to Pertinax; they dreaded the
strictness of the ancient discipline, which he was preparing to
restore; and they regretted the license of the former reign.
Their discontents were secretly fomented by Laetus, their
praefect, who found, when it was too late, that his new emperor
would reward a servant, but would not be ruled by a favorite. On
the third day of his reign, the soldiers seized on a noble
senator, with a design to carry him to the camp, and to invest
him with the Imperial purple. Instead of being dazzled by the
dangerous honor, the affrighted victim escaped from their
violence, and took refuge at the feet of Pertinax. A short time
afterwards, Sosius Falco, one of the consuls of the year, a rash
youth, ^54 but of an ancient and opulent family, listened to the
voice of ambition; and a conspiracy was formed during a short
absence of Pertinax, which was crushed by his sudden return to
Rome, and his resolute behavior. Falco was on the point of being
justly condemned to death as a public enemy had he not been saved
by the earnest and sincere entreaties of the injured emperor, who
conjured the senate, that the purity of his reign might not be
stained by the blood even of a guilty senator.
[Footnote 54: If we credit Capitolinus, (which is rather
difficult,) Falco behaved with the most petulant indecency to
Pertinax, on the day of his accession. The wise emperor only
admonished him of his youth and in experience. Hist. August. p.
55.]
These disappointments served only to irritate the rage of
the Praetorian guards. On the twenty-eighth of March, eighty-six
days only after the death of Commodus, a general sedition broke
out in the camp, which the officers wanted either power or
inclination to suppress. Two or three hundred of the most
desperate soldiers marched at noonday, with arms in their hands
and fury in their looks, towards the Imperial palace. The gates
were thrown open by their companions upon guard, and by the
domestics of the old court, who had already formed a secret
conspiracy against the life of the too virtuous emperor. On the
news of their approach, Pertinax, disdaining either flight or
concealment, advanced to meet his assassins; and recalled to
their minds his own innocence, and the sanctity of their recent
oath. For a few moments they stood in silent suspense, ashamed
of their atrocious design, and awed by the venerable aspect and
majestic firmness of their sovereign, till at length, the despair
of pardon reviving their fury, a barbarian of the country of
Tongress ^55 levelled the first blow against Pertinax, who was
instantly despatched with a multitude of wounds. His head,
separated from his body, and placed on a lance, was carried in
triumph to the Praetorian camp, in the sight of a mournful and
indignant people, who lamented the unworthy fate of that
excellent prince, and the transient blessings of a reign, the
memory of which could serve only to aggravate their approaching
misfortunes. ^56
[Footnote 55: The modern bishopric of Liege. This soldier
probably belonged to the Batavian horse-guards, who were mostly
raised in the duchy of Gueldres and the neighborhood, and were
distinguished by their valor, and by the boldness with which they
swam their horses across the broadest and most rapid rivers.
Tacit. Hist. iv. 12 Dion, l. lv p. 797 Lipsius de magnitudine
Romana, l. i. c. 4.]
[Footnote 56: Dion, l. lxxiii. p. 1232. Herodian, l. ii. p. 60.
Hist. August. p. 58. Victor in Epitom. et in Caesarib.
Eutropius, viii. 16.]
Chapter V: Sale Of The Empire To Didius Julianus.
Part I.
Public Sale Of The Empire To Didius Julianus By The Praetorian
Guards - Clodius Albinus In Britain, Pescennius Niger In Syria,
And Septimius Severus In Pannonia, Declare Against The Murderers
Of Pertinax - Civil Wars And Victory Of Severus Over His Three
Rivals - Relaxation Of Discipline - New Maxims Of Government.
The power of the sword is more sensibly felt in an extensive
monarchy, than in a small community. It has been calculated by
the ablest politicians, that no state, without being soon
exhausted, can maintain above the hundredth part of its members
in arms and idleness. But although this relative proportion may
be uniform, the influence of the army over the rest of the
society will vary according to the degree of its positive
strength. The advantages of military science and discipline
cannot be exerted, unless a proper number of soldiers are united
into one body, and actuated by one soul. With a handful of men,
such a union would be ineffectual; with an unwieldy host, it
would be impracticable; and the powers of the machine would be
alike destroyed by the extreme minuteness or the excessive weight
of its springs. To illustrate this observation, we need only
reflect, that there is no superiority of natural strength,
artificial weapons, or acquired skill, which could enable one man
to keep in constant subjection one hundred of his
fellow-creatures: the tyrant of a single town, or a small
district, would soon discover that a hundred armed followers were
a weak defence against ten thousand peasants or citizens; but a
hundred thousand well-disciplined soldiers will command, with
despotic sway, ten millions of subjects; and a body of ten or
fifteen thousand guards will strike terror into the most numerous
populace that ever crowded the streets of an immense capital.
The Praetorian bands, whose licentious fury was the first
symptom and cause of the decline of the Roman empire, scarcely
amounted to the last- mentioned number ^1 They derived their
institution from Augustus. That crafty tyrant, sensible that
laws might color, but that arms alone could maintain, his usurped
dominion, had gradually formed this powerful body of guards, in
constant readiness to protect his person, to awe the senate, and
either to prevent or to crush the first motions of rebellion. He
distinguished these favored troops by a double pay and superior
privileges; but, as their formidable aspect would at once have
alarmed and irritated the Roman people, three cohorts only were
stationed in the capital, whilst the remainder was dispersed in
the adjacent towns of Italy. ^2 But after fifty years of peace
and servitude, Tiberius ventured on a decisive measure, which
forever rivetted the fetters of his country. Under the fair
pretences of relieving Italy from the heavy burden of military
quarters, and of introducing a stricter discipline among the
guards, he assembled them at Rome, in a permanent camp, ^3 which
was fortified with skilful care, ^4 and placed on a commanding
situation. ^5
[Footnote 1: They were originally nine or ten thousand men, (for
Tacitus and son are not agreed upon the subject,) divided into as
many cohorts. Vitellius increased them to sixteen thousand, and
as far as we can learn from inscriptions, they never afterwards
sunk much below that number. See Lipsius de magnitudine Romana,
i. 4.]
[Footnote 2: Sueton. in August. c. 49.]
[Footnote 3: Tacit. Annal. iv. 2. Sueton. in Tiber. c. 37. Dion
Cassius, l. lvii. p. 867.]
[Footnote 4: In the civil war between Vitellius and Vespasian,
the Praetorian camp was attacked and defended with all the
machines used in the siege of the best fortified cities. Tacit.
Hist. iii. 84.]
[Footnote 5: Close to the walls of the city, on the broad summit
of the Quirinal and Viminal hills. See Nardini Roma Antica, p.
174. Donatus de Roma Antiqua, p. 46.
Note: Not on both these hills: neither Donatus nor Nardini
justify this position. (Whitaker's Review. p. 13.) At the
northern extremity of this hill (the Viminal) are some
considerable remains of a walled enclosure which bears all the
appearance of a Roman camp, and therefore is generally thought to
correspond with the Castra Praetoria. Cramer's Italy 390. - M.]
Such formidable servants are always necessary, but often
fatal to the throne of despotism. By thus introducing the
Praetorian guards as it were into the palace and the senate, the
emperors taught them to perceive their own strength, and the
weakness of the civil government; to view the vices of their
masters with familiar contempt, and to lay aside that reverential
awe, which distance only, and mystery, can preserve towards an
imaginary power. In the luxurious idleness of an opulent city,
their pride was nourished by the sense of their irresistible
weight; nor was it possible to conceal from them, that the person
of the sovereign, the authority of the senate, the public
treasure, and the seat of empire, were all in their hands. To
divert the Praetorian bands from these dangerous reflections, the
firmest and best established princes were obliged to mix
blandishments with commands, rewards with punishments, to flatter
their pride, indulge their pleasures, connive at their
irregularities, and to purchase their precarious faith by a
liberal donative; which, since the elevation of Claudius, was
enacted as a legal claim, on the accession of every new emperor.
^6
[Footnote 6: Claudius, raised by the soldiers to the empire, was
the first who gave a donative. He gave quina dena, 120l.
(Sueton. in Claud. c. 10: ) when Marcus, with his colleague
Lucius Versus, took quiet possession of the throne, he gave
vicena, 160l. to each of the guards. Hist. August. p. 25, (Dion,
l. lxxiii. p. 1231.) We may form some idea of the amount of these
sums, by Hadrian's complaint that the promotion of a Caesar had
cost him ter millies, two millions and a half sterling.]
The advocate of the guards endeavored to justify by
arguments the power which they asserted by arms; and to maintain
that, according to the purest principles of the constitution,
their consent was essentially necessary in the appointment of an
emperor. The election of consuls, of generals, and of
magistrates, however it had been recently usurped by the senate,
was the ancient and undoubted right of the Roman people. ^7 But
where was the Roman people to be found? Not surely amongst the
mixed multitude of slaves and strangers that filled the streets
of Rome; a servile populace, as devoid of spirit as destitute of
property. The defenders of the state, selected from the flower
of the Italian youth, ^8 and trained in the exercise of arms and
virtue, were the genuine representatives of the people, and the
best entitled to elect the military chief of the republic. These
assertions, however defective in reason, became unanswerable when
the fierce Praetorians increased their weight, by throwing, like
the barbarian conqueror of Rome, their swords into the scale. ^9
[Footnote 7: Cicero de Legibus, iii. 3. The first book of Livy,
and the second of Dionysius of Halicarnassus, show the authority
of the people, even in the election of the kings.]
[Footnote 8: They were originally recruited in Latium, Etruria,
and the old colonies, (Tacit. Annal. iv. 5.) The emperor Otho
compliments their vanity with the flattering titles of Italiae,
Alumni, Romana were juventus. Tacit. Hist. i. 84.]
[Footnote 9: In the siege of Rome by the Gauls. See Livy, v. 48.
Plutarch. in Camill. p. 143.]
The Praetorians had violated the sanctity of the throne by
the atrocious murder of Pertinax; they dishonored the majesty of
it by their subsequent conduct. The camp was without a leader,
for even the praefect Laetus, who had excited the tempest,
prudently declined the public indignation. Amidst the wild
disorder, Sulpicianus, the emperor's father-in-law, and governor
of the city, who had been sent to the camp on the first alarm of
mutiny, was endeavoring to calm the fury of the multitude, when
he was silenced by the clamorous return of the murderers, bearing
on a lance the head of Pertinax. Though history has accustomed us
to observe every principle and every passion yielding to the
imperious dictates of ambition, it is scarcely credible that, in
these moments of horror, Sulpicianus should have aspired to
ascend a throne polluted with the recent blood of so near a
relation and so excellent a prince. He had already begun to use
the only effectual argument, and to treat for the Imperial
dignity; but the more prudent of the Praetorians, apprehensive
that, in this private contract, they should not obtain a just
price for so valuable a commodity, ran out upon the ramparts;
and, with a loud voice, proclaimed that the Roman world was to be
disposed of to the best bidder by public auction. ^10
[Footnote 10: Dion, L. lxxiii. p. 1234. Herodian, l. ii. p. 63.
Hist. August p. 60. Though the three historians agree that it
was in fact an auction, Herodian alone affirms that it was
proclaimed as such by the soldiers.]
This infamous offer, the most insolent excess of military
license, diffused a universal grief, shame, and indignation
throughout the city. It reached at length the ears of Didius
Julianus, a wealthy senator, who, regardless of the public
calamities, was indulging himself in the luxury of the table. ^11
His wife and his daughter, his freedmen and his parasites, easily
convinced him that he deserved the throne, and earnestly conjured
him to embrace so fortunate an opportunity. The vain old man
hastened to the Praetorian camp, where Sulpicianus was still in
treaty with the guards, and began to bid against him from the
foot of the rampart. The unworthy negotiation was transacted by
faithful emissaries, who passed alternately from one candidate to
the other, and acquainted each of them with the offers of his
rival. Sulpicianus had already promised a donative of five
thousand drachms (above one hundred and sixty pounds) to each
soldier; when Julian, eager for the prize, rose at once to the
sum of six thousand two hundred and fifty drachms, or upwards of
two hundred pounds sterling. The gates of the camp were
instantly thrown open to the purchaser; he was declared emperor,
and received an oath of allegiance from the soldiers, who
retained humanity enough to stipulate that he should pardon and
forget the competition of Sulpicianus. ^*
[Footnote 11: Spartianus softens the most odious parts of the
character and elevation of Julian.]
[Footnote *: One of the principal causes of the preference of
Julianus by the soldiers, was the dexterty dexterity with which
he reminded them that Sulpicianus would not fail to revenge on
them the death of his son-in-law. (See Dion, p. 1234, 1234. c.
11. Herod. ii. 6.) - W.]
It was now incumbent on the Praetorians to fulfil the
conditions of the sale. They placed their new sovereign, whom
they served and despised, in the centre of their ranks,
surrounded him on every side with their shields, and conducted
him in close order of battle through the deserted streets of the
city. The senate was commanded to assemble; and those who had
been the distinguished friends of Pertinax, or the personal
enemies of Julian, found it necessary to affect a more than
common share of satisfaction at this happy revolution. ^12 After
Julian had filled the senate house with armed soldiers, he
expatiated on the freedom of his election, his own eminent
virtues, and his full assurance of the affections of the senate.
The obsequious assembly congratulated their own and the public
felicity; engaged their allegiance, and conferred on him all the
several branches of the Imperial power. ^13 From the senate
Julian was conducted, by the same military procession, to take
possession of the palace. The first objects that struck his
eyes, were the abandoned trunk of Pertinax, and the frugal
entertainment prepared for his supper. The one he viewed with
indifference, the other with contempt. A magnificent feast was
prepared by his order, and he amused himself, till a very late
hour, with dice, and the performances of Pylades, a celebrated
dancer. Yet it was observed, that after the crowd of flatterers
dispersed, and left him to darkness, solitude, and terrible
reflection, he passed a sleepless night; revolving most probably
in his mind his own rash folly, the fate of his virtuous
predecessor, and the doubtful and dangerous tenure of an empire
which had not been acquired by merit, but purchased by money. ^14
[Footnote 12: Dion Cassius, at that time praetor, had been a
personal enemy to Julian, i. lxxiii. p. 1235.]
[Footnote 13: Hist. August. p. 61. We learn from thence one
curious circumstance, that the new emperor, whatever had been his
birth, was immediately aggregated to the number of patrician
families.
Note: A new fragment of Dion shows some shrewdness in the
character of Julian. When the senate voted him a golden statue,
he preferred one of brass, as more lasting. He "had always
observed," he said, "that the statues of former emperors were
soon destroyed. Those of brass alone remained." The indignant
historian adds that he was wrong. The virtue of sovereigns alone
preserves their images: the brazen statue of Julian was broken to
pieces at his death. Mai. Fragm. Vatican. p. 226. - M.]
[Footnote 14: Dion, l. lxxiii. p. 1235. Hist. August. p. 61. I
have endeavored to blend into one consistent story the seeming
contradictions of the two writers.
Note: The contradiction as M. Guizot observed, is
irreconcilable. He quotes both passages: in one Julianus is
represented as a miser, in the other as a voluptuary. In the one
he refuses to eat till the body of Pertinax has been buried; in
the other he gluts himself with every luxury almost in the sight
of his headless remains. - M.]
He had reason to tremble. On the throne of the world he
found himself without a friend, and even without an adherent.
The guards themselves were ashamed of the prince whom their
avarice had persuaded them to accept; nor was there a citizen who
did not consider his elevation with horror, as the last insult on
the Roman name. The nobility, whose conspicuous station, and
ample possessions, exacted the strictest caution, dissembled
their sentiments, and met the affected civility of the emperor
with smiles of complacency and professions of duty. But the
people, secure in their numbers and obscurity, gave a free vent
to their passions. The streets and public places of Rome
resounded with clamors and imprecations. The enraged multitude
affronted the person of Julian, rejected his liberality, and,
conscious of the impotence of their own resentment, they called
aloud on the legions of the frontiers to assert the violated
majesty of the Roman empire.
The public discontent was soon diffused from the centre to
the frontiers of the empire. The armies of Britain, of Syria,
and of Illyricum, lamented the death of Pertinax, in whose
company, or under whose command, they had so often fought and
conquered. They received with surprise, with indignation, and
perhaps with envy, the extraordinary intelligence, that the
Praetorians had disposed of the empire by public auction; and
they sternly refused to ratify the ignominious bargain. Their
immediate and unanimous revolt was fatal to Julian, but it was
fatal at the same time to the public peace, as the generals of
the respective armies, Clodius Albinus, Pescennius Niger, and
Septimius Severus, were still more anxious to succeed than to
revenge the murdered Pertinax. Their forces were exactly
balanced. Each of them was at the head of three legions, ^15
with a numerous train of auxiliaries; and however different in
their characters, they were all soldiers of experience and
capacity.
[Footnote 15: Dion, l. lxxiii. p. 1235.]
Clodius Albinus, governor of Britain, surpassed both his
competitors in the nobility of his extraction, which he derived
from some of the most illustrious names of the old republic. ^16
But the branch from which he claimed his descent was sunk into
mean circumstances, and transplanted into a remote province. It
is difficult to form a just idea of his true character. Under
the philosophic cloak of austerity, he stands accused of
concealing most of the vices which degrade human nature. ^17 But
his accusers are those venal writers who adored the fortune of
Severus, and trampled on the ashes of an unsuccessful rival.
Virtue, or the appearances of virtue, recommended Albinus to the
confidence and good opinion of Marcus; and his preserving with
the son the same interest which he had acquired with the father,
is a proof at least that he was possessed of a very flexible
disposition. The favor of a tyrant does not always suppose a
want of merit in the object of it; he may, without intending it,
reward a man of worth and ability, or he may find such a man
useful to his own service. It does not appear that Albinus
served the son of Marcus, either as the minister of his
cruelties, or even as the associate of his pleasures. He was
employed in a distant honorable command, when he received a
confidential letter from the emperor, acquainting him of the
treasonable designs of some discontented generals, and
authorizing him to declare himself the guardian and successor of
the throne, by assuming the title and ensigns of Caesar. ^18 The
governor of Britain wisely declined the dangerous honor, which
would have marked him for the jealousy, or involved him in the
approaching ruin, of Commodus. He courted power by nobler, or,
at least, by more specious arts. On a premature report of the
death of the emperor, he assembled his troops; and, in an
eloquent discourse, deplored the inevitable mischiefs of
despotism, described the happiness and glory which their
ancestors had enjoyed under the consular government, and declared
his firm resolution to reinstate the senate and people in their
legal authority. This popular harangue was answered by the loud
acclamations of the British legions, and received at Rome with a
secret murmur of applause. Safe in the possession of his little
world, and in the command of an army less distinguished indeed
for discipline than for numbers and valor, ^19 Albinus braved the
menaces of Commodus, maintained towards Pertinax a stately
ambiguous reserve, and instantly declared against the usurpation
of Julian. The convulsions of the capital added new weight to
his sentiments, or rather to his professions of patriotism. A
regard to decency induced him to decline the lofty titles of
Augustus and Emperor; and he imitated perhaps the example of
Galba, who, on a similar occasion, had styled himself the
Lieutenant of the senate and people. ^20
[Footnote 16: The Posthumian and the Ce'onian; the former of whom
was raised to the consulship in the fifth year after its
institution.]
[Footnote 17: Spartianus, in his undigested collections, mixes up
all the virtues and all the vices that enter into the human
composition, and bestows them on the same object. Such, indeed
are many of the characters in the Augustan History.]
[Footnote 18: Hist. August. p. 80, 84.]
[Footnote 19: Pertinax, who governed Britain a few years before,
had been left for dead, in a mutiny of the soldiers. Hist.
August. p 54. Yet they loved and regretted him; admirantibus eam
virtutem cui irascebantur.]
[Footnote 20: Sueton. in Galb. c. 10.]
Personal merit alone had raised Pescennius Niger, from an
obscure birth and station, to the government of Syria; a
lucrative and important command, which in times of civil
confusion gave him a near prospect of the throne. Yet his parts
seem to have been better suited to the second than to the first
rank; he was an unequal rival, though he might have approved
himself an excellent lieutenant, to Severus, who afterwards
displayed the greatness of his mind by adopting several useful
institutions from a vanquished enemy. ^21 In his government Niger
acquired the esteem of the soldiers and the love of the
provincials. His rigid discipline foritfied the valor and
confirmed the obedience of the former, whilst the voluptuous
Syrians were less delighted with the mild firmness of his
administration, than with the affability of his manners, and the
apparent pleasure with which he attended their frequent and
pompous festivals. ^22 As soon as the intelligence of the
atrocious murder of Pertinax had reached Antioch, the wishes of
Asia invited Niger to assume the Imperial purple and revenge his
death. The legions of the eastern frontier embraced his cause;
the opulent but unarmed provinces, from the frontiers of
Aethiopia ^23 to the Hadriatic, cheerfully submitted to his
power; and the kings beyond the Tigris and the Euphrates
congratulated his election, and offered him their homage and
services. The mind of Niger was not capable of receiving this
sudden tide of fortune: he flattered himself that his accession
would be undisturbed by competition and unstained by civil blood;
and whilst he enjoyed the vain pomp of triumph, he neglected to
secure the means of victory. Instead of entering into an
effectual negotiation with the powerful armies of the West, whose
resolution might decide, or at least must balance, the mighty
contest; instead of advancing without delay towards Rome and
Italy, where his presence was impatiently expected, ^24 Niger
trifled away in the luxury of Antioch those irretrievable moments
which were diligently improved by the decisive activity of
Severus. ^25 [Footnote 21: Hist. August. p. 76.]
[Footnote 22: Herod. l. ii. p. 68. The Chronicle of John Malala,
of Antioch, shows the zealous attachment of his countrymen to
these festivals, which at once gratified their superstition, and
their love of pleasure.]
[Footnote 23: A king of Thebes, in Egypt, is mentioned, in the
Augustan History, as an ally, and, indeed, as a personal friend
of Niger. If Spartianus is not, as I strongly suspect, mistaken,
he has brought to light a dynasty of tributary princes totally
unknown to history.]
[Footnote 24: Dion, l. lxxiii. p. 1238. Herod. l. ii. p. 67. A
verse in every one's mouth at that time, seems to express the
general opinion of the three rivals; Optimus est Niger, [Fuscus,
which preserves the quantity. - M.] bonus After, pessimus Albus.
Hist. August. p. 75.]
[Footnote 25: Herodian, l. ii. p. 71.]
The country of Pannonia and Dalmatia, which occupied the
space between the Danube and the Hadriatic, was one of the last
and most difficult conquests of the Romans. In the defence of
national freedom, two hundred thousand of these barbarians had
once appeared in the field, alarmed the declining age of
Augustus, and exercised the vigilant prudence of Tiberius at the
head of the collected force of the empire. ^26 The Pannonians
yielded at length to the arms and institutions of Rome. Their
recent subjection, however, the neighborhood, and even the
mixture, of the unconquered tribes, and perhaps the climate,
adapted, as it has been observed, to the production of great
bodies and slow minds, ^27 all contributed to preserve some
remains of their original ferocity, and under the tame and
uniform countenance of Roman provincials, the hardy features of
the natives were still to be discerned. Their warlike youth
afforded an inexhaustible supply of recruits to the legions
stationed on the banks of the Danube, and which, from a perpetual
warfare against the Germans and Sarmazans, were deservedly
esteemed the best troops in the service.
[Footnote 26: See an account of that memorable war in Velleius
Paterculus, is 110, &c., who served in the army of Tiberius.]
[Footnote 27: Such is the reflection of Herodian, l. ii. p. 74.
Will the modern Austrians allow the influence?]
The Pannonian army was at this time commanded by Septimius
Severus, a native of Africa, who, in the gradual ascent of
private honors, had concealed his daring ambition, which was
never diverted from its steady course by the allurements of
pleasure, the apprehension of danger, or the feelings of
humanity. ^28 On the first news of the murder of Pertinax, he
assembled his troops, painted in the most lively colors the
crime, the insolence, and the weakness of the Praetorian guards,
and animated the legions to arms and to revenge. He concluded
(and the peroration was thought extremely eloquent) with
promising every soldier about four hundred pounds; an honorable
donative, double in value to the infamous bribe with which Julian
had purchased the empire. ^29 The acclamations of the army
immediately saluted Severus with the names of Augustus, Pertinax,
and Emperor; and he thus attained the lofty station to which he
was invited, by conscious merit and a long train of dreams and
omens, the fruitful offsprings either of his superstition or
policy. ^30
[Footnote 28: In the letter to Albinus, already mentioned,
Commodus accuses Severus, as one of the ambitious generals who
censured his conduct, and wished to occupy his place. Hist.
August. p. 80.]
[Footnote 29: Pannonia was too poor to supply such a sum. It was
probably promised in the camp, and paid at Rome, after the
victory. In fixing the sum, I have adopted the conjecture of
Casaubon. See Hist. August. p. 66. Comment. p. 115.]
[Footnote 30: Herodian, l. ii. p. 78. Severus was declared
emperor on the banks of the Danube, either at Carnuntum,
according to Spartianus, (Hist. August. p. 65,) or else at
Sabaria, according to Victor. Mr. Hume, in supposing that the
birth and dignity of Severus were too much inferior to the
Imperial crown, and that he marched into Italy as general only,
has not considered this transaction with his usual accuracy,
(Essay on the original contract.)
Note: Carnuntum, opposite to the mouth of the Morava: its
position is doubtful, either Petronel or Haimburg. A little
intermediate village seems to indicate by its name (Altenburg)
the site of an old town. D'Anville Geogr. Anc. Sabaria, now
Sarvar. - G. Compare note 37. - M.]
The new candidate for empire saw and improved the peculiar
advantage of his situation. His province extended to the Julian
Alps, which gave an easy access into Italy; and he remembered the
saying of Augustus, That a Pannonian army might in ten days
appear in sight of Rome. ^31 By a celerity proportioned to the
greatness of the occasion, he might reasonably hope to revenge
Pertinax, punish Julian, and receive the homage of the senate and
people, as their lawful emperor, before his competitors,
separated from Italy by an immense tract of sea and land, were
apprised of his success, or even of his election. During the
whole expedition, he scarcely allowed himself any moments for
sleep or food; marching on foot, and in complete armor, at the
head of his columns, he insinuated himself into the confidence
and affection of his troops, pressed their diligence, revived
their spirits, animated their hopes, and was well satisfied to
share the hardships of the meanest soldier, whilst he kept in
view the infinite superiority of his reward.
[Footnote 31: Velleius Paterculus, l. ii. c. 3. We must reckon
the march from the nearest verge of Pannonia, and extend the
sight of the city as far as two hundred miles.]
The wretched Julian had expected, and thought himself
prepared, to dispute the empire with the governor of Syria; but
in the invincible and rapid approach of the Pannonian legions, he
saw his inevitable ruin. The hasty arrival of every messenger
increased his just apprehensions. He was successively informed,
that Severus had passed the Alps; that the Italian cities,
unwilling or unable to oppose his progress, had received him with
the warmest professions of joy and duty; that the important place
of Ravenna had surrendered without resistance, and that the
Hadriatic fleet was in the hands of the conqueror. The enemy was
now within two hundred and fifty miles of Rome; and every moment
diminished the narrow span of life and empire allotted to Julian.
He attempted, however, to prevent, or at least to protract,
his ruin. He implored the venal faith of the Praetorians, filled
the city with unavailing preparations for war, drew lines round
the suburbs, and even strengthened the fortifications of the
palace; as if those last intrenchments could be defended, without
hope of relief, against a victorious invader. Fear and shame
prevented the guards from deserting his standard; but they
trembled at the name of the Pannonian legions, commanded by an
experienced general, and accustomed to vanquish the barbarians on
the frozen Danube. ^32 They quitted, with a sigh, the pleasures
of the baths and theatres, to put on arms, whose use they had
almost forgotten, and beneath the weight of which they were
oppressed. The unpractised elephants, whose uncouth appearance,
it was hoped, would strike terror into the army of the north,
threw their unskilful riders; and the awkward evolutions of the
marines, drawn from the fleet of Misenum, were an object of
ridicule to the populace; whilst the senate enjoyed, with secret
pleasure, the distress and weakness of the usurper. ^33
[Footnote 32: This is not a puerile figure of rhetoric, but an
allusion to a real fact recorded by Dion, l. lxxi. p. 1181. It
probably happened more than once.]
[Footnote 33: Dion, l. lxxiii. p. 1233. Herodian, l. ii. p. 81.
There is no surer proof of the military skill of the Romans, than
their first surmounting the idle terror, and afterwards
disdaining the dangerous use, of elephants in war.
Note: These elephants were kept for processions, perhaps for
the games. Se Herod. in loc. - M.]
Every motion of Julian betrayed his trembling perplexity.
He insisted that Severus should be declared a public enemy by the
senate. He entreated that the Pannonian general might be
associated to the empire. He sent public ambassadors of consular
rank to negotiate with his rival; he despatched private assassins
to take away his life. He designed that the Vestal virgins, and
all the colleges of priests, in their sacerdotal habits, and
bearing before them the sacred pledges of the Roman religion,
should advance in solemn procession to meet the Pannonian
legions; and, at the same time, he vainly tried to interrogate,
or to appease, the fates, by magic ceremonies and unlawful
sacrifices. ^34
[Footnote 34: Hist. August. p. 62, 63.
Note: Quae ad speculum dicunt fieri in quo pueri praeligatis
oculis, incantate..., respicere dicuntur. * * * Tuncque puer
vidisse dicitur et adventun Severi et Juliani decessionem. This
seems to have been a practice somewhat similar to that of which
our recent Egyptian travellers relate such extraordinary
circumstances. See also Apulius, Orat. de Magia. - M.]
Chapter V: Sale Of The Empire To Didius Julianus.
Part II.
Severus, who dreaded neither his arms nor his enchantments,
guarded himself from the only danger of secret conspiracy, by the
faithful attendance of six hundred chosen men, who never quitted
his person or their cuirasses, either by night or by day, during
the whole march. Advancing with a steady and rapid course, he
passed, without difficulty, the defiles of the Apennine, received
into his party the troops and ambassadors sent to retard his
progress, and made a short halt at Interamnia, about seventy
miles from Rome. His victory was already secure, but the despair
of the Praetorians might have rendered it bloody; and Severus had
the laudable ambition of ascending the throne without drawing the
sword. ^35 His emissaries, dispersed in the capital, assured the
guards, that provided they would abandon their worthless prince,
and the perpetrators of the murder of Pertinax, to the justice of
the conqueror, he would no longer consider that melancholy event
as the act of the whole body. The faithless Praetorians, whose
resistance was supported only by sullen obstinacy, gladly
complied with the easy conditions, seized the greatest part of
the assassins, and signified to the senate, that they no longer
defended the cause of Julian. That assembly, convoked by the
consul, unanimously acknowledged Severus as lawful emperor,
decreed divine honors to Pertinax, and pronounced a sentence of
deposition and death against his unfortunate successor. Julian
was conducted into a private apartment of the baths of the
palace, and beheaded as a common criminal, after having
purchased, with an immense treasure, an anxious and precarious
reign of only sixty-six days. ^36 The almost incredible
expedition of Severus, who, in so short a space of time,
conducted a numerous army from the banks of the Danube to those
of the Tyber, proves at once the plenty of provisions produced by
agriculture and commerce, the goodness of the roads, the
discipline of the legions, and the indolent, subdued temper of
the provinces. ^37
[Footnote 35: Victor and Eutropius, viii. 17, mention a combat
near the Milvian bridge, the Ponte Molle, unknown to the better
and more ancient writers.]
[Footnote 36: Dion, l. lxxiii. p. 1240. Herodian, l. ii. p. 83.
Hist. August. p. 63.]
[Footnote 37: From these sixty-six days, we must first deduct
sixteen, as Pertinax was murdered on the 28th of March, and
Severus most probably elected on the 13th of April, (see Hist.
August. p. 65, and Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, tom. iii. p.
393, note 7.) We cannot allow less than ten days after his
election, to put a numerous army in motion. Forty days remain
for this rapid march; and as we may compute about eight hundred
miles from Rome to the neighborhood of Vienna, the army of
Severus marched twenty miles every day, without halt or
intermission.]
The first cares of Severus were bestowed on two measures the
one dictated by policy, the other by decency; the revenge, and
the honors, due to the memory of Pertinax. Before the new
emperor entered Rome, he issued his commands to the Praetorian
guards, directing them to wait his arrival on a large plain near
the city, without arms, but in the habits of ceremony, in which
they were accustomed to attend their sovereign. He was obeyed by
those haughty troops, whose contrition was the effect of their
just terrors. A chosen part of the Illyrian army encompassed
them with levelled spears. Incapable of flight or resistance,
they expected their fate in silent consternation. Severus
mounted the tribunal, sternly reproached them with perfidy and
cowardice, dismissed them with ignominy from the trust which they
had betrayed, despoiled them of their splendid ornaments, and
banished them, on pain of death, to the distance of a hundred
miles from the capital. During the transaction, another
detachment had been sent to seize their arms, occupy their camp,
and prevent the hasty consequences of their despair. ^38
[Footnote 38: Dion, l. lxxiv. p. 1241. Herodian, l. ii. p. 84.]
The funeral and consecration of Pertinax was next solemnized
with every circumstance of sad magnificence. ^39 The senate, with
a melancholy pleasure, performed the last rites to that excellent
prince, whom they had loved, and still regretted. The concern of
his successor was probably less sincere; he esteemed the virtues
of Pertinax, but those virtues would forever have confined his
ambition to a private station. Severus pronounced his funeral
oration with studied eloquence, inward satisfaction, and
well-acted sorrow; and by this pious regard to his memory,
convinced the credulous multitude, that he alone was worthy to
supply his place. Sensible, however, that arms, not ceremonies,
must assert his claim to the empire, he left Rome at the end of
thirty days, and without suffering himself to be elated by this
easy victory, prepared to encounter his more formidable rivals.
[Footnote 39: Dion, (l. lxxiv. p. 1244,) who assisted at the
ceremony as a senator, gives a most pompous description of it.]
The uncommon abilities and fortune of Severus have induced
an elegant historian to compare him with the first and greatest
of the Caesars. ^40 The parallel is, at least, imperfect. Where
shall we find, in the character of Severus, the commanding
superiority of soul, the generous clemency, and the various
genius, which could reconcile and unite the love of pleasure, the
thirst of knowledge, and the fire of ambition? ^41 In one
instance only, they may be compared, with some degree of
propriety, in the celerity of their motions, and their civil
victories. In less than four years, ^42 Severus subdued the
riches of the East, and the valor of the West. He vanquished two
competitors of reputation and ability, and defeated numerous
armies, provided with weapons and discipline equal to his own.
In that age, the art of fortification, and the principles of
tactics, were well understood by all the Roman generals; and the
constant superiority of Severus was that of an artist, who uses
the same instruments with more skill and industry than his
rivals. I shall not, however, enter into a minute narrative of
these military operations; but as the two civil wars against
Niger and against Albinus were almost the same in their conduct,
event, and consequences, I shall collect into one point of view
the most striking circumstances, tending to develop the character
of the conqueror and the state of the empire.
[Footnote 40: Herodian, l. iii. p. 112]
[Footnote 41: Though it is not, most assuredly, the intention of
Lucan to exalt the character of Caesar, yet the idea he gives of
that hero, in the tenth book of the Pharsalia, where he describes
him, at the same time, making love to Cleopatra, sustaining a
siege against the power of Egypt, and conversing with the sages
of the country, is, in reality, the noblest panegyric.
Note: Lord Byron wrote, no doubt, from a reminiscence of
that passage - "It is possible to be a very great man, and to be
still very inferior to Julius Caesar, the most complete
character, so Lord Bacon thought, of all antiquity. Nature seems
incapable of such extraordinary combinations as composed his
versatile capacity, which was the wonder even of the Romans
themselves. The first general; the only triumphant politician;
inferior to none in point of eloquence; comparable to any in the
attainments of wisdom, in an age made up of the greatest
commanders, statesmen, orators, and philosophers, that ever
appeared in the world; an author who composed a perfect specimen
of military annals in his travelling carriage; at one time in a
controversy with Cato, at another writing a treatise on punuing,
and collecting a set of good sayings; fighting and making love at
the same moment, and willing to abandon both his empire and his
mistress for a sight of the fountains of the Nile. Such did
Julius Caesar appear to his contemporaries, and to those of the
subsequent ages who were the most inclined to deplore and
execrate his fatal genius." Note 47 to Canto iv. of Childe
Harold. - M.]
[Footnote 42: Reckoning from his election, April 13, 193, to the
death of Albinus, February 19, 197. See Tillemont's Chronology.]
Falsehood and insincerity, unsuitable as they seem to the
dignity of public transactions, offend us with a less degrading
idea of meanness, than when they are found in the intercourse of
private life. In the latter, they discover a want of courage; in
the other, only a defect of power: and, as it is impossible for
the most able statesmen to subdue millions of followers and
enemies by their own personal strength, the world, under the name
of policy, seems to have granted them a very liberal indulgence
of craft and dissimulation. Yet the arts of Severus cannot be
justified by the most ample privileges of state reason. He
promised only to betray, he flattered only to ruin; and however
he might occasionally bind himself by oaths and treaties, his
conscience, obsequious to his interest, always released him from
the inconvenient obligation. ^43
[Footnote 43: Herodian, l. ii. p. 85.]
If his two competitors, reconciled by their common danger,
had advanced upon him without delay, perhaps Severus would have
sunk under their united effort. Had they even attacked him, at
the same time, with separate views and separate armies, the
contest might have been long and doubtful. But they fell, singly
and successively, an easy prey to the arts as well as arms of
their subtle enemy, lulled into security by the moderation of his
professions, and overwhelmed by the rapidity of his action. He
first marched against Niger, whose reputation and power he the
most dreaded: but he declined any hostile declarations,
suppressed the name of his antagonist, and only signified to the
senate and people his intention of regulating the eastern
provinces. In private, he spoke of Niger, his old friend and
intended successor, ^44 with the most affectionate regard, and
highly applauded his generous design of revenging the murder of
Pertinax. To punish the vile usurper of the throne, was the duty
of every Roman general. To persevere in arms, and to resist a
lawful emperor, acknowledged by the senate, would alone render
him criminal. ^45 The sons of Niger had fallen into his hands
among the children of the provincial governors, detained at Rome
as pledges for the loyalty of their parents. ^46 As long as the
power of Niger inspired terror, or even respect, they were
educated with the most tender care, with the children of Severus
himself; but they were soon involved in their father's ruin, and
removed first by exile, and afterwards by death, from the eye of
public compassion. ^47
[Footnote 44: Whilst Severus was very dangerously ill, it was
industriously given out, that he intended to appoint Niger and
Albinus his successors. As he could not be sincere with respect
to both, he might not be so with regard to either. Yet Severus
carried his hypocrisy so far, as to profess that intention in the
memoirs of his own life.]
[Footnote 45: Hist. August. p. 65.]
[Footnote 46: This practice, invented by Commodus, proved very
useful to Severus. He found at Rome the children of many of the
principal adherents of his rivals; and he employed them more than
once to intimidate, or seduce, the parents.]
[Footnote 47: Herodian, l. iii. p. 95. Hist. August. p. 67, 68.]
Whilst Severus was engaged in his eastern war, he had reason
to apprehend that the governor of Britain might pass the sea and
the Alps, occupy the vacant seat of empire, and oppose his return
with the authority of the senate and the forces of the West. The
ambiguous conduct of Albinus, in not assuming the Imperial title,
left room for negotiation. Forgetting, at once, his professions
of patriotism, and the jealousy of sovereign power, he accepted
the precarious rank of Caesar, as a reward for his fatal
neutrality. Till the first contest was decided, Severus treated
the man, whom he had doomed to destruction, with every mark of
esteem and regard. Even in the letter, in which he announced his
victory over Niger, he styles Albinus the brother of his soul and
empire, sends him the affectionate salutations of his wife Julia,
and his young family, and entreats him to preserve the armies and
the republic faithful to their common interest. The messengers
charged with this letter were instructed to accost the Caesar
with respect, to desire a private audience, and to plunge their
daggers into his heart. ^48 The conspiracy was discovered, and
the too credulous Albinus, at length, passed over to the
continent, and prepared for an unequal contest with his rival,
who rushed upon him at the head of a veteran and victorious army.
[Footnote 48: Hist. August. p. 84. Spartianus has inserted this
curious letter at full length.]
The military labors of Severus seem inadequate to the
importance of his conquests. Two engagements, ^* the one near
the Hellespont, the other in the narrow defiles of Cilicia,
decided the fate of his Syrian competitor; and the troops of
Europe asserted their usual ascendant over the effeminate natives
of Asia. ^49 The battle of Lyons, where one hundred and fifty
thousand Romans ^50 were engaged, was equally fatal to Albinus.
The valor of the British army maintained, indeed, a sharp and
doubtful contest, with the hardy discipline of the Illyrian
legions. The fame and person of Severus appeared, during a few
moments, irrecoverably lost, till that warlike prince rallied his
fainting troops, and led them on to a decisive victory. ^51 The
war was finished by that memorable day. ^*
[Footnote *: There were three actions; one near Cyzicus, on the
Hellespont, one near Nice, in Bithynia, the third near the Issus,
in Cilicia, where Alexander conquered Darius. (Dion, lxiv. c. 6.
Herodian, iii. 2, 4.) - W Herodian represents the second battle
as of less importance than Dion - M.]
[Footnote 49: Consult the third book of Herodian, and the
seventy-fourth book of Dion Cassius.]
[Footnote 50: Dion, l. lxxv. p. 1260.]
[Footnote 51: Dion, l. lxxv. p. 1261. Herodian, l. iii. p. 110.
Hist. August. p. 68. The battle was fought in the plain of
Trevoux, three or four leagues from Lyons. See Tillemont, tom.
iii. p. 406, note 18.]
[Footnote *: According to Herodian, it was his lieutenant Laetus
who led back the troops to the battle, and gained the day, which
Severus had almost lost. Dion also attributes to Laetus a great
share in the victory. Severus afterwards put him to death,
either from fear or jealousy. - W. and G. Wenck and M. Guizot
have not given the real statement of Herodian or of Dion.
According to the former, Laetus appeared with his own army
entire, which he was suspected of having designedly kept
disengaged when the battle was still doudtful, or rather after
the rout of severus. Dion says that he did not move till Severus
had won the victory. - M.]
The civil wars of modern Europe have been distinguished, not
only by the fierce animosity, but likewise by the obstinate
perseverance, of the contending factions. They have generally
been justified by some principle, or, at least, colored by some
pretext, of religion, freedom, or loyalty. The leaders were
nobles of independent property and hereditary influence. The
troops fought like men interested in the decision of the quarrel;
and as military spirit and party zeal were strongly diffused
throughout the whole community, a vanquished chief was
immediately supplied with new adherents, eager to shed their
blood in the same cause. But the Romans, after the fall of the
republic, combated only for the choice of masters. Under the
standard of a popular candidate for empire, a few enlisted from
affection, some from fear, many from interest, none from
principle. The legions, uninflamed by party zeal, were allured
into civil war by liberal donatives, and still more liberal
promises. A defeat, by disabling the chief from the performance
of his engagements, dissolved the mercenary allegiance of his
followers, and left them to consult their own safety by a timely
desertion of an unsuccessful cause. It was of little moment to
the provinces, under whose name they were oppressed or governed;
they were driven by the impulsion of the present power, and as
soon as that power yielded to a superior force, they hastened to
implore the clemency of the conqueror, who, as he had an immense
debt to discharge, was obliged to sacrifice the most guilty
countries to the avarice of his soldiers. In the vast extent of
the Roman empire, there were few fortified cities capable of
protecting a routed army; nor was there any person, or family, or
order of men, whose natural interest, unsupported by the powers
of government, was capable of restoring the cause of a sinking
party. ^52
[Footnote 52: Montesquieu, Considerations sur la Grandeur et la
Decadence des Romains, c. xiii.]
Yet, in the contest between Niger and Severus, a single city
deserves an honorable exception. As Byzantium was one of the
greatest passages from Europe into Asia, it had been provided
with a strong garrison, and a fleet of five hundred vessels was
anchored in the harbor. ^53 The impetuosity of Severus
disappointed this prudent scheme of defence; he left to his
generals the siege of Byzantium, forced the less guarded passage
of the Hellespont, and, impatient of a meaner enemy, pressed
forward to encounter his rival. Byzantium, attacked by a numerous
and increasing army, and afterwards by the whole naval power of
the empire, sustained a siege of three years, and remained
faithful to the name and memory of Niger. The citizens and
soldiers (we know not from what cause) were animated with equal
fury; several of the principal officers of Niger, who despaired
of, or who disdained, a pardon, had thrown themselves into this
last refuge: the fortifications were esteemed impregnable, and,
in the defence of the place, a celebrated engineer displayed all
the mechanic powers known to the ancients. ^54 Byzantium, at
length, surrendered to famine. The magistrates and soldiers were
put to the sword, the walls demolished, the privileges
suppressed, and the destined capital of the East subsisted only
as an open village, subject to the insulting jurisdiction of
Perinthus. The historian Dion, who had admired the flourishing,
and lamented the desolate, state of Byzantium, accused the
revenge of Severus, for depriving the Roman people of the
strongest bulwark against the barbarians of Pontus and Asia ^55
The truth of this observation was but too well justified in the
succeeding age, when the Gothic fleets covered the Euxine, and
passed through the undefined Bosphorus into the centre of the
Mediterranean.
[Footnote 53: Most of these, as may be supposed, were small open
vessels; some, however, were galleys of two, and a few of three
ranks of oars.]
[Footnote 54: The engineer's name was Priscus. His skill saved
his life, and he was taken into the service of the conqueror.
For the particular facts of the siege, consult Dion Cassius (l.
lxxv. p. 1251) and Herodian, (l. iii. p. 95;) for the theory of
it, the fanciful chevalier de Folard may be looked into. See
Polybe, tom. i. p. 76.]
[Footnote 55 : Notwithstanding the authority of Spartianus, and
some modern Greeks, we may be assured, from Dion and Herodian,
that Byzantium, many years after the death of Severus, lay in
ruins.
Footnote *: There is no contradiction between the relation
of Dion and that of Spartianus and the modern Greeks. Dion does
not say that Severus destroyed Byzantium, but that he deprived it
of its franchises and privileges, stripped the inhabitants of
their property, razed the fortifications, and subjected the city
to the jurisdiction of Perinthus. Therefore, when Spartian,
Suidas, Cedrenus, say that Severus and his son Antoninus restored
to Byzantium its rights and franchises, ordered temples to be
built, &c., this is easily reconciled with the relation of Dion.
Perhaps the latter mentioned it in some of the fragments of his
history which have been lost. As to Herodian, his expressions
are evidently exaggerated, and he has been guilty of so many
inaccuracies in the history of Severus, that we have a right to
suppose one in this passage. - G. from W Wenck and M. Guizot have
omitted to cite Zosimus, who mentions a particular portico built
by Severus, and called, apparently, by his name. Zosim. Hist.
ii. c. xxx. p. 151, 153, edit Heyne. - M.]
Both Niger and Albinus were discovered and put to death in
their flight from the field of battle. Their fate excited
neither surprise nor compassion. They had staked their lives
against the chance of empire, and suffered what they would have
inflicted; nor did Severus claim the arrogant superiority of
suffering his rivals to live in a private station. But his
unforgiving temper, stimulated by avarice, indulged a spirit of
revenge, where there was no room for apprehension. The most
considerable of the provincials, who, without any dislike to the
fortunate candidate, had obeyed the governor under whose
authority they were accidentally placed, were punished by death,
exile, and especially by the confiscation of their estates. Many
cities of the East were stripped of their ancient honors, and
obliged to pay, into the treasury of Severus, four times the
amount of the sums contributed by them for the service of Niger.
^56
[Footnote 56: Dion, l. lxxiv. p. 1250.]
Till the final decision of the war, the cruelty of Severus
was, in some measure, restrained by the uncertainty of the event,
and his pretended reverence for the senate. The head of Albinus,
accompanied with a menacing letter, announced to the Romans that
he was resolved to spare none of the adherents of his unfortunate
competitors. He was irritated by the just auspicion that he had
never possessed the affections of the senate, and he concealed
his old malevolence under the recent discovery of some
treasonable correspondences. Thirty-five senators, however,
accused of having favored the party of Albinus, he freely
pardoned, and, by his subsequent behavior, endeavored to convince
them, that he had forgotten, as well as forgiven, their supposed
offences. But, at the same time, he condemned forty-one ^57
other senators, whose names history has recorded; their wives,
children, and clients attended them in death, ^* and the noblest
provincials of Spain and Gaul were involved in the same ruin. ^!
Such rigid justice - for so he termed it - was, in the opinion of
Severus, the only conduct capable of insuring peace to the people
or stability to the prince; and he condescended slightly to
lament, that to be mild, it was necessary that he should first be
cruel. ^58
[Footnote 57: Dion, (l. lxxv. p. 1264;) only twenty-nine senators
are mentioned by him, but forty-one are named in the Augustan
History, p. 69, among whom were six of the name of Pescennius.
Herodian (l. iii. p. 115) speaks in general of the cruelties of
Severus.]
[Footnote *: Wenck denies that there is any authority for this
massacre of the wives of the senators. He adds, that only the
children and relatives of Niger and Albinus were put to death.
This is true of the family of Albinus, whose bodies were thrown
into the Rhone; those of Niger, according to Lampridius, were
sent into exile, but afterwards put to death. Among the
partisans of Albinus who were put to death were many women of
rank, multae foeminae illustres. Lamprid. in Sever. - M.]
[Footnote !: A new fragment of Dion describes the state of Rome
during this contest. All pretended to be on the side of Severus;
but their secret sentiments were often betrayed by a change of
countenance on the arrival of some sudden report. Some were
detected by overacting their loyalty, Mai. Fragm. Vatican. p. 227
Severus told the senate he would rather have their hearts than
their votes. - Ibid. - M.]
[Footnote 58: Aurelius Victor.]
The true interest of an absolute monarch generally coincides
with that of his people. Their numbers, their wealth, their
order, and their security, are the best and only foundations of
his real greatness; and were he totally devoid of virtue,
prudence might supply its place, and would dictate the same rule
of conduct. Severus considered the Roman empire as his property,
and had no sooner secured the possession, than he bestowed his
care on the cultivation and improvement of so valuable an
acquisition. Salutary laws, executed with inflexible firmness,
soon corrected most of the abuses with which, since the death of
Marcus, every part of the government had been infected. In the
administration of justice, the judgments of the emperor were
characterized by attention, discernment, and impartiality; and
whenever he deviated from the strict line of equity, it was
generally in favor of the poor and oppressed; not so much indeed
from any sense of humanity, as from the natural propensity of a
despot to humble the pride of greatness, and to sink all his
subjects to the same common level of absolute dependence. His
expensive taste for building, magnificent shows, and above all a
constant and liberal distribution of corn and provisions, were
the surest means of captivating the affection of the Roman
people. ^59 The misfortunes of civil discord were obliterated.
The clam of peace and prosperity was once more experienced in the
provinces; and many cities, restored by the munificence of
Severus, assumed the title of his colonies, and attested by
public monuments their gratitude and felicity. ^60 The fame of
the Roman arms was revived by that warlike and successful
emperor, ^61 and he boasted, with a just pride, that, having
received the empire oppressed with foreign and domestic wars, he
left it established in profound, universal, and honorable peace.
^62
[Footnote 59: Dion, l. lxxvi. p. 1272. Hist. August. p. 67.
Severus celebrated the secular games with extraordinary
magnificence, and he left in the public granaries a provision of
corn for seven years, at the rate of 75,000 modii, or about 2500
quarters per day. I am persuaded that the granaries of Severus
were supplied for a long term, but I am not less persuaded, that
policy on one hand, and admiration on the other, magnified the
hoard far beyond its true contents.]
[Footnote 60: See Spanheim's treatise of ancient medals, the
inscriptions, and our learned travellers Spon and Wheeler, Shaw,
Pocock, &c, who, in Africa, Greece, and Asia, have found more
monuments of Severus than of any other Roman emperor whatsoever.]
[Footnote 61: He carried his victorious arms to Seleucia and
Ctesiphon, the capitals of the Parthian monarchy. I shall have
occasion to mention this war in its proper place.]
[Footnote 62: Etiam in Britannis, was his own just and emphatic
expression Hist. August. 73.]
Although the wounds of civil war appeared completely healed,
its mortal poison still lurked in the vitals of the constitution.
Severus possessed a considerable share of vigor and ability; but
the daring soul of the first Caesar, or the deep policy of
Augustus, were scarcely equal to the task of curbing the
insolence of the victorious legions. By gratitude, by misguided
policy, by seeming necessity, Severus was reduced to relax the
nerves of discipline. ^63 The vanity of his soldiers was
flattered with the honor of wearing gold rings their ease was
indulged in the permission of living with their wives in the
idleness of quarters. He increased their pay beyond the example
of former times, and taught them to expect, and soon to claim,
extraordinary donatives on every public occasion of danger or
festivity. Elated by success, enervated by luxury, and raised
above the level of subjects by their dangerous privileges, ^64
they soon became incapable of military fatigue, oppressive to the
country, and impatient of a just subordination. Their officers
asserted the superiority of rank by a more profuse and elegant
luxury. There is still extant a letter of Severus, lamenting the
licentious stage of the army, ^* and exhorting one of his
generals to begin the necessary reformation from the tribunes
themselves; since, as he justly observes, the officer who has
forfeited the esteem, will never command the obedience, of his
soldiers. ^65 Had the emperor pursued the train of reflection, he
would have discovered, that the primary cause of this general
corruption might be ascribed, not indeed to the example, but to
the pernicious indulgence, however, of the commander-in-chief.
[Footnote 63: Herodian, l. iii. p. 115. Hist. August. p. 68.]
[Footnote 64: Upon the insolence and privileges of the soldier,
the 16th satire, falsely ascribed to Juvenal, may be consulted;
the style and circumstances of it would induce me to believe,
that it was composed under the reign of Severus, or that of his
son.]
[Footnote *: Not of the army, but of the troops in Gaul. The
contents of this letter seem to prove that Severus was really
anxious to restore discipline Herodian is the only historian who
accuses him of being the first cause of its relaxation. - G. from
W Spartian mentions his increase of the pays. - M.]
[Footnote 65: Hist. August. p. 73.]
The Praetorians, who murdered their emperor and sold the
empire, had received the just punishment of their treason; but
the necessary, though dangerous, institution of guards was soon
restored on a new model by Severus, and increased to four times
the ancient number. ^66 Formerly these troops had been recruited
in Italy; and as the adjacent provinces gradually imbibed the
softer manners of Rome, the levies were extended to Macedonia,
Noricum, and Spain. In the room of these elegant troops, better
adapted to the pomp of courts than to the uses of war, it was
established by Severus, that from all the legions of the
frontiers, the soldiers most distinguished for strength, valor,
and fidelity, should be occasionally draughted; and promoted, as
an honor and reward, into the more eligible service of the
guards. ^67 By this new institution, the Italian youth were
diverted from the exercise of arms, and the capital was terrified
by the strange aspect and manners of a multitude of barbarians.
But Severus flattered himself, that the legions would consider
these chosen Praetorians as the representatives of the whole
military order; and that the present aid of fifty thousand men,
superior in arms and appointments to any force that could be
brought into the field against them, would forever crush the
hopes of rebellion, and secure the empire to himself and his
posterity.
[Footnote 66: Herodian, l. iii. p. 131.]
[Footnote 67: Dion, l. lxxiv. p. 1243.]
The command of these favored and formidable troops soon
became the first office of the empire. As the government
degenerated into military despotism, the Praetorian Praefect, who
in his origin had been a simple captain of the guards, ^* was
placed not only at the head of the army, but of the finances, and
even of the law. In every department of administration, he
represented the person, and exercised the authority, of the
emperor. The first praefect who enjoyed and abused this immense
power was Plautianus, the favorite minister of Severus. His
reign lasted above then years, till the marriage of his daughter
with the eldest son of the emperor, which seemed to assure his
fortune, proved the occasion of his ruin. ^68 The animosities of
the palace, by irritating the ambition and alarming the fears of
Plautianus, ^* threatened to produce a revolution, and obliged
the emperor, who still loved him, to consent with reluctance to
his death. ^69 After the fall of Plautianus, an eminent lawyer,
the celebrated Papinian, was appointed to execute the motley
office of Praetorian Praefect.
[Footnote *: The Praetorian Praefect had never been a simple
captain of the guards; from the first creation of this office,
under Augustus, it possessed great power. That emperor,
therefore, decreed that there should be always two Praetorian
Praefects, who could only be taken from the equestrian order
Tiberius first departed from the former clause of this edict;
Alexander Severus violated the second by naming senators
praefects. It appears that it was under Commodus that the
Praetorian Praefects obtained the province of civil jurisdiction.
it extended only to Italy, with the exception of Rome and its
district, which was governed by the Praefectus urbi. As to the
control of the finances, and the levying of taxes, it was not
intrusted to them till after the great change that Constantine I.
made in the organization of the empire at least, I know no
passage which assigns it to them before that time; and
Drakenborch, who has treated this question in his Dissertation de
official praefectorum praetorio, vi., does not quote one. - W.]
[Footnote 68: One of his most daring and wanton acts of power,
was the castration of a hundred free Romans, some of them married
men, and even fathers of families; merely that his daughter, on
her marriage with the young emperor, might be attended by a train
of eunuchs worthy of an eastern queen. Dion, l. lxxvi. p. 1271.]
[Footnote *: Plautianus was compatriot, relative, and the old
friend, of Severus; he had so completely shut up all access to
the emperor, that the latter was ignorant how far he abused his
powers: at length, being informed of it, he began to limit his
authority. The marriage of Plautilla with Caracalla was
unfortunate; and the prince who had been forced to consent to it,
menaced the father and the daughter with death when he should
come to the throne. It was feared, after that, that Plautianus
would avail himself of the power which he still possessed,
against the Imperial family; and Severus caused him to be
assassinated in his presence, upon the pretext of a conspiracy,
which Dion considers fictitious. - W. This note is not, perhaps,
very necessary and does not contain the whole facts. Dion
considers the conspiracy the invention of Caracalla, by whose
command, almost by whose hand, Plautianus was slain in the
presence of Severus. - M.]
[Footnote 69: Dion, l. lxxvi. p. 1274. Herodian, l. iii. p. 122,
129. The grammarian of Alexander seems, as is not unusual, much
better acquainted with this mysterious transaction, and more
assured of the guilt of Plautianus than the Roman senator
ventures to be.]
Till the reign of Severus, the virtue and even the good
sense of the emperors had been distinguished by their zeal or
affected reverence for the senate, and by a tender regard to the
nice frame of civil policy instituted by Augustus. But the youth
of Severus had been trained in the implicit obedience of camps,
and his riper years spent in the despotism of military command.
His haughty and inflexible spirit cou' not discover, or would not
acknowledge, the advantage of preserving an intermediate power,
however imaginary, between the emperor and the army. He
disdained to profess himself the servant of an assembly that
detested his person and trembled at his frown; he issued his
commands, where his requests would have proved as effectual;
assumed the conduct and style of a sovereign and a conqueror, and
exercised, without disguise, the whole legislative, as well as
the executive power.
The victory over the senate was easy and inglorious. Every
eye and every passion were directed to the supreme magistrate,
who possessed the arms and treasure of the state; whilst the
senate, neither elected by the people, nor guarded by military
force, nor animated by public spirit, rested its declining
authority on the frail and crumbling basis of ancient opinion.
The fine theory of a republic insensibly vanished, and made way
for the more natural and substantial feelings of monarchy. As
the freedom and honors of Rome were successively communicated to
the provinces, in which the old government had been either
unknown, or was remembered with abhorrence, the tradition of
republican maxims was gradually obliterated. The Greek
historians of the age of the Antonines ^70 observe, with a
malicious pleasure, that although the sovereign of Rome, in
compliance with an obsolete prejudice, abstained from the name of
king, he possessed the full measure of regal power. In the reign
of Severus, the senate was filled with polished and eloquent
slaves from the eastern provinces, who justified personal
flattery by speculative principles of servitude. These new
advocates of prerogative were heard with pleasure by the court,
and with patience by the people, when they inculcated the duty of
passive obedience, and descanted on the inevitable mischiefs of
freedom. The lawyers and historians concurred in teaching, that
the Imperial authority was held, not by the delegated commission,
but by the irrevocable resignation of the senate; that the
emperor was freed from the restraint of civil laws, could command
by his arbitrary will the lives and fortunes of his subjects, and
might dispose of the empire as of his private patrimony. ^71 The
most eminent of the civil lawyers, and particularly Papinian,
Paulus, and Ulpian, flourished under the house of Severus; and
the Roman jurisprudence, having closely united itself with the
system of monarchy, was supposed to have attained its full
majority and perfection.
[Footnote 70: Appian in Prooem.]
[Footnote 71: Dion Cassius seems to have written with no other
view than to form these opinions into an historical system. The
Pandea's will how how assiduously the lawyers, on their side,
laboree in the cause of prerogative.]
The contemporaries of Severus in the enjoyment of the peace
and glory of his reign, forgave the cruelties by which it had
been introduced. Posterity, who experienced the fatal effects of
his maxims and example, justly considered him as the principal
author of the decline of the Roman empire.
Chapter VI: Death Of Severus, Tyranny Of Caracalla, Usurpation Of
Marcinus.
Part I.
The Death Of Severus. - Tyranny Of Caracalla. - Usurpation Of
Macrinus. - Follies Of Elagabalus. - Virtues Of Alexander
Severus. - Licentiousness Of The Army. - General State Of The
Roman Finances.
The ascent to greatness, however steep and dangerous, may
entertain an active spirit with the consciousness and exercise of
its own powers: but the possession of a throne could never yet
afford a lasting satisfaction to an ambitious mind. This
melancholy truth was felt and acknowledged by Severus. Fortune
and merit had, from an humble station, elevated him to the first
place among mankind. "He had been all things," as he said
himself, "and all was of little value" ^1 Distracted with the
care, not of acquiring, but of preserving an empire, oppressed
with age and infirmities, careless of fame, ^2 and satiated with
power, all his prospects of life were closed. The desire of
perpetuating the greatness of his family was the only remaining
wish of his ambition and paternal tenderness.
[Footnote 1: Hist. August. p. 71. "Omnia fui, et nihil
expedit."]
[Footnote 2: Dion Cassius, l. lxxvi. p. 1284.]
Like most of the Africans, Severus was passionately addicted
to the vain studies of magic and divination, deeply versed in the
interpretation of dreams and omens, and perfectly acquainted with
the science of judicial astrology; which, in almost every age
except the present, has maintained its dominion over the mind of
man. He had lost his first wife, while he was governor of the
Lionnese Gaul. ^3 In the choice of a second, he sought only to
connect himself with some favorite of fortune; and as soon as he
had discovered that the young lady of Emesa in Syria had a royal
nativity, he solicited and obtained her hand. ^4 Julia Domna (for
that was her name) deserved all that the stars could promise her.
She possessed, even in advanced age, the attractions of beauty,
^5 and united to a lively imagination a firmness of mind, and
strength of judgment, seldom bestowed on her sex. Her amiable
qualities never made any deep impression on the dark and jealous
temper of her husband; but in her son's reign, she administered
the principal affairs of the empire, with a prudence that
supported his authority, and with a moderation that sometimes
corrected his wild extravagancies. ^6 Julia applied herself to
letters and philosophy, with some success, and with the most
splendid reputation. She was the patroness of every art, and the
friend of every man of genius. ^7 The grateful flattery of the
learned has celebrated her virtues; but, if we may credit the
scandal of ancient history, chastity was very far from being the
most conspicuous virtue of the empress Julia. ^8
[Footnote 3: About the year 186. M. de Tillemont is miserably
embarrassed with a passage of Dion, in which the empress
Faustina, who died in the year 175, is introduced as having
contributed to the marriage of Severus and Julia, (l. lxxiv. p.
1243.) The learned compiler forgot that Dion is relating not a
real fact, but a dream of Severus; and dreams are circumscribed
to no limits of time or space. Did M. de Tillemont imagine that
marriages were consummated in the temple of Venus at Rome? Hist.
des Empereurs, tom. iii. p. 389. Note 6.]
[Footnote 4: Hist. August. p. 65.]
[Footnote 5: Hist. August. p. 5.]
[Footnote 6: Dion Cassius, l. lxxvii. p. 1304, 1314.]
[Footnote 7: See a dissertation of Menage, at the end of his
edition of Diogenes Laertius, de Foeminis Philosophis.]
[Footnote 8: Dion, l. lxxvi. p. 1285. Aurelius Victor.]
Two sons, Caracalla ^9 and Geta, were the fruit of this
marriage, and the destined heirs of the empire. The fond hopes
of the father, and of the Roman world, were soon disappointed by
these vain youths, who displayed the indolent security of
hereditary princes; and a presumption that fortune would supply
the place of merit and application. Without any emulation of
virtue or talents, they discovered, almost from their infancy, a
fixed and implacable antipathy for each other.
[Footnote 9: Bassianus was his first name, as it had been that of
his maternal grandfather. During his reign, he assumed the
appellation of Antoninus, which is employed by lawyers and
ancient historians. After his death, the public indignation
loaded him with the nicknames of Tarantus and Caracalla. The
first was borrowed from a celebrated Gladiator, the second from a
long Gallic gown which he distributed to the people of Rome.]
Their aversion, confirmed by years, and fomented by the arts
of their interested favorites, broke out in childish, and
gradually in more serious competitions; and, at length, divided
the theatre, the circus, and the court, into two factions,
actuated by the hopes and fears of their respective leaders. The
prudent emperor endeavored, by every expedient of advice and
authority, to allay this growing animosity. The unhappy discord
of his sons clouded all his prospects, and threatened to overturn
a throne raised with so much labor, cemented with so much blood,
and guarded with every defence of arms and treasure. With an
impartial hand he maintained between them an exact balance of
favor, conferred on both the rank of Augustus, with the revered
name of Antoninus; and for the first time the Roman world beheld
three emperors. ^10 Yet even this equal conduct served only to
inflame the contest, whilst the fierce Caracalla asserted the
right of primogeniture, and the milder Geta courted the
affections of the people and the soldiers. In the anguish of a
disappointed father, Severus foretold that the weaker of his sons
would fall a sacrifice to the stronger; who, in his turn, would
be ruined by his own vices. ^11
[Footnote 10: The elevation of Caracalla is fixed by the accurate
M. de Tillemont to the year 198; the association of Geta to the
year 208.]
[Footnote 11: Herodian, l. iii. p. 130. The lives of Caracalla
and Geta, in the Augustan History.]
In these circumstances the intelligence of a war in Britain,
and of an invasion of the province by the barbarians of the
North, was received with pleasure by Severus. Though the
vigilance of his lieutenants might have been sufficient to repel
the distant enemy, he resolved to embrace the honorable pretext
of withdrawing his sons from the luxury of Rome, which enervated
their minds and irritated their passions; and of inuring their
youth to the toils of war and government. Notwithstanding his
advanced age, (for he was above threescore,) and his gout, which
obliged him to be carried in a litter, he transported himself in
person into that remote island, attended by his two sons, his
whole court, and a formidable army. He immediately passed the
walls of Hadrian and Antoninus, and entered the enemy's country,
with a design of completing the long attempted conquest of
Britain. He penetrated to the northern extremity of the island,
without meeting an enemy. But the concealed ambuscades of the
Caledonians, who hung unseen on the rear and flanks of his army,
the coldness of the climate and the severity of a winter march
across the hills and morasses of Scotland, are reported to have
cost the Romans above fifty thousand men. The Caledonians at
length yielded to the powerful and obstinate attack, sued for
peace, and surrendered a part of their arms, and a large tract of
territory. But their apparent submission lasted no longer than
the present terror. As soon as the Roman legions had retired,
they resumed their hostile independence. Their restless spirit
provoked Severus to send a new army into Caledonia, with the most
bloody orders, not to subdue, but to extirpate the natives. They
were saved by the death of their haughty enemy. ^12
[Footnote 12: Dion, l. lxxvi. p. 1280, &c. Herodian, l. iii. p.
132, &c.]
This Caledonian war, neither marked by decisive events, nor
attended with any important consequences, would ill deserve our
attention; but it is supposed, not without a considerable degree
of probability, that the invasion of Severus is connected with
the most shining period of the British history or fable. Fingal,
whose fame, with that of his heroes and bards, has been revived
in our language by a recent publication, is said to have
commanded the Caledonians in that memorable juncture, to have
eluded the power of Severus, and to have obtained a signal
victory on the banks of the Carun, in which the son of the King
of the World, Caracul, fled from his arms along the fields of his
pride. ^13 Something of a doubtful mist still hangs over these
Highland traditions; nor can it be entirely dispelled by the most
ingenious researches of modern criticism; ^14 but if we could,
with safety, indulge the pleasing supposition, that Fingal lived,
and that Ossian sung, the striking contrast of the situation and
manners of the contending nations might amuse a philosophic mind.
The parallel would be little to the advantage of the more
civilized people, if we compared the unrelenting revenge of
Severus with the generous clemency of Fingal; the timid and
brutal cruelty of Caracalla with the bravery, the tenderness, the
elegant genius of Ossian; the mercenary chiefs, who, from motives
of fear or interest, served under the imperial standard, with the
free-born warriors who started to arms at the voice of the king
of Morven; if, in a word, we contemplated the untutored
Caledonians, glowing with the warm virtues of nature, and the
degenerate Romans, polluted with the mean vices of wealth and
slavery.
[Footnote 13: Ossian's Poems, vol. i. p. 175.]
[Footnote 14: That the Caracul of Ossian is the Caracalla of the
Roman History, is, perhaps, the only point of British antiquity
in which Mr. Macpherson and Mr. Whitaker are of the same opinion;
and yet the opinion is not without difficulty. In the Caledonian
war, the son of Severus was known only by the appellation of
Antoninus, and it may seem strange that the Highland bard should
describe him by a nickname, invented four years afterwards,
scarcely used by the Romans till after the death of that emperor,
and seldom employed by the most ancient historians. See Dion, l.
lxxvii. p. 1317. Hist. August. p. 89 Aurel. Victor. Euseb. in
Chron. ad ann. 214.
Note: The historical authority of Macpherson's Ossian has
not increased since Gibbon wrote. We may, indeed, consider it
exploded. Mr. Whitaker, in a letter to Gibbon (Misc. Works, vol.
ii. p. 100,) attempts, not very successfully, to weaken this
objection of the historian. - M.]
The declining health and last illness of Severus inflamed
the wild ambition and black passions of Caracalla's soul.
Impatient of any delay or division of empire, he attempted, more
than once, to shorten the small remainder of his father's days,
and endeavored, but without success, to excite a mutiny among the
troops. ^15 The old emperor had often censured the misguided
lenity of Marcus, who, by a single act of justice, might have
saved the Romans from the tyranny of his worthless son. Placed
in the same situation, he experienced how easily the rigor of a
judge dissolves away in the tenderness of a parent. He
deliberated, he threatened, but he could not punish; and this
last and only instance of mercy was more fatal to the empire than
a long series of cruelty. ^16 The disorder of his mind irritated
the pains of his body; he wished impatiently for death, and
hastened the instant of it by his impatience. He expired at York
in the sixty-fifth year of his life, and in the eighteenth of a
glorious and successful reign. In his last moments he
recommended concord to his sons, and his sons to the army. The
salutary advice never reached the heart, or even the
understanding, of the impetuous youths; but the more obedient
troops, mindful of their oath of allegiance, and of the authority
of their deceased master, resisted the solicitations of
Caracalla, and proclaimed both brothers emperors of Rome. The new
princes soon left the Caledonians in peace, returned to the
capital, celebrated their father's funeral with divine honors,
and were cheerfully acknowledged as lawful sovereigns, by the
senate, the people, and the provinces. Some preeminence of rank
seems to have been allowed to the elder brother; but they both
administered the empire with equal and independent power. ^17
[Footnote 15: Dion, l. lxxvi. p. 1282. Hist. August. p. 71.
Aurel. Victor.]
[Footnote 16: Dion, l. lxxvi. p. 1283. Hist. August. p. 89]
[Footnote 17: Dion, l. lxxvi. p. 1284. Herodian, l. iii. p.
135.]
Such a divided form of government would have proved a source
of discord between the most affectionate brothers. It was
impossible that it could long subsist between two implacable
enemies, who neither desired nor could trust a reconciliation.
It was visible that one only could reign, and that the other must
fall; and each of them, judging of his rival's designs by his
own, guarded his life with the most jealous vigilance from the
repeated attacks of poison or the sword. Their rapid journey
through Gaul and Italy, during which they never ate at the same
table, or slept in the same house, displayed to the provinces the
odious spectacle of fraternal discord. On their arrival at Rome,
they immediately divided the vast extent of the imperial palace.
^18 No communication was allowed between their apartments; the
doors and passages were diligently fortified, and guards posted
and relieved with the same strictness as in a besieged place.
The emperors met only in public, in the presence of their
afflicted mother; and each surrounded by a numerous train of
armed followers. Even on these occasions of ceremony, the
dissimulation of courts could ill disguise the rancor of their
hearts. ^19
[Footnote 18: Mr. Hume is justly surprised at a passage of
Herodian, (l. iv. p. 139,) who, on this occasion, represents the
Imperial palace as equal in extent to the rest of Rome. The
whole region of the Palatine Mount, on which it was built,
occupied, at most, a circumference of eleven or twelve thousand
feet, (see the Notitia and Victor, in Nardini's Roma Antica.) But
we should recollect that the opulent senators had almost
surrounded the city with their extensive gardens and suburb
palaces, the greatest part of which had been gradually
confiscated by the emperors. If Geta resided in the gardens that
bore his name on the Janiculum, and if Caracalla inhabited the
gardens of Maecenas on the Esquiline, the rival brothers were
separated from each other by the distance of several miles; and
yet the intermediate space was filled by the Imperial gardens of
Sallust, of Lucullus, of Agrippa, of Domitian, of Caius, &c., all
skirting round the city, and all connected with each other, and
with the palace, by bridges thrown over the Tiber and the
streets. But this explanation of Herodian would require, though
it ill deserves, a particular dissertation, illustrated by a map
of ancient Rome. (Hume, Essay on Populousness of Ancient
Nations. - M.)]
[Footnote 19: Herodian, l. iv. p. 139]
This latent civil war already distracted the whole
government, when a scheme was suggested that seemed of mutual
benefit to the hostile brothers. It was proposed, that since it
was impossible to reconcile their minds, they should separate
their interest, and divide the empire between them. The
conditions of the treaty were already drawn with some accuracy.
It was agreed that Caracalla, as the elder brother should remain
in possession of Europe and the western Africa; and that he
should relinquish the sovereignty of Asia and Egypt to Geta, who
might fix his residence at Alexandria or Antioch, cities little
inferior to Rome itself in wealth and greatness; that numerous
armies should be constantly encamped on either side of the
Thracian Bosphorus, to guard the frontiers of the rival
monarchies; and that the senators of European extraction should
acknowledge the sovereign of Rome, whilst the natives of Asia
followed the emperor of the East. The tears of the empress Julia
interrupted the negotiation, the first idea of which had filled
every Roman breast with surprise and indignation. The mighty
mass of conquest was so intimately united by the hand of time and
policy, that it required the most forcible violence to rend it
asunder. The Romans had reason to dread, that the disjointed
members would soon be reduced by a civil war under the dominion
of one master; but if the separation was permanent, the division
of the provinces must terminate in the dissolution of an empire
whose unity had hitherto remained inviolate. ^20
[Footnote 20: Herodian, l. iv. p. 144.]
Had the treaty been carried into execution, the sovereign of
Europe might soon have been the conqueror of Asia; but Caracalla
obtained an easier, though a more guilty, victory. He artfully
listened to his mother's entreaties, and consented to meet his
brother in her apartment, on terms of peace and reconciliation.
In the midst of their conversation, some centurions, who had
contrived to conceal themselves, rushed with drawn swords upon
the unfortunate Geta. His distracted mother strove to protect
him in her arms; but, in the unavailing struggle, she was wounded
in the hand, and covered with the blood of her younger son, while
she saw the elder animating and assisting ^21 the fury of the
assassins. As soon as the deed was perpetrated, Caracalla, with
hasty steps, and horror in his countenance, ran towards the
Praetorian camp, as his only refuge, and threw himself on the
ground before the statues of the tutelar deities. ^22 The
soldiers attempted to raise and comfort him. In broken and
disordered words he informed them of his imminent danger, and
fortunate escape; insinuating that he had prevented the designs
of his enemy, and declared his resolution to live and die with
his faithful troops. Geta had been the favorite of the soldiers;
but complaint was useless, revenge was dangerous, and they still
reverenced the son of Severus. Their discontent died away in
idle murmurs, and Caracalla soon convinced them of the justice of
his cause, by distributing in one lavish donative the accumulated
treasures of his father's reign. ^23 The real sentiments of the
soldiers alone were of importance to his power or safety. Their
declaration in his favor commanded the dutiful professions of the
senate. The obsequious assembly was always prepared to ratify
the decision of fortune; ^* but as Caracalla wished to assuage
the first emotions of public indignation, the name of Geta was
mentioned with decency, and he received the funeral honors of a
Roman emperor. ^24 Posterity, in pity to his misfortune, has cast
a veil over his vices. We consider that young prince as the
innocent victim of his brother's ambition, without recollecting
that he himself wanted power, rather than inclination, to
consummate the same attempts of revenge and murder. ^!
[Footnote 21: Caracalla consecrated, in the temple of Serapis,
the sword with which, as he boasted, he had slain his brother
Geta. Dion, l. lxxvii p. 1307.]
[Footnote 22: Herodian, l. iv. p. 147. In every Roman camp there
was a small chapel near the head-quarters, in which the statues
of the tutelar deities were preserved and adored; and we may
remark that the eagles, and other military ensigns, were in the
first rank of these deities; an excellent institution, which
confirmed discipline by the sanction of religion. See Lipsius de
Militia Romana, iv. 5, v. 2.]
[Footnote 23: Herodian, l. iv. p. 148. Dion, l. lxxvii. p.
1289.]
[Footnote *: The account of this transaction, in a new passage of
Dion, varies in some degree from this statement. It adds that
the next morning, in the senate, Antoninus requested their
indulgence, not because he had killed his brother, but because he
was hoarse, and could not address them. Mai. Fragm. p. 228. -
M.]
[Footnote 24: Geta was placed among the gods. Sit divus, dum non
sit vivus said his brother. Hist. August. p. 91. Some marks of
Geta's consecration are still found upon medals.]
[Footnote !: The favorable judgment which history has given of
Geta is not founded solely on a feeling of pity; it is supported
by the testimony of contemporary historians: he was too fond of
the pleasures of the table, and showed great mistrust of his
brother; but he was humane, well instructed; he often endeavored
to mitigate the rigorous decrees of Severus and Caracalla. Herod
iv. 3. Spartian in Geta. - W.]
The crime went not unpunished. Neither business, nor
pleasure, nor flattery, could defend Caracalla from the stings of
a guilty conscience; and he confessed, in the anguish of a
tortured mind, that his disordered fancy often beheld the angry
forms of his father and his brother rising into life, to threaten
and upbraid him. ^25 The consciousness of his crime should have
induced him to convince mankind, by the virtues of his reign,
that the bloody deed had been the involuntary effect of fatal
necessity. But the repentance of Caracalla only prompted him to
remove from the world whatever could remind him of his guilt, or
recall the memory of his murdered brother. On his return from
the senate to the palace, he found his mother in the company of
several noble matrons, weeping over the untimely fate of her
younger son. The jealous emperor threatened them with instant
death; the sentence was executed against Fadilla, the last
remaining daughter of the emperor Marcus; ^* and even the
afflicted Julia was obliged to silence her lamentations, to
suppress her sighs, and to receive the assassin with smiles of
joy and approbation. It was computed that, under the vague
appellation of the friends of Geta, above twenty thousand persons
of both sexes suffered death. His guards and freedmen, the
ministers of his serious business, and the companions of his
looser hours, those who by his interest had been promoted to any
commands in the army or provinces, with the long connected chain
of their dependants, were included in the proscription; which
endeavored to reach every one who had maintained the smallest
correspondence with Geta, who lamented his death, or who even
mentioned his name. ^26 Helvius Pertinax, son to the prince of
that name, lost his life by an unseasonable witticism. ^27 It was
a sufficient crime of Thrasea Priscus to be descended from a
family in which the love of liberty seemed an hereditary quality.
^28 The particular causes of calumny and suspicion were at length
exhausted; and when a senator was accused of being a secret enemy
to the government, the emperor was satisfied with the general
proof that he was a man of property and virtue. From this
well-grounded principle he frequently drew the most bloody
inferences. ^!
[Footnote 25: Dion, l. lxxvii. p. 1307]
[Footnote *: The most valuable paragraph of dion, which the
industry of M. Manas recovered, relates to this daughter of
Marcus, executed by Caracalla. Her name, as appears from Fronto,
as well as from Dion, was Cornificia. When commanded to choose
the kind of death she was to suffer, she burst into womanish
tears; but remembering her father Marcus, she thus spoke: - "O my
hapless soul, (... animula,) now imprisoned in the body, burst
forth! be free! show them, however reluctant to believe it, that
thou art the daughter of Marcus." She then laid aside all her
ornaments, and preparing herself for death, ordered her veins to
be opened. Mai. Fragm. Vatican ii p. 220. - M.]
[Footnote 26: Dion, l. lxxvii. p. 1290. Herodian, l. iv. p. 150.
Dion (p. 2298) says, that the comic poets no longer durst employ
the name of Geta in their plays, and that the estates of those
who mentioned it in their testaments were confiscated.]
[Footnote 27: Caracalla had assumed the names of several
conquered nations; Pertinax observed, that the name of Geticus
(he had obtained some advantage over the Goths, or Getae) would
be a proper addition to Parthieus, Alemannicus, &c. Hist.
August. p. 89.]
[Footnote 28: Dion, l. lxxvii. p. 1291. He was probably
descended from Helvidius Priscus, and Thrasea Paetus, those
patriots, whose firm, but useless and unseasonable, virtue has
been immortalized by Tacitus.
Note: M. Guizot is indignant at this "cold" observation of
Gibbon on the noble character of Thrasea; but he admits that his
virtue was useless to the public, and unseasonable amidst the
vices of his age. - M.]
[Footnote !: Caracalla reproached all those who demanded no
favors of him. "It is clear that if you make me no requests, you
do not trust me; if you do not trust me, you suspect me; if you
suspect me, you fear me; if you fear me, you hate me." And
forthwith he condemned them as conspirators, a good specimen of
the sorites in a tyrant's logic. See Fragm. Vatican p. - M.]
Chapter VI: Death Of Severus, Tyranny Of Caracalla, Usurpation Of
Marcinus.
Part II.
The execution of so many innocent citizens was bewailed by
the secret tears of their friends and families. The death of
Papinian, the Praetorian Praefect, was lamented as a public
calamity. ^!! During the last seven years of Severus, he had
exercised the most important offices of the state, and, by his
salutary influence, guided the emperor's steps in the paths of
justice and moderation. In full assurance of his virtue and
abilities, Severus, on his death-bed, had conjured him to watch
over the prosperity and union of the Imperial family. ^29 The
honest labors of Papinian served only to inflame the hatred which
Caracalla had already conceived against his father's minister.
After the murder of Geta, the Praefect was commanded to exert the
powers of his skill and eloquence in a studied apology for that
atrocious deed. The philosophic Seneca had condescended to
compose a similar epistle to the senate, in the name of the son
and assassin of Agrippina. ^30 "That it was easier to commit than
to justify a parricide," was the glorious reply of Papinian; ^31
who did not hesitate between the loss of life and that of honor.
Such intrepid virtue, which had escaped pure and unsullied from
the intrigues courts, the habits of business, and the arts of his
profession, reflects more lustre on the memory of Papinian, than
all his great employments, his numerous writings, and the
superior reputation as a lawyer, which he has preserved through
every age of the Roman jurisprudence. ^32
[Footnote !!: Papinian was no longer Praetorian Praefect.
Caracalla had deprived him of that office immediately after the
death of Severus. Such is the statement of Dion; and the
testimony of Spartian, who gives Papinian the Praetorian
praefecture till his death, is of little weight opposed to that
of a senator then living at Rome. - W.]
[Footnote 29: It is said that Papinian was himself a relation of
the empress Julia.]
[Footnote 30: Tacit. Annal. xiv. 2.]
[Footnote 31: Hist. August. p. 88.]
[Footnote 32: With regard to Papinian, see Heineccius's Historia
Juris Roma ni, l. 330, &c.]
It had hitherto been the peculiar felicity of the Romans,
and in the worst of times the consolation, that the virtue of the
emperors was active, and their vice indolent. Augustus, Trajan,
Hadrian, and Marcus visited their extensive dominions in person,
and their progress was marked by acts of wisdom and beneficence.
The tyranny of Tiberius, Nero, and Domitian, who resided almost
constantly at Rome, or in the adjacent was confined to the
senatorial and equestrian orders. ^33 But Caracalla was the
common enemy of mankind. He left capital (and he never returned
to it) about a year after the murder of Geta. The rest of his
reign was spent in the several provinces of the empire,
particularly those of the East, and province was by turns the
scene of his rapine and cruelty. The senators, compelled by fear
to attend his capricious motions,were obliged to provide daily
entertainments at an immense expense, which he abandoned with
contempt to his guards; and to erect, in every city, magnificent
palaces and theatres, which he either disdained to visit, or
ordered immediately thrown down. The most wealthy families
ruined by partial fines and confiscations, and the great body of
his subjects oppressed by ingenious and aggravated taxes. ^34 In
the midst of peace, and upon the slightest provocation, he issued
his commands, at Alexandria, in Egypt for a general massacre.
From a secure post in the temple of Serapis, he viewed and
directed the slaughter of many thousand citizens, as well as
strangers, without distinguishing the number or the crime of the
sufferers; since as he coolly informed the senate, all the
Alexandrians, those who perished, and those who had escaped, were
alike guilty. ^35
[Footnote 33: Tiberius and Domitian never moved from the
neighborhood of Rome. Nero made a short journey into Greece.
"Et laudatorum Principum usus ex aequo, quamvis procul agentibus.
Saevi proximis ingruunt." Tacit. Hist. iv. 74.]
[Footnote 34: Dion, l. lxxvii. p. 1294.]
[Footnote 35: Dion, l. lxxvii. p. 1307. Herodian, l. iv. p. 158.
The former represents it as a cruel massacre, the latter as a
perfidious one too. It seems probable that the Alexandrians has
irritated the tyrant by their railleries, and perhaps by their
tumults.
Note: After these massacres, Caracalla also deprived the
Alexandrians of their spectacles and public feasts; he divided
the city into two parts by a wall with towers at intervals, to
prevent the peaceful communications of the citizens. Thus was
treated the unhappy Alexandria, says Dion, by the savage beast of
Ausonia. This, in fact, was the epithet which the oracle had
applied to him; it is said, indeed, that he was much pleased with
the name and often boasted of it. Dion, lxxvii. p. 1307. - G.]
The wise instructions of Severus never made any lasting
impression on the mind of his son, who, although not destitute of
imagination and eloquence, was equally devoid of judgment and
humanity. ^36 One dangerous maxim, worthy of a tyrant, was
remembered and abused by Caracalla. "To secure the affections of
the army, and to esteem the rest of his subjects as of little
moment." ^37 But the liberality of the father had been restrained
by prudence, and his indulgence to the troops was tempered by
firmness and authority. The careless profusion of the son was
the policy of one reign, and the inevitable ruin both of the army
and of the empire. The vigor of the soldiers, instead of being
confirmed by the severe discipline of camps, melted away in the
luxury of cities. The excessive increase of their pay and
donatives ^38 exhausted the state to enrich the military order,
whose modesty in peace, and service in war, is best secured by an
honorable poverty. The demeanor of Caracalla was haughty and
full of pride; but with the troops he forgot even the proper
dignity of his rank, encouraged their insolent familiarity, and,
neglecting the essential duties of a general, affected to imitate
the dress and manners of a common soldier.
[Footnote 36: Dion, l. lxxvii. p. 1296.]
[Footnote 37: Dion, l. lxxvi. p. 1284. Mr. Wotton (Hist. of
Rome, p. 330) suspects that this maxim was invented by Caracalla
himself, and attributed to his father.]
[Footnote 38: Dion (l. lxxviii. p. 1343) informs us that the
extraordinary gifts of Caracalla to the army amounted annually to
seventy millions of drachmae (about two millions three hundred
and fifty thousand pounds.) There is another passage in Dion,
concerning the military pay, infinitely curious, were it not
obscure, imperfect, and probably corrupt. The best sense seems
to be, that the Praetorian guards received twelve hundred and
fifty drachmae, (forty pounds a year,) (Dion, l. lxxvii. p.
1307.) Under the reign of Augustus, they were paid at the rate of
two drachmae, or denarii, per day, 720 a year, (Tacit. Annal. i.
17.) Domitian, who increased the soldiers' pay one fourth, must
have raised the Praetorians to 960 drachmae, (Gronoviue de
Pecunia Veteri, l. iii. c. 2.) These successive augmentations
ruined the empire; for, with the soldiers' pay, their numbers too
were increased. We have seen the Praetorians alone increased
from 10,000 to 50,000 men.
Note: Valois and Reimar have explained in a very simple and
probable manner this passage of Dion, which Gibbon seems to me
not to have understood. He ordered that the soldiers should
receive, as the reward of their services the Praetorians 1250
drachms, the other 5000 drachms. Valois thinks that the numbers
have been transposed, and that Caracalla added 5000 drachms to
the donations made to the Praetorians, 1250 to those of the
legionaries. The Praetorians, in fact, always received more than
the others. The error of Gibbon arose from his considering that
this referred to the annual pay of the soldiers, while it relates
to the sum they received as a reward for their services on their
discharge: donatives means recompense for service. Augustus had
settled that the Praetorians, after sixteen campaigns, should
receive 5000 drachms: the legionaries received only 3000 after
twenty years. Caracalla added 5000 drachms to the donative of
the Praetorians, 1250 to that of the legionaries. Gibbon appears
to have been mistaken both in confounding this donative on
discharge with the annual pay, and in not paying attention to the
remark of Valois on the transposition of the numbers in the text.
- G]
It was impossible that such a character, and such conduct as
that of Caracalla, could inspire either love or esteem; but as
long as his vices were beneficial to the armies, he was secure
from the danger of rebellion. A secret conspiracy, provoked by
his own jealousy, was fatal to the tyrant. The Praetorian
praefecture was divided between two ministers. The military
department was intrusted to Adventus, an experienced rather than
able soldier; and the civil affairs were transacted by Opilius
Macrinus, who, by his dexterity in business, had raised himself,
with a fair character, to that high office. But his favor varied
with the caprice of the emperor, and his life might depend on the
slightest suspicion, or the most casual circumstance. Malice or
fanaticism had suggested to an African, deeply skilled in the
knowledge of futurity, a very dangerous prediction, that Macrinus
and his son were destined to reign over the empire. The report
was soon diffused through the province; and when the man was sent
in chains to Rome, he still asserted, in the presence of the
praefect of the city, the faith of his prophecy. That
magistrate, who had received the most pressing instructions to
inform himself of the successors of Caracalla, immediately
communicated the examination of the African to the Imperial
court, which at that time resided in Syria. But, notwithstanding
the diligence of the public messengers, a friend of Macrinus
found means to apprise him of the approaching danger. The
emperor received the letters from Rome; and as he was then
engaged in the conduct of a chariot race, he delivered them
unopened to the Praetorian Praefect, directing him to despatch
the ordinary affairs, and to report the more important business
that might be contained in them. Macrinus read his fate, and
resolved to prevent it. He inflamed the discontents of some
inferior officers, and employed the hand of Martialis, a
desperate soldier, who had been refused the rank of centurion.
The devotion of Caracalla prompted him to make a pilgrimage from
Edessa to the celebrated temple of the Moon at Carrhae. ^* He was
attended by a body of cavalry: but having stopped on the road for
some necessary occasion, his guards preserved a respectful
distance, and Martialis, approaching his person under a presence
of duty, stabbed him with a dagger. The bold assassin was
instantly killed by a Scythian archer of the Imperial guard.
Such was the end of a monster whose life disgraced human nature,
and whose reign accused the patience of the Romans. ^39 The
grateful soldiers forgot his vices, remembered only his partial
liberality, and obliged the senate to prostitute their own
dignity and that of religion, by granting him a place among the
gods. Whilst he was upon earth, Alexander the Great was the only
hero whom this god deemed worthy his admiration. He assumed the
name and ensigns of Alexander, formed a Macedonian phalanx of
guards, persecuted the disciples of Aristotle, and displayed,
with a puerile enthusiasm, the only sentiment by which he
discovered any regard for virtue or glory. We can easily
conceive, that after the battle of Narva, and the conquest of
Poland, Charles XII. (though he still wanted the more elegant
accomplishments of the son of Philip) might boast of having
rivalled his valor and magnanimity; but in no one action of his
life did Caracalla express the faintest resemblance of the
Macedonian hero, except in the murder of a great number of his
own and of his father's friends. ^40
[Footnote *: Carrhae, now Harran, between Edessan and Nisibis,
famous for the defeat of Crassus - the Haran from whence Abraham
set out for the land of Canaan. This city has always been
remarkable for its attachment to Sabaism - G]
[Footnote 39: Dion, l. lxxviii. p. 1312. Herodian, l. iv. p.
168.]
[Footnote 40: The fondness of Caracalla for the name and ensigns
of Alexander is still preserved on the medals of that emperor.
See Spanheim, de Usu Numismatum, Dissertat. xii. Herodian (l.
iv. p. 154) had seen very ridiculous pictures, in which a figure
was drawn with one side of the face like Alexander, and the other
like Caracalla.]
After the extinction of the house of Severus, the Roman
world remained three days without a master. The choice of the
army (for the authority of a distant and feeble senate was little
regarded) hung in anxious suspense, as no candidate presented
himself whose distinguished birth and merit could engage their
attachment and unite their suffrages. The decisive weight of the
Praetorian guards elevated the hopes of their praefects, and
these powerful ministers began to assert their legal claim to
fill the vacancy of the Imperial throne. Adventus, however, the
senior praefect, conscious of his age and infirmities, of his
small reputation, and his smaller abilities, resigned the
dangerous honor to the crafty ambition of his colleague Macrinus,
whose well-dissembled grief removed all suspicion of his being
accessary to his master's death. ^41 The troops neither loved nor
esteemed his character. They cast their eyes around in search of
a competitor, and at last yielded with reluctance to his promises
of unbounded liberality and indulgence. A short time after his
accession, he conferred on his son Diadumenianus, at the age of
only ten years, the Imperial title, and the popular name of
Antoninus. The beautiful figure of the youth, assisted by an
additional donative, for which the ceremony furnished a pretext,
might attract, it was hoped, the favor of the army, and secure
the doubtful throne of Macrinus.
[Footnote 41: Herodian, l. iv. p. 169. Hist. August. p. 94.]
The authority of the new sovereign had been ratified by the
cheerful submission of the senate and provinces. They exulted in
their unexpected deliverance from a hated tyrant, and it seemed
of little consequence to examine into the virtues of the
successor of Caracalla. But as soon as the first transports of
joy and surprise had subsided, they began to scrutinize the
merits of Macrinus with a critical severity, and to arraign the
nasty choice of the army. It had hitherto been considered as a
fundamental maxim of the constitution, that the emperor must be
always chosen in the senate, and the sovereign power, no longer
exercised by the whole body, was always delegated to one of its
members. But Macrinus was not a senator. ^42 The sudden
elevation of the Praetorian praefects betrayed the meanness of
their origin; and the equestrian order was still in possession of
that great office, which commanded with arbitrary sway the lives
and fortunes of the senate. A murmur of indignation was heard,
that a man, whose obscure ^43 extraction had never been
illustrated by any signal service, should dare to invest himself
with the purple, instead of bestowing it on some distinguished
senator, equal in birth and dignity to the splendor of the
Imperial station. As soon as the character of Macrinus was
surveyed by the sharp eye of discontent, some vices, and many
defects, were easily discovered. The choice of his ministers was
in many instances justly censured, and the dissastified
dissatisfied people, with their usual candor, accused at once his
indolent tameness and his excessive severity. ^44
[Footnote 42: Dion, l. lxxxviii. p. 1350. Elagabalus reproached
his predecessor with daring to seat himself on the throne;
though, as Praetorian praefect, he could not have been admitted
into the senate after the voice of the crier had cleared the
house. The personal favor of Plautianus and Sejanus had broke
through the established rule. They rose, indeed, from the
equestrian order; but they preserved the praefecture, with the
rank of senator and even with the annulship.]
[Footnote 43: He was a native of Caesarea, in Numidia, and began
his fortune by serving in the household of Plautian, from whose
ruin he narrowly escaped. His enemies asserted that he was born a
slave, and had exercised, among other infamous professions, that
of Gladiator. The fashion of aspersing the birth and condition
of an adversary seems to have lasted from the time of the Greek
orators to the learned grammarians of the last age.]
[Footnote 44: Both Dion and Herodian speak of the virtues and
vices of Macrinus with candor and impartiality; but the author of
his life, in the Augustan History, seems to have implicitly
copied some of the venal writers, employed by Elagabalus, to
blacken the memory of his predecessor.]
His rash ambition had climbed a height where it was
difficult to stand with firmness, and impossible to fall without
instant destruction. Trained in the arts of courts and the forms
of civil business, he trembled in the presence of the fierce and
undisciplined multitude, over whom he had assumed the command;
his military talents were despised, and his personal courage
suspected; a whisper that circulated in the camp, disclosed the
fatal secret of the conspiracy against the late emperor,
aggravated the guilt of murder by the baseness of hypocrisy, and
heightened contempt by detestation. To alienate the soldiers,
and to provoke inevitable ruin, the character of a reformer was
only wanting; and such was the peculiar hardship of his fate,
that Macrinus was compelled to exercise that invidious office.
The prodigality of Caracalla had left behind it a long train of
ruin and disorder; and if that worthless tyrant had been capable
of reflecting on the sure consequences of his own conduct, he
would perhaps have enjoyed the dark prospect of the distress and
calamities which he bequeathed to his successors.
In the management of this necessary reformation, Macrinus
proceeded with a cautious prudence, which would have restored
health and vigor to the Roman army in an easy and almost
imperceptible manner. To the soldiers already engaged in the
service, he was constrained to leave the dangerous privileges and
extravagant pay given by Caracalla; but the new recruits were
received on the more moderate though liberal establishment of
Severus, and gradually formed to modesty and obedience. ^45 One
fatal error destroyed the salutary effects of this judicious
plan. The numerous army, assembled in the East by the late
emperor, instead of being immediately dispersed by Macrinus
through the several provinces, was suffered to remain united in
Syria, during the winter that followed his elevation. In the
luxurious idleness of their quarters, the troops viewed their
strength and numbers, communicated their complaints, and revolved
in their minds the advantages of another revolution. The
veterans, instead of being flattered by the advantageous
distinction, were alarmed by the first steps of the emperor,
which they considered as the presage of his future intentions.
The recruits, with sullen reluctance, entered on a service, whose
labors were increased while its rewards were diminished by a
covetous and unwarlike sovereign. The murmurs of the army
swelled with impunity into seditious clamors; and the partial
mutinies betrayed a spirit of discontent and disaffection that
waited only for the slightest occasion to break out on every side
into a general rebellion. To minds thus disposed, the occasion
soon presented itself.
[Footnote 45: Dion, l. lxxxiii. p. 1336. The sense of the author
is as the intention of the emperor; but Mr. Wotton has mistaken
both, by understanding the distinction, not of veterans and
recruits, but of old and new legions. History of Rome, p. 347.]
The empress Julia had experienced all the vicissitudes of
fortune. From an humble station she had been raised to
greatness, only to taste the superior bitterness of an exalted
rank. She was doomed to weep over the death of one of her sons,
and over the life of the other. The cruel fate of Caracalla,
though her good sense must have long taught' er to expect it,
awakened the feelings of a mother and of an empress.
Notwithstanding the respectful civility expressed by the usurper
towards the widow of Severus, she descended with a painful
struggle into the condition of a subject, and soon withdrew
herself, by a voluntary death, from the anxious and humiliating
dependence. ^46 ^* Julia Maesa, her sister, was ordered to leave
the court and Antioch. She retired to Emesa with an immense
fortune, the fruit of twenty years' favor accompanied by her two
daughters, Soaemias and Mamae, each of whom was a widow, and each
had an only son. Bassianus, ^! for that was the name of the son
of Soaemias, was consecrated to the honorable ministry of high
priest of the Sun; and this holy vocation, embraced either from
prudence or superstition, contributed to raise the Syrian youth
to the empire of Rome. A numerous body of troops was stationed
at Emesa; and as the severe discipline of Macrinus had
constrained them to pass the winter encamped, they were eager to
revenge the cruelty of such unaccustomed hardships. The
soldiers, who resorted in crowds to the temple of the Sun, beheld
with veneration and delight the elegant dress and figure of the
young pontiff; they recognized, or they thought that they
recognized, the features of Caracalla, whose memory they now
adored. The artful Maesa saw and cherished their rising
partiality, and readily sacrificing her daughter's reputation to
the fortune of her grandson, she insinuated that Bassianus was
the natural son of their murdered sovereign. The sums
distributed by her emissaries with a lavish hand silenced every
objection, and the profusion sufficiently proved the affinity, or
at least the resemblance, of Bassianus with the great original.
The young Antoninus (for he had assumed and polluted that
respectable name) was declared emperor by the troops of Emesa,
asserted his hereditary right, and called aloud on the armies to
follow the standard of a young and liberal prince, who had taken
up arms to revenge his father's death and the oppression of the
military order. ^47
[Footnote 46: Dion, l. lxxviii. p. 1330. The abridgment of
Xiphilin, though less particular, is in this place clearer than
the original.]
[Footnote *: As soon as this princess heard of the death of
Caracalla, she wished to starve herself to death: the respect
shown to her by Macrinus, in making no change in her attendants
or her court, induced her to prolong her life. But it appears,
as far as the mutilated text of Dion and the imperfect epitome of
Xiphilin permit us to judge, that she conceived projects of
ambition, and endeavored to raise herself to the empire. She
wished to tread in the steps of Semiramis and Nitocris, whose
country bordered on her own. Macrinus sent her an order
immediately to leave Antioch, and to retire wherever she chose.
She returned to her former purpose, and starved herself to death.
- G.]
[Footnote !: He inherited this name from his great-grandfather of
the mother's side, Bassianus, father of Julia Maesa, his
grandmother, and of Julia Domna, wife of Severus. Victor (in his
epitome) is perhaps the only historian who has given the key to
this genealogy, when speaking of Caracalla. His Bassianus ex avi
materni nomine dictus. Caracalla, Elagabalus, and Alexander
Seyerus, bore successively this name. - G.]
[Footnote 47: According to Lampridius, (Hist. August. p. 135,)
Alexander Severus lived twenty-nine years three months and seven
days. As he was killed March 19, 235, he was born December 12,
205 and was consequently about this time thirteen years old, as
his elder cousin might be about seventeen. This computation suits
much better the history of the young princes than that of
Herodian, (l. v. p. 181,) who represents them as three years
younger; whilst, by an opposite error of chronology, he lengthens
the reign of Elagabalus two years beyond its real duration. For
the particulars of the conspiracy, see Dion, l. lxxviii. p. 1339.
Herodian, l. v. p. 184.]
Whilst a conspiracy of women and eunuchs was concerted with
prudence, and conducted with rapid vigor, Macrinus, who, by a
decisive motion, might have crushed his infant enemy, floated
between the opposite extremes of terror and security, which alike
fixed him inactive at Antioch. A spirit of rebellion diffused
itself through all the camps and garrisons of Syria, successive
detachments murdered their officers, ^48 and joined the party of
the rebels; and the tardy restitution of military pay and
privileges was imputed to the acknowledged weakness of Macrinus.
At length he marched out of Antioch, to meet the increasing and
zealous army of the young pretender. His own troops seemed to
take the field with faintness and reluctance; but, in the heat of
the battle, ^49 the Praetorian guards, almost by an involuntary
impulse, asserted the superiority of their valor and discipline.
The rebel ranks were broken; when the mother and grandmother of
the Syrian prince, who, according to their eastern custom, had
attended the army, threw themselves from their covered chariots,
and, by exciting the compassion of the soldiers, endeavored to
animate their drooping courage. Antoninus himself, who, in the
rest of his life, never acted like a man, in this important
crisis of his fate, approved himself a hero, mounted his horse,
and, at the head of his rallied troops, charged sword in hand
among the thickest of the enemy; whilst the eunuch Gannys, ^*
whose occupations had been confined to female cares and the soft
luxury of Asia, displayed the talents of an able and experienced
general. The battle still raged with doubtful violence, and
Macrinus might have obtained the victory, had he not betrayed his
own cause by a shameful and precipitate flight. His cowardice
served only to protract his life a few days, and to stamp
deserved ignominy on his misfortunes. It is scarcely necessary
to add, that his son Diadumenianus was involved in the same fate.
As soon as the stubborn Praetorians could be convinced that they
fought for a prince who had basely deserted them, they
surrendered to the conqueror: the contending parties of the Roman
army, mingling tears of joy and tenderness, united under the
banners of the imagined son of Caracalla, and the East
acknowledged with pleasure the first emperor of Asiatic
extraction.
[Footnote 48: By a most dangerous proclamation of the pretended
Antoninus, every soldier who brought in his officer's head became
entitled to his private estate, as well as to his military
commission.]
[Footnote 49: Dion, l. lxxviii. p. 1345. Herodian, l. v. p. 186.
The battle was fought near the village of Immae, about
two-and-twenty miles from Antioch.]
[Footnote *: Gannys was not a eunuch. Dion, p. 1355. - W]
The letters of Macrinus had condescended to inform the
senate of the slight disturbance occasioned by an impostor in
Syria, and a decree immediately passed, declaring the rebel and
his family public enemies; with a promise of pardon, however, to
such of his deluded adherents as should merit it by an immediate
return to their duty. During the twenty days that elapsed from
the declaration of the victory of Antoninus, (for in so short an
interval was the fate of the Roman world decided,) the capital
and the provinces, more especially those of the East, were
distracted with hopes and fears, agitated with tumult, and
stained with a useless effusion of civil blood, since whosoever
of the rivals prevailed in Syria must reign over the empire. The
specious letters in which the young conqueror announced his
victory to the obedient senate were filled with professions of
virtue and moderation; the shining examples of Marcus and
Augustus, he should ever consider as the great rule of his
administration; and he affected to dwell with pride on the
striking resemblance of his own age and fortunes with those of
Augustus, who in the earliest youth had revenged, by a successful
war, the murder of his father. By adopting the style of Marcus
Aurelius Antoninus, son of Antoninus and grandson of Severus, he
tacitly asserted his hereditary claim to the empire; but, by
assuming the tribunitian and proconsular powers before they had
been conferred on him by a decree of the senate, he offended the
delicacy of Roman prejudice. This new and injudicious violation
of the constitution was probably dictated either by the ignorance
of his Syrian courtiers, or the fierce disdain of his military
followers. ^50
[Footnote 50: Dion, l. lxxix. p. 1353.]
As the attention of the new emperor was diverted by the most
trifling amusements, he wasted many months in his luxurious
progress from Syria to Italy, passed at Nicomedia his first
winter after his victory, and deferred till the ensuing summer
his triumphal entry into the capital. A faithful picture,
however, which preceded his arrival, and was placed by his
immediate order over the altar of Victory in the senate house,
conveyed to the Romans the just but unworthy resemblance of his
person and manners. He was drawn in his sacerdotal robes of silk
and gold, after the loose flowing fashion of the Medes and
Phoenicians; his head was covered with a lofty tiara, his
numerous collars and bracelets were adorned with gems of an
inestimable value. His eyebrows were tinged with black, and his
cheeks painted with an artificial red and white. ^51 The grave
senators confessed with a sigh, that, after having long
experienced the stern tyranny of their own countrymen, Rome was
at length humbled beneath the effeminate luxury of Oriental
despotism.
[Footnote 51: Dion, l. lxxix. p. 1363. Herodian, l. v. p. 189.]
The Sun was worshipped at Emesa, under the name of
Elagabalus, ^52 and under the form of a black conical stone,
which, as it was universally believed, had fallen from heaven on
that sacred place. To this protecting deity, Antoninus, not
without some reason, ascribed his elevation to the throne. The
display of superstitious gratitude was the only serious business
of his reign. The triumph of the god of Emesa over all the
religions of the earth, was the great object of his zeal and
vanity; and the appellation of Elagabalus (for he presumed as
pontiff and favorite to adopt that sacred name) was dearer to him
than all the titles of Imperial greatness. In a solemn
procession through the streets of Rome, the way was strewed with
gold dust; the black stone, set in precious gems, was placed on a
chariot drawn by six milk-white horses richly caparisoned. The
pious emperor held the reins, and, supported by his ministers,
moved slowly backwards, that he might perpetually enjoy the
felicity of the divine presence. In a magnificent temple raised
on the Palatine Mount, the sacrifices of the god Elagabalus were
celebrated with every circumstance of cost and solemnity. The
richest wines, the most extraordinary victims, and the rarest
aromatics, were profusely consumed on his altar. Around the
altar, a chorus of Syrian damsels performed their lascivious
dances to the sound of barbarian music, whilst the gravest
personages of the state and army, clothed in long Phoenician
tunics, officiated in the meanest functions, with affected zeal
and secret indignation. ^53
[Footnote 52: This name is derived by the learned from two Syrian
words, Ela a God, and Gabal, to form, the forming or plastic god,
a proper, and even happy epithet for the sun. Wotton's History of
Rome, p. 378
Note: The name of Elagabalus has been disfigured in various
ways. Herodian calls him; Lampridius, and the more modern
writers, make him Heliogabalus. Dion calls him Elegabalus; but
Elegabalus was the true name, as it appears on the medals.
(Eckhel. de Doct. num. vet. t. vii. p. 250.) As to its etymology,
that which Gibbon adduces is given by Bochart, Chan. ii. 5; but
Salmasius, on better grounds. (not. in Lamprid. in Elagab.,)
derives the name of Elagabalus from the idol of that god,
represented by Herodian and the medals in the form of a mountain,
(gibel in Hebrew,) or great stone cut to a point, with marks
which represent the sun. As it was not permitted, at Hierapolis,
in Syria, to make statues of the sun and moon, because, it was
said, they are themselves sufficiently visible, the sun was
represented at Emesa in the form of a great stone, which, as it
appeared, had fallen from heaven. Spanheim, Caesar. notes, p.
46. - G. The name of Elagabalus, in "nummis rarius legetur."
Rasche, Lex. Univ. Ref. Numm. Rasche quotes two. - M]
[Footnote 53: Herodian, l. v. p. 190.]
Chapter VI: Death Of Severus, Tyranny Of Caracalla, Usurpation Of
Marcinus.
Part III.
To this temple, as to the common centre of religious
worship, the Imperial fanatic attempted to remove the Ancilia,
the Palladium, ^54 and all the sacred pledges of the faith of
Numa. A crowd of inferior deities attended in various stations
the majesty of the god of Emesa; but his court was still
imperfect, till a female of distinguished rank was admitted to
his bed. Pallas had been first chosen for his consort; but as it
was dreaded lest her warlike terrors might affright the soft
delicacy of a Syrian deity, the Moon, adorned by the Africans
under the name of Astarte, was deemed a more suitable companion
for the Sun. Her image, with the rich offerings of her temple as
a marriage portion, was transported with solemn pomp from
Carthage to Rome, and the day of these mystic nuptials was a
general festival in the capital and throughout the empire. ^55
[Footnote 54: He broke into the sanctuary of Vesta, and carried
away a statue, which he supposed to be the palladium; but the
vestals boasted that, by a pious fraud, they had imposed a
counterfeit image on the profane intruder. Hist. August., p.
103.]
[Footnote 55: Dion, l. lxxix. p. 1360. Herodian, l. v. p. 193.
The subjects of the empire were obliged to make liberal presents
to the new married couple; and whatever they had promised during
the life of Elagabalus was carefully exacted under the
administration of Mamaea.]
A rational voluptuary adheres with invariable respect to the
temperate dictates of nature, and improves the gratifications of
sense by social intercourse, endearing connections, and the soft
coloring of taste and the imagination. But Elagabalus, (I speak
of the emperor of that name,) corrupted by his youth, his
country, and his fortune, abandoned himself to the grossest
pleasures with ungoverned fury, and soon found disgust and
satiety in the midst of his enjoyments. The inflammatory powers
of art were summoned to his aid: the confused multitude of women,
of wines, and of dishes, and the studied variety of attitude and
sauces, served to revive his languid appetites. New terms and
new inventions in these sciences, the only ones cultivated and
patronized by the monarch, ^56 signalized his reign, and
transmitted his infamy to succeeding times. A capricious
prodigality supplied the want of taste and elegance; and whilst
Elagabalus lavished away the treasures of his people in the
wildest extravagance, his own voice and that of his flatterers
applauded a spirit of magnificence unknown to the tameness of his
predecessors. To confound the order of seasons and climates, ^57
to sport with the passions and prejudices of his subjects, and to
subvert every law of nature and decency, were in the number of
his most delicious amusements. A long train of concubines, and a
rapid succession of wives, among whom was a vestal virgin,
ravished by force from her sacred asylum, ^58 were insufficient
to satisfy the impotence of his passions. The master of the
Roman world affected to copy the dress and manners of the female
sex, preferred the distaff to the sceptre, and dishonored the
principal dignities of the empire by distributing them among his
numerous lovers; one of whom was publicly invested with the title
and authority of the emperor's, or, as he more properly styled
himself, of the empress's husband. ^59
[Footnote 56: The invention of a new sauce was liberally
rewarded; but if it was not relished, the inventor was confined
to eat of nothing else till he had discoveredanother more
agreeable to the Imperial palate Hist. August. p. 111.]
[Footnote 57: He never would eat sea-fish except at a great
distance from the sea; he then would distribute vast quantities
of the rarest sorts, brought at an immense expense, to the
peasants of the inland country. Hist. August. p. 109.]
[Footnote 58: Dion, l. lxxix. p. 1358. Herodian, l. v. p. 192.]
[Footnote 59: Hierocles enjoyed that honor; but he would have
been supplanted by one Zoticus, had he not contrived, by a
potion, to enervate the powers of his rival, who, being found on
trial unequal to his reputation, was driven with ignominy from
the palace. Dion, l. lxxix. p. 1363, 1364. A dancer was made
praefect of the city, a charioteer praefect of the watch, a
barber praefect of the provisions. These three ministers, with
many inferior officers, were all recommended enormitate
membrorum. Hist. August. p. 105.]
It may seem probable, the vices and follies of Elagabalus
have been adorned by fancy, and blackened by prejudice. ^60 Yet,
confining ourselves to the public scenes displayed before the
Roman people, and attested by grave and contemporary historians,
their inexpressible infamy surpasses that of any other age or
country. The license of an eastern monarch is secluded from the
eye of curiosity by the inaccessible walls of his seraglio. The
sentiments of honor and gallantry have introduced a refinement of
pleasure, a regard for decency, and a respect for the public
opinion, into the modern courts of Europe; ^* but the corrupt and
opulent nobles of Rome gratified every vice that could be
collected from the mighty conflux of nations and manners. Secure
of impunity, careless of censure, they lived without restraint in
the patient and humble society of their slaves and parasites.
The emperor, in his turn, viewing every rank of his subjects with
the same contemptuous indifference, asserted without control his
sovereign privilege of lust and luxury.
[Footnote 60: Even the credulous compiler of his life, in the
Augustan History (p. 111) is inclined to suspect that his vices
may have been exaggerated.]
[Footnote *: Wenck has justly observed that Gibbon should have
reckoned the influence of Christianity in this great change. In
the most savage times, and the most corrupt courts, since the
introduction of Christianity there have been no Neros or
Domitians, no Commodus or Elagabalus. - M.]
The most worthless of mankind are not afraid to condemn in
others the same disorders which they allow in themselves; and can
readily discover some nice difference of age, character, or
station, to justify the partial distinction. The licentious
soldiers, who had raised to the throne the dissolute son of
Caracalla, blushed at their ignominious choice, and turned with
disgust from that monster, to contemplate with pleasure the
opening virtues of his cousin Alexander, the son of Mamaea. The
crafty Maesa, sensible that her grandson Elagabalus must
inevitably destroy himself by his own vices, had provided another
and surer support of her family. Embracing a favorable moment of
fondness and devotion, she had persuaded the young emperor to
adopt Alexander, and to invest him with the title of Caesar, that
his own divine occupations might be no longer interrupted by the
care of the earth. In the second rank that amiable prince soon
acquired the affections of the public, and excited the tyrant's
jealousy, who resolved to terminate the dangerous competition,
either by corrupting the manners, or by taking away the life, of
his rival. His arts proved unsuccessful; his vain designs were
constantly discovered by his own loquacious folly, and
disappointed by those virtuous and faithful servants whom the
prudence of Mamaea had placed about the person of her son. In a
hasty sally of passion, Elagabalus resolved to execute by force
what he had been unable to compass by fraud, and by a despotic
sentence degraded his cousin from the rank and honors of Caesar.
The message was received in the senate with silence, and in the
camp with fury. The Praetorian guards swore to protect
Alexander, and to revenge the dishonored majesty of the throne.
The tears and promises of the trembling Elagabalus, who only
begged them to spare his life, and to leave him in the possession
of his beloved Hierocles, diverted their just indignation; and
they contented themselves with empowering their praefects to
watch over the safety of Alexander, and the conduct of the
emperor. ^61
[Footnote 61: Dion, l. lxxix. p. 1365. Herodian, l. v. p. 195 -
201. Hist. August. p. 105. The last of the three historians
seems to have followed the best authors in his account of the
revolution.]
It was impossible that such a reconciliation should last, or
that even the mean soul of Elagabalus could hold an empire on
such humiliating terms of dependence. He soon attempted, by a
dangerous experiment, to try the temper of the soldiers. The
report of the death of Alexander, and the natural suspicion that
he had been murdered, inflamed their passions into fury, and the
tempest of the camp could only be appeased by the presence and
authority of the popular youth. Provoked at this new instance of
their affection for his cousin, and their contempt for his
person, the emperor ventured to punish some of the leaders of the
mutiny. His unseasonable severity proved instantly fatal to his
minions, his mother, and himself. Elagabalus was massacred by
the indignant Praetorians, his mutilated corpse dragged through
the streets of the city, and thrown into the Tiber. His memory
was branded with eternal infamy by the senate; the justice of
whose decree has been ratified by posterity. ^62
[See Island In The Tiber: Elagabalus was thrown into the Tiber
[Footnote 62: The aera of the death of Elagabalus, and of the
accession of Alexander, has employed the learning and ingenuity
of Pagi, Tillemont, Valsecchi, Vignoli, and Torre, bishop of
Adria. The question is most assuredly intricate; but I still
adhere to the authority of Dion, the truth of whose calculations
is undeniable, and the purity of whose text is justified by the
agreement of Xiphilin, Zonaras, and Cedrenus. Elagabalus reigned
three years nine months and four days, from his victory over
Macrinus, and was killed March 10, 222. But what shall we reply
to the medals, undoubtedly genuine, which reckon the fifth year
of his tribunitian power? We shall reply, with the learned
Valsecchi, that the usurpation of Macrinus was annihilated, and
that the son of Caracalla dated his reign from his father's
death? After resolving this great difficulty, the smaller knots
of this question may be easily untied, or cut asunder. Note:
This opinion of Valsecchi has been triumphantly contested by
Eckhel, who has shown the impossibility of reconciling it with
the medals of Elagabalus, and has given the most satisfactory
explanation of the five tribunates of that emperor. He ascended
the throne and received the tribunitian power the 16th of May, in
the year of Rome 971; and on the 1st January of the next year,
972, he began a new tribunate, according to the custom
established by preceding emperors. During the years 972, 973,
974, he enjoyed the tribunate, and commenced his fifth in the
year 975, during which be was killed on the 10th March. Eckhel de
Doct. Num. viii. 430 &c. - G.] In the room of Elagabalus, his
cousin Alexander was raised to the throne by the Praetorian
guards. His relation to the family of Severus, whose name he
assumed, was the same as that of his predecessor; his virtue and
his danger had already endeared him to the Romans, and the eager
liberality of the senate conferred upon him, in one day, the
various titles and powers of the Imperial dignity. ^63 But as
Alexander was a modest and dutiful youth, of only seventeen years
of age, the reins of government were in the hands of two women,
of his mother, Mamaea, and of Maesa, his grandmother. After the
death of the latter, who survived but a short time the elevation
of Alexander, Mamaea remained the sole regent of her son and of
the empire. [Footnote 63: Hist. August. p. 114. By this unusual
precipitation, the senate meant to confound the hopes of
pretenders, and prevent the factions of the armies.] In every age
and country, the wiser, or at least the stronger, of the two
sexes, has usurped the powers of the state, and confined the
other to the cares and pleasures of domestic life. In hereditary
monarchies, however, and especially in those of modern Europe,
the gallant spirit of chivalry, and the law of succession, have
accustomed us to allow a singular exception; and a woman is often
acknowledged the absolute sovereign of a great kingdom, in which
she would be deemed incapable of exercising the smallest
employment, civil or military. But as the Roman emperors were
still considered as the generals and magistrates of the republic,
their wives and mothers, although distinguished by the name of
Augusta were never associated to their personal honors; and a
female reign would have appeared an inexpiable prodigy in the
eyes of those primitive Romans, who married without love, or
loved without delicacy and respect. ^64 The haughty Agripina
aspired, indeed, to share the honors of the empire which she had
conferred on her son; but her mad ambition, detested by every
citizen who felt for the dignity of Rome, was disappointed by the
artful firmness of Seneca and Burrhus. ^65 The good sense, or the
indifference, of succeeding princes, restrained them from
offending the prejudices of their subjects; and it was reserved
for the profligate Elagabalus to discharge the acts of the senate
with the name of his mother Soaemias, who was placed by the side
of the consuls, and subscribed, as a regular member, the decrees
of the legislative assembly. Her more prudent sister, Mamaea,
declined the useless and odious prerogative, and a solemn law was
enacted, excluding women forever from the senate, and devoting to
the infernal gods the head of the wretch by whom this sanction
should be violated. ^66 The substance, not the pageantry, of
power. was the object of Mamaea's manly ambition. She maintained
an absolute and lasting empire over the mind of her son, and in
his affection the mother could not brook a rival. Alexander, with
her consent, married the daughter of a patrician; but his respect
for his father-in-law, and love for the empress, were
inconsistent with the tenderness of interest of Mamaea. The
patrician was executed on the ready accusation of treason, and
the wife of Alexander driven with ignominy from the palace, and
banished into Africa. ^67 [Footnote 64: Metellus Numidicus, the
censor, acknowledged to the Roman people, in a public oration,
that had kind nature allowed us to exist without the help of
women, we should be delivered from a very troublesome companion;
and he could recommend matrimony only as the sacrifice of private
pleasure to public duty. Aulus Gellius, i. 6.] [Footnote 65:
Tacit. Annal. xiii. 5.] [Footnote 66: Hist. August. p. 102,
107.] [Footnote 67: Dion, l. lxxx. p. 1369. Herodian, l. vi. p.
206. Hist. August. p. 131. Herodian represents the patrician as
innocent. The Augustian History, on the authority of Dexippus,
condemns him, as guilty of a conspiracy against the life of
Alexander. It is impossible to pronounce between them; but Dion
is an irreproachable witness of the jealousy and cruelty of
Mamaea towards the young empress, whose hard fate Alexander
lamented, but durst not oppose.] Notwithstanding this act of
jealous cruelty, as well as some instances of avarice, with which
Mamaea is charged, the general tenor of her administration was
equally for the benefit of her son and of the empire. With the
approbation of the senate, she chose sixteen of the wisest and
most virtuous senators as a perpetual council of state, before
whom every public business of moment was debated and determined.
The celebrated Ulpian, equally distinguished by his knowledge of,
and his respect for, the laws of Rome, was at their head; and the
prudent firmness of this aristocracy restored order and authority
to the government. As soon as they had purged the city from
foreign superstition and luxury, the remains of the capricious
tyranny of Elagabalus, they applied themselves to remove his
worthless creatures from every department of the public
administration, and to supply their places with men of virtue and
ability. Learning, and the love of justice, became the only
recommendations for civil offices; valor, and the love of
discipline, the only qualifications for military employments. ^68
[Footnote 68: Herodian, l. vi. p. 203. Hist. August. p. 119. The
latter insinuates, that when any law was to be passed, the
council was assisted by a number of able lawyers and experienced
senators, whose opinions were separately given, and taken down in
writing.] But the most important care of Mamaea and her wise
counsellors, was to form the character of the young emperor, on
whose personal qualities the happiness or misery of the Roman
world must ultimately depend. The fortunate soil assisted, and
even prevented, the hand of cultivation. An excellent
understanding soon convinced Alexander of the advantages of
virtue, the pleasure of knowledge, and the necessity of labor. A
natural mildness and moderation of temper preserved him from the
assaults of passion, and the allurements of vice. His unalterable
regard for his mother, and his esteem for the wise Ulpian,
guarded his unexperienced youth from the poison of flattery. ^*
[Footnote *: Alexander received into his chapel all the religions
which prevailed in the empire; he admitted Jesus Christ, Abraham,
Orpheus, Apollonius of Tyana, &c. It was almost certain that his
mother Mamaea had instructed him in the morality of Christianity.
Historians in general agree in calling her a Christian; there is
reason to believe that she had begun to have a taste for the
principles of Christianity. (See Tillemont, Alexander Severus)
Gibbon has not noticed this circumstance; he appears to have
wished to lower the character of this empress; he has throughout
followed the narrative of Herodian, who, by the acknowledgment of
Capitolinus himself, detested Alexander. Without believing the
exaggerated praises of Lampridius, he ought not to have followed
the unjust severity of Herodian, and, above all, not to have
forgotten to say that the virtuous Alexander Severus had insured
to the Jews the preservation of their privileges, and permitted
the exercise of Christianity. Hist. Aug. p. 121. The Christians
had established their worship in a public place, of which the
victuallers (cauponarii) claimed, not the property, but
possession by custom. Alexander answered, that it was better that
the place should be used for the service of God, in any form,
than for victuallers. - G. I have scrupled to omit this note, as
it contains some points worthy of notice; but it is very unjust
to Gibbon, who mentions almost all the circumstances, which he is
accused of omitting, in another, and, according to his plan, a
better place, and, perhaps, in stronger terms than M. Guizot. See
Chap. xvi. - M.] The simple journal of his ordinary occupations
exhibits a pleasing picture of an accomplished emperor, ^69 and,
with some allowance for the difference of manners, might well
deserve the imitation of modern princes. Alexander rose early:
the first moments of the day were consecrated to private
devotion, and his domestic chapel was filled with the images of
those heroes, who, by improving or reforming human life, had
deserved the grateful reverence of posterity. But as he deemed
the service of mankind the most acceptable worship of the gods,
the greatest part of his morning hours was employed in his
council, where he discussed public affairs, and determined
private causes, with a patience and discretion above his years.
The dryness of business was relieved by the charms of literature;
and a portion of time was always set apart for his favorite
studies of poetry, history, and philosophy. The works of Virgil
and Horace, the republics of Plato and Cicero, formed his taste,
enlarged his understanding, and gave him the noblest ideas of man
and government. The exercises of the body succeeded to those of
the mind; and Alexander, who was tall, active, and robust,
surpassed most of his equals in the gymnastic arts. Refreshed by
the use of the bath and a slight dinner, he resumed, with new
vigor, the business of the day; and, till the hour of supper, the
principal meal of the Romans, he was attended by his secretaries,
with whom he read and answered the multitude of letters,
memorials, and petitions, that must have been addressed to the
master of the greatest part of the world. His table was served
with the most frugal simplicity, and whenever he was at liberty
to consult his own inclination, the company consisted of a few
select friends, men of learning and virtue, amongst whom Ulpian
was constantly invited. Their conversation was familiar and
instructive; and the pauses were occasionally enlivened by the
recital of some pleasing composition, which supplied the place of
the dancers, comedians, and even gladiators, so frequently
summoned to the tables of the rich and luxurious Romans. ^70 The
dress of Alexander was plain and modest, his demeanor courteous
and affable: at the proper hours his palace was open to all his
subjects, but the voice of a crier was heard, as in the
Eleusinian mysteries, pronouncing the same salutary admonition:
"Let none enter these holy walls, unless he is conscious of a
pure and innocent mind." ^71 [Footnote 69: See his life in the
Augustan History. The undistinguishing compiler has buried these
interesting anecdotes under a load of trivial unmeaning
circumstances.] [Footnote 70: See the 13th Satire of Juvenal.]
[Footnote 71: Hist. August. p. 119.] Such a uniform tenor of
life, which left not a moment for vice or folly, is a better
proof of the wisdom and justice of Alexander's government, than
all the trifling details preserved in the compilation of
Lampridius. Since the accession of Commodus, the Roman world had
experienced, during the term of forty years, the successive and
various vices of four tyrants. From the death of Elagabalus, it
enjoyed an auspicious calm of thirteen years. ^* The provinces,
relieved from the oppressive taxes invented by Caracalla and his
pretended son, flourished in peace and prosperity, under the
administration of magistrates, who were convinced by experience
that to deserve the love of the subjects, was their best and only
method of obtaining the favor of their sovereign. While some
gentle restraints were imposed on the innocent luxury of the
Roman people, the price of provisions and the interest of money,
were reduced by the paternal care of Alexander, whose prudent
liberality, without distressing the industrious, supplied the
wants and amusements of the populace. The dignity, the freedom,
the authority of the senate was restored; and every virtuous
senator might approach the person of the emperor without a fear
and without a blush. [Footnote *: Wenck observes that Gibbon,
enchanted with the virtue of Alexander has heightened,
particularly in this sentence, its effect on the state of the
world. His own account, which follows, of the insurrections and
foreign wars, is not in harmony with this beautiful picture. -
M.] The name of Antoninus, ennobled by the virtues of Pius and
Marcus, had been communicated by adoption to the dissolute Verus,
and by descent to the cruel Commodus. It became the honorable
appellation of the sons of Severus, was bestowed on young
Diadumenianus, and at length prostituted to the infamy of the
high priest of Emesa. Alexander, though pressed by the studied,
and, perhaps, sincere importunity of the senate, nobly refused
the borrowed lustre of a name; whilst in his whole conduct he
labored to restore the glories and felicity of the age of the
genuine Antonines. ^72 [Footnote 72: See, in the Hist. August.
p. 116, 117, the whole contest between Alexander and the senate,
extracted from the journals of that assembly. It happened on the
sixth of March, probably of the year 223, when the Romans had
enjoyed, almost a twelvemonth, the blessings of his reign. Before
the appellation of Antoninus was offered him as a title of honor,
the senate waited to see whether Alexander would not assume it as
a family name.] In the civil administration of Alexander,
wisdom was enforced by power, and the people, sensible of the
public felicity, repaid their benefactor with their love and
gratitude. There still remained a greater, a more necessary, but
a more difficult enterprise; the reformation of the military
order, whose interest and temper, confirmed by long impunity,
rendered them impatient of the restraints of discipline, and
careless of the blessings of public tranquillity. In the
execution of his design, the emperor affected to display his
love, and to conceal his fear of the army. The most rigid economy
in every other branch of the administration supplied a fund of
gold and silver for the ordinary pay and the extraordinary
rewards of the troops. In their marches he relaxed the severe
obligation of carrying seventeen days' provision on their
shoulders. Ample magazines were formed along the public roads,
and as soon as they entered the enemy's country, a numerous train
of mules and camels waited on their haughty laziness. As
Alexander despaired of correcting the luxury of his soldiers, he
attempted, at least, to direct it to objects of martial pomp and
ornament, fine horses, splendid armor, and shields enriched with
silver and gold. He shared whatever fatigues he was obliged to
impose, visited, in person, the sick and wounded, preserved an
exact register of their services and his own gratitude, and
expressed on every occasion, the warmest regard for a body of
men, whose welfare, as he affected to declare, was so closely
connected with that of the state. ^73 By the most gentle arts he
labored to inspire the fierce multitude with a sense of duty, and
to restore at least a faint image of that discipline to which the
Romans owed their empire over so many other nations, as warlike
and more powerful than themselves. But his prudence was vain, his
courage fatal, and the attempt towards a reformation served only
to inflame the ills it was meant to cure. [Footnote 73: It was a
favorite saying of the emperor's Se milites magis servare, quam
seipsum, quod salus publica in his esset. Hist. Aug. p. 130.]
The Praetorian guards were attached to the youth of Alexander.
They loved him as a tender pupil, whom they had saved from a
tyrant's fury, and placed on the Imperial throne. That amiable
prince was sensible of the obligation; but as his gratitude was
restrained within the limits of reason and justice, they soon
were more dissatisfied with the virtues of Alexander, than they
had ever been with the vices of Elagabalus. Their praefect, the
wise Ulpian, was the friend of the laws and of the people; he was
considered as the enemy of the soldiers, and to his pernicious
counsels every scheme of reformation was imputed. Some trifling
accident blew up their discontent into a furious mutiny; and the
civil war raged, during three days, in Rome, whilst the life of
that excellent minister was defended by the grateful people.
Terrified, at length, by the sight of some houses in flames, and
by the threats of a general conflagration, the people yielded
with a sigh, and left the virtuous but unfortunate Ulpian to his
fate. He was pursued into the Imperial palace, and massacred at
the feet of his master, who vainly strove to cover him with the
purple, and to obtain his pardon from the inexorable soldiers. ^*
Such was the deplorable weakness of government, that the emperor
was unable to revenge his murdered friend and his insulted
dignity, without stooping to the arts of patience and
dissimulation. Epagathus, the principal leader of the mutiny, was
removed from Rome, by the honorable employment of praefect of
Egypt: from that high rank he was gently degraded to the
government of Crete; and when at length, his popularity among the
guards was effaced by time and absence, Alexander ventured to
inflict the tardy but deserved punishment of his crimes. ^74
Under the reign of a just and virtuous prince, the tyranny of the
army threatened with instant death his most faithful ministers,
who were suspected of an intention to correct their intolerable
disorders. The historian Dion Cassius had commanded the Pannonian
legions with the spirit of ancient discipline. Their brethren of
Rome, embracing the common cause of military license, demanded
the head of the reformer. Alexander, however, instead of yielding
to their seditious clamors, showed a just sense of his merit and
services, by appointing him his colleague in the consulship, and
defraying from his own treasury the expense of that vain dignity:
but as was justly apprehended, that if the soldiers beheld him
with the ensigns of his office, they would revenge the insult in
his blood, the nominal first magistrate of the state retired, by
the emperor's advice, from the city, and spent the greatest part
of his consulship at his villas in Campania. ^75 ^* [Footnote *:
Gibbon has confounded two events altogether different - the
quarrel of the people with the Praetorians, which lasted three
days, and the assassination of Ulpian by the latter. Dion relates
first the death of Ulpian, afterwards, reverting back according
to a manner which is usual with him, he says that during the life
of Ulpian, there had been a war of three days between the
Praetorians and the people. But Ulpian was not the cause. Dion
says, on the contrary, that it was occasioned by some unimportant
circumstance; whilst he assigns a weighty reason for the murder
of Ulpian, the judgment by which that Praetorian praefect had
condemned his predecessors, Chrestus and Flavian, to death, whom
the soldiers wished to revenge. Zosimus (l. 1, c. xi.) attributes
this sentence to Mamaera; but, even then, the troops might have
imputed it to Ulpian, who had reaped all the advantage and was
otherwise odious to them. - W.] [Footnote 74: Though the author
of the life of Alexander (Hist. August. p. 182) mentions the
sedition raised against Ulpian by the soldiers, he conceals the
catastrophe, as it might discover a weakness in the
administration of his hero. From this designed omission, we may
judge of the weight and candor of that author.] [Footnote 75:
For an account of Ulpian's fate and his own danger, see the
mutilated conclusion of Dion's History, l. lxxx. p. 1371.]
[Footnote *: Dion possessed no estates in Campania, and was not
rich. He only says that the emperor advised him to reside, during
his consulate, in some place out of Rome; that he returned to
Rome after the end of his consulate, and had an interview with
the emperor in Campania. He asked and obtained leave to pass the
rest of his life in his native city, (Nice, in Bithynia: ) it was
there that he finished his history, which closes with his second
consulship. - W.]]
Chapter VI: Death Of Severus, Tyranny Of Caracalla, Usurpation Of
Marcinus.
Part IV.
The lenity of the emperor confirmed the insolence of the
troops; the legions imitated the example of the guards, and
defended their prerogative of licentiousness with the same
furious obstinacy. The administration of Alexander was an
unavailing struggle against the corruption of his age. In
llyricum, in Mauritania, in Armenia, in Mesopotamia, in Germany,
fresh mutinies perpetually broke out; his officers were murdered,
his authority was insulted, and his life at last sacrificed to
the fierce discontents of the army. ^76 One particular fact well
deserves to be recorded, as it illustrates the manners of the
troops, and exhibits a singular instance of their return to a
sense of duty and obedience. Whilst the emperor lay at Antioch,
in his Persian expedition, the particulars of which we shall
hereafter relate, the punishment of some soldiers, who had been
discovered in the baths of women, excited a sedition in the
legion to which they belonged. Alexander ascended his tribunal,
and with a modest firmness represented to the armed multitude the
absolute necessity, as well as his inflexible resolution, of
correcting the vices introduced by his impure predecessor, and of
maintaining the discipline, which could not be relaxed without
the ruin of the Roman name and empire. Their clamors interrupted
his mild expostulation. "Reserve your shout," said the undaunted
emperor, "till you take the field against the Persians, the
Germans, and the Sarmatians. Be silent in the presence of your
sovereign and benefactor, who bestows upon you the corn, the
clothing, and the money of the provinces. Be silent, or I shall
no longer style you solders, but citizens, ^77 if those indeed
who disclaim the laws of Rome deserve to be ranked among the
meanest of the people." His menaces inflamed the fury of the
legion, and their brandished arms already threatened his person.
"Your courage," resumed the intrepid Alexander, "would be more
nobly displayed in the field of battle; me you may destroy, you
cannot intimidate; and the severe justice of the republic would
punish your crime and revenge my death." The legion still
persisted in clamorous sedition, when the emperor pronounced,
with a cud voice, the decisive sentence, "Citizens! lay down
your arms, and depart in peace to your respective habitations."
The tempest was instantly appeased: the soldiers, filled with
grief and shame, silently confessed the justice of their
punishment, and the power of discipline, yielded up their arms
and military ensigns, and retired in confusion, not to their
camp, but to the several inns of the city. Alexander enjoyed,
during thirty days, the edifying spectacle of their repentance;
nor did he restore them to their former rank in the army, till he
had punished with death those tribunes whose connivance had
occasioned the mutiny. The grateful legion served the emperor
whilst living, and revenged him when dead. ^78
[Footnote 76: Annot. Reimar. ad Dion Cassius, l. lxxx. p. 1369.]
[Footnote 77: Julius Caesar had appeased a sedition with the same
word, Quirites; which, thus opposed to soldiers, was used in a
sense of contempt, and reduced the offenders to the less
honorable condition of mere citizens. Tacit. Annal. i. 43.]
[Footnote 78: Hist. August. p. 132.]
The resolutions of the multitude generally depend on a
moment; and the caprice of passion might equally determine the
seditious legion to lay down their arms at the emperor's feet, or
to plunge them into his breast. Perhaps, if this singular
transaction had been investigated by the penetration of a
philosopher, we should discover the secret causes which on that
occasion authorized the boldness of the prince, and commanded the
obedience of the troops; and perhaps, if it had been related by a
judicious historian, we should find this action, worthy of Caesar
himself, reduced nearer to the level of probability and the
common standard of the character of Alexander Severus. The
abilities of that amiable prince seem to have been inadequate to
the difficulties of his situation, the firmness of his conduct
inferior to the purity of his intentions. His virtues, as well
as the vices of Elagabalus, contracted a tincture of weakness and
effeminacy from the soft climate of Syria, of which he was a
native; though he blushed at his foreign origin, and listened
with a vain complacency to the flattering genealogists, who
derived his race from the ancient stock of Roman nobility. ^79
The pride and avarice of his mother cast a shade on the glories
of his reign; an by exacting from his riper years the same
dutiful obedience which she had justly claimed from his
unexperienced youth, Mamaea exposed to public ridicule both her
son's character and her own. ^80 The fatigues of the Persian war
irritated the military discontent; the unsuccessful event ^*
degraded the reputation of the emperor as a general, and even as
a soldier. Every cause prepared, and every circumstance
hastened, a revolution, which distracted the Roman empire with a
long series of intestine calamities.
[Footnote 79: From the Metelli. Hist. August. p. 119. The
choice was judicious. In one short period of twelve years, the
Metelli could reckon seven consulships and five triumphs. See
Velleius Paterculus, ii. 11, and the Fasti.]
[Footnote 80: The life of Alexander, in the Augustan History, is
the mere idea of a perfect prince, an awkward imitation of the
Cyropaedia. The account of his reign, as given by Herodian, is
rational and moderate, consistent with the general history of the
age; and, in some of the most invidious particulars, confirmed by
the decisive fragments of Dion. Yet from a very paltry
prejudice, the greater number of our modern writers abuse
Herodian, and copy the Augustan History. See Mess de Tillemont
and Wotton. From the opposite prejudice, the emperor Julian (in
Caesarib. p. 315) dwells with a visible satisfaction on the
effeminate weakness of the Syrian, and the ridiculous avarice of
his mother.]
[Footnote *: Historians are divided as to the success of the
campaign against the Persians; Herodian alone speaks of defeat.
Lampridius, Eutropius, Victor, and others, say that it was very
glorious to Alexander; that he beat Artaxerxes in a great battle,
and repelled him from the frontiers of the empire. This much is
certain, that Alexander, on his return to Rome, (Lamp. Hist. Aug.
c. 56, 133, 134,) received the honors of a triumph, and that he
said, in his oration to the people. Quirites, vicimus Persas,
milites divites reduximus, vobis congiarium pollicemur, cras
ludos circenses Persicos donabimus. Alexander, says Eckhel, had
too much modesty and wisdom to permit himself to receive honors
which ought only to be the reward of victory, if he had not
deserved them; he would have contented himself with dissembling
his losses. Eckhel, Doct. Num. vet. vii. 276. The medals
represent him as in triumph; one, among others, displays him
crowned by Victory between two rivers, the Euphrates and the
Tigris. P. M. TR. P. xii. Cos. iii. PP. Imperator paludatus D.
hastam. S. parazonium, stat inter duos fluvios humi jacentes, et
ab accedente retro Victoria coronatur. Ae. max. mod. (Mus. Reg.
Gall.) Although Gibbon treats this question more in detail when
he speaks of the Persian monarchy, I have thought fit to place
here what contradicts his opinion. - G]
The dissolute tyranny of Commodus, the civil wars occasioned
by his death, and the new maxims of policy introduced by the
house of Severus, had all contributed to increase the dangerous
power of the army, and to obliterate the faint image of laws and
liberty that was still impressed on the minds of the Romans. The
internal change, which undermined the foundations of the empire,
we have endeavored to explain with some degree of order and
perspicuity. The personal characters of the emperors, their
victories, laws, follies, and fortunes, can interest us no
farther than as they are connected with the general history of
the Decline and Fall of the monarchy. Our constant attention to
that great object will not suffer us to overlook a most important
edict of Antoninus Caracalla, which communicated to all the free
inhabitants of the empire the name and privileges of Roman
citizens. His unbounded liberality flowed not, however, from the
sentiments of a generous mind; it was the sordid result of
avarice, and will naturally be illustrated by some observations
on the finances of that state, from the victorious ages of the
commonwealth to the reign of Alexander Severus.
The siege of Veii in Tuscany, the first considerable
enterprise of the Romans, was protracted to the tenth year, much
less by the strength of the place than by the unskillfulness of
the besiegers. The unaccustomed hardships of so many winter
campaigns, at the distance of near twenty miles from home, ^81
required more than common encouragements; aud the senate wisely
prevented the clamors of the people, by the institution of a
regular pay for the soldiers, which was levied by a general
tribute, assessed according to an equitable proportion on the
property of the citizens. ^82 During more than two hundred years
after the conquest of Veii, the victories of the republic added
less to the wealth than to the power of Rome. The states of
Italy paid their tribute in military service only, and the vast
force, both by sea and land, which was exerted in the Punic wars,
was maintained at the expense of the Romans themselves. That
high-spirited people (such is often the generous enthusiasm of
freedom) cheerfully submitted to the most excessive but voluntary
burdens, in the just confidence that they should speedily enjoy
the rich harvest of their labors. Their expectations were not
disappointed. In the course of a few years, the riches of
Syracuse, of Carthage, of Macedonia, and of Asia, were brought in
triumph to Rome. The treasures of Perseus alone amounted to near
two millions sterling, and the Roman people, the sovereign of so
many nations, was forever delivered from the weight of taxes. ^83
The increasing revenue of the provinces was found sufficient to
defray the ordinary establishment of war and government, and the
superfluous mass of gold and silver was deposited in the temple
of Saturn, and reserved for any unforeseen emergency of the
state. ^84
[Footnote 81: According to the more accurate Dionysius, the city
itself was only a hundred stadia, or twelve miles and a half,
from Rome, though some out-posts might be advanced farther on the
side of Etruria. Nardini, in a professed treatise, has combated
the popular opinion and the authority of two popes, and has
removed Veii from Civita Castellana, to a little spot called
Isola, in the midway between Rome and the Lake Bracianno.
Note: See the interesting account of the site and ruins of
Veii in Sir W Gell's topography of Rome and its Vicinity. v. ii.
p. 303. - M.]
[Footnote 82: See the 4th and 5th books of Livy. In the Roman
census, property, power, and taxation were commensurate with each
other.]
[Footnote 83: Plin. Hist. Natur. l. xxxiii. c. 3. Cicero de
Offic. ii. 22. Plutarch, P. Aemil. p. 275.]
[Footnote 84: See a fine description of this accumulated wealth
of ages in Phars. l. iii. v. 155, &c.]
History has never, perhaps, suffered a greater or more
irreparable injury than in the loss of the curious register ^*
bequeathed by Augustus to the senate, in which that experienced
prince so accurately balanced the revenues and expenses of the
Roman empire. ^85 Deprived of this clear and comprehensive
estimate, we are reduced to collect a few imperfect hints from
such of the ancients as have accidentally turned aside from the
splendid to the more useful parts of history. We are informed
that, by the conquests of Pompey, the tributes of Asia were
raised from fifty to one hundred and thirty-five millions of
drachms; or about four millions and a half sterling. ^86 ^! Under
the last and most indolent of the Ptolemies, the revenue of Egypt
is said to have amounted to twelve thousand five hundred talents;
a sum equivalent to more than two millions and a half of our
money, but which was afterwards considerably improved by the more
exact economy of the Romans, and the increase of the trade of
Aethiopia and India. ^87 Gaul was enriched by rapine, as Egypt
was by commerce, and the tributes of those two great provinces
have been compared as nearly equal to each other in value. ^88
The ten thousand Euboic or Phoenician talents, about four
millions sterling, ^89 which vanquished Carthage was condemned to
pay within the term of fifty years, were a slight acknowledgment
of the superiority of Rome, ^90 and cannot bear the least
proportion with the taxes afterwards raised both on the lands and
on the persons of the inhabitants, when the fertile coast of
Africa was reduced into a province. ^91
[Footnote *: See Rationarium imperii. Compare besides Tacitus,
Suet. Aug. c. ult. Dion, p. 832. Other emperors kept and
published similar registers. See a dissertation of Dr. Wolle, de
Rationario imperii Rom. Leipsig, 1773. The last book of Appian
also contained the statistics of the Roman empire, but it is
lost. - W.]
[Footnote 85: Tacit. in Annal. i. ll. It seems to have existed
in the time of Appian.]
[Footnote 86: Plutarch, in Pompeio, p. 642.]
[Footnote !: Wenck contests the accuracy of Gibbon's version of
Plutarch, and supposes that Pompey only raised the revenue from
50,000,000 to 85,000,000 of drachms; but the text of Plutarch
seems clearly to mean that his conquests added 85,000,000 to the
ordinary revenue. Wenck adds, "Plutarch says in another part,
that Antony made Asia pay, at one time, 200,000 talents, that is
to say, 38,875,000l. sterling." But Appian explains this by
saying that it was the revenue of ten years, which brings the
annual revenue, at the time of Antonv, to 3,875 000l. sterling. -
M.]
[Footnote 87: Strabo, l. xvii. p. 798.]
[Footnote 88: Velleius Paterculus, l. ii. c. 39. He seems to
give the preference to the revenue of Gaul.]
[Footnote 89: The Euboic, the Phoenician, and the Alexandrian
talents were double in weight to the Attic. See Hooper on
ancient weights and measures, p. iv. c. 5. It is very probable
that the same talent was carried from Tyre to Carthage.]
[Footnote 90: Polyb. l. xv. c. 2.]
[Footnote 91: Appian in Punicis, p. 84.]
Spain, by a very singular fatality, was the Peru and Mexico
of the old world. The discovery of the rich western continent by
the Phoenicians, and the oppression of the simple natives, who
were compelled to labor in their own mines for the benefit of
strangers, form an exact type of the more recent history of
Spanish America. ^92 The Phoenicians were acquainted only with
the sea-coast of Spain; avarice, as well as ambition, carried the
arms of Rome and Carthage into the heart of the country, and
almost every part of the soil was found pregnant with copper,
silver, and gold. ^* Mention is made of a mine near Carthagena
which yielded every day twenty-five thousand drachmns of silver,
or about three hundred thousand pounds a year. ^93 Twenty
thousand pound weight of gold was annually received from the
provinces of Asturia, Gallicia, and Lusitania. ^94
[Footnote 92: Diodorus Siculus, l. 5. Oadiz was built by the
Phoenicians a little more than a thousand years before Christ.
See Vell. Pa ter. i.2.]
[Footnote *: Compare Heeren's Researches vol. i. part ii. p.]
[Footnote 93: Strabo, l. iii. p. 148.]
[Footnote 94: Plin. Hist. Natur. l. xxxiii. c. 3. He mentions
likewise a silver mine in Dalmatia, that yielded every day fifty
pounds to the state.]
We want both leisure and materials to pursue this curious
inquiry through the many potent states that were annihilated in
the Roman empire. Some notion, however, may be formed of the
revenue of the provinces where considerable wealth had been
deposited by nature, or collected by man, if we observe the
severe attention that was directed to the abodes of solitude and
sterility. Augustus once received a petition from the
inhabitants of Gyarus, humbly praying that they might be relieved
from one third of their excessive impositions. Their whole tax
amounted indeed to no more than one hundred and fifty drachms, or
about five pounds: but Gyarus was a little island, or rather a
rock, of the Aegean Sea, destitute of fresh water and every
necessary of life, and inhabited only by a few wretched
fishermen. ^95
[Footnote 95: Strabo, l. x. p. 485. Tacit. Annal. iu. 69, and
iv. 30. See Tournefort (Voyages au Levant, Lettre viii.) a very
lively picture of the actual misery of Gyarus.]
From the faint glimmerings of such doubtful and scattered
lights, we should be inclined to believe, 1st, That (with every
fair allowance for the differences of times and circumstances)
the general income of the Roman provinces could seldom amount to
less than fifteen or twenty millions of our money; ^96 and, 2dly,
That so ample a revenue must have been fully adequate to all the
expenses of the moderate government instituted by Augustus, whose
court was the modest family of a private senator, and whose
military establishment was calculated for the defence of the
frontiers, without any aspiring views of conquest, or any serious
apprehension of a foreign invasion.
[Footnote 96: Lipsius de magnitudine Romana (l. ii. c. 3)
computes the revenue at one hundred and fifty millions of gold
crowns; but his whole book, though learned and ingenious, betrays
a very heated imagination.
Note: If Justus Lipsius has exaggerated the revenue of the
Roman empire Gibbon, on the other hand, has underrated it. He
fixes it at fifteen or twenty millions of our money. But if we
take only, on a moderate calculation, the taxes in the provinces
which he has already cited, they will amount, considering the
augmentations made by Augustus, to nearly that sum. There remain
also the provinces of Italy, of Rhaetia, of Noricum, Pannonia,
and Greece, &c., &c. Let us pay attention, besides, to the
prodigious expenditure of some emperors, (Suet. Vesp. 16;) we
shall see that such a revenue could not be sufficient. The
authors of the Universal History, part xii., assign forty
millions sterling as the sum to about which the public revenue
might amount. - G. from W.]
Notwithstanding the seeming probability of both these
conclusions, the latter of them at least is positively disowned
by the language and conduct of Augustus. It is not easy to
determine whether, on this occasion, he acted as the common
father of the Roman world, or as the oppressor of liberty;
whether he wished to relieve the provinces, or to impoverish the
senate and the equestrian order. But no sooner had he assumed
the reins of government, than he frequently intimated the
insufficiency of the tributes, and the necessity of throwing an
equitable proportion of the public burden upon Rome and Italy. ^!
In the prosecution of this unpopular design, he advanced,
however, by cautious and well-weighed steps. The introduction of
customs was followed by the establishment of an excise, and the
scheme of taxation was completed by an artful assessment on the
real and personal property of the Roman citizens, who had been
exempted from any kind of contribution above a century and a
half.
[Footnote !: It is not astonishing that Augustus held this
language. The senate declared also under Nero, that the state
could not exist without the imposts as well augmented as founded
by Augustus. Tac. Ann. xiii. 50. After the abolition of the
different tributes paid by Italy, an abolition which took place
A. U. 646, 694, and 695, the state derived no revenues from that
great country, but the twentieth part of the manumissions,
(vicesima manumissionum,) and Ciero laments this in many places,
particularly in his epistles to ii. 15. - G. from W.]
I. In a great empire like that of Rome, a natural balance
of money must have gradually established itself. It has been
already observed, that as the wealth of the provinces was
attracted to the capital by the strong hand of conquest and
power, so a considerable part of it was restored to the
industrious provinces by the gentle influence of commerce and
arts. In the reign of Augustus and his successors, duties were
imposed on every kind of merchandise, which through a thousand
channels flowed to the great centre of opulence and luxury; and
in whatsoever manner the law was expressed, it was the Roman
purchaser, and not the provincial merchant, who paid the tax. ^97
The rate of the customs varied from the eighth to the fortieth
part of the value of the commodity; and we have a right to
suppose that the variation was directed by the unalterable maxims
of policy; that a higher duty was fixed on the articles of luxury
than on those of necessity, and that the productions raised or
manufactured by the labor of the subjects of the empire were
treated with more indulgence than was shown to the pernicious, or
at least the unpopular commerce of Arabia and India. ^98 There is
still extant a long but imperfect catalogue of eastern
commodities, which about the time of Alexander Severus were
subject to the payment of duties; cinnamon, myrrh, pepper,
ginger, and the whole tribe of aromatics a great variety of
precious stones, among which the diamond was the most remarkable
for its price, and the emerald for its beauty; ^99 Parthian and
Babylonian leather, cottons, silks, both raw and manufactured,
ebony ivory, and eunuchs. ^100 We may observe that the use and
value of those effeminate slaves gradually rose with the decline
of the empire.
[Footnote 97: Tacit. Annal. xiii. 31.
Note: The customs (portoria) existed in the times of the
ancient kings of Rome. They were suppressed in Italy, A. U. 694,
by the Praetor, Cecilius Matellus Nepos. Augustus only
reestablished them. See note above. - W.]
[Footnote 98: See Pliny, (Hist. Natur. l. vi. c. 23, lxii. c.
18.) His observation that the Indian commodities were sold at
Rome at a hundred times their original price, may give us some
notion of the produce of the customs, since that original price
amounted to more than eight hundred thousand pounds.]
[Footnote 99: The ancients were unacquainted with the art of
cutting diamonds.]
[Footnote 100: M. Bouchaud, in his treatise de l'Impot chez les
Romains, has transcribed this catalogue from the Digest, and
attempts to illustrate it by a very prolix commentary.
Note: In the Pandects, l. 39, t. 14, de Publican. Compare
Cicero in Verrem. c. 72 - 74. - W.]
II. The excise, introduced by Augustus after the civil
wars, was extremely moderate, but it was general. It seldom
exceeded one per cent.; but it comprehended whatever was sold in
the markets or by public auction, from the most considerable
purchases of lands and houses, to those minute objects which can
only derive a value from their infinite multitude and daily
consumption. Such a tax, as it affects the body of the people,
has ever been the occasion of clamor and discontent. An emperor
well acquainted with the wants and resources of the state was
obliged to declare, by a public edict, that the support of the
army depended in a great measure on the produce of the excise.
^101
[Footnote 101: Tacit. Annal. i. 78. Two years afterwards, the
reduction of the poor kingdom of Cappadocia gave Tiberius a
pretence for diminishing the excise of one half, but the relief
was of very short duration.]
III. When Augustus resolved to establish a permanent
military force for the defence of his government against foreign
and domestic enemies, he instituted a peculiar treasury for the
pay of the soldiers, the rewards of the veterans, and the
extra-ordinary expenses of war. The ample revenue of the excise,
though peculiarly appropriated to those uses, was found
inadequate. To supply the deficiency, the emperor suggested a
new tax of five per cent. on all legacies and inheritances. But
the nobles of Rome were more tenacious of property than of
freedom. Their indignant murmurs were received by Augustus with
his usual temper. He candidly referred the whole business to the
senate, and exhorted them to provide for the public service by
some other expedient of a less odious nature. They were divided
and perplexed. He insinuated to them, that their obstinacy would
oblige him to propose a general land tax and capitation. They
acquiesced in silence. ^102. The new imposition on legacies and
inheritances was, however, mitigated by some restrictions. It
did not take place unless the object was of a certain value, most
probably of fifty or a hundred pieces of gold; ^103 nor could it
be exacted from the nearest of kin on the father's side. ^104
When the rights of nature and poverty were thus secured, it
seemed reasonable, that a stranger, or a distant relation, who
acquired an unexpected accession of fortune, should cheerfully
resign a twentieth part of it, for the benefit of the state. ^105
[Footnote 102: Dion Cassius, l. lv. p. 794, l. lvi. p. 825.
Note: Dion neither mentions this proposition nor the
capitation. He only says that the emperor imposed a tax upon
landed property, and sent every where men employed to make a
survey, without fixing how much, and for how much each was to
pay. The senators then preferred giving the tax on legacies and
inheritances. - W.]
[Footnote 103: The sum is only fixed by conjecture.]
[Footnote 104: As the Roman law subsisted for many ages, the
Cognati, or relations on the mother's side, were not called to
the succession. This harsh institution was gradually undermined
by humanity, and finally abolished by Justinian.]
[Footnote 105: Plin. Panegyric. c. 37.]
Such a tax, plentiful as it must prove in every wealthy
community, was most happily suited to the situation of the
Romans, who could frame their arbitrary wills, according to the
dictates of reason or caprice, without any restraint from the
modern fetters of entails and settlements. From various causes,
the partiality of paternal affection often lost its influence
over the stern patriots of the commonwealth, and the dissolute
nobles of the empire; and if the father bequeathed to his son the
fourth part of his estate, he removed all ground of legal
complaint. ^106 But a rich childish old man was a domestic
tyrant, and his power increased with his years and infirmities.
A servile crowd, in which he frequently reckoned praetors and
consuls, courted his smiles, pampered his avarice, applauded his
follies, served his passions, and waited with impatience for his
death. The arts of attendance and flattery were formed into a
most lucrative science; those who professed it acquired a
peculiar appellation; and the whole city, according to the lively
descriptions of satire, was divided between two parties, the
hunters and their game. ^107 Yet, while so many unjust and
extravagant wills were every day dictated by cunning and
subscribed by folly, a few were the result of rational esteem and
virtuous gratitude. Cicero, who had so often defended the lives
and fortunes of his fellow-citizens, was rewarded with legacies
to the amount of a hundred and seventy thousand pounds; ^108 nor
do the friends of the younger Pliny seem to have been less
generous to that amiable orator. ^109 Whatever was the motive of
the testator, the treasury claimed, without distinction, the
twentieth part of his estate: and in the course of two or three
generations, the whole property of the subject must have
gradually passed through the coffers of the state.
[Footnote 106: See Heineccius in the Antiquit. Juris Romani, l.
ii.]
[Footnote 107: Horat. l. ii. Sat. v. Potron. c. 116, &c. Plin.
l. ii. Epist. 20.]
[Footnote 108: Cicero in Philip. ii. c. 16.]
[Footnote 109: See his epistles. Every such will gave him an
occasion of displaying his reverence to the dead, and his justice
to the living. He reconciled both in his behavior to a son who
had been disinherited by his mother, (v.l.)]
In the first and golden years of the reign of Nero, that
prince, from a desire of popularity, and perhaps from a blind
impulse of benevolence, conceived a wish of abolishing the
oppression of the customs and excise. The wisest senators
applauded his magnanimity: but they diverted him from the
execution of a design which would have dissolved the strength and
resources of the republic. ^110 Had it indeed been possible to
realize this dream of fancy, such princes as Trajan and the
Antonines would surely have embraced with ardor the glorious
opportunity of conferring so signal an obligation on mankind.
Satisfied, however, with alleviating the public burden, they
attempted not to remove it. The mildness and precision of their
laws ascertained the rule and measure of taxation, and protected
the subject of every rank against arbitrary interpretations,
antiquated claims, and the insolent vexation of the farmers of
the revenue. ^111 For it is somewhat singular, that, in every
age, the best and wisest of the Roman governors persevered in
this pernicious method of collecting the principal branches at
least of the excise and customs. ^112
[Footnote 110: Tacit. Annal. xiii. 50. Esprit des Loix, l. xii.
c. 19.]
[Footnote 111: See Pliny's Panegyric, the Augustan History, and
Burman de Vectigal. passim.]
[Footnote 112: The tributes (properly so called) were not farmed;
since the good princes often remitted many millions of arrears.]
The sentiments, and, indeed, the situation, of Caracalla
were very different from those of the Antonines. Inattentive, or
rather averse, to the welfare of his people, he found himself
under the necessity of gratifying the insatiate avarice which he
had excited in the army. Of the several impositions introduced
by Augustus, the twentieth on inheritances and legacies was the
most fruitful, as well as the most comprehensive. As its
influence was not confined to Rome or Italy, the produce
continually increased with the gradual extension of the Roman
City. The new citizens, though charged, on equal terms, ^113
with the payment of new taxes, which had not affected them as
subjects, derived an ample compensation from the rank they
obtained, the privileges they acquired, and the fair prospect of
honors and fortune that was thrown open to their ambition. But
the favor which implied a distinction was lost in the prodigality
of Caracalla, and the reluctant provincials were compelled to
assume the vain title, and the real obligations, of Roman
citizens. ^* Nor was the rapacious son of Severus contented with
such a measure of taxation as had appeared sufficient to his
moderate predecessors. Instead of a twentieth, he exacted a
tenth of all legacies and inheritances; and during his reign (for
the ancient proportion was restored after his death) he crushed
alike every part of the empire under the weight of his iron
sceptre. ^114
[Footnote 113: The situation of the new citizens is minutely
described by Pliny, (Panegyric, c. 37, 38, 39). Trajan published
a law very much in their favor.]
[Footnote *: Gibbon has adopted the opinion of Spanheim and of
Burman, which attributes to Caracalla this edict, which gave the
right of the city to all the inhabitants of the provinces. This
opinion may be disputed. Several passages of Spartianus, of
Aurelius Victor, and of Aristides, attribute this edict to Marc.
Aurelius. See a learned essay, entitled Joh. P. Mahneri Comm. de
Marc. Aur. Antonino Constitutionis de Civitate Universo Orbi
Romano data auctore. Halae, 1772, 8vo. It appears that Marc.
Aurelius made some modifications of this edict, which released
the provincials from some of the charges imposed by the right of
the city, and deprived them of some of the advantages which it
conferred. Caracalla annulled these modifications. - W.]
[Footnote 114: Dion, l. lxxvii. p. 1295.]
When all the provincials became liable to the peculiar
impositions of Roman citizens, they seemed to acquire a legal
exemption from the tributes which they had paid in their former
condition of subjects. Such were not the maxims of government
adopted by Caracalla and his pretended son. The old as well as
the new taxes were, at the same time, levied in the provinces.
It was reserved for the virtue of Alexander to relieve them in a
great measure from this intolerable grievance, by reducing the
tributes to a thirteenth part of the sum exacted at the time of
his accession. ^115 It is impossible to conjecture the motive
that engaged him to spare so trifling a remnant of the public
evil; but the noxious weed, which had not been totally
eradicated, again sprang up with the most luxuriant growth, and
in the succeeding age darkened the Roman world with its deadly
shade. In the course of this history, we shall be too often
summoned to explain the land tax, the capitation, and the heavy
contributions of corn, wine, oil, and meat, which were exacted
from the provinces for the use of the court, the army, and the
capital.
[Footnote 115: He who paid ten aurei, the usual tribute, was
charged with no more than the third part of an aureus, and
proportional pieces of gold were coined by Alexander's order.
Hist. August. p. 127, with the commentary of Salmasius.]
As long as Rome and Italy were respected as the centre of
government, a national spirit was preserved by the ancient, and
insensibly imbibed by the adopted, citizens. The principal
commands of the army were filled by men who had received a
liberal education, were well instructed in the advantages of laws
and letters, and who had risen, by equal steps, through the
regular succession of civil and military honors. ^116 To their
influence and example we may partly ascribe the modest obedience
of the legions during the two first centuries of the Imperial
history.
[Footnote 116: See the lives of Agricola, Vespasian, Trajan,
Severus, and his three competitors; and indeed of all the eminent
men of those times.]
But when the last enclosure of the Roman constitution was
trampled down by Caracalla, the separation of professions
gradually succeeded to the distinction of ranks. The more
polished citizens of the internal provinces were alone qualified
to act as lawyers and magistrates. The rougher trade of arms was
abandoned to the peasants and barbarians of the frontiers, who
knew no country but their camp, no science but that of war no
civil laws, and scarcely those of military discipline. With
bloody hands, savage manners, and desperate resolutions, they
sometimes guarded, but much oftener subverted, the throne of the
emperors.
Chapter VII: Tyranny Of Maximin, Rebellion, Civil Wars, Death Of
Maximin.
Part I.
The Elevation And Tyranny Of Maximin. - Rebellion In Africa And
Italy, Under The Authority Of The Senate. - Civil Wars And
Seditions. - Violent Deaths Of Maximin And His Son, Of Maximus
And Balbinus, And Of The Three Gordians. - Usurpation And Secular
Games Of Philip.
Of the various forms of government which have prevailed in
the world, an hereditary monarchy seems to present the fairest
scope for ridicule. Is it possible to relate without an
indignant smile, that, on the father's decease, the property of a
nation, like that of a drove of oxen, descends to his infant son,
as yet unknown to mankind and to himself; and that the bravest
warriors and the wisest statesmen, relinquishing their natural
right to empire, approach the royal cradle with bended knees and
protestations of inviolable fidelity? Satire and declamation may
paint these obvious topics in the most dazzling colors, but our
more serious thoughts will respect a useful prejudice, that
establishes a rule of succession, independent of the passions of
mankind; and we shall cheerfully acquiesce in any expedient which
deprives the multitude of the dangerous, and indeed the ideal,
power of giving themselves a master.
In the cool shade of retirement, we may easily devise
imaginary forms of government, in which the sceptre shall be
constantly bestowed on the most worthy, by the free and incorrupt
suffrage of the whole community. Experience overturns these airy
fabrics, and teaches us, that in a large society, the election of
a monarch can never devolve to the wisest, or to the most
numerous part of the people. The army is the only order of men
sufficiently united to concur in the same sentiments, and
powerful enough to impose them on the rest of their
fellow-citizens; but the temper of soldiers, habituated at once
to violence and to slavery, renders them very unfit guardians of
a legal, or even a civil constitution. Justice, humanity, or
political wisdom, are qualities they are too little acquainted
with in themselves, to appreciate them in others. Valor will
acquire their esteem, and liberality will purchase their
suffrage; but the first of these merits is often lodged in the
most savage breasts; the latter can only exert itself at the
expense of the public; and both may be turned against the
possessor of the throne, by the ambition of a daring rival.
The superior prerogative of birth, when it has obtained the
sanction of time and popular opinion, is the plainest and least
invidious of all distinctions among mankind. The acknowledged
right extinguishes the hopes of faction, and the conscious
security disarms the cruelty of the monarch. To the firm
establishment of this idea we owe the peaceful succession and
mild administration of European monarchies. To the defect of it
we must attribute the frequent civil wars, through which an
Asiatic despot is obliged to cut his way to the throne of his
fathers. Yet, even in the East, the sphere of contention is
usually limited to the princes of the reigning house, and as soon
as the more fortunate competitor has removed his brethren by the
sword and the bowstring, he no longer entertains any jealousy of
his meaner subjects. But the Roman empire, after the authority
of the senate had sunk into contempt, was a vast scene of
confusion. The royal, and even noble, families of the provinces
had long since been led in triumph before the car of the haughty
republicans. The ancient families of Rome had successively
fallen beneath the tyranny of the Caesars; and whilst those
princes were shackled by the forms of a commonwealth, and
disappointed by the repeated failure of their posterity, ^1 it
was impossible that any idea of hereditary succession should have
taken root in the minds of their subjects. The right to the
throne, which none could claim from birth, every one assumed from
merit. The daring hopes of ambition were set loose from the
salutary restraints of law and prejudice; and the meanest of
mankind might, without folly, entertain a hope of being raised by
valor and fortune to a rank in the army, in which a single crime
would enable him to wrest the sceptre of the world from his
feeble and unpopular master. After the murder of Alexander
Severus, and the elevation of Maximin, no emperor could think
himself safe upon the throne, and every barbarian peasant of the
frontier might aspire to that august, but dangerous station.
[Footnote 1: There had been no example of three successive
generations on the throne; only three instances of sons who
succeeded their fathers. The marriages of the Caesars
(notwithstanding the permission, and the frequent practice of
divorces) were generally unfruitful.]
About thirty-two years before that event, the emperor
Severus, returning from an eastern expedition, halted in Thrace,
to celebrate, with military games, the birthday of his younger
son, Geta. The country flocked in crowds to behold their
sovereign, and a young barbarian of gigantic stature earnestly
solicited, in his rude dialect, that he might be allowed to
contend for the prize of wrestling. As the pride of discipline
would have been disgraced in the overthrow of a Roman soldier by
a Thracian peasant, he was matched with the stoutest followers of
the camp, sixteen of whom he successively laid on the ground.
His victory was rewarded by some trifling gifts, and a permission
to enlist in the troops. The next day, the happy barbarian was
distinguished above a crowd of recruits, dancing and exulting
after the fashion of his country. As soon as he perceived that
he had attracted the emperor's notice, he instantly ran up to his
horse, and followed him on foot, without the least appearance of
fatigue, in a long and rapid career. "Thracian," said Severus
with astonishment, "art thou disposed to wrestle after thy race?"
"Most willingly, sir," replied the unwearied youth; and, almost
in a breath, overthrew seven of the strongest soldiers in the
army. A gold collar was the prize of his matchless vigor and
activity, and he was immediately appointed to serve in the
horseguards who always attended on the person of the sovereign.
^2
[Footnote 2: Hist. August p. 138.]
Maximin, for that was his name, though born on the
territories of the empire, descended from a mixed race of
barbarians. His father was a Goth, and his mother of the nation
of the Alani. He displayed on every occasion a valor equal to
his strength; and his native fierceness was soon tempered or
disguised by the knowledge of the world. Under the reign of
Severus and his son, he obtained the rank of centurion, with the
favor and esteem of both those princes, the former of whom was an
excellent judge of merit. Gratitude forbade Maximin to serve
under the assassin of Caracalla. Honor taught him to decline the
effeminate insults of Elagabalus. On the accession of Alexander
he returned to court, and was placed by that prince in a station
useful to the service, and honorable to himself. The fourth
legion, to which he was appointed tribune, soon became, under his
care, the best disciplined of the whole army. With the general
applause of the soldiers, who bestowed on their favorite hero the
names of Ajax and Hercules, he was successively promoted to the
first military command; ^3 and had not he still retained too much
of his savage origin, the emperor might perhaps have given his
own sister in marriage to the son of Maximin. ^4
[Footnote 3: Hist. August. p. 140. Herodian, l. vi. p. 223.
Aurelius Victor. By comparing these authors, it should seem that
Maximin had the particular command of the Tribellian horse, with
the general commission of disciplining the recruits of the whole
army. His biographer ought to have marked, with more care, his
exploits, and the successive steps of his military promotions.]
[Footnote 4: See the original letter of Alexander Severus, Hist.
August. p. 149.]
Instead of securing his fidelity, these favors served only
to inflame the ambition of the Thracian peasant, who deemed his
fortune inadequate to his merit, as long as he was constrained to
acknowledge a superior. Though a stranger to rea wisdom, he was
not devoid of a selfish cunning, which showed him that the
emperor had lost the affection of the army, and taught him to
improve their discontent to his own advantage. It is easy for
faction and calumny to shed their poison on the administration of
the best of princes, and to accuse even their virtues by artfully
confounding them with those vices to which they bear the nearest
affinity. The troops listened with pleasure to the emissaries of
Maximin. They blushed at their own ignominious patience, which,
during thirteen years, had supported the vexatious discipline
imposed by an effeminate Syrian, the timid slave of his mother
and of the senate. It was time, they cried, to cast away that
useless phantom of the civil power, and to elect for their prince
and general a real soldier, educated in camps, exercised in war,
who would assert the glory, and distribute among his companions
the treasures, of the empire. A great army was at that time
assembled on the banks of the Rhine, under the command of the
emperor himself, who, almost immediately after his return from
the Persian war, had been obliged to march against the barbarians
of Germany. The important care of training and reviewing the new
levies was intrusted to Maximin. One day, as he entered the
field of exercise, the troops either from a sudden impulse, or a
formed conspiracy, saluted him emperor, silenced by their loud
acclamations his obstinate refusal, and hastened to consummate
their rebellion by the murder of Alexander Severus.
The circumstances of his death are variously related. The
writers, who suppose that he died in ignorance of the ingratitude
and ambition of Maximin, affirm, that, after taking a frugal
repast in the sight of the army, he retired to sleep, and that,
about the seventh hour of the day, a part of his own guards broke
into the imperial tent, and, with many wounds, assassinated their
virtuous and unsuspecting prince. ^5 If we credit another, and
indeed a more probable account, Maximin was invested with the
purple by a numerous detachment, at the distance of several miles
from the head-quarters; and he trusted for success rather to the
secret wishes than to the public declarations of the great army.
Alexander had sufficient time to awaken a faint sense of loyalty
among the troops; but their reluctant professions of fidelity
quickly vanished on the appearance of Maximin, who declared
himself the friend and advocate of the military order, and was
unanimously acknowledged emperor of the Romans by the applauding
legions. The son of Mamaea, betrayed and deserted, withdrew into
his tent, desirous at least to conceal his approaching fate from
the insults of the multitude. He was soon followed by a tribune
and some centurions, the ministers of death; but instead of
receiving with manly resolution the inevitable stroke, his
unavailing cries and entreaties disgraced the last moments of his
life, and converted into contempt some portion of the just pity
which his innocence and misfortunes must inspire. His mother,
Mamaea, whose pride and avarice he loudly accused as the cause of
his ruin, perished with her son. The most faithful of his
friends were sacrificed to the first fury of the soldiers. Others
were reserved for the more deliberate cruelty of the usurper; and
those who experienced the mildest treatment, were stripped of
their employments, and ignominiously driven from the court and
army. ^6
[Footnote 5: Hist. August. p. 135. I have softened some of the
most improbable circumstances of this wretched biographer. From
his ill-worded narration, it should seem that the prince's
buffoon having accidentally entered the tent, and awakened the
slumbering monarch, the fear of punishment urged him to persuade
the disaffected soldiers to commit the murder.]
[Footnote 6: Herodian, l. vi. 223-227.]
The former tyrants, Caligula and Nero, Commodus, and
Caracalla, were all dissolute and unexperienced youths, ^7
educated in the purple, and corrupted by the pride of empire, the
luxury of Rome, and the perfidious voice of flattery. The
cruelty of Maximin was derived from a different source, the fear
of contempt. Though he depended on the attachment of the
soldiers, who loved him for virtues like their own, he was
conscious that his mean and barbarian origin, his savage
appearance, and his total ignorance of the arts and institutions
of civil life, ^8 formed a very unfavorable contrast with the
amiable manners of the unhappy Alexander. He remembered, that,
in his humbler fortune, he had often waited before the door of
the haughty nobles of Rome, and had been denied admittance by the
insolence of their slaves. He recollected too the friendship of
a few who had relieved his poverty, and assisted his rising
hopes. But those who had spurned, and those who had protected,
the Thracian, were guilty of the same crime, the knowledge of his
original obscurity. For this crime many were put to death; and
by the execution of several of his benefactors, Maximin
published, in characters of blood, the indelible history of his
baseness and ingratitude. ^9
[Footnote 7: Caligula, the eldest of the four, was only
twenty-five years of age when he ascended the throne; Caracalla
was twenty-three, Commodus nineteen, and Nero no more than
seventeen.]
[Footnote 8: It appears that he was totally ignorant of the Greek
language; which, from its universal use in conversation and
letters, was an essential part of every liberal education.]
[Footnote 9: Hist. August. p. 141. Herodian, l. vii. p. 237.
The latter of these historians has been most unjustly censured
for sparing the vices of Maximin.]
The dark and sanguinary soul of the tyrant was open to every
suspicion against those among his subjects who were the most
distinguished by their birth or merit. Whenever he was alarmed
with the sound of treason, his cruelty was unbounded and
unrelenting. A conspiracy against his life was either discovered
or imagined, and Magnus, a consular senator, was named as the
principal author of it. Without a witness, without a trial, and
without an opportunity of defence, Magnus, with four thousand of
his supposed accomplices, was put to death. Italy and the whole
empire were infested with innumerable spies and informers. On
the slightest accusation, the first of the Roman nobles, who had
governed provinces, commanded armies, and been adorned with the
consular and triumphal ornaments, were chained on the public
carriages, and hurried away to the emperor's presence.
Confiscation, exile, or simple death, were esteemed uncommon
instances of his lenity. Some of the unfortunate sufferers he
ordered to be sewed up in the hides of slaughtered animals,
others to be exposed to wild beasts, others again to be beaten to
death with clubs. During the three years of his reign, he
disdained to visit either Rome or Italy. His camp, occasionally
removed from the banks of the Rhine to those of the Danube, was
the seat of his stern despotism, which trampled on every
principle of law and justice, and was supported by the avowed
power of the sword. ^10 No man of noble birth, elegant
accomplishments, or knowledge of civil business, was suffered
near his person; and the court of a Roman emperor revived the
idea of those ancient chiefs of slaves and gladiators, whose
savage power had left a deep impression of terror and
detestation. ^11
[Footnote 10: The wife of Maximin, by insinuating wise counsels
with female gentleness, sometimes brought back the tyrant to the
way of truth and humanity. See Ammianus Marcellinus, l. xiv. c.
l, where he alludes to the fact which he had more fully related
under the reign of the Gordians. We may collect from the medals,
that Paullina was the name of this benevolent empress; and from
the title of Diva, that she died before Maximin. (Valesius ad
loc. cit. Ammian.) Spanheim de U. et P. N. tom. ii. p. 300.
Note: If we may believe Syrcellus and Zonaras, in was
Maximin himself who ordered her death - G]
[Footnote 11: He was compared to Spartacus and Athenio. Hist.
August p. 141.]
As long as the cruelty of Maximin was confined to the
illustrious senators, or even to the bold adventurers, who in the
court or army expose themselves to the caprice of fortune, the
body of the people viewed their sufferings with indifference, or
perhaps with pleasure. But the tyrant's avarice, stimulated by
the insatiate desires of the soldiers, at length attacked the
public property. Every city of the empire was possessed of an
independent revenue, destined to purchase corn for the multitude,
and to supply the expenses of the games and entertainments. By a
single act of authority, the whole mass of wealth was at once
confiscated for the use of the Imperial treasury. The temples
were stripped of their most valuable offerings of gold and
silver, and the statues of gods, heroes, and emperors, were
melted down and coined into money. These impious orders could
not be executed without tumults and massacres, as in many places
the people chose rather to die in the defence of their altars,
than to behold in the midst of peace their cities exposed to the
rapine and cruelty of war. The soldiers themselves, among whom
this sacrilegious plunder was distributed, received it with a
blush; and hardened as they were in acts of violence, they
dreaded the just reproaches of their friends and relations.
Throughout the Roman world a general cry of indignation was
heard, imploring vengeance on the common enemy of human kind; and
at length, by an act of private oppression, a peaceful and
unarmed province was driven into rebellion against him. ^12
[Footnote 12: Herodian, l. vii. p. 238. Zosim. l. i. p. 15.]
The procurator of Africa was a servant worthy of such a
master, who considered the fines and confiscations of the rich as
one of the most fruitful branches of the Imperial revenue. An
iniquitous sentence had been pronounced against some opulent
youths of that country, the execution of which would have
stripped them of far the greater part of their patrimony. In this
extremity, a resolution that must either complete or prevent
their ruin, was dictated by despair. A respite of three days,
obtained with difficulty from the rapacious treasurer, was
employed in collecting from their estates a great number of
slaves and peasants blindly devoted to the commands of their
lords, and armed with the rustic weapons of clubs and axes. The
leaders of the conspiracy, as they were admitted to the audience
of the procurator, stabbed him with the daggers concealed under
their garments, and, by the assistance of their tumultuary train,
seized on the little town of Thysdrus, ^13 and erected the
standard of rebellion against the sovereign of the Roman empire.
They rested their hopes on the hatred of mankind against Maximin,
and they judiciously resolved to oppose to that detested tyrant
an emperor whose mild virtues had already acquired the love and
esteem of the Romans, and whose authority over the province would
give weight and stability to the enterprise. Gordianus, their
proconsul, and the object of their choice, refused, with
unfeigned reluctance, the dangerous honor, and begged with tears,
that they would suffer him to terminate in peace a long and
innocent life, without staining his feeble age with civil blood.
Their menaces compelled him to accept the Imperial purple, his
only refuge, indeed, against the jealous cruelty of Maximin;
since, according to the reasoning of tyrants, those who have been
esteemed worthy of the throne deserve death, and those who
deliberate have already rebelled. ^14
[Footnote 13: In the fertile territory of Byzacium, one hundred
and fifty miles to the south of Carthage. This city was
decorated, probably by the Gordians, with the title of colony,
and with a fine amphitheatre, which is still in a very perfect
state. See Intinerar. Wesseling, p. 59; and Shaw's Travels, p.
117.]
[Footnote 14: Herodian, l. vii. p. 239. Hist. August. p. 153.]
The family of Gordianus was one of the most illustrious of
the Roman senate. On the father's side he was descended from the
Gracchi; on his mother's, from the emperor Trajan. A great
estate enabled him to support the dignity of his birth, and in
the enjoyment of it, he displayed an elegant taste and beneficent
disposition. The palace in Rome, formerly inhabited by the great
Pompey, had been, during several generations, in the possession
of Gordian's family. ^15 It was distinguished by ancient trophies
of naval victories, and decorated with the works of modern
painting. His villa on the road to Praeneste was celebrated for
baths of singular beauty and extent, for three stately rooms of a
hundred feet in length, and for a magnificent portico, supported
by two hundred columns of the four most curious and costly sorts
of marble. ^16 The public shows exhibited at his expense, and in
which the people were entertained with many hundreds of wild
beasts and gladiators, ^17 seem to surpass the fortune of a
subject; and whilst the liberality of other magistrates was
confined to a few solemn festivals at Rome, the magnificence of
Gordian was repeated, when he was aedile, every month in the
year, and extended, during his consulship, to the principal
cities of Italy. He was twice elevated to the last-mentioned
dignity, by Caracalla and by Alexander; for he possessed the
uncommon talent of acquiring the esteem of virtuous princes,
without alarming the jealousy of tyrants. His long life was
innocently spent in the study of letters and the peaceful honors
of Rome; and, till he was named proconsul of Africa by the voice
of the senate and the approbation of Alexander, ^18 he appears
prudently to have declined the command of armies and the
government of provinces. ^* As long as that emperor lived, Africa
was happy under the administration of his worthy representative:
after the barbarous Maximin had usurped the throne, Gordianus
alleviated the miseries which he was unable to prevent. When he
reluctantly accepted the purple, he was above fourscore years
old; a last and valuable remains of the happy age of the
Antonines, whose virtues he revived in his own conduct, and
celebrated in an elegant poem of thirty books. With the
venerable proconsul, his son, who had accompanied him into Africa
as his lieutenant, was likewise declared emperor. His manners
were less pure, but his character was equally amiable with that
of his father. Twenty-two acknowledged concubines, and a library
of sixty-two thousand volumes, attested the variety of his
inclinations; and from the productions which he left behind him,
it appears that the former as well as the latter were designed
for use rather than for ostentation. ^19 The Roman people
acknowledged in the features of the younger Gordian the
resemblance of Scipio Africanus, ^! recollected with pleasure
that his mother was the granddaughter of Antoninus Pius, and
rested the public hope on those latent virtues which had
hitherto, as they fondly imagined, lain concealed in the
luxurious indolence of private life.
[Footnote 15: Hist. Aug. p. 152. The celebrated house of Pompey
in carinis was usurped by Marc Antony, and consequently became,
after the Triumvir's death, a part of the Imperial domain. The
emperor Trajan allowed, and even encouraged, the rich senators to
purchase those magnificent and useless places, (Plin. Panegyric.
c. 50;) and it may seem probable, that, on this occasion,
Pompey's house came into the possession of Gordian's great-
grandfather.]
[Footnote 16: The Claudian, the Numidian, the Carystian, and the
Synnadian. The colors of Roman marbles have been faintly
described and imperfectly distinguished. It appears, however,
that the Carystian was a sea-green, and that the marble of
Synnada was white mixed with oval spots of purple. See Salmasius
ad Hist. August. p. 164.]
[Footnote 17: Hist. August. p. 151, 152. He sometimes gave five
hundred pair of gladiators, never less than one hundred and
fifty. He once gave for the use of the circus one hundred
Sicilian, and as many Cappaecian Cappadecian horses. The animals
designed for hunting were chiefly bears, boars, bulls, stags,
elks, wild asses, &c. Elephants and lions seem to have been
appropriated to Imperial magnificence.]
[Footnote 18: See the original letter, in the Augustan History,
p. 152, which at once shows Alexander's respect for the authority
of the senate, and his esteem for the proconsul appointed by that
assembly.]
[Footnote *: Herodian expressly says that he had administered
many provinces, lib. vii. 10. - W.]
[Footnote 19: By each of his concubines, the younger Gordian left
three or four children. His literary productions, though less
numerous, were by no means contemptible.]
[Footnote !: Not the personal likeness, but the family descent
from the Scipiod. - W.]
As soon as the Gordians had appeased the first tumult of a
popular election, they removed their court to Carthage. They
were received with the acclamations of the Africans, who honored
their virtues, and who, since the visit of Hadrian, had never
beheld the majesty of a Roman emperor. But these vain
acclamations neither strengthened nor confirmed the title of the
Gordians. They were induced by principle, as well as interest,
to solicit the approbation of the senate; and a deputation of the
noblest provincials was sent, without delay, to Rome, to relate
and justify the conduct of their countrymen, who, having long
suffered with patience, were at length resolved to act with
vigor. The letters of the new princes were modest and
respectful, excusing the necessity which had obliged them to
accept the Imperial title; but submitting their election and
their fate to the supreme judgment of the senate. ^20
[Footnote 20: Herodian, l. vii. p. 243. Hist. August. p. 144.]
The inclinations of the senate were neither doubtful nor
divided. The birth and noble alliances of the Gordians had
intimately connected them with the most illustrious houses of
Rome. Their fortune had created many dependants in that
assembly, their merit had acquired many friends. Their mild
administration opened the flattering prospect of the restoration,
not only of the civil but even of the republican government. The
terror of military violence, which had first obliged the senate
to forget the murder of Alexander, and to ratify the election of
a barbarian peasant, ^21 now produced a contrary effect, and
provoked them to assert the injured rights of freedom and
humanity. The hatred of Maximin towards the senate was declared
and implacable; the tamest submission had not appeased his fury,
the most cautious innocence would not remove his suspicions; and
even the care of their own safety urged them to share the fortune
of an enterprise, of which (if unsuccessful) they were sure to be
the first victims. These considerations, and perhaps others of a
more private nature, were debated in a previous conference of the
consuls and the magistrates. As soon as their resolution was
decided, they convoked in the temple of Castor the whole body of
the senate, according to an ancient form of secrecy, ^22
calculated to awaken their attention, and to conceal their
decrees. "Conscript fathers," said the consul Syllanus, "the two
Gordians, both of consular dignity, the one your proconsul, the
other your lieutenant, have been declared emperors by the general
consent of Africa. Let us return thanks," he boldly continued,
"to the youth of Thysdrus; let us return thanks to the faithful
people of Carthage, our generous deliverers from a horrid monster
- Why do you hear me thus coolly, thus timidly? Why do you cast
those anxious looks on each other? Why hesitate? Maximin is a
public enemy! may his enmity soon expire with him, and may we
long enjoy the prudence and felicity of Gordian the father, the
valor and constancy of Gordian the son!" ^23 The noble ardor of
the consul revived the languid spirit of the senate. By a
unanimous decree, the election of the Gordians was ratified,
Maximin, his son, and his adherents, were pronounced enemies of
their country, and liberal rewards were offered to whomsoever had
the courage and good fortune to destroy them.
[See Temple Of Castor and Pollux]
[Footnote 21: Quod. tamen patres dum periculosum existimant;
inermes armato esistere approbaverunt. - Aurelius Victor.]
[Footnote 22: Even the servants of the house, the scribes, &c.,
were excluded, and their office was filled by the senators
themselves. We are obliged to the Augustan History. p. 159, for
preserving this curious example of the old discipline of the
commonwealth.]
[Footnote 23: This spirited speech, translated from the Augustan
historian, p. 156, seems transcribed by him from the origina
registers of the senate]
During the emperor's absence, a detachment of the Praetorian
guards remained at Rome, to protect, or rather to command, the
capital. The praefect Vitalianus had signalized his fidelity to
Maximin, by the alacrity with which he had obeyed, and even
prevented the cruel mandates of the tyrant. His death alone
could rescue the authority of the senate, and the lives of the
senators from a state of danger and suspense. Before their
resolves had transpired, a quaestor and some tribunes were
commissioned to take his devoted life. They executed the order
with equal boldness and success; and, with their bloody daggers
in their hands, ran through the streets, proclaiming to the
people and the soldiers the news of the happy revolution. The
enthusiasm of liberty was seconded by the promise of a large
donative, in lands and money; the statues of Maximin were thrown
down; the capital of the empire acknowledged, with transport, the
authority of the two Gordians and the senate; ^24 and the example
of Rome was followed by the rest of Italy.
[Footnote 24: Herodian, l. vii. p. 244]
A new spirit had arisen in that assembly, whose long
patience had been insulted by wanton despotism and military
license. The senate assumed the reins of government, and, with a
calm intrepidity, prepared to vindicate by arms the cause of
freedom. Among the consular senators recommended by their merit
and services to the favor of the emperor Alexander, it was easy
to select twenty, not unequal to the command of an army, and the
conduct of a war. To these was the defence of Italy intrusted.
Each was appointed to act in his respective department,
authorized to enroll and discipline the Italian youth; and
instructed to fortify the ports and highways, against the
impending invasion of Maximin. A number of deputies, chosen from
the most illustrious of the senatorian and equestrian orders,
were despatched at the same time to the governors of the several
provinces, earnestly conjuring them to fly to the assistance of
their country, and to remind the nations of their ancient ties of
friendship with the Roman senate and people. The general respect
with which these deputies were received, and the zeal of Italy
and the provinces in favor of the senate, sufficiently prove that
the subjects of Maximin were reduced to that uncommon distress,
in which the body of the people has more to fear from oppression
than from resistance. The consciousness of that melancholy
truth, inspires a degree of persevering fury, seldom to be found
in those civil wars which are artificially supported for the
benefit of a few factious and designing leaders. ^25 [Footnote
25: Herodian, l. vii. p. 247, l. viii. p. 277. Hist. August. p
156-158.]
For while the cause of the Gordians was embraced with such
diffusive ardor, the Gordians themselves were no more. The
feeble court of Carthage was alarmed by the rapid approach of
Capelianus, governor of Mauritania, who, with a small band of
veterans, and a fierce host of barbarians, attacked a faithful,
but unwarlike province. The younger Gordian sallied out to meet
the enemy at the head of a few guards, and a numerous
undisciplined multitude, educated in the peaceful luxury of
Carthage. His useless valor served only to procure him an
honorable death on the field of battle. His aged father, whose
reign had not exceeded thirty-six days, put an end to his life on
the first news of the defeat. Carthage, destitute of defence,
opened her gates to the conqueror, and Africa was exposed to the
rapacious cruelty of a slave, obliged to satisfy his unrelenting
master with a large account of blood and treasure. ^26
[Footnote 26: Herodian, l. vii. p. 254. Hist. August. p.
150-160. We may observe, that one month and six days, for the
reign of Gordian, is a just correction of Casaubon and Panvinius,
instead of the absurd reading of one year and six months. See
Commentar. p. 193. Zosimus relates, l. i. p. 17, that the two
Gordians perished by a tempest in the midst of their navigation.
A strange ignorance of history, or a strange abuse of metaphors!]
The fate of the Gordians filled Rome with just but
unexpected terror. The senate, convoked in the temple of Concord,
affected to transact the common business of the day; and seemed
to decline, with trembling anxiety, the consideration of their
own and the public danger. A silent consternation prevailed in
the assembly, till a senator, of the name and family of Trajan,
awakened his brethren from their fatal lethargy. He represented
to them that the choice of cautious, dilatory measures had been
long since out of their power; that Maximin, implacable by
nature, and exasperated by injuries, was advancing towards Italy,
at the head of the military force of the empire; and that their
only remaining alternative was either to meet him bravely in the
field, or tamely to expect the tortures and ignominious death
reserved for unsuccessful rebellion. "We have lost," continued
he, "two excellent princes; but unless we desert ourselves, the
hopes of the republic have not perished with the Gordians. Many
are the senators whose virtues have deserved, and whose abilities
would sustain, the Imperial dignity. Let us elect two emperors,
one of whom may conduct the war against the public enemy, whilst
his colleague remains at Rome to direct the civil administration.
I cheerfully expose myself to the danger and envy of the
nomination, and give my vote in favor of Maximus and Balbinus.
Ratify my choice, conscript fathers, or appoint in their place,
others more worthy of the empire." The general apprehension
silenced the whispers of jealousy; the merit of the candidates
was universally acknowledged; and the house resounded with the
sincere acclamations of "Long life and victory to the emperors
Maximus and Balbinus. You are happy in the judgment of the
senate; may the republic be happy under your administration!" ^27
[Footnote 27: See the Augustan History, p. 166, from the
registers of the senate; the date is confessedly faulty but the
coincidence of the Apollinatian games enables us to correct it.]
Chapter VII: Tyranny Of Maximin, Rebellion, Civil Wars, Death Of
Maximin.
Part II.
The virtues and the reputation of the new emperors justified
the most sanguine hopes of the Romans. The various nature of
their talents seemed to appropriate to each his peculiar
department of peace and war, without leaving room for jealous
emulation. Balbinus was an admired orator, a poet of
distinguished fame, and a wise magistrate, who had exercised with
innocence and applause the civil jurisdiction in almost all the
interior provinces of the empire. His birth was noble, ^28 his
fortune affluent, his manners liberal and affable. In him the
love of pleasure was corrected by a sense of dignity, nor had the
habits of ease deprived him of a capacity for business. The mind
of Maximus was formed in a rougher mould. By his valor and
abilities he had raised himself from the meanest origin to the
first employments of the state and army. His victories over the
Sarmatians and the Germans, the austerity of his life, and the
rigid impartiality of his justice, while he was a Praefect of the
city, commanded the esteem of a people whose affections were
engaged in favor of the more amiable Balbinus. The two colleagues
had both been consuls, (Balbinus had twice enjoyed that honorable
office,) both had been named among the twenty lieutenants of the
senate; and since the one was sixty and the other seventy-four
years old, ^29 they had both attained the full maturity of age
and experience.
[Footnote 28: He was descended from Cornelius Balbus, a noble
Spaniard, and the adopted son of Theophanes, the Greek historian.
Balbus obtained the freedom of Rome by the favor of Pompey, and
preserved it by the eloquence of Cicero. (See Orat. pro Cornel.
Balbo.) The friendship of Caesar, (to whom he rendered the most
important secret services in the civil war) raised him to the
consulship and the pontificate, honors never yet possessed by a
stranger. The nephew of this Balbus triumphed over the
Garamantes. See Dictionnaire de Bayle, au mot Balbus, where he
distinguishes the several persons of that name, and rectifies,
with his usual accuracy, the mistakes of former writers
concerning them.]
[Footnote 29: Zonaras, l. xii. p. 622. But little dependence is
to be had on the authority of a modern Greek, so grossly ignorant
of the history of the third century, that he creates several
imaginary emperors, and confounds those who really existed.]
After the senate had conferred on Maximus and Balbinus an
equal portion of the consular and tribunitian powers, the title
of Fathers of their country, and the joint office of Supreme
Pontiff, they ascended to the Capitol to return thanks to the
gods, protectors of Rome. ^30 The solemn rites of sacrifice were
disturbed by a sedition of the people. The licentious multitude
neither loved the rigid Maximus, nor did they sufficiently fear
the mild and humane Balbinus. Their increasing numbers
surrounded the temple of Jupiter; with obstinate clamors they
asserted their inherent right of consenting to the election of
their sovereign; and demanded, with an apparent moderation, that,
besides the two emperors, chosen by the senate, a third should be
added of the family of the Gordians, as a just return of
gratitude to those princes who had sacrificed their lives for the
republic. At the head of the city-guards, and the youth of the
equestrian order, Maximus and Balbinus attempted to cut their way
through the seditious multitude. The multitude, armed with
sticks and stones, drove them back into the Capitol. It is
prudent to yield when the contest, whatever may be the issue of
it, must be fatal to both parties. A boy, only thirteen years of
age, the grandson of the elder, and nephew ^* of the younger
Gordian, was produced to the people, invested with the ornaments
and title of Caesar. The tumult was appeased by this easy
condescension; and the two emperors, as soon as they had been
peaceably acknowledged in Rome, prepared to defend Italy against
the common enemy.
[Footnote 30: Herodian, l. vii. p. 256, supposes that the senate
was at first convoked in the Capitol, and is very eloquent on the
occasion. The Augustar History p. 116, seems much more
authentic.]
[Footnote *: According to some, the son. - G.]
Whilst in Rome and Africa, revolutions succeeded each other
with such amazing rapidity, that the mind of Maximin was agitated
by the most furious passions. He is said to have received the
news of the rebellion of the Gordians, and of the decree of the
senate against him, not with the temper of a man, but the rage of
a wild beast; which, as it could not discharge itself on the
distant senate, threatened the life of his son, of his friends,
and of all who ventured to approach his person. The grateful
intelligence of the death of the Gordians was quickly followed by
the assurance that the senate, laying aside all hopes of pardon
or accommodation, had substituted in their room two emperors,
with whose merit he could not be unacquainted. Revenge was the
only consolation left to Maximin, and revenge could only be
obtained by arms. The strength of the legions had been assembled
by Alexander from all parts of the empire. Three successful
campaigns against the Germans and the Sarmatians, had raised
their fame, confirmed their discipline, and even increased their
numbers, by filling the ranks with the flower of the barbarian
youth. The life of Maximin had been spent in war, and the candid
severity of history cannot refuse him the valor of a soldier, or
even the abilities of an experienced general. ^31 It might
naturally be expected, that a prince of such a character, instead
of suffering the rebellion to gain stability by delay, should
immediately have marched from the banks of the Danube to those of
the Tyber, and that his victorious army, instigated by contempt
for the senate, and eager to gather the spoils of Italy, should
have burned with impatience to finish the easy and lucrative
conquest. Yet as far as we can trust to the obscure chronology
of that period, ^32 it appears that the operations of some
foreign war deferred the Italian expedition till the ensuing
spring. From the prudent conduct of Maximin, we may learn that
the savage features of his character have been exaggerated by the
pencil of party, that his passions, however impetuous, submitted
to the force of reason, and that the barbarian possessed
something of the generous spirit of Sylla, who subdued the
enemies of Rome before he suffered himself to revenge his private
injuries. ^33
[Footnote 31: In Herodian, l. vii. p. 249, and in the Augustan
History, we have three several orations of Maximin to his army,
on the rebellion of Africa and Rome: M. de Tillemont has very
justly observed that they neither agree with each other nor with
truth. Histoire des Empereurs, tom. iii. p. 799.]
[Footnote 32: The carelessness of the writers of that age, leaves
us in a singular perplexity. 1. We know that Maximus and
Balbinus were killed during the Capitoline games. Herodian, l.
viii. p. 285. The authority of Censorinus (de Die Natali, c. 18)
enables us to fix those games with certainty to the year 238, but
leaves us in ignorance of the month or day. 2. The election of
Gordian by the senate is fixed with equal certainty to the 27th
of May; but we are at a loss to discover whether it was in the
same or the preceding year. Tillemont and Muratori, who maintain
the two opposite opinions, bring into the field a desultory troop
of authorities, conjectures and probabilities. The one seems to
draw out, the other to contract the series of events between
those periods, more than can be well reconciled to reason and
history. Yet it is necessary to choose between them.
Note: Eckhel has more recently treated these chronological
questions with a perspicuity which gives great probability to his
conclusions. Setting aside all the historians, whose
contradictions are irreconcilable, he has only consulted the
medals, and has arranged the events before us in the following
order: -
Maximin, A. U. 990, after having conquered the Germans,
reenters Pannonia, establishes his winter quarters at Sirmium,
and prepares himself to make war against the people of the North.
In the year 991, in the cal ends of January, commences his fourth
tribunate. The Gordians are chosen emperors in Africa, probably
at the beginning of the month of March. The senate confirms this
election with joy, and declares Maximin the enemy of Rome. Five
days after he had heard of this revolt, Maximin sets out from
Sirmium on his march to Italy. These events took place about the
beginning of April; a little after, the Gordians are slain in
Africa by Capellianus, procurator of Mauritania. The senate, in
its alarm, names as emperors Balbus and Maximus Pupianus, and
intrusts the latter with the war against Maximin. Maximin is
stopped on his road near Aquileia, by the want of provisions, and
by the melting of the snows: he begins the siege of Aquileia at
the end of April. Pupianus assembles his army at Ravenna.
Maximin and his son are assassinated by the soldiers enraged at
the resistance of Aquileia: and this was probably in the middle
of May. Pupianus returns to Rome, and assumes the government
with Balbinus; they are assassinated towards the end of July
Gordian the younger ascends the throne. Eckhel de Doct. Vol vii
295. - G.]
[Footnote 33: Velleius Paterculus, l. ii. c. 24. The president
de Montesquieu (in his dialogue between Sylla and Eucrates)
expresses the sentiments of the dictator in a spirited, and even
a sublime manner.]
When the troops of Maximin, advancing in excellent order,
arrived at the foot of the Julian Alps, they were terrified by
the silence and desolation that reigned on the frontiers of
Italy. The villages and open towns had been abandoned on their
approach by the inhabitants, the cattle was driven away, the
provisions removed or destroyed, the bridges broken down, nor was
any thing left which could afford either shelter or subsistence
to an invader. Such had been the wise orders of the generals of
the senate: whose design was to protract the war, to ruin the
army of Maximin by the slow operation of famine, and to consume
his strength in the sieges of the principal cities of Italy,
which they had plentifully stored with men and provisions from
the deserted country. Aquileia received and withstood the first
shock of the invasion. The streams that issue from the head of
the Hadriatic Gulf, swelled by the melting of the winter snows,
^34 opposed an unexpected obstacle to the arms of Maximin. At
length, on a singular bridge, constructed with art and
difficulty, of large hogsheads, he transported his army to the
opposite bank, rooted up the beautiful vineyards in the
neighborhood of Aquileia, demolished the suburbs, and employed
the timber of the buildings in the engines and towers, with which
on every side he attacked the city. The walls, fallen to decay
during the security of a long peace, had been hastily repaired on
this sudden emergency: but the firmest defence of Aquileia
consisted in the constancy of the citizens; all ranks of whom,
instead of being dismayed, were animated by the extreme danger,
and their knowledge of the tyrant's unrelenting temper. Their
courage was supported and directed by Crispinus and Menophilus,
two of the twenty lieutenants of the senate, who, with a small
body of regular troops, had thrown themselves into the besieged
place. The army of Maximin was repulsed in repeated attacks, his
machines destroyed by showers of artificial fire; and the
generous enthusiasm of the Aquileians was exalted into a
confidence of success, by the opinion that Belenus, their tutelar
deity, combated in person in the defence of his distressed
worshippers. ^35
[Footnote 34: Muratori (Annali d' Italia, tom. ii. p. 294) thinks
the melting of the snows suits better with the months of June or
July, than with those of February. The opinion of a man who
passed his life between the Alps and the Apennines, is
undoubtedly of great weight; yet I observe, 1. That the long
winter, of which Muratori takes advantage, is to be found only in
the Latin version, and not in the Greek text of Herodian. 2.
That the vicissitudes of suns and rains, to which the soldiers of
Maximin were exposed, (Herodian, l. viii. p. 277,) denote the
spring rather than the summer. We may observe, likewise, that
these several streams, as they melted into one, composed the
Timavus, so poetically (in every sense of the word) described by
Virgil. They are about twelve miles to the east of Aquileia. See
Cluver. Italia Antiqua, tom. i. p. 189, &c.]
[Footnote 35: Herodian, l. viii. p. 272. The Celtic deity was
supposed to be Apollo, and received under that name the thanks of
the senate. A temple was likewise built to Venus the Bald, in
honor of the women of Aquileia, who had given up their hair to
make ropes for the military engines.]
The emperor Maximus, who had advanced as far as Ravenna, to
secure that important place, and to hasten the military
preparations, beheld the event of the war in the more faithful
mirror of reason and policy. He was too sensible, that a single
town could not resist the persevering efforts of a great army;
and he dreaded, lest the enemy, tired with the obstinate
resistance of Aquileia, should on a sudden relinquish the
fruitless siege, and march directly towards Rome. The fate of
the empire and the cause of freedom must then be committed to the
chance of a battle; and what arms could he oppose to the veteran
legions of the Rhine and Danube? Some troops newly levied among
the generous but enervated youth of Italy; and a body of German
auxiliaries, on whose firmness, in the hour of trial, it was
dangerous to depend. In the midst of these just alarms, the
stroke of domestic conspiracy punished the crimes of Maximin, and
delivered Rome and the senate from the calamities that would
surely have attended the victory of an enraged barbarian.
The people of Aquileia had scarcely experienced any of the
common miseries of a siege; their magazines were plentifully
supplied, and several fountains within the walls assured them of
an inexhaustible resource of fresh water. The soldiers of
Maximin were, on the contrary, exposed to the inclemency of the
season, the contagion of disease, and the horrors of famine. The
open country was ruined, the rivers filled with the slain, and
polluted with blood. A spirit of despair and disaffection began
to diffuse itself among the troops; and as they were cut off from
all intelligence, they easily believed that the whole empire had
embraced the cause of the senate, and that they were left as
devoted victims to perish under the impregnable walls of
Aquileia. The fierce temper of the tyrant was exasperated by
disappointments, which he imputed to the cowardice of his army;
and his wanton and ill-timed cruelty, instead of striking terror,
inspired hatred, and a just desire of revenge. A party of
Praetorian guards, who trembled for their wives and children in
the camp of Alba, near Rome, executed the sentence of the senate.
Maximin, abandoned by his guards, was slain in his tent, with his
son, (whom he had associated to the honors of the purple,)
Anulinus the praefect, and the principal ministers of his
tyranny. ^36 The sight of their heads, borne on the point of
spears, convinced the citizens of Aquileia that the siege was at
an end; the gates of the city were thrown open, a liberal market
was provided for the hungry troops of Maximin, and the whole army
joined in solemn protestations of fidelity to the senate and the
people of Rome, and to their lawful emperors Maximus and
Balbinus. Such was the deserved fate of a brutal savage,
destitute, as he has generally been represented, of every
sentiment that distinguishes a civilized, or even a human being.
The body was suited to the soul. The stature of Maximin exceeded
the measure of eight feet, and circumstances almost incredible
are related of his matchless strength and appetite. ^37 Had he
lived in a less enlightened age, tradition and poetry might well
have described him as one of those monstrous giants, whose
supernatural power was constantly exerted for the destruction of
mankind.
[Footnote 36: Herodian, l. viii. p. 279. Hist. August. p. 146.
The duration of Maximin's reign has not been defined with much
accuracy, except by Eutropius, who allows him three years and a
few days, (l. ix. 1;) we may depend on the integrity of the text,
as the Latin original is checked by the Greek version of
Paeanius.]
[Footnote 37: Eight Roman feet and one third, which are equal to
above eight English feet, as the two measures are to each other
in the proportion of 967 to 1000. See Graves's discourse on the
Roman foot. We are told that Maximin could drink in a day an
amphora (or about seven gallons) of wine, and eat thirty or forty
pounds of meat. He could move a loaded wagon, break a horse's
leg with his fist, crumble stones in his hand, and tear up small
trees by the roots. See his life in the Augustan History.]
It is easier to conceive than to describe the universal joy
of the Roman world on the fall of the tyrant, the news of which
is said to have been carried in four days from Aquileia to Rome.
The return of Maximus was a triumphal procession; his colleague
and young Gordian went out to meet him, and the three princes
made their entry into the capital, attended by the ambassadors of
almost all the cities of Italy, saluted with the splendid
offerings of gratitude and superstition, and received with the
unfeigned acclamations of the senate and people, who persuaded
themselves that a golden age would succeed to an age of iron. ^38
The conduct of the two emperors corresponded with these
expectations. They administered justice in person; and the rigor
of the one was tempered by the other's clemency. The oppressive
taxes with which Maximin had loaded the rights of inheritance and
succession, were repealed, or at least moderated. Discipline was
revived, and with the advice of the senate many wise laws were
enacted by their imperial ministers, who endeavored to restore a
civil constitution on the ruins of military tyranny. "What
reward may we expect for delivering Rome from a monster?" was the
question asked by Maximus, in a moment of freedom and confidence.
Balbinus answered it without hesitation - "The love of the
senate, of the people, and of all mankind." "Alas!" replied his
more penetrating colleague - "alas! I dread the hatred of the
soldiers, and the fatal effects of their resentment." ^39 His
apprehensions were but too well justified by the event.
[Footnote 38: See the congratulatory letter of Claudius Julianus,
the consul to the two emperors, in the Augustan History.]
[Footnote 39: Hist. August. p. 171.]
Whilst Maximus was preparing to defend Italy against the
common foe, Balbinus, who remained at Rome, had been engaged in
scenes of blood and intestine discord. Distrust and jealousy
reigned in the senate; and even in the temples where they
assembled, every senator carried either open or concealed arms.
In the midst of their deliberations, two veterans of the guards,
actuated either by curiosity or a sinister motive, audaciously
thrust themselves into the house, and advanced by degrees beyond
the altar of Victory. Gallicanus, a consular, and Maecenas, a
Praetorian senator, viewed with indignation their insolent
intrusion: drawing their daggers, they laid the spies (for such
they deemed them) dead at the foot of the altar, and then,
advancing to the door of the senate, imprudently exhorted the
multitude to massacre the Praetorians, as the secret adherents of
the tyrant. Those who escaped the first fury of the tumult took
refuge in the camp, which they defended with superior advantage
against the reiterated attacks of the people, assisted by the
numerous bands of gladiators, the property of opulent nobles.
The civil war lasted many days, with infinite loss and confusion
on both sides. When the pipes were broken that supplied the camp
with water, the Praetorians were reduced to intolerable distress;
but in their turn they made desperate sallies into the city, set
fire to a great number of houses, and filled the streets with the
blood of the inhabitants. The emperor Balbinus attempted, by
ineffectual edicts and precarious truces, to reconcile the
factions at Rome. But their animosity, though smothered for a
while, burnt with redoubled violence. The soldiers, detesting
the senate and the people, despised the weakness of a prince, who
wanted either the spirit or the power to command the obedience of
his subjects. ^40
[Footnote 40: Herodian, l. viii. p. 258.]
After the tyrant's death, his formidable army had
acknowledged, from necessity rather than from choice, the
authority of Maximus, who transported himself without delay to
the camp before Aquileia. As soon as he had received their oath
of fidelity, he addressed them in terms full of mildness and
moderation; lamented, rather than arraigned the wild disorders of
the times, and assured the soldiers, that of all their past
conduct the senate would remember only their generous desertion
of the tyrant, and their voluntary return to their duty. Maximus
enforced his exhortations by a liberal donative, purified the
camp by a solemn sacrifice of expiation, and then dismissed the
legions to their several provinces, impressed, as he hoped, with
a lively sense of gratitude and obedience. ^41 But nothing could
reconcile the haughty spirit of the Praetorians. They attended
the emperors on the memorable day of their public entry into
Rome; but amidst the general acclamations, the sullen, dejected
countenance of the guards sufficiently declared that they
considered themselves as the object, rather than the partners, of
the triumph. When the whole body was united in their camp, those
who had served under Maximin, and those who had remained at Rome,
insensibly communicated to each other their complaints and
apprehensions. The emperors chosen by the army had perished with
ignominy; those elected by the senate were seated on the throne.
^42 The long discord between the civil and military powers was
decided by a war, in which the former had obtained a complete
victory. The soldiers must now learn a new doctrine of
submission to the senate; and whatever clemency was affected by
that politic assembly, they dreaded a slow revenge, colored by
the name of discipline, and justified by fair pretences of the
public good. But their fate was still in their own hands; and if
they had courage to despise the vain terrors of an impotent
republic, it was easy to convince the world, that those who were
masters of the arms, were masters of the authority, of the state.
[Footnote 41: Herodian, l. viii. p. 213.]
[Footnote 42: The observation had been made imprudently enough in
the acclamations of the senate, and with regard to the soldiers
it carried the appearance of a wanton insult. Hist. August. p.
170.]
When the senate elected two princes, it is probable that,
besides the declared reason of providing for the various
emergencies of peace and war, they were actuated by the secret
desire of weakening by division the despotism of the supreme
magistrate. Their policy was effectual, but it proved fatal both
to their emperors and to themselves. The jealousy of power was
soon exasperated by the difference of character. Maximus
despised Balbinus as a luxurious noble, and was in his turn
disdained by his colleague as an obscure soldier. Their silent
discord was understood rather than seen; ^43 but the mutual
consciousness prevented them from uniting in any vigorous
measures of defence against their common enemies of the
Praetorian camp. The whole city was employed in the Capitoline
games, and the emperors were left almost alone in the palace. On
a sudden, they were alarmed by the approach of a troop of
desperate assassins. Ignorant of each other's situation or
designs, (for they already occupied very distant apartments,)
afraid to give or to receive assistance, they wasted the
important moments in idle debates and fruitless recriminations.
The arrival of the guards put an end to the vain strife. They
seized on these emperors of the senate, for such they called them
with malicious contempt, stripped them of their garments, and
dragged them in insolent triumph through the streets of Rome,
with the design of inflicting a slow and cruel death on these
unfortunate princes. The fear of a rescue from the faithful
Germans of the Imperial guards, shortened their tortures; and
their bodies, mangled with a thousand wounds, were left exposed
to the insults or to the pity of the populace. ^44
[Footnote 43: Discordiae tacitae, et quae intelligerentur potius
quam viderentur. Hist. August. p. 170. This well-chosen
expression is probably stolen from some better writer.]
[Footnote 44: Herodian, l. viii. p. 287, 288.]
In the space of a few months, six princes had been cut off
by the sword. Gordian, who had already received the title of
Caesar, was the only person that occurred to the soldiers as
proper to fill the vacant throne. ^45 They carried him to the
camp, and unanimously saluted him Augustus and Emperor. His name
was dear to the senate and people; his tender age promised a long
impunity of military license; and the submission of Rome and the
provinces to the choice of the Praetorian guards, saved the
republic, at the expense indeed of its freedom and dignity, from
the horrors of a new civil war in the heart of the capital. ^46
[Footnote 45: Quia non alius erat in praesenti, is the expression
of the Augustan History.]
[Footnote 46: Quintus Curtius (l. x. c. 9,) pays an elegant
compliment to the emperor of the day, for having, by his happy
accession, extinguished so many firebrands, sheathed so many
swords, and put an end to the evils of a divided government.
After weighing with attention every word of the passage, I am of
opinion, that it suits better with the elevation of Gordian, than
with any other period of the Roman history. In that case, it may
serve to decide the age of Quintus Curtius. Those who place him
under the first Caesars, argue from the purity of his style but
are embarrassed by the silence of Quintilian, in his accurate
list of Roman historians.
Note: This conjecture of Gibbon is without foundation. Many
passages in the work of Quintus Curtius clearly place him at an
earlier period. Thus, in speaking of the Parthians, he says,
Hinc in Parthicum perventum est, tunc ignobilem gentem: nunc
caput omnium qui post Euphratem et Tigrim amnes siti Rubro mari
terminantur. The Parthian empire had this extent only in the
first age of the vulgar aera: to that age, therefore, must be
assigned the date of Quintus Curtius. Although the critics (says
M. de Sainte Croix) have multiplied conjectures on this subject,
most of them have ended by adopting the opinion which places
Quintus Curtius under the reign of Claudius. See Just. Lips. ad
Ann. Tac. ii. 20. Michel le Tellier Praef. in Curt. Tillemont
Hist. des Emp. i. p. 251. Du Bos Reflections sur la Poesie, 2d
Partie. Tiraboschi Storia della, Lett. Ital. ii. 149. Examen.
crit. des Historiens d'Alexandre, 2d ed. p. 104, 849, 850. - G.
This interminable question seems as much perplexed as ever.
The first argument of M. Guizot is a strong one, except that
Parthian is often used by later writers for Persian. Cunzius, in
his preface to an edition published at Helmstadt, (1802,)
maintains the opinion of Bagnolo, which assigns Q. Curtius to the
time of Constantine the Great. Schmieder, in his edit. Gotting.
1803, sums up in this sentence, aetatem Curtii ignorari pala
mest. - M.]
As the third Gordian was only nineteen years of age at the
time of his death, the history of his life, were it known to us
with greater accuracy than it really is, would contain little
more than the account of his education, and the conduct of the
ministers, who by turns abused or guided the simplicity of his
unexperienced youth. Immediately after his accession, he fell
into the hands of his mother's eunuchs, that pernicious vermin of
the East, who, since the days of Elagabalus, had infested the
Roman palace. By the artful conspiracy of these wretches, an
impenetrable veil was drawn between an innocent prince and his
oppressed subjects, the virtuous disposition of Gordian was
deceived, and the honors of the empire sold without his
knowledge, though in a very public manner, to the most worthless
of mankind. We are ignorant by what fortunate accident the
emperor escaped from this ignominious slavery, and devolved his
confidence on a minister, whose wise counsels had no object
except the glory of his sovereign and the happiness of the
people. It should seem that love and learning introduced
Misitheus to the favor of Gordian. The young prince married the
daughter of his master of rhetoric, and promoted his
father-in-law to the first offices of the empire. Two admirable
letters that passed between them are still extant. The minister,
with the conscious dignity of virtue, congratulates Gordian that
he is delivered from the tyranny of the eunuchs, ^47 and still
more that he is sensible of his deliverance. The emperor
acknowledges, with an amiable confusion, the errors of his past
conduct; and laments, with singular propriety, the misfortune of
a monarch, from whom a venal tribe of courtiers perpetually labor
to conceal the truth. ^48
[Footnote 47: Hist. August. p. 161. From some hints in the two
letters, I should expect that the eunuchs were not expelled the
palace without some degree of gentle violence, and that the young
Gordian rather approved of, than consented to, their disgrace.]
[Footnote 48: Duxit uxorem filiam Misithei, quem causa
eloquentiae dignum parentela sua putavit; et praefectum statim
fecit; post quod, non puerile jam et contemptibile videbatur
imperium.]
The life of Misitheus had been spent in the profession of
letters, not of arms; yet such was the versatile genius of that
great man, that, when he was appointed Praetorian Praefect, he
discharged the military duties of his place with vigor and
ability. The Persians had invaded Mesopotamia, and threatened
Antioch. By the persuasion of his father-in-law, the young
emperor quitted the luxury of Rome, opened, for the last time
recorded in history, the temple of Janus, and marched in person
into the East. On his approach, with a great army, the Persians
withdrew their garrisons from the cities which they had already
taken, and retired from the Euphrates to the Tigris. Gordian
enjoyed the pleasure of announcing to the senate the first
success of his arms, which he ascribed, with a becoming modesty
and gratitude, to the wisdom of his father and Praefect. During
the whole expedition, Misitheus watched over the safety and
discipline of the army; whilst he prevented their dangerous
murmurs by maintaining a regular plenty in the camp, and by
establishing ample magazines of vinegar, bacon, straw, barley,
and wheat in all the cities of the frontier. ^49 But the
prosperity of Gordian expired with Misitheus, who died of a flux,
not with out very strong suspicions of poison. Philip, his
successor in the praefecture, was an Arab by birth, and
consequently, in the earlier part of his life, a robber by
profession. His rise from so obscure a station to the first
dignities of the empire, seems to prove that he was a bold and
able leader. But his boldness prompted him to aspire to the
throne, and his abilities were employed to supplant, not to
serve, his indulgent master. The minds of the soldiers were
irritated by an artificial scarcity, created by his contrivance
in the camp; and the distress of the army was attributed to the
youth and incapacity of the prince. It is not in our power to
trace the successive steps of the secret conspiracy and open
sedition, which were at length fatal to Gordian. A sepulchral
monument was erected to his memory on the spot ^50 where he was
killed, near the conflux of the Euphrates with the little river
Aboras. ^51 The fortunate Philip, raised to the empire by the
votes of the soldiers, found a ready obedience from the senate
and the provinces. ^52
[Footnote 49: Hist. August. p. 162. Aurelius Victor. Porphyrius
in Vit Plotin. ap. Fabricium, Biblioth. Graec. l. iv. c. 36.
The philosopher Plotinus accompanied the army, prompted by the
love of knowledge, and by the hope of penetrating as far as
India.]
[Footnote 50: About twenty miles from the little town of
Circesium, on the frontier of the two empires.
Note: Now Kerkesia; placed in the angle formed by the
juncture of the Chaboras, or al Khabour, with the Euphrates.
This situation appeared advantageous to Diocletian, that he
raised fortifications to make it the but wark of the empire on
the side of Mesopotamia. D'Anville. Geog. Anc. ii. 196. - G. It
is the Carchemish of the Old Testament, 2 Chron. xxxv. 20. ler.
xlvi. 2. - M.]
[Footnote 51: The inscription (which contained a very singular
pun) was erased by the order of Licinius, who claimed some degree
of relationship to Philip, (Hist. August. p. 166;) but the
tumulus, or mound of earth which formed the sepulchre, still
subsisted in the time of Julian. See Ammian Marcellin. xxiii.
5.]
[Footnote 52: Aurelius Victor. Eutrop. ix. 2. Orosius, vii. 20.
Ammianus Marcellinus, xxiii. 5. Zosimus, l. i. p. 19. Philip,
who was a native of Bostra, was about forty years of age.
Note: Now Bosra. It was once the metropolis of a province
named Arabia, and the chief city of Auranitis, of which the name
is preserved in Beled Hauran, the limits of which meet the
desert. D'Anville. Geog. Anc. ii. 188. According to Victor, (in
Caesar.,) Philip was a native of Tracbonitis another province of
Arabia. - G.]
We cannot forbear transcribing the ingenious, though
somewhat fanciful description, which a celebrated writer of our
own times has traced of the military government of the Roman
empire. "What in that age was called the Roman empire, was only
an irregular republic, not unlike the aristocracy ^53 of Algiers,
^54 where the militia, possessed of the sovereignty, creates and
deposes a magistrate, who is styled a Dey. Perhaps, indeed, it
may be laid down as a general rule, that a military government
is, in some respects, more republican than monarchical. Nor can
it be said that the soldiers only partook of the government by
their disobedience and rebellions. The speeches made to them by
the emperors, were they not at length of the same nature as those
formerly pronounced to the people by the consuls and the
tribunes? And although the armies had no regular place or forms
of assembly; though their debates were short, their action
sudden, and their resolves seldom the result of cool reflection,
did they not dispose, with absolute sway, of the public fortune?
What was the emperor, except the minister of a violent
government, elected for the private benefit of the soldiers?
[Footnote 53: Can the epithet of Aristocracy be applied, with any
propriety, to the government of Algiers? Every military
government floats between two extremes of absolute monarchy and
wild democracy.]
[Footnote 54: The military republic of the Mamelukes in Egypt
would have afforded M. de Montesquieu (see Considerations sur la
Grandeur et la Decadence des Romains, c. 16) a juster and more
noble parallel.]
"When the army had elected Philip, who was Praetorian
praefect to the third Gordian, the latter demanded that he might
remain sole emperor; he was unable to obtain it. He requested
that the power might be equally divided between them; the army
would not listen to his speech. He consented to be degraded to
the rank of Caesar; the favor was refused him. He desired, at
least, he might be appointed Praetorian praefect; his prayer was
rejected. Finally, he pleaded for his life. The army, in these
several judgments, exercised the supreme magistracy." According
to the historian, whose doubtful narrative the President De
Montesquieu has adopted, Philip, who, during the whole
transaction, had preserved a sullen silence, was inclined to
spare the innocent life of his benefactor; till, recollecting
that his innocence might excite a dangerous compassion in the
Roman world, he commanded, without regard to his suppliant cries,
that he should be seized, stripped, and led away to instant
death. After a moment's pause, the inhuman sentence was
executed. ^55
[Footnote 55: The Augustan History (p. 163, 164) cannot, in this
instance, be reconciled with itself or with probability. How
could Philip condemn his predecessor, and yet consecrate his
memory? How could he order his public execution, and yet, in his
letters to the senate, exculpate himself from the guilt of his
death? Philip, though an ambitious usurper, was by no means a
mad tyrant. Some chronological difficulties have likewise been
discovered by the nice eyes of Tillemont and Muratori, in this
supposed association of Philip to the empire.
Note: Wenck endeavors to reconcile these discrepancies. He
supposes that Gordian was led away, and died a natural death in
prison. This is directly contrary to the statement of
Capitolinus and of Zosimus, whom he adduces in support of his
theory. He is more successful in his precedents of usurpers
deifying the victims of their ambition. Sit divus, dummodo non
sit vivus. - M.]
Chapter VII: Tyranny Of Maximin, Rebellion, Civil Wars, Death Of
Maximin.
Part III.
On his return from the East to Rome, Philip, desirous of
obliterating the memory of his crimes, and of captivating the
affections of the people, solemnized the secular games with
infinite pomp and magnificence. Since their institution or
revival by Augustus, ^56 they had been celebrated by Claudius, by
Domitian, and by Severus, and were now renewed the fifth time, on
the accomplishment of the full period of a thousand years from
the foundation of Rome. Every circumstance of the secular games
was skillfully adapted to inspire the superstitious mind with
deep and solemn reverence. The long interval between them ^57
exceeded the term of human life; and as none of the spectators
had already seen them, none could flatter themselves with the
expectation of beholding them a second time. The mystic
sacrifices were performed, during three nights, on the banks of
the Tyber; and the Campus Martius resounded with music and
dances, and was illuminated with innumerable lamps and torches.
Slaves and strangers were excluded from any participation in
these national ceremonies. A chorus of twenty-seven youths, and
as many virgins, of noble families, and whose parents were both
alive, implored the propitious gods in favor of the present, and
for the hope of the rising generation; requesting, in religious
hymns, that according to the faith of their ancient oracles, they
would still maintain the virtue, the felicity, and the empire of
the Roman people. ^58 The magnificence of Philip's shows and
entertainments dazzled the eyes of the multitude. The devout
were employed in the rites of superstition, whilst the reflecting
few revolved in their anxious minds the past history and the
future fate of the empire.
[Footnote 56: The account of the last supposed celebration,
though in an enlightened period of history, was so very doubtful
and obscure, that the alternative seems not doubtful. When the
popish jubilees, the copy of the secular games, were invented by
Boniface VII., the crafty pope pretended that he only revived an
ancient institution. See M. le Chais, Lettres sur les Jubiles.]
[Footnote 57: Either of a hundred or a hundred and ten years.
Varro and Livy adopted the former opinion, but the infallible
authority of the Sybil consecrated the latter, (Censorinus de Die
Natal. c. 17.) The emperors Claudius and Philip, however, did not
treat the oracle with implicit respect.]
[Footnote 58: The idea of the secular games is best understood
from the poem of Horace, and the description of Zosimus, 1. l.
ii. p. 167, &c.]
Since Romulus, with a small band of shepherds and outlaws,
fortified himself on the hills near the Tyber, ten centuries had
already elapsed. ^59 During the four first ages, the Romans, in
the laborious school of poverty, had acquired the virtues of war
and government: by the vigorous exertion of those virtues, and by
the assistance of fortune, they had obtained, in the course of
the three succeeding centuries, an absolute empire over many
countries of Europe, Asia, and Africa. The last three hundred
years had been consumed in apparent prosperity and internal
decline. The nation of soldiers, magistrates, and legislators,
who composed the thirty-five tribes of the Roman people, were
dissolved into the common mass of mankind, and confounded with
the millions of servile provincials, who had received the name,
without adopting the spirit, of Romans. A mercenary army, levied
among the subjects and barbarians of the frontier, was the only
order of men who preserved and abused their independence. By
their tumultuary election, a Syrian, a Goth, or an Arab, was
exalted to the throne of Rome, and invested with despotic power
over the conquests and over the country of the Scipios.
[Footnote 59: The received calculation of Varro assigns to the
foundation of Rome an aera that corresponds with the 754th year
before Christ. But so little is the chronology of Rome to be
depended on, in the more early ages, that Sir Isaac Newton has
brought the same event as low as the year 627 (Compare Niebuhr
vol. i. p. 271. - M.)]
The limits of the Roman empire still extended from the
Western Ocean to the Tigris, and from Mount Atlas to the Rhine
and the Danube. To the undiscerning eye of the vulgar, Philip
appeared a monarch no less powerful than Hadrian or Augustus had
formerly been. The form was still the same, but the animating
health and vigor were fled. The industry of the people was
discouraged and exhausted by a long series of oppression. The
discipline of the legions, which alone, after the extinction of
every other virtue, had propped the greatness of the state, was
corrupted by the ambition, or relaxed by the weakness, of the
emperors. The strength of the frontiers, which had always
consisted in arms rather than in fortifications, was insensibly
undermined; and the fairest provinces were left exposed to the
rapaciousness or ambition of the barbarians, who soon discovered
the decline of the Roman empire.
Chapter VIII: State Of Persion And Restoration Of The Monarchy.
Part I.
Of The State Of Persia After The Restoration Of The Monarchy By
Artaxerxes.
Whenever Tacitus indulges himself in those beautiful
episodes, in which he relates some domestic transaction of the
Germans or of the Parthians, his principal object is to relieve
the attention of the reader from a uniform scene of vice and
misery. From the reign of Augustus to the time of Alexander
Severus, the enemies of Rome were in her bosom - the tyrants and
the soldiers; and her prosperity had a very distant and feeble
interest in the revolutions that might happen beyond the Rhine
and the Euphrates. But when the military order had levelled, in
wild anarchy, the power of the prince, the laws of the senate,
and even the discipline of the camp, the barbarians of the North
and of the East, who had long hovered on the frontier, boldly
attacked the provinces of a declining monarchy. Their vexatious
inroads were changed into formidable irruptions, and, after a
long vicissitude of mutual calamities, many tribes of the
victorious invaders established themselves in the provinces of
the Roman Empire. To obtain a clearer knowledge of these great
events, we shall endeavor to form a previous idea of the
character, forces, and designs of those nations who avenged the
cause of Hannibal and Mithridates.
In the more early ages of the world, whilst the forest that
covered Europe afforded a retreat to a few wandering savages, the
inhabitants of Asia were already collected into populous cities,
and reduced under extensive empires, the seat of the arts, of
luxury, and of despotism. The Assyrians reigned over the East,
^1 till the sceptre of Ninus and Semiramis dropped from the hands
of their enervated successors. The Medes and the Babylonians
divided their power, and were themselves swallowed up in the
monarchy of the Persians, whose arms could not be confined within
the narrow limits of Asia. Followed, as it is said, by two
millions of men, Xerxes, the descendant of Cyrus, invaded Greece.
Thirty thousand soldiers, under the command of Alexander, the son
of Philip, who was intrusted by the Greeks with their glory and
revenge, were sufficient to subdue Persia. The princes of the
house of Seleucus usurped and lost the Macedonian command over
the East. About the same time, that, by an ignominious treaty,
they resigned to the Romans the country on this side Mount Tarus,
they were driven by the Parthians, ^* an obscure horde of
Scythian origin, from all the provinces of Upper Asia. The
formidable power of the Parthians, which spread from India to the
frontiers of Syria, was in its turn subverted by Ardshir, or
Artaxerxes; the founder of a new dynasty, which, under the name
of Sassanides, governed Persia till the invasion of the Arabs.
This great revolution, whose fatal influence was soon experienced
by the Romans, happened in the fourth year of Alexander Severus,
two hundred and twenty-six years after the Christian era. ^2 ^!
[Footnote 1: An ancient chronologist, quoted by Valleius
Paterculus, (l. i. c. 6,) observes, that the Assyrians, the
Medes, the Persians, and the Macedonians, reigned over Asia one
thousand nine hundred and ninety-five years, from the accession
of Ninus to the defeat of Antiochus by the Romans. As the latter
of these great events happened 289 years before Christ, the
former may be placed 2184 years before the same aera. The
Astronomical Observations, found at Babylon, by Alexander, went
fifty years higher.]
[Footnote *: The Parthians were a tribe of the Indo-Germanic
branch which dwelt on the south-east of the Caspian, and belonged
to the same race as the Getae, the Massagetae, and other nations,
confounded by the ancients under the vague denomination of
Scythians. Klaproth, Tableaux Hist. d l'Asie, p. 40. Strabo (p.
747) calls the Parthians Carduchi, i.e., the inhabitants of
Curdistan. - M.]
[Footnote 2: In the five hundred and thirty-eighth year of the
aera of Seleucus. See Agathias, l. ii. p. 63. This great event
(such is the carelessness of the Orientals) is placed by
Eutychius as high as the tenth year of Commodus, and by Moses of
Chorene as low as the reign of Philip. Ammianus Marcellinus has
so servilely copied (xxiii. 6) his ancient materials, which are
indeed very good, that he describes the family of the Arsacides
as still seated on the Persian throne in the middle of the fourth
century.]
[Footnote !: The Persian History, if the poetry of the Shah
Nameh, the Book of Kings, may deserve that name mentions four
dynasties from the earliest ages to the invasion of the Saracens.
The Shah Nameh was composed with the view of perpetuating the
remains of the original Persian records or traditions which had
survived the Saracenic invasion. The task was undertaken by the
poet Dukiki, and afterwards, under the patronage of Mahmood of
Ghazni, completed by Ferdusi. The first of these dynasties is
that of Kaiomors, as Sir W. Jones observes, the dark and fabulous
period; the second, that of the Kaianian, the heroic and
poetical, in which the earned have discovered some curious, and
imagined some fanciful, analogies with the Jewish, the Greek, and
the Roman accounts of the eastern world. See, on the Shah Nameh,
Translation by Goerres, with Von Hammer's Review, Vienna Jahrbuch
von Lit. 17, 75, 77. Malcolm's Persia, 8vo. ed. i. 503. Macan's
Preface to his Critical Edition of the Shah Nameh. On the early
Persian History, a very sensible abstract of various opinions in
Malcolm's Hist. of Persian. - M.]
Artaxerxes had served with great reputation in the armies of
Artaban, the last king of the Parthians, and it appears that he
was driven into exile and rebellion by royal ingratitude, the
customary reward for superior merit. His birth was obscure, and
the obscurity equally gave room to the aspersions of his enemies,
and the flattery of his adherents. If we credit the scandal of
the former, Artaxerxes sprang from the illegitimate commerce of a
tanner's wife with a common soldier. ^3 The latter represent him
as descended from a branch of the ancient kings of Persian,
though time and misfortune had gradually reduced his ancestors to
the humble station of private citizens. ^4 As the lineal heir of
the monarchy, he asserted his right to the throne, and challenged
the noble task of delivering the Persians from the oppression
under which they groaned above five centuries since the death of
Darius. The Parthians were defeated in three great battles. ^*
In the last of these their king Artaban was slain, and the spirit
of the nation was forever broken. ^5 The authority of Artaxerxes
was solemnly acknowledged in a great assembly held at Balch in
Khorasan. ^! Two younger branches of the royal house of Arsaces
were confounded among the prostrate satraps. A third, more
mindful of ancient grandeur than of present necessity, attempted
to retire, with a numerous train of vessels, towards their
kinsman, the king of Armenia; but this little army of deserters
was intercepted, and cut off, by the vigilance of the conqueror,
^6 who boldly assumed the double diadem, and the title of King of
Kings, which had been enjoyed by his predecessor. But these
pompous titles, instead of gratifying the vanity of the Persian,
served only to admonish him of his duty, and to inflame in his
soul and should the ambition of restoring in their full splendor,
the religion and empire of Cyrus.
[Footnote 3: The tanner's name was Babec; the soldier's, Sassan:
from the former Artaxerxes obtained the surname of Babegan, from
the latter all his descendants have been styled Sassanides.]
[Footnote 4: D'Herbelot, Bibliotheque Orientale, Ardshir.]
[Footnote *: In the plain of Hoormuz, the son of Babek was hailed
in the field with the proud title of Shahan Shah, king of kings -
a name ever since assumed by the sovereigns of Persia. Malcolm,
i. 71. - M.]
[Footnote 5: Dion Cassius, l. lxxx. Herodian, l. vi. p. 207.
Abulpharagins Dynast. p. 80.]
[Footnote !: See the Persian account of the rise of Ardeschir
Babegan in Malcolm l 69. - M.]
[Footnote 6: See Moses Chorenensis, l. ii. c. 65 - 71.]
I. During the long servitude of Persia under the Macedonian
and the Parthian yoke, the nations of Europe and Asia had
mutually adopted and corrupted each other's superstitions. The
Arsacides, indeed, practised the worship of the Magi; but they
disgraced and polluted it with a various mixture of foreign
idolatry. ^* The memory of Zoroaster, the ancient prophet and
philosopher of the Persians, ^7 was still revered in the East;
but the obsolete and mysterious language, in which the Zendavesta
was composed, ^8 opened a field of dispute to seventy sects, who
variously explained the fundamental doctrines of their religion,
and were all indifferently devided by a crowd of infidels, who
rejected the divine mission and miracles of the prophet. To
suppress the idolaters, reunite the schismatics, and confute the
unbelievers, by the infallible decision of a general council, the
pious Artaxerxes summoned the Magi from all parts of his
dominions. These priests, who had so long sighed in contempt and
obscurity obeyed the welcome summons; and, on the appointed day,
appeared, to the number of about eighty thousand. But as the
debates of so tumultuous an assembly could not have been directed
by the authority of reason, or influenced by the art of policy,
the Persian synod was reduced, by successive operations, to forty
thousand, to four thousand, to four hundred, to forty, and at
last to seven Magi, the most respected for their learning and
piety. One of these, Erdaviraph, a young but holy prelate,
received from the hands of his brethren three cups of
soporiferous wine. He drank them off, and instantly fell into a
long and profound sleep. As soon as he waked, he related to the
king and to the believing multitude, his journey to heaven, and
his intimate conferences with the Deity. Every doubt was
silenced by this supernatural evidence; and the articles of the
faith of Zoroaster were fixed with equal authority and precision.
^9 A short delineation of that celebrated system will be found
useful, not only to display the character of the Persian nation,
but to illustrate many of their most important transactions, both
in peace and war, with the Roman empire. ^10
[Footnote *: Silvestre de Sacy (Antiquites de la Perse) had
proved the neglect of the Zoroastrian religion under the Parthian
kings. - M.]
[Footnote 7: Hyde and Prideaux, working up the Persian legends
and their own conjectures into a very agreeable story, represent
Zoroaster as a contemporary of Darius Hystaspes. But it is
sufficient to observe, that the Greek writers, who lived almost
in the age of Darius, agree in placing the aera of Zoroaster many
hundred, or even thousand, years before their own time. The
judicious criticisms of Mr. Moyle perceived, and maintained
against his uncle, Dr. Prideaux, the antiquity of the Persian
prophet. See his work, vol. ii.
Note: There are three leading theories concerning the age of
Zoroaster: 1. That which assigns him to an age of great and
almost indefinite antiquity - it is that of Moyle, adopted by
Gibbon, Volney, Recherches sur l'Histoire, ii. 2. Rhode, also,
(die Heilige Sage, &c.,) in a very ingenious and ably-developed
theory, throws the Bactrian prophet far back into antiquity 2.
Foucher, (Mem. de l'Acad. xxvii. 253,) Tychsen, (in Com. Soc.
Gott. ii. 112), Heeren, (ldeen. i. 459,) and recently Holty,
identify the Gushtasp of the Persian mythological history with
Cyaxares the First, the king of the Medes, and consider the
religion to be Median in its origin. M. Guizot considers this
opinion most probable, note in loc. 3. Hyde, Prideaux, Anquetil
du Perron, Kleuker, Herder, Goerres, (Mythen-Geschichte,) Von
Hammer. (Wien. Jahrbuch, vol. ix.,) Malcolm, (i. 528,) De
Guigniaut, (Relig. de l'Antiq. 2d part, vol. iii.,) Klaproth,
(Tableaux de l'Asie, p. 21,) make Gushtasp Darius Hystaspes, and
Zoroaster his contemporary. The silence of Herodotus appears the
great objection to this theory. Some writers, as M. Foucher
(resting, as M. Guizot observes, on the doubtful authority of
Pliny,) make more than one Zoroaster, and so attempt to reconcile
the conflicting theories. - M.]
[Footnote 8: That ancient idiom was called the Zend. The
language of the commentary, the Pehlvi, though much more modern,
has ceased many ages ago to be a living tongue. This fact alone
(if it is allowed as authentic) sufficiently warrants the
antiquity of those writings which M d'Anquetil has brought into
Europe, and translated into French.
Note: Zend signifies life, living. The word means, either
the collection of the canonical books of the followers of
Zoroaster, or the language itself in which they are written.
They are the books that contain the word of life whether the
language was originally called Zend, or whether it was so called
from the contents of the books. Avesta means word, oracle,
revelation: this term is not the title of a particular work, but
of the collection of the books of Zoroaster, as the revelation of
Ormuzd. This collection is sometimes called Zendavesta,
sometimes briefly Zend.
The Zend was the ancient language of Media, as is proved by
its affinity with the dialects of Armenia and Georgia; it was
already a dead language under the Arsacides in the country which
was the scene of the events recorded in the Zendavesta. Some
critics, among others Richardson and Sir W. Jones, have called in
question the antiquity of these books. The former pretended that
Zend had never been a written or spoken language, but had been
invented in the later times by the Magi, for the purposes of
their art; but Kleuker, in the dissertations which he added to
those of Anquetil and the Abbe Foucher, has proved that the Zend
was a living and spoken language. - G. Sir W. Jones appears to
have abandoned his doubts, on discovering the affinity between
the Zend and the Sanskrit. Since the time of Kleuker, this
question has been investigated by many learned scholars. Sir W.
Jones, Leyden, (Asiat. Research. x. 283,) and Mr. Erskine,
(Bombay Trans. ii. 299,) consider it a derivative from the
Sanskrit. The antiquity of the Zendavesta has likewise been
asserted by Rask, the great Danish linguist, who, according to
Malcolm, brought back from the East fresh transcripts and
additions to those published by Anquetil. According to Rask, the
Zend and Sanskrit are sister dialects; the one the parent of the
Persian, the other of the Indian family of languages. - G. and M.
But the subject is more satisfactorily illustrated in Bopp's
comparative Grammar of the Sanscrit, Zend, Greek, Latin,
Lithuanian, Gothic, and German languages. Berlin. 1833-5.
According to Bopp, the Zend is, in some respects, of a more
remarkable structure than the Sanskrit. Parts of the Zendavesta
have been published in the original, by M. Bournouf, at Paris,
and M. Ol. shausen, in Hamburg. - M.
The Pehlvi was the language of the countries bordering on
Assyria, and probably of Assyria itself. Pehlvi signifies valor,
heroism; the Pehlvi, therefore, was the language of the ancient
heroes and kings of Persia, the valiant. (Mr. Erskine prefers
the derivation from Pehla, a border. - M.) It contains a number
of Aramaic roots. Anquetil considered it formed from the Zend.
Kleuker does not adopt this opinion. The Pehlvi, he says, is
much more flowing, and less overcharged with vowels, than the
Zend. The books of Zoroaster, first written in Zend, were
afterwards translated into Pehlvi and Parsi. The Pehlvi had
fallen into disuse under the dynasty of the Sassanides, but the
learned still wrote it. The Parsi, the dialect of Pars or
Farristan, was then prevailing dialect. Kleuker, Anhang zum Zend
Avesta, 2, ii. part i. p. 158, part ii. 31. - G.
Mr. Erskine (Bombay Transactions) considers the existing
Zendavesta to have been compiled in the time of Ardeschir
Babegan. - M.]
[Footnote 9: Hyde de Religione veterum Pers. c. 21.]
[Footnote 10: I have principally drawn this account from the
Zendavesta of M. d'Anquetil, and the Sadder, subjoined to Dr.
Hyde's treatise. It must, however, be confessed, that the
studied obscurity of a prophet, the figurative style of the East,
and the deceitful medium of a French or Latin version may have
betrayed us into error and heresy, in this abridgment of Persian
theology.
Note: It is to be regretted that Gibbon followed the post-
Mahometan Sadder of Hyde. - M.]
The great and fundamental article of the system, was the
celebrated doctrine of the two principles; a bold and injudicious
attempt of Eastern philosophy to reconcile the existence of moral
and physical evil with the attributes of a beneficent Creator and
Governor of the world. The first and original Being, in whom, or
by whom, the universe exists, is denominated in the writings of
Zoroaster, Time without bounds; ^! but it must be confessed, that
this infinite substance seems rather a metaphysical, abstraction
of the mind, than a real object endowed with self-consciousness,
or possessed of moral perfections. From either the blind or the
intelligent operation of this infinite Time, which bears but too
near an affinity with the chaos of the Greeks, the two secondary
but active principles of the universe, were from all eternity
produced, Ormusd and Ahriman, each of them possessed of the
powers of creation, but each disposed, by his invariable nature,
to exercise them with different designs. ^* The principle of good
is eternally aborbed in light; the principle of evil eternally
buried in darkness. The wise benevolence of Ormusd formed man
capable of virtue, and abundantly provided his fair habitation
with the materials of happiness. By his vigilant providence, the
motion of the planets, the order of the seasons, and the
temperate mixture of the elements, are preserved. But the malice
of Ahriman has long since pierced Ormusd's egg; or, in other
words, has violated the harmony of his works. Since that fatal
eruption, the most minute articles of good and evil are
intimately intermingled and agitated together; the rankest
poisons spring up amidst the most salutary plants; deluges,
earthquakes, and conflagrations attest the conflict of Nature,
and the little world of man is perpetually shaken by vice and
misfortune. Whilst the rest of human kind are led away captives
in the chains of their infernal enemy, the faithful Persian alone
reserves his religious adoration for his friend and protector
Ormusd, and fights under his banner of light, in the full
confidence that he shall, in the last day, share the glory of his
triumph. At that decisive period, the enlightened wisdom of
goodness will render the power of Ormusd superior to the furious
malice of his rival. Ahriman and his followers, disarmed and
subdued, will sink into their native darkness; and virtue will
maintain the eternal peace and harmony of the universe. ^11 ^!!
[Footnote !: Zeruane Akerene, so translated by Anquetil and
Kleuker. There is a dissertation of Foucher on this subject, Mem.
de l'Acad. des Inscr. t. xxix. According to Bohlen (das alte
Indien) it is the Sanskrit Sarvan Akaranam, the Uncreated Whole;
or, according to Fred. Schlegel, Sarvan Akharyam the Uncreate
Indivisible. - M.]
[Footnote *: This is an error. Ahriman was not forced by his
invariable nature to do evil; the Zendavesta expressly recognizes
(see the Izeschne) that he was born good, that in his origin he
was light; envy rendered him evil; he became jealous of the power
and attributes of Ormuzd; then light was changed into darkness,
and Ahriman was precipitated into the abyss. See the Abridgment
of the Doctrine of the Ancient Persians, by Anquetil, c. ii
Section 2. - G.]
[Footnote 11: The modern Parsees (and in some degree the Sadder)
exalt Ormusd into the first and omnipotent cause, whilst they
degrade Ahriman into an inferior but rebellious spirit. Their
desire of pleasing the Mahometans may have contributed to refine
their theological systems.]
[Footnote !!: According to the Zendavesta, Ahriman will not be
annihilated or precipitated forever into darkness: at the
resurrection of the dead he will be entirely defeated by Ormuzd,
his power will be destroyed, his kingdom overthrown to its
foundations, he will himself be purified in torrents of melting
metal; he will change his heart and his will, become holy,
heavenly establish in his dominions the law and word of Ormuzd,
unite himself with him in everlasting friendship, and both will
sing hymns in honor of the Great Eternal. See Anquetil's
Abridgment. Kleuker, Anhang part iii. p 85, 36; and the
Izeschne, one of the books of the Zendavesta. According to the
Sadder Bun-Dehesch, a more modern work, Ahriman is to be
annihilated: but this is contrary to the text itself of the
Zendavesta, and to the idea its author gives of the kingdom of
Eternity, after the twelve thousand years assigned to the contest
between Good and Evil. - G.]
Chapter VIII: State Of Persion And Restoration Of The Monarchy.
Part II.
The theology of Zoroaster was darkly comprehended by
foreigners, and even by the far greater number of his disciples;
but the most careless observers were struck with the philosophic
simplicity of the Persian worship. "That people," said Herodotus,
^12 "rejects the use of temples, of altars, and of statues, and
smiles at the folly of those nations who imagine that the gods
are sprung from, or bear any affinity with, the human nature.
The tops of the highest mountains are the places chosen for
sacrifices. Hymns and prayers are the principal worship; the
Supreme God, who fills the wide circle of heaven, is the object
to whom they are addressed." Yet, at the same time, in the true
spirit of a polytheist, he accuseth them of adoring Earth, Water,
Fire, the Winds, and the Sun and Moon. But the Persians of every
age have denied the charge, and explained the equivocal conduct,
which might appear to give a color to it. The elements, and more
particularly Fire, Light, and the Sun, whom they called Mithra,
^! were the objects of their religious reverence, because they
considered them as the purest symbols, the noblest productions,
and the most powerful agents of the Divine Power and Nature. ^13
[Footnote 12: Herodotus, l. i. c. 131. But Dr. Prideaux thinks,
with reason, that the use of temples was afterwards permitted in
the Magian religion.
Note: The Pyraea, or fire temples of the Zoroastrians,
(observes Kleuker, Persica, p. 16,) were only to be found in
Media or Aderbidjan, provinces into which Herodotus did not
penetrate. - M.]
[Footnote !: Among the Persians Mithra is not the Sun: Anquetil
has contested and triumphantly refuted the opinion of those who
confound them, and it is evidently contrary to the text of the
Zendavesta. Mithra is the first of the genii, or jzeds, created
by Ormuzd; it is he who watches over all nature. Hence arose the
misapprehension of some of the Greeks, who have said that Mithra
was the summus deus of the Persians: he has a thousand ears and
ten thousand eyes. The Chaldeans appear to have assigned him a
higher rank than the Persians. It is he who bestows upon the
earth the light of the sun. The sun. named Khor, (brightness,)
is thus an inferior genius, who, with many other genii, bears a
part in the functions of Mithra. These assistant genii to
another genius are called his kamkars; but in the Zendavesta they
are never confounded. On the days sacred to a particular genius,
the Persian ought to recite, not only the prayers addressed to
him, but those also which are addressed to his kamkars; thus the
hymn or iescht of Mithra is recited on the day of the sun,
(Khor,) and vice versa. It is probably this which has sometimes
caused them to be confounded; but Anquetil had himself exposed
this error, which Kleuker, and all who have studied the
Zendavesta, have noticed. See viii. Diss. of Anquetil. Kleuker's
Anhang, part iii. p. 132. - G.
M. Guizot is unquestionably right, according to the pure and
original doctrine of the Zend. The Mithriac worship, which was
so extensively propagated in the West, and in which Mithra and
the sun were perpetually confounded, seems to have been formed
from a fusion of Zoroastrianism and Chaldaism, or the Syrian
worship of the sun. An excellent abstract of the question, with
references to the works of the chief modern writers on his
curious subject, De Sacy, Kleuker, Von Hammer, &c., may be found
in De Guigniaut's translation of Kreuzer. Relig. d'Antiquite,
notes viii. ix. to book ii. vol. i. 2d part, page 728. - M.]
[Footnote 13: Hyde de Relig. Pers. c. 8. Notwithstanding all
their distinctions and protestations, which seem sincere enough,
their tyrants, the Mahometans, have constantly stigmatized them
as idolatrous worshippers of the fire.]
Every mode of religion, to make a deep and lasting
impression on the human mind, must exercise our obedience, by
enjoining practices of devotion, for which we can assign no
reason; and must acquire our esteem, by inculcating moral duties
analogous to the dictates of our own hearts. The religion of
Zoroaster was abundantly provided with the former and possessed a
sufficient portion of the latter. At the age of puberty, the
faithful Persian was invested with a mysterious girdle, the badge
of the divine protection; and from that moment all the actions of
his life, even the most indifferent, or the most necessary, were
sanctified by their peculiar prayers, ejaculations, or
genuflections; the omission of which, under any circumstances,
was a grievous sin, not inferior in guilt to the violation of the
moral duties. The moral duties, however, of justice, mercy,
liberality, &c., were in their turn required of the disciple of
Zoroaster, who wished to escape the persecution of Ahriman, and
to live with Ormusd in a blissful eternity, where the degree of
felicity will be exactly proportioned to the degree of virtue and
piety. ^14
[Footnote 14: See the Sadder, the smallest part of which consists
of moral precepts. The ceremonies enjoined are infinite and
trifling. Fifteen genuflections, prayers, &c., were required
whenever the devout Persian cut his nails or made water; or as
often as he put on the sacred girdle Sadder, Art. 14, 50, 60.
Note: Zoroaster exacted much less ceremonial observance,
than at a later period, the priests of his doctrines. This is
the progress of all religions the worship, simple in its origin,
is gradually overloaded with minute superstitions. The maxim of
the Zendavesta, on the relative merit of sowing the earth and of
prayers, quoted below by Gibbon, proves that Zoroaster did not
attach too much importance to these observances. Thus it is not
from the Zendavesta that Gibbon derives the proof of his
allegation, but from the Sadder, a much later work. - G]
But there are some remarkable instances in which Zoroaster
lays aside the prophet, assumes the legislator, and discovers a
liberal concern for private and public happiness, seldom to be
found among the grovelling or visionary schemes of superstition.
Fasting and celibacy, the common means of purchasing the divine
favor, he condemns with abhorrence, as a criminal rejection of
the best gifts of Providence. The saint, in the Magian religion,
is obliged to beget children, to plant useful trees, to destroy
noxious animals, to convey water to the dry lands of Persia, and
to work out his salvation by pursuing all the labors of
agriculture. ^* We may quote from the Zendavesta a wise and
benevolent maxim, which compensates for many an absurdity. "He
who sows the ground with care and diligence acquires a greater
stock of religious merit than he could gain by the repetition of
ten thousand prayers." ^15 In the spring of every year a festival
was celebrated, destined to represent the primitive equality, and
the present connection, of mankind. The stately kings of Persia,
exchanging their vain pomp for more genuine greatness, freely
mingled with the humblest but most useful of their subjects. On
that day the husbandmen were admitted, without distinction, to
the table of the king and his satraps. The monarch accepted
their petitions, inquired into their grievances, and conversed
with them on the most equal terms. "From your labors," was he
accustomed to say, (and to say with truth, if not with
sincerity,) "from your labors we receive our subsistence; you
derive your tranquillity from our vigilance: since, therefore, we
are mutually necessary to each other, let us live together like
brothers in concord and love." ^16 Such a festival must indeed
have degenerated, in a wealthy and despotic empire, into a
theatrical representation; but it was at least a comedy well
worthy of a royal audience, and which might sometimes imprint a
salutary lesson on the mind of a young prince.
[Footnote *: See, on Zoroaster's encouragement of agriculture,
the ingenious remarks of Heeren, Ideen, vol. i. p. 449, &c., and
Rhode, Heilige Sage, p. 517 - M.]
[Footnote 15: Zendavesta, tom. i. p. 224, and Precis du Systeme
de Zoroastre, tom. iii.]
[Footnote 16: Hyde de Religione Persarum, c. 19.]
Had Zoroaster, in all his institutions, invariably supported
this exalted character, his name would deserve a place with those
of Numa and Confucius, and his system would be justly entitled to
all the applause, which it has pleased some of our divines, and
even some of our philosophers, to bestow on it. But in that
motley composition, dictated by reason and passion, by enthusiasm
and by selfish motives, some useful and sublime truths were
disgraced by a mixture of the most abject and dangerous
superstition. The Magi, or sacerdotal order, were extremely
numerous, since, as we have already seen, fourscore thousand of
them were convened in a general council. Their forces were
multiplied by discipline. A regular hierarchy was diffused
through all the provinces of Persia; and the Archimagus, who
resided at Balch, was respected as the visible head of the
church, and the lawful successor of Zoroaster. ^17 The property
of the Magi was very considerable. Besides the less invidious
possession of a large tract of the most fertile lands of Media,
^18 they levied a general tax on the fortunes and the industry of
the Persians. ^19 "Though your good works," says the interested
prophet, "exceed in number the leaves of the trees, the drops of
rain, the stars in the heaven, or the sands on the sea-shore,
they will all be unprofitable to you, unless they are accepted by
the destour, or priest. To obtain the acceptation of this guide
to salvation, you must faithfully pay him tithes of all you
possess, of your goods, of your lands, and of your money. If the
destour be satisfied, your soul will escape hell tortures; you
will secure praise in this world and happiness in the next. For
the destours are the teachers of religion; they know all things,
and they deliver all men." ^20 ^*
[Footnote 17: Hyde de Religione Persarum, c. 28. Both Hyde and
Prideaux affect to apply to the Magian the terms consecrated to
the Christian hierarchy.]
[Footnote 18: Ammian. Marcellin. xxiii. 6. He informs us (as far
as we may credit him) of two curious particulars: 1. That the
Magi derived some of their most secret doctrines from the Indian
Brachmans; and 2. That they were a tribe, or family, as well as
order.]
[Footnote 19: The divine institution of tithes exhibits a
singular instance of conformity between the law of Zoroaster and
that of Moses. Those who cannot otherwise account for it, may
suppose, if they please that the Magi of the latter times
inserted so useful an interpolation into the writings of their
prophet.]
[Footnote 20: Sadder, Art. viii.]
[Footnote *: The passage quoted by Gibbon is not taken from the
writings of Zoroaster, but from the Sadder, a work, as has been
before said, much later than the books which form the Zendavesta.
and written by a Magus for popular use; what it contains,
therefore, cannot be attributed to Zoroaster. It is remarkable
that Gibbon should fall into this error, for Hyde himself does
not ascribe the Sadder to Zoroaster; he remarks that it is
written inverse, while Zoroaster always wrote in prose. Hyde, i.
p. 27. Whatever may be the case as to the latter assertion, for
which there appears little foundation, it is unquestionable that
the Sadder is of much later date. The Abbe Foucher does not even
believe it to be an extract from the works of Zoroaster. See his
Diss. before quoted. Mem. de l'Acad. des Ins. t. xxvii. - G.
Perhaps it is rash to speak of any part of the Zendavesta as the
writing of Zoroaster, though it may be a genuine representation
of his. As to the Sadder, Hyde (in Praef.) considered it not
above 200 years old. It is manifestly post-Mahometan. See Art.
xxv. on fasting. - M.]
These convenient maxims of reverence and implicit were
doubtless imprinted with care on the tender minds of youth; since
the Magi were the masters of education in Persia, and to their
hands the children even of the royal family were intrusted. ^21
The Persian priests, who were of a speculative genius, preserved
and investigated the secrets of Oriental philosophy; and
acquired, either by superior knowledge, or superior art, the
reputation of being well versed in some occult sciences, which
have derived their appellation from the Magi. ^22 Those of more
active dispositions mixed with the world in courts and cities;
and it is observed, that the administration of Artaxerxes was in
a great measure directed by the counsels of the sacerdotal order,
whose dignity, either from policy or devotion, that prince
restored to its ancient splendor. ^23
[Footnote 21: Plato in Alcibiad.]
[Footnote 22: Pliny (Hist. Natur. l. xxx. c. 1) observes, that
magic held mankind by the triple chain of religion, of physic,
and of astronomy.] [Footnote 23: Agathias, l. iv. p. 134.]
The first counsel of the Magi was agreeable to the
unsociable genius of their faith, ^24 to the practice of ancient
kings, ^25 and even to the example of their legislator, who had a
victim to a religious war, excited by his own intolerant zeal.
^26 By an edict of Artaxerxes, the exercise of every worship,
except that of Zoroaster, was severely prohibited. The temples of
the Parthians, and the statues of their deified monarchs, were
thrown down with ignominy. ^27 The sword of Aristotle (such was
the name given by the Orientals to the polytheism and philosophy
of the Greeks) was easily broken; ^28 the flames of persecution
soon reached the more stubborn Jews and Christians; ^29 nor did
they spare the heretics of their own nation and religion. The
majesty of Ormusd, who was jealous of a rival, was seconded by
the despotism of Artaxerxes, who could not suffer a rebel; and
the schismatics within his vast empire were soon reduced to the
inconsiderable number of eighty thousand. ^30 ^* This spirit of
persecution reflects dishonor on the religion of Zoroaster; but
as it was not productive of any civil commotion, it served to
strengthen the new monarchy, by uniting all the various
inhabitants of Persia in the bands of religious zeal. ^!
[Footnote 24: Mr. Hume, in the Natural History of Religion,
sagaciously remarks, that the most refined and philosophic sects
are constantly the most intolerant.
Note: Hume's comparison is rather between theism and
polytheism. In India, in Greece, and in modern Europe,
philosophic religion has looked down with contemptuous toleration
on the superstitions of the vulgar. - M.]
[Footnote 25: Cicero de Legibus, ii. 10. Xerxes, by the advice
of the Magi, destroyed the temples of Greece.]
[Footnote 26: Hyde de Relig. Persar. c. 23, 24. D'Herbelot,
Bibliotheque Orientale, Zurdusht. Life of Zoroaster in tom. ii.
of the Zendavesta.]
[Footnote 27: Compare Moses of Chorene, l. ii. c. 74, with
Ammian. Marcel lin. xxiii. 6. Hereafter I shall make use of
these passages.]
[Footnote 28: Rabbi Abraham, in the Tarikh Schickard, p. 108,
109.]
[Footnote 29: Basnage, Histoire des Juifs, l. viii. c. 3.
Sozomen, l. ii. c. 1 Manes, who suffered an ignominious death,
may be deemed a Magian as well as a Christian heretic.]
[Footnote 30: Hyde de Religione Persar. c. 21.]
[Footnote *: It is incorrect to attribute these persecutions to
Artaxerxes. The Jews were held in honor by him, and their schools
flourished during his reign. Compare Jost, Geschichte der
Israeliter, b. xv. 5, with Basnage. Sapor was forced by the
people to temporary severities; but their real persecution did
not begin till the reigns of Yezdigerd and Kobad. Hist. of Jews,
iii. 236. According to Sozomen , i. viii., Sapor first
persecuted the Christians. Manes was put to death by Varanes the
First, A. D. 277. Beausobre, Hist. de Man. i. 209. - M.]
[Footnote !: In the testament of Ardischer in Ferdusi, the poet
assigns these sentiments to the dying king, as he addresses his
son: Never forget that as a king, you are at once the protector
of religion and of your country. Consider the altar and the
throne as inseparable; they must always sustain each other.
Malcolm's Persia. i. 74 - M]
II. Artaxerxes, by his valor and conduct, had wrested the
sceptre of the East from the ancient royal family of Parthia.
There still remained the more difficult task of establishing,
throughout the vast extent of Persia, a uniform and vigorous
administration. The weak indulgence of the Arsacides had
resigned to their sons and brothers the principal provinces, and
the greatest offices of the kingdom in the nature of hereditary
possessions. The vitaxoe, or eighteen most powerful satraps,
were permitted to assume the regal title; and the vain pride of
the monarch was delighted with a nominal dominion over so many
vassal kings. Even tribes of barbarians in their mountains, and
the Greek cities of Upper Asia, ^31 within their walls, scarcely
acknowledged, or seldom obeyed. any superior; and the Parthian
empire exhibited, under other names, a lively image of the feudal
system ^32 which has since prevailed in Europe. But the active
victor, at the head of a numerous and disciplined army, visited
in person every province of Persia. The defeat of the boldest
rebels, and the reduction of the strongest fortifications, ^33
diffused the terror of his arms, and prepared the way for the
peaceful reception of his authority. An obstinate resistance was
fatal to the chiefs; but their followers were treated with
lenity. ^34 A cheerful submission was rewarded with honors and
riches, but the prudent Artaxerxes suffering no person except
himself to assume the title of king, abolished every intermediate
power between the throne and the people. His kingdom, nearly
equal in extent to modern Persia, was, on every side, bounded by
the sea, or by great rivers; by the Euphrates, the Tigris, the
Araxes, the Oxus, and the Indus, by the Caspian Sea, and the Gulf
of Persia. ^35 That country was computed to contain, in the last
century, five hundred and fifty-four cities, sixty thousand
villages, and about forty millions of souls. ^36 If we compare
the administration of the house of Sassan with that of the house
of Sefi, the political influence of the Magian with that of the
Mahometan religion, we shall probably infer, that the kingdom of
Artaxerxes contained at least as great a number of cities,
villages, and inhabitants. But it must likewise be confessed,
that in every age the want of harbors on the sea- coast, and the
scarcity of fresh water in the inland provinces, have been very
unfavorable to the commerce and agriculture of the Persians; who,
in the calculation of their numbers, seem to have indulged one of
the nearest, though most common, artifices of national vanity.
[Footnote 31: These colonies were extremely numerous. Seleucus
Nicator founded thirty-nine cities, all named from himself, or
some of his relations, (see Appian in Syriac. p. 124.) The aera
of Seleucus (still in use among the eastern Christians) appears
as late as the year 508, of Christ 196, on the medals of the
Greek cities within the Parthian empire. See Moyle's works, vol.
i. p. 273, &c., and M. Freret, Mem. de l'Academie, tom. xix.]
[Footnote 32: The modern Persians distinguish that period as the
dynasty of the kings of the nations. See Plin. Hist. Nat. vi.
25.]
[Footnote 33: Eutychius (tom. i. p. 367, 371, 375) relates the
siege of the island of Mesene in the Tigris, with some
circumstances not unlike the story of Nysus and Scylla.]
[Footnote 34: Agathias, ii. 64, [and iv. p. 260.] The princes of
Segestan de fended their independence during many years. As
romances generally transport to an ancient period the events of
their own time, it is not impossible that the fabulous exploits
of Rustan, Prince of Segestan, many have been grafted on this
real history.]
[Footnote 35: We can scarcely attribute to the Persian monarchy
the sea-coast of Gedrosia or Macran, which extends along the
Indian Ocean from Cape Jask (the promontory Capella) to Cape
Goadel. In the time of Alexander, and probably many ages
afterwards, it was thinly inhabited by a savage people of
Icthyophagi, or Fishermen, who knew no arts, who acknowledged no
master, and who were divided by in-hospitable deserts from the
rest of the world. (See Arrian de Reb. Indicis.) In the twelfth
century, the little town of Taiz (supposed by M. d'Anville to be
the Teza of Ptolemy) was peopled and enriched by the resort of
the Arabian merchants. (See Geographia Nubiens, p. 58, and
d'Anville, Geographie Ancienne, tom. ii. p. 283.) In the last
age, the whole country was divided between three princes, one
Mahometan and two Idolaters, who maintained their independence
against the successors of Shah Abbas. (Voyages de Tavernier, part
i. l. v. p. 635.]
[Footnote 36: Chardin, tom. iii c 1 2, 3.]
As soon as the ambitious mind of Artaxerxes had triumphed
ever the resistance of his vassals, he began to threaten the
neighboring states, who, during the long slumber of his
predecessors, had insulted Persia with impunity. He obtained
some easy victories over the wild Scythians and the effeminate
Indians; but the Romans were an enemy, who, by their past
injuries and present power, deserved the utmost efforts of his
arms. A forty years' tranquillity, the fruit of valor and
moderation, had succeeded the victories of Trajan. During the
period that elapsed from the accession of Marcus to the reign of
Alexander, the Roman and the Parthian empires were twice engaged
in war; and although the whole strength of the Arsacides
contended with a part only of the forces of Rome, the event was
most commonly in favor of the latter. Macrinus, indeed, prompted
by his precarious situation and pusillanimous temper, purchased a
peace at the expense of near two millions of our money; ^37 but
the generals of Marcus, the emperor Severus, and his son, erected
many trophies in Armenia, Mesopotamia, and Assyria. Among their
exploits, the imperfect relation of which would have unseasonably
interrupted the more important series of domestic revolutions, we
shall only mention the repeated calamities of the two great
cities of Seleucia and Ctesiphon.
[Footnote 37: Dion, l. xxviii. p. 1335.]
Seleucia, on the western bank of the Tigris, about
forty-five miles to the north of ancient Babylon, was the capital
of the Macedonian conquests in Upper Asia. ^38 Many ages after
the fall of their empire, Seleucia retained the genuine
characters of a Grecian colony, arts, military virtue, and the
love of freedom. The independent republic was governed by a
senate of three hundred nobles; the people consisted of six
hundred thousand citizens; the walls were strong, and as long as
concord prevailed among the several orders of the state, they
viewed with contempt the power of the Parthian: but the madness
of faction was sometimes provoked to implore the dangerous aid of
the common enemy, who was posted almost at the gates of the
colony. ^39 The Parthian monarchs, like the Mogul sovereigns of
Hindostan, delighted in the pastoral life of their Scythian
ancestors; and the Imperial camp was frequently pitched in the
plain of Ctesiphon, on the eastern bank of the Tigris, at the
distance of only three miles from Seleucia. ^40 The innumerable
attendants on luxury and despotism resorted to the court, and the
little village of Ctesiphon insensibly swelled into a great city.
^41 Under the reign of Marcus, the Roman generals penetrated as
far as Ctesiphon and Seleucia. They were received as friends by
the Greek colony; they attacked as enemies the seat of the
Parthian kings; yet both cities experienced the same treatment.
The sack and conflagration of Seleucia, with the massacre of
three hundred thousand of the inhabitants, tarnished the glory of
the Roman triumph. ^42 Seleucia, already exhausted by the
neighborhood of a too powerful rival, sunk under the fatal blow;
but Ctesiphon, in about thirty- three years, had sufficiently
recovered its strength to maintain an obstinate siege against the
emperor Severus. The city was, however, taken by assault; the
king, who defended it in person, escaped with precipitation; a
hundred thousand captives, and a rich booty, rewarded the
fatigues of the Roman soldiers. ^43 Notwithstanding these
misfortunes, Ctesiphon succeeded to Babylon and to Seleucia, as
one of the great capitals of the East. In summer, the monarch of
Persia enjoyed at Ecbatana the cool breezes of the mountains of
Media; but the mildness of the climate engaged him to prefer
Ctesiphon for his winter residence.
[Footnote 38: For the precise situation of Babylon, Seleucia,
Ctesiphon, Moiain, and Bagdad, cities often confounded with each
other, see an excellent Geographical Tract of M. d'Anville, in
Mem. de l'Academie, tom. xxx.]
[Footnote 39: Tacit. Annal. xi. 42. Plin. Hist. Nat. vi. 26.]
[Footnote 40: This may be inferred from Strabo, l. xvi. p. 743.]
[Footnote 41: That most curious traveller, Bernier, who followed
the camp of Aurengzebe from Delhi to Cashmir, describes with
great accuracy the immense moving city. The guard of cavalry
consisted of 35,000 men, that of infantry of 10,000. It was
computed that the camp contained 150,000 horses, mules, and
elephants; 50,000 camels, 50,000 oxen, and between 300,000 and
400,000 persons. Almost all Delhi followed the court, whose
magnificence supported its industry.]
[Footnote 42: Dion, l. lxxi. p. 1178. Hist. August. p. 38.
Eutrop. viii. 10 Euseb. in Chronic. Quadratus (quoted in the
Augustan History) attempted to vindicate the Romans by alleging
that the citizens of Seleucia had first violated their faith.]
[Footnote 43: Dion, l. lxxv. p. 1263. Herodian, l. iii. p. 120.
Hist. August. p. 70.]
From these successful inroads the Romans derived no real or
lasting benefit; nor did they attempt to preserve such distant
conquests, separated from the provinces of the empire by a large
tract of intermediate desert. The reduction of the kingdom of
Osrhoene was an acquisition of less splendor indeed, but of a far
more solid advantage. That little state occupied the northern
and most fertile part of Mesopotamia, between the Euphrates and
the Tigris. Edessa, its capital, was situated about twenty miles
beyond the former of those rivers; and the inhabitants, since the
time of Alexander, were a mixed race of Greeks, Arabs, Syrians,
and Armenians. ^44 The feeble sovereigns of Osrhoene, placed on
the dangerous verge of two contending empires, were attached from
inclination to the Parthian cause; but the superior power of Rome
exacted from them a reluctant homage, which is still attested by
their medals. After the conclusion of the Parthian war under
Marcus, it was judged prudent to secure some substantia, pledges
of their doubtful fidelity. Forts were constructed in several
parts of the country, and a Roman garrison was fixed in the
strong town of Nisibis. During the troubles that followed the
death of Commodus, the princes of Osrhoene attempted to shake off
the yoke; but the stern policy of Severus confirmed their
dependence, ^45 and the perfidy of Caracalla completed the easy
conquest. Abgarus, the last king of Edessa, was sent in chains
to Rome, his dominions reduced into a province, and his capital
dignified with the rank of colony; and thus the Romans, about ten
years before the fall of the Parthian monarchy, obtained a firm
and permanent establishment beyond the Euphrates. ^46
[Footnote 44: The polished citizens of Antioch called those of
Edessa mixed barbarians. It was, however, some praise, that of
the three dialects of the Syriac, the purest and most elegant
(the Aramaean) was spoken at Edessa. This remark M. Bayer (Hist.
Edess. p 5) has borrowed from George of Malatia, a Syrian
writer.]
[Footnote 45: Dion, l. lxxv. p. 1248, 1249, 1250. M. Bayer has
neglected to use this most important passage.]
[Footnote 46: This kingdom, from Osrhoes, who gave a new name to
the country, to the last Abgarus, had lasted 353 years. See the
learned work of M. Bayer, Historia Osrhoena et Edessena.]
Prudence as well as glory might have justified a war on the
side of Artaxerxes, had his views been confined to the defence or
acquisition of a useful frontier. but the ambitious Persian
openly avowed a far more extensive design of conquest; and he
thought himself able to support his lofty pretensions by the arms
of reason as well as by those of power. Cyrus, he alleged, had
first subdued, and his successors had for a long time possessed,
the whole extent of Asia, as far as the Propontis and the Aegean
Sea; the provinces of Caria and Ionia, under their empire, had
been governed by Persian satraps, and all Egypt, to the confines
of Aethiopia, had acknowledged their sovereignty. ^47 Their
rights had been suspended, but not destroyed, by a long
usurpation; and as soon as he received the Persian diadem, which
birth and successful valor had placed upon his head, the first
great duty of his station called upon him to restore the ancient
limits and splendor of the monarchy. The Great King, therefore,
(such was the haughty style of his embassies to the emperor
Alexander,) commanded the Romans instantly to depart from all the
provinces of his ancestors, and, yielding to the Persians the
empire of Asia, to content themselves with the undisturbed
possession of Europe. This haughty mandate was delivered by four
hundred of the tallest and most beautiful of the Persians; who,
by their fine horses, splendid arms, and rich apparel, displayed
the pride and greatness of their master. ^48 Such an embassy was
much less an offer of negotiation than a declaration of war.
Both Alexander Severus and Artaxerxes, collecting the military
force of the Roman and Persian monarchies, resolved in this
important contest to lead their armies in person.
[Footnote 47: Xenophon, in the preface to the Cyropaedia, gives a
clear and magnificent idea of the extent of the empire of Cyrus.
Herodotus (l. iii. c. 79, &c.) enters into a curious and
particular description of the twenty great Satrapies into which
the Persian empire was divided by Darius Hystaspes.]
[Footnote 48: Herodian, vi. 209, 212.]
If we credit what should seem the most authentic of all
records, an oration, still extant, and delivered by the emperor
himself to the senate, we must allow that the victory of
Alexander Severus was not inferior to any of those formerly
obtained over the Persians by the son of Philip. The army of the
Great King consisted of one hundred and twenty thousand horse,
clothed in complete armor of steel; of seven hundred elephants,
with towers filled with archers on their backs, and of eighteen
hundred chariots armed with scythes. This formidable host, the
like of which is not to be found in eastern history, and has
scarcely been imagined in eastern romance, ^49 was discomfited in
a great battle, in which the Roman Alexander proved himself an
intrepid soldier and a skilful general. The Great King fled
before his valor; an immense booty, and the conquest of
Mesopotamia, were the immediate fruits of this signal victory.
Such are the circumstances of this ostentatious and improbable
relation, dictated, as it too plainly appears, by the vanity of
the monarch, adorned by the unblushing servility of his
flatterers, and received without contradiction by a distant and
obsequious senate. ^50 Far from being inclined to believe that
the arms of Alexander obtained any memorable advantage over the
Persians, we are induced to suspect that all this blaze of
imaginary glory was designed to conceal some real disgrace.
[Footnote 49: There were two hundred scythed chariots at the
battle of Arbela, in the host of Darius. In the vast army of
Tigranes, which was vanquished by Lucullus, seventeen thousand
horse only were completely armed. Antiochus brought fifty-four
elephants into the field against the Romans: by his frequent wars
and negotiations with the princes of India, he had once collected
a hundred and fifty of those great animals; but it may be
questioned whether the most powerful monarch of Hindostan evci
formed a line of battle of seven hundred elephants. Instead of
three or four thousand elephants, which the Great Mogul was
supposed to possess, Tavernier (Voyages, part ii. l. i. p. 198)
discovered, by a more accurate inquiry, that he had only five
hundred for his baggage, and eighty or ninety for the service of
war. The Greeks have varied with regard to the number which
Porus brought into the field; but Quintus Curtius, (viii. 13,) in
this instance judicious and moderate, is contented with
eighty-five elephants, distinguished by their size and strength.
In Siam, where these animals are the most numerous and the most
esteemed, eighteen elephants are allowed as a sufficient
proportion for each of the nine brigades into which a just army
is divided. The whole number, of one hundred and sixty-two
elephants of war, may sometimes be doubled. Hist. des Voyages,
tom. ix. p. 260.
Note: Compare Gibbon's note 10 to ch. lvii - M.]
[Footnote 50: Hist. August. p. 133.
Note: See M. Guizot's note, p. 267. According to the
Persian authorities Ardeschir extended his conquests to the
Euphrates. Malcolm i. 71. - M.]
Our suspicious are confirmed by the authority of a
contemporary historian, who mentions the virtues of Alexander
with respect, and his faults with candor. He describes the
judicious plan which had been formed for the conduct of the war.
Three Roman armies were destined to invade Persia at the same
time, and by different roads. But the operations of the
campaign, though wisely concerted, were not executed either with
ability or success. The first of these armies, as soon as it had
entered the marshy plains of Babylon, towards the artificial
conflux of the Euphrates and the Tigris, ^51 was encompassed by
the superior numbers, and destroyed by the arrows of the enemy.
The alliance of Chosroes, king of Armenia, ^52 and the long tract
of mountainous country, in which the Persian cavalry was of
little service, opened a secure entrance into the heart of Media,
to the second of the Roman armies. These brave troops laid waste
the adjacent provinces, and by several successful actions against
Artaxerxes, gave a faint color to the emperor's vanity. But the
retreat of this victorious army was imprudent, or at least
unfortunate. In repassing the mountains, great numbers of
soldiers perished by the badness of the roads, and the severity
of the winter season. It had been resolved, that whilst these
two great detachments penetrated into the opposite extremes of
the Persian dominions, the main body, under the command of
Alexander himself, should support their attack, by invading the
centre of the kingdom. But the unexperienced youth, influenced
by his mother's counsels, and perhaps by his own fears, deserted
the bravest troops, and the fairest prospect of victory; and
after consuming in Mesopotamia an inactive and inglorious summer,
he led back to Antioch an army diminished by sickness, and
provoked by disappointment. The behavior of Artaxerxes had been
very different. Flying with rapidity from the hills of Media to
the marshes of the Euphrates, he had everywhere opposed the
invaders in person; and in either fortune had united with the
ablest conduct the most undaunted resolution. But in several
obstinate engagements against the veteran legions of Rome, the
Persian monarch had lost the flower of his troops. Even his
victories had weakened his power. The favorable opportunities of
the absence of Alexander, and of the confusions that followed
that emperor's death, presented themselves in vain to his
ambition. Instead of expelling the Romans, as he pretended, from
the continent of Asia, he found himself unable to wrest from
their hands the little province of Mesopotamia. ^53
[Footnote 51: M. de Tillemont has already observed, that
Herodian's geography is somewhat confused.]
[Footnote 52: Moses of Chorene (Hist. Armen. l. ii. c. 71)
illustrates this invasion of Media, by asserting that Chosroes,
king of Armenia, defeated Artaxerxes, and pursued him to the
confines of India. The exploits of Chosroes have been magnified;
and he acted as a dependent ally to the Romans.]
[Footnote 53: For the account of this war, see Herodian, l. vi.
p. 209, 212. The old abbreviators and modern compilers have
blindly followed the Augustan History.]
The reign of Artaxerxes, which, from the last defeat of the
Parthians, lasted only fourteen years, forms a memorable aera in
the history of the East, and even in that of Rome. His character
seems to have been marked by those bold and commanding features,
that generally distinguish the princes who conquer, from those
who inherit an empire. Till the last period of the Persian
monarchy, his code of laws was respected as the groundwork of
their civil and religious policy. ^54 Several of his sayings are
preserved. One of them in particular discovers a deep insight
into the constitution of government. "The authority of the
prince," said Artaxerxes, "must be defended by a military force;
that force can only be maintained by taxes; all taxes must, at
last, fall upon agriculture; and agriculture can never flourish
except under the protection of justice and moderation." ^55
Artaxerxes bequeathed his new empire, and his ambitious designs
against the Romans, to Sapor, a son not unworthy of his great
father; but those designs were too extensive for the power of
Persia, and served only to involve both nations in a long series
of destructive wars and reciprocal calamities.
[Footnote 54: Eutychius, tom. ii. p. 180, vers. Pocock. The
great Chosroes Noushirwan sent the code of Artaxerxes to all his
satraps, as the invariable rule of their conduct.]
[Footnote 55: D'Herbelot, Bibliotheque Orientale, au mot Ardshir.
We may observe, that after an ancient period of fables, and a
long interval of darkness, the modern histories of Persia begin
to assume an air of truth with the dynasty of Sassanides.
[Compare Malcolm, i. 79. - M.]
The Persians, long since civilized and corrupted, were very
far from possessing the martial independence, and the intrepid
hardiness, both of mind and body, which have rendered the
northern barbarians masters of the world. The science of war,
that constituted the more rational force of Greece and Rome, as
it now does of Europe, never made any considerable progress in
the East. Those disciplined evolutions which harmonize and
animate a confused multitude, were unknown to the Persians. They
were equally unskilled in the arts of constructing, besieging, or
defending regular fortifications. They trusted more to their
numbers than to their courage; more to their courage than to
their discipline. The infantry was a half-armed, spiritless
crowd of peasants, levied in haste by the allurements of plunder,
and as easily dispersed by a victory as by a defeat. The monarch
and his nobles transported into the camp the pride and luxury of
the seraglio. Their military operations were impeded by a
useless train of women, eunuchs, horses, and camels; and in the
midst of a successful campaign, the Persian host was often
separated or destroyed by an unexpected famine. ^56
[Footnote 56: Herodian, l. vi. p. 214. Ammianus Marcellinus, l.
xxiii. c. 6. Some differences may be observed between the two
historians, the natural effects of the changes produced by a
century and a half.]
But the nobles of Persia, in the bosom of luxury and
despotism, preserved a strong sense of personal gallantry and
national honor. From the age of seven years they were taught to
speak truth, to shoot with the bow, and to ride; and it was
universally confessed, that in the two last of these arts, they
had made a more than common proficiency. ^57 The most
distinguished youth were educated under the monarch's eye,
practised their exercises in the gate of his palace, and were
severely trained up to the habits of temperance and obedience, in
their long and laborious parties of hunting. In every province,
the satrap maintained a like school of military virtue. The
Persian nobles (so natural is the idea of feudal tenures)
received from the king's bounty lands and houses, on the
condition of their service in war. They were ready on the first
summons to mount on horseback, with a martial and splendid train
of followers, and to join the numerous bodies of guards, who were
carefully selected from among the most robust slaves, and the
bravest adventures of Asia. These armies, both of light and of
heavy cavalry, equally formidable by the impetuosity of their
charge and the rapidity of their motions, threatened, as an
impending cloud, the eastern provinces of the declining empire of
Rome. ^58
[Footnote 57: The Persians are still the most skilful horsemen,
and their horses the finest in the East.]
[Footnote 58: From Herodotus, Xenophon, Herodian, Ammianus,
Chardin, &c., I have extracted such probable accounts of the
Persian nobility, as seem either common to every age, or
particular to that of the Sassanides.]
Chapter IX: State Of Germany Until The Barbarians.
Part I.
The State Of Germany Till The Invasion Of The Barbarians In The
Time Of The Emperor Decius.
The government and religion of Persia have deserved some
notice, from their connection with the decline and fall of the
Roman empire. We shall occasionally mention the Scythian or
Sarmatian tribes, ^* which, with their arms and horses, their
flocks and herds, their wives and families, wandered over the
immense plains which spread themselves from the Caspian Sea to
the Vistula, from the confines of Persia to those of Germany.
But the warlike Germans, who first resisted, then invaded, and at
length overturned the Western monarchy of Rome, will occupy a
much more important place in this history, and possess a
stronger, and, if we may use the expression, a more domestic,
claim to our attention and regard. The most civilized nations of
modern Europe issued from the woods of Germany; and in the rude
institutions of those barbarians we may still distinguish the
original principles of our present laws and manners. In their
primitive state of simplicity and independence, the Germans were
surveyed by the discerning eye, and delineated by the masterly
pencil, of Tacitus, ^* the first of historians who applied the
science of philosophy to the study of facts. The expressive
conciseness of his descriptions has served to exercise the
diligence of innumerable antiquarians, and to excite the genius
and penetration of the philosophic historians of our own times.
The subject, however various and important, has already been so
frequently, so ably, and so successfully discussed, that it is
now grown familiar to the reader, and difficult to the writer.
We shall therefore content ourselves with observing, and indeed
with repeating, some of the most important circumstances of
climate, of manners, and of institutions, which rendered the wild
barbarians of Germany such formidable enemies to the Roman power.
[Footnote *: The Scythians, even according to the ancients, are
not Sarmatians. It may be doubted whether Gibbon intended to
confound them. - M.] The Greeks, after having divided the world
into Greeks and barbarians. divided the barbarians into four
great classes, the Celts, the Scythians, the Indians, and the
Ethiopians. They called Celts all the inhabitants of Gaul.
Scythia extended from the Baltic Sea to the Lake Aral: the people
enclosed in the angle to the north-east, between Celtica and
Scythia, were called Celto- Scythians, and the Sarmatians were
placed in the southern part of that angle. But these names of
Celts, of Scythians, of Celto-Scythians, and Sarmatians, were
invented, says Schlozer, by the profound cosmographical ignorance
of the Greeks, and have no real ground; they are purely
geographical divisions, without any relation to the true
affiliation of the different races. Thus all the inhabitants of
Gaul are called Celts by most of the ancient writers; yet Gaul
contained three totally distinct nations, the Belgae, the
Aquitani, and the Gauls, properly so called. Hi omnes lingua
institutis, legibusque inter se differunt. Caesar. Com. c. i.
It is thus the Turks call all Europeans Franks. Schlozer,
Allgemeine Nordische Geschichte, p. 289. 1771. Bayer (de Origine
et priscis Sedibus Scytharum, in Opusc. p. 64) says, Primus
eorum, de quibus constat, Ephorus, in quarto historiarum libro,
orbem terrarum inter Scythas, Indos, Aethiopas et Celtas divisit.
Fragmentum ejus loci Cosmas Indicopleustes in topographia
Christiana, f. 148, conservavit. Video igitur Ephorum, cum
locorum positus per certa capita distribuere et explicare
constitueret, insigniorum nomina gentium vastioribus spatiis
adhibuisse, nulla mala fraude et successu infelici. Nam Ephoro
quoquomodo dicta pro exploratis habebant Graeci plerique et
Romani: ita gliscebat error posteritate. Igitur tot tamque
diversae stirpis gentes non modo intra communem quandam regionem
definitae, unum omnes Scytharum nomen his auctoribus subierunt,
sed etiam ab illa regionis adpellatione in eandem nationem sunt
conflatae. Sic Cimmeriorum res cum Scythicis, Scytharum cum
Sarmaticis, Russicis, Hunnicis, Tataricis commiscentur. - G.]
[Footnote *: The Germania of Tacitus has been a fruitful source
of hypothesis to the ingenuity of modern writers, who have
endeavored to account for the form of the work and the views of
the author. According to Luden, (Geschichte des T. V. i. 432,
and note,) it contains the unfinished and disarranged for a
larger work. An anonymous writer, supposed by Luden to be M.
Becker, conceives that it was intended as an episode in his
larger history. According to M. Guizot, "Tacite a peint les
Germains comme Montaigne et Rousseau les sauvages, dans un acces
d'humeur contre sa patrie: son livre est une satire des moeurs
Romaines, l'eloquente boutade d'un patriote philosophe qui veut
voir la vertu la, ou il ne rencontre pas la mollesse honteuse et
la depravation savante d'une vielle societe." Hist. de la
Civilisation Moderne, i. 258. - M.]
Ancient Germany, excluding from its independent limits the
province westward of the Rhine, which had submitted to the Roman
yoke, extended itself over a third part of Europe. ^1 Almost the
whole of modern Germany, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland,
Livonia, Prussia, and the greater part of Poland, were peopled by
the various tribes of one great nation, whose complexion,
manners, and language denoted a common origin, and preserved a
striking resemblance. On the west, ancient Germany was divided
by the Rhine from the Gallic, and on the south, by the Danube,
from the Illyrian, provinces of the empire. A ridge of hills,
rising from the Danube, and called the Carpathian Mountains,
covered Germany on the side of Dacia or Hungary. The eastern
frontier was faintly marked by the mutual fears of the Germans
and the Sarmatians, and was often confounded by the mixture of
warring and confederating tribes of the two nations. In the
remote darkness of the north, the ancients imperfectly descried a
frozen ocean that lay beyond the Baltic Sea, and beyond the
Peninsula, or islands ^1 of Scandinavia.
[Footnote 1: Germany was not of such vast extent. It is from
Caesar, and more particularly from Ptolemy, (says Gatterer,) that
we can know what was the state of ancient Germany before the wars
with the Romans had changed the positions of the tribes.
Germany, as changed by these wars, has been described by Strabo,
Pliny, and Tacitus. Germany, properly so called, was bounded on
the west by the Rhine, on the east by the Vistula, on the north
by the southern point of Norway, by Sweden, and Esthonia. On the
south, the Maine and the mountains to the north of Bohemia formed
the limits. Before the time of Caesar, the country between the
Maine and the Danube was partly occupied by the Helvetians and
other Gauls, partly by the Hercynian forest but, from the time of
Caesar to the great migration, these boundaries were advanced as
far as the Danube, or, what is the same thing, to the Suabian
Alps, although the Hercynian forest still occupied, from north to
south, a space of nine days' journey on both banks of the Danube.
"Gatterer, Versuch einer all-gemeinen Welt-Geschichte," p. 424,
edit. de 1792. This vast country was far from being inhabited by
a single nation divided into different tribes of the same origin.
We may reckon three principal races, very distinct in their
language, their origin, and their customs. 1. To the east, the
Slaves or Vandals. 2. To the west, the Cimmerians or Cimbri. 3.
Between the Slaves and Cimbrians, the Germans, properly so
called, the Suevi of Tacitus. The South was inhabited, before
Julius Caesar, by nations of Gaulish origin, afterwards by the
Suevi. - G. On the position of these nations, the German
antiquaries differ. I. The Slaves, or Sclavonians, or Wendish
tribes, according to Schlozer, were originally settled in parts
of Germany unknown to the Romans, Mecklenburgh, Pomerania,
Brandenburgh, Upper Saxony; and Lusatia. According to Gatterer,
they remained to the east of the Theiss, the Niemen, and the
Vistula, till the third century. The Slaves, according to
Procopius and Jornandes, formed three great divisions. 1. The
Venedi or Vandals, who took the latter name, (the Wenden,) having
expelled the Vandals, properly so called, (a Suevian race, the
conquerors of Africa,) from the country between the Memel and the
Vistula. 2. The Antes, who inhabited between the Dneister and
the Dnieper. 3. The Sclavonians, properly so called, in the
north of Dacia. During the great migration, these races advanced
into Germany as far as the Saal and the Elbe. The Sclavonian
language is the stem from which have issued the Russian, the
Polish, the Bohemian, and the dialects of Lusatia, of some parts
of the duchy of Luneburgh, of Carniola, Carinthia, and Styria,
&c.; those of Croatia, Bosnia, and Bulgaria. Schlozer, Nordische
Geschichte, p. 323, 335. II. The Cimbric race. Adelung calls
by this name all who were not Suevi. This race had passed the
Rhine, before the time of Caesar, occupied Belgium, and are the
Belgae of Caesar and Pliny. The Cimbrians also occupied the Isle
of Jutland. The Cymri of Wales and of Britain are of this race.
Many tribes on the right bank of the Rhine, the Guthini in
Jutland, the Usipeti in Westphalia, the Sigambri in the duchy of
Berg, were German Cimbrians. III. The Suevi, known in very
early times by the Romans, for they are mentioned by L. Corn.
Sisenna, who lived 123 years before Christ, (Nonius v. Lancea.)
This race, the real Germans, extended to the Vistula, and from
the Baltic to the Hercynian forest. The name of Suevi was
sometimes confined to a single tribe, as by Caesar to the Catti.
The name of the Suevi has been preserved in Suabia.
These three were the principal races which inhabited
Germany; they moved from east to west, and are the parent stem of
the modern natives. But northern Europe, according to Schlozer,
was not peopled by them alone; other races, of different origin,
and speaking different languages, have inhabited and left
descendants in these countries.
The German tribes called themselves, from very remote times,
by the generic name of Teutons, (Teuten, Deutschen,) which
Tacitus derives from that of one of their gods, Tuisco. It
appears more probable that it means merely men, people. Many
savage nations have given themselves no other name. Thus the
Laplanders call themselves Almag, people; the Samoiedes Nilletz,
Nissetsch, men, &c. As to the name of Germans, (Germani,) Caesar
found it in use in Gaul, and adopted it as a word already known
to the Romans. Many of the learned (from a passage of Tacitus,
de Mor Germ. c. 2) have supposed that it was only applied to the
Teutons after Caesar's time; but Adelung has triumphantly refuted
this opinion. The name of Germans is found in the Fasti
Capitolini. See Gruter, Iscrip. 2899, in which the consul
Marcellus, in the year of Rome 531, is said to have defeated the
Gauls, the Insubrians, and the Germans, commanded by Virdomar.
See Adelung, Aelt. Geschichte der Deutsch, p. 102. - Compressed
from G.]
[Footnote 1: The modern philosophers of Sweden seem agreed that
the waters of the Baltic gradually sink in a regular proportion,
which they have ventured to estimate at half an inch every year.
Twenty centuries ago the flat country of Scandinavia must have
been covered by the sea; while the high lands rose above the
waters, as so many islands of various forms and dimensions.
Such, indeed, is the notion given us by Mela, Pliny, and Tacitus,
of the vast countries round the Baltic. See in the Bibliotheque
Raisonnee, tom. xl. and xlv. a large abstract of Dalin's History
of Sweden, composed in the Swedish language.
Note: Modern geologists have rejected this theory of the
depression of the Baltic, as inconsistent with recent
observation. The considerable changes which have taken place on
its shores, Mr. Lyell, from actual observation now decidedly
attributes to the regular and uniform elevation of the land. -
Lyell's Geology, b. ii. c. 17 - M.]
Some ingenious writers ^2 have suspected that Europe was
much colder formerly than it is at present; and the most ancient
descriptions of the climate of Germany tend exceedingly to
confirm their theory. The general complaints of intense frost
and eternal winter, are perhaps little to be regarded, since we
have no method of reducing to the accurate standard of the
thermometer, the feelings, or the expressions, of an orator born
in the happier regions of Greece or Asia. But I shall select two
remarkable circumstances of a less equivocal nature. 1. The
great rivers which covered the Roman provinces, the Rhine and the
Danube, were frequently frozen over, and capable of supporting
the most enormous weights. The barbarians, who often chose that
severe season for their inroads, transported, without
apprehension or danger, their numerous armies, their cavalry, and
their heavy wagons, over a vast and solid bridge of ice. ^3
Modern ages have not presented an instance of a like phenomenon.
2. The reindeer, that useful animal, from whom the savage of the
North derives the best comforts of his dreary life, is of a
constitution that supports, and even requires, the most intense
cold. He is found on the rock of Spitzberg, within ten degrees
of the Pole; he seems to delight in the snows of Lapland and
Siberia: but at present he cannot subsist, much less multiply, in
any country to the south of the Baltic. ^4 In the time of Caesar
the reindeer, as well as the elk and the wild bull, was a native
of the Hercynian forest, which then overshadowed a great part of
Germany and Poland. ^5 The modern improvements sufficiently
explain the causes of the diminution of the cold. These immense
woods have been gradually cleared, which intercepted from the
earth the rays of the sun. ^6 The morasses have been drained,
and, in proportion as the soil has been cultivated, the air has
become more temperate. Canada, at this day, is an exact picture
of ancient Germany. Although situated in the same parallel with
the finest provinces of France and England, that country
experiences the most rigorous cold. The reindeer are very
numerous, the ground is covered with deep and lasting snow, and
the great river of St. Lawrence is regularly frozen, in a season
when the waters of the Seine and the Thames are usually free from
ice. ^7
[Footnote 2: In particular, Mr. Hume, the Abbe du Bos, and M.
Pelloutier. Hist. des Celtes, tom. i.]
[Footnote 3: Diodorus Siculus, l. v. p. 340, edit. Wessel.
Herodian, l. vi. p. 221. Jornandes, c. 55. On the banks of the
Danube, the wine, when brought to table, was frequently frozen
into great lumps, frusta vini. Ovid. Epist. ex Ponto, l. iv. 7,
9, 10. Virgil. Georgic. l. iii. 355. The fact is confirmed by a
soldier and a philosopher, who had experienced the intense cold
of Thrace. See Xenophon, Anabasis, l. vii. p. 560, edit.
Hutchinson.
Note: The Danube is constantly frozen over. At Pesth the
bridge is usually taken up, and the traffic and communication
between the two banks carried on over the ice. The Rhine is
likewise in many parts passable at least two years out of five.
Winter campaigns are so unusual, in modern warfare, that I
recollect but one instance of an army crossing either river on
the ice. In the thirty years' war, (1635,) Jan van Werth, an
Imperialist partisan, crossed the Rhine from Heidelberg on the
ice with 5000 men, and surprised Spiers. Pichegru's memorable
campaign, (1794-5,) when the freezing of the Meuse and Waal
opened Holland to his conquests, and his cavalry and artillery
attacked the ships frozen in, on the Zuyder Zee, was in a winter
of unprecedented severity. - M. 1845.]
[Footnote 4: Buffon, Histoire Naturelle, tom. xii. p. 79, 116.]
[Footnote 5: Caesar de Bell. Gallic. vi. 23, &c. The most
inquisitive of the Germans were ignorant of its utmost limits,
although some of them had travelled in it more than sixty days'
journey.
Note: The passage of Caesar, "parvis renonum tegumentis
utuntur," is obscure, observes Luden, (Geschichte des Teutschen
Volkes,) and insufficient to prove the reindeer to have existed
in Germany. It is supported however, by a fragment of Sallust.
Germani intectum rhenonibus corpus tegunt. - M. It has been
suggested to me that Caesar (as old Gesner supposed) meant the
reindeer in the following description. Est bos cervi figura
cujus a media fronte inter aures unum cornu existit, excelsius
magisque directum (divaricatum, qu ?) his quae nobis nota sunt
cornibus. At ejus summo, sicut palmae, rami quam late
diffunduntur. Bell. vi. - M. 1845.]
[Footnote 6: Cluverius (Germania Antiqua, l. iii. c. 47)
investigates the small and scattered remains of the Hercynian
wood.]
[Footnote 7: Charlevoix, Histoire du Canada.]
It is difficult to ascertain, and easy to exaggerate, the
influence of the climate of ancient Germany over the minds and
bodies of the natives. Many writers have supposed, and most have
allowed, though, as it should seem, without any adequate proof,
that the rigorous cold of the North was favorable to long life
and generative vigor, that the women were more fruitful, and the
human species more prolific, than in warmer or more temperate
climates. ^8 We may assert, with greater confidence, that the
keen air of Germany formed the large and masculine limbs of the
natives, who were, in general, of a more lofty stature than the
people of the South, ^9 gave them a kind of strength better
adapted to violent exertions than to patient labor, and inspired
them with constitutional bravery, which is the result of nerves
and spirits. The severity of a winter campaign, that chilled the
courage of the Roman troops, was scarcely felt by these hardy
children of the North, ^10 who, in their turn, were unable to
resist the summer heats, and dissolved away in languor and
sickness under the beams of an Italian sun. ^11
[Footnote 8: Olaus Rudbeck asserts that the Swedish women often
bear ten or twelve children, and not uncommonly twenty or thirty;
but the authority of Rudbeck is much to be suspected.]
[Footnote 9: In hos artus, in haec corpora, quae miramur,
excrescunt. Taeit Germania, 3, 20. Cluver. l. i. c. 14.]
[Footnote 10: Plutarch. in Mario. The Cimbri, by way of
amusement, often did down mountains of snow on their broad
shields.]
[Footnote 11: The Romans made war in all climates, and by their
excellent discipline were in a great measure preserved in health
and vigor. It may be remarked, that man is the only animal which
can live and multiply in every country from the equator to the
poles. The hog seems to approach the nearest to our species in
that privilege.]
Chapter IX: State Of Germany Until The Barbarians.
Part II.
There is not any where upon the globe a large tract of
country, which we have discovered destitute of inhabitants, or
whose first population can be fixed with any degree of historical
certainty. And yet, as the most philosophic minds can seldom
refrain from investigating the infancy of great nations, our
curiosity consumes itself in toilsome and disappointed efforts.
When Tacitus considered the purity of the German blood, and the
forbidding aspect of the country, he was disposed to pronounce
those barbarians Indigence, or natives of the soil. We may allow
with safety, and perhaps with truth, that ancient Germany was not
originally peopled by any foreign colonies already formed into a
political society; ^12 but that the name and nation received
their existence from the gradual union of some wandering savages
of the Hercynian woods. To assert those savages to have been the
spontaneous production of the earth which they inhabited would be
a rash inference, condemned by religion, and unwarranted by
reason.
[Footnote 12: Facit. Germ. c. 3. The emigration of the Gauls
followed the course of the Danube, and discharged itself on
Greece and Asia. Tacitus could discover only one inconsiderable
tribe that retained any traces of a Gallic origin.
Note: The Gothini, who must not be confounded with the
Gothi, a Suevian tribe. In the time of Caesar many other tribes
of Gaulish origin dwelt along the course of the Danube, who could
not long resist the attacks of the Suevi. The Helvetians, who
dwelt on the borders of the Black Forest, between the Maine and
the Danube, had been expelled long before the time of Caesar. He
mentions also the Volci Tectosagi, who came from Languedoc and
settled round the Black Forest. The Boii, who had penetrated
into that forest, and also have left traces of their name in
Bohemia, were subdued in the first century by the Marcomanni.
The Boii settled in Noricum, were mingled afterwards with the
Lombards, and received the name of Boio Arii (Bavaria) or
Boiovarii: var, in some German dialects, appearing to mean
remains, descendants. Compare Malte B-m, Geography, vol. i. p.
410, edit 1832 - M.]
Such rational doubt is but ill suited with the genius of
popular vanity. Among the nations who have adopted the Mosaic
history of the world, the ark of Noah has been of the same use,
as was formerly to the Greeks and Romans the siege of Troy. On a
narrow basis of acknowledged truth, an immense but rude
superstructure of fable has been erected; and the wild Irishman,
^13 as well as the wild Tartar, ^14 could point out the
individual son of Japhet, from whose loins his ancestors were
lineally descended. The last century abounded with antiquarians
of profound learning and easy faith, who, by the dim light of
legends and traditions, of conjectures and etymologies, conducted
the great grandchildren of Noah from the Tower of Babel to the
extremities of the globe. Of these judicious critics, one of the
most entertaining was Oaus Rudbeck, professor in the university
of Upsal. ^15 Whatever is celebrated either in history or fable,
this zealous patriot ascribes to his country. From Sweden (which
formed so considerable a part of ancient Germany) the Greeks
themselves derived their alphabetical characters, their
astronomy, and their religion. Of that delightful region (for
such it appeared to the eyes of a native) the Atlantis of Plato,
the country of the Hyperboreans, the gardens of the Hesperides,
the Fortunate Islands, and even the Elysian Fields, were all but
faint and imperfect transcripts. A clime so profusely favored by
Nature could not long remain desert after the flood. The learned
Rudbeck allows the family of Noah a few years to multiply from
eight to about twenty thousand persons. He then disperses them
into small colonies to replenish the earth, and to propagate the
human species. The German or Swedish detachment (which marched,
if I am not mistaken, under the command of Askenaz, the son of
Gomer, the son of Japhet) distinguished itself by a more than
common diligence in the prosecution of this great work. The
northern hive cast its swarms over the greatest part of Europe,
Africa, and Asia; and (to use the author's metaphor) the blood
circulated from the extremities to the heart.
[Footnote 13: According to Dr. Keating, (History of Ireland, p.
13, 14,) the giant Portholanus, who was the son of Seara, the son
of Esra, the son of Sru, the son of Framant, the son of
Fathaclan, the son of Magog, the son of Japhet, the son of Noah,
landed on the coast of Munster the 14th day of May, in the year
of the world one thousand nine hundred and seventy-eight. Though
he succeeded in his great enterprise, the loose behavior of his
wife rendered his domestic life very unhappy, and provoked him to
such a degree, that he killed - her favorite greyhound. This, as
the learned historian very properly observes, was the first
instance of female falsehood and infidelity ever known in
Ireland.]
[Footnote 14: Genealogical History of the Tartars, by Abulghazi
Bahadur Khan.]
[Footnote 15: His work, entitled Atlantica, is uncommonly scarce.
Bayle has given two most curious extracts from it. Republique
des Lettres Janvier et Fevrier, 1685.]
But all this well-labored system of German antiquities is
annihilated by a single fact, too well attested to admit of any
doubt, and of too decisive a nature to leave room for any reply.
The Germans, in the age of Tacitus, were unacquainted with the
use of letters; ^16 and the use of letters is the principal
circumstance that distinguishes a civilized people from a herd of
savages incapable of knowledge or reflection. Without that
artificial help, the human memory soon dissipates or corrupts the
ideas intrusted to her charge; and the nobler faculties of the
mind, no longer supplied with models or with materials, gradually
forget their powers; the judgment becomes feeble and lethargic,
the imagination languid or irregular. Fully to apprehend this
important truth, let us attempt, in an improved society, to
calculate the immense distance between the man of learning and
the illiterate peasant. The former, by reading and reflection,
multiplies his own experience, and lives in distant ages and
remote countries; whilst the latter, rooted to a single spot, and
confined to a few years of existence, surpasses but very little
his fellow-laborer, the ox, in the exercise of his mental
faculties. The same, and even a greater, difference will be
found between nations than between individuals; and we may safely
pronounce, that without some species of writing, no people has
ever preserved the faithful annals of their history, ever made
any considerable progress in the abstract sciences, or ever
possessed, in any tolerable degree of perfection, the useful and
agreeable arts of life.
[Footnote 16: Tacit. Germ. ii. 19. Literarum secreta viri
pariter ac foeminae ignorant. We may rest contented with this
decisive authority, without entering into the obscure disputes
concerning the antiquity of the Runic characters. The learned
Celsius, a Swede, a scholar, and a philosopher, was of opinion,
that they were nothing more than the Roman letters, with the
curves changed into straight lines for the ease of engraving.
See Pelloutier, Histoire des Celtes, l. ii. c. 11. Dictionnaire
Diplomatique, tom. i. p. 223. We may add, that the oldest Runic
inscriptions are supposed to be of the third century, and the
most ancient writer who mentions the Runic characters is Venan
tius Frotunatus, (Carm. vii. 18,) who lived towards the end of
the sixth century.
Barbara fraxineis pingatur Runa tabellis.
Note: The obscure subject of the Runic characters has
exercised the industry and ingenuity of the modern scholars of
the north. There are three distinct theories; one, maintained by
Schlozer, (Nordische Geschichte, p. 481, &c.,) who considers
their sixteen letters to be a corruption of the Roman alphabet,
post-Christian in their date, and Schlozer would attribute their
introduction into the north to the Alemanni. The second, that of
Frederick Schlegel, (Vorlesungen uber alte und neue Literatur,)
supposes that these characters were left on the coasts of the
Mediterranean and Northern Seas by the Phoenicians, preserved by
the priestly castes, and employed for purposes of magic. Their
common origin from the Phoenician would account for heir
similarity to the Roman letters. The last, to which we incline,
claims much higher and more venerable antiquity for the Runic,
and supposes them to have been the original characters of the
Indo-Teutonic tribes, brought from the East, and preserved among
the different races of that stock. See Ueber Deutsche Runen von
W. C. Grimm, 1821. A Memoir by Dr. Legis. Fundgruben des alten
Nordens. Foreign Quarterly Review vol. ix. p. 438. - M.]
Of these arts, the ancient Germans were wretchedly
destitute. They passed their lives in a state of ignorance and
poverty, which it has pleased some declaimers to dignify with the
appellation of virtuous simplicity. Modern Germany is said to
contain about two thousand three hundred walled towns. ^17 In a
much wider extent of country, the geographer Ptolemy could
discover no more than ninety places which he decorates with the
name of cities; ^18 though, according to our ideas, they would
but ill deserve that splendid title. We can only suppose them to
have been rude fortifications, constructed in the centre of the
woods, and designed to secure the women, children, and cattle,
whilst the warriors of the tribe marched out to repel a sudden
invasion. ^19 But Tacitus asserts, as a well-known fact, that the
Germans, in his time, had no cities; ^20 and that they affected
to despise the works of Roman industry, as places of confinement
rather than of security. ^21 Their edifices were not even
contiguous, or formed into regular villas; ^22 each barbarian
fixed his independent dwelling on the spot to which a plain, a
wood, or a stream of fresh water, had induced him to give the
preference. Neither stone, nor brick, nor tiles, were employed
in these slight habitations. ^23 They were indeed no more than
low huts, of a circular figure, built of rough timber, thatched
with straw, and pierced at the top to leave a free passage for
the smoke. In the most inclement winter, the hardy German was
satisfied with a scanty garment made of the skin of some animal.
The nations who dwelt towards the North clothed themselves in
furs; and the women manufactured for their own use a coarse kind
of linen. ^24 The game of various sorts, with which the forests
of Germany were plentifully stocked, supplied its inhabitants
with food and exercise. ^25 Their monstrous herds of cattle, less
remarkable indeed for their beauty than for their utility, ^26
formed the principal object of their wealth. A small quantity of
corn was the only produce exacted from the earth; the use of
orchards or artificial meadows was unknown to the Germans; nor
can we expect any improvements in agriculture from a people,
whose prosperity every year experienced a general change by a new
division of the arable lands, and who, in that strange operation,
avoided disputes, by suffering a great part of their territory to
lie waste and without tillage. ^27
[Footnote *: Luden (the author of the Geschichte des Teutschen
Volkes) has surpassed most writers in his patriotic enthusiasm
for the virtues and noble manners of his ancestors. Even the
cold of the climate, and the want of vines and fruit trees, as
well as the barbarism of the inhabitants, are calumnies of the
luxurious Italians. M. Guizot, on the other side, (in his
Histoire de la Civilisation, vol. i. p. 272, &c.,) has drawn a
curious parallel between the Germans of Tacitus and the North
American Indians. - M.] [Footnote 17: Recherches Philosophiques
sur les Americains, tom. iii. p. 228. The author of that very
curious work is, if I am not misinformed, a German by birth. (De
Pauw.)]
[Footnote 18: The Alexandrian Geographer is often criticized by
the accurate Cluverius.]
[Footnote 19: See Caesar, and the learned Mr. Whitaker in his
History of Manchester, vol. i.]
[Footnote 20: Tacit. Germ. 15.]
[Footnote 21: When the Germans commanded the Ubii of Cologne to
cast off the Roman yoke, and with their new freedom to resume
their ancient manners, they insisted on the immediate demolition
of the walls of the colony. "Postulamus a vobis, muros coloniae,
munimenta servitii, detrahatis; etiam fera animalia, si clausa
teneas, virtutis obliviscuntur." Tacit. Hist. iv. 64.]
[Footnote 22: The straggling villages of Silesia are several
miles in length. See Cluver. l. i. c. 13.]
[Footnote 23: One hundred and forty years after Tacitus, a few
more regular structures were erected near the Rhine and Danube.
Herodian, l. vii. p. 234.]
[Footnote 24: Tacit. Germ. 17.]
[Footnote 25: Tacit. Germ. 5.]
[Footnote 26: Caesar de Bell. Gall. vi. 21.]
[Footnote 27: Tacit. Germ. 26. Caesar, vi. 22.]
Gold, silver, and iron, were extremely scarce in Germany.
Its barbarous inhabitants wanted both skill and patience to
investigate those rich veins of silver, which have so liberally
rewarded the attention of the princes of Brunswick and Saxony.
Sweden, which now supplies Europe with iron, was equally ignorant
of its own riches; and the appearance of the arms of the Germans
furnished a sufficient proof how little iron they were able to
bestow on what they must have deemed the noblest use of that
metal. The various transactions of peace and war had introduced
some Roman coins (chiefly silver) among the borderers of the
Rhine and Danube; but the more distant tribes were absolutely
unacquainted with the use of money, carried on their confined
traffic by the exchange of commodities, and prized their rude
earthen vessels as of equal value with the silver vases, the
presents of Rome to their princes and ambassadors. ^28 To a mind
capable of reflection, such leading facts convey more
instruction, than a tedious detail of subordinate circumstances.
The value of money has been settled by general consent to express
our wants and our property, as letters were invented to express
our ideas; and both these institutions, by giving a more active
energy to the powers and passions of human nature, have
contributed to multiply the objects they were designed to
represent. The use of gold and silver is in a great measure
factitious; but it would be impossible to enumerate the important
and various services which agriculture, and all the arts, have
received from iron, when tempered and fashioned by the operation
of fire, and the dexterous hand of man. Money, in a word, is the
most universal incitement, iron the most powerful instrument, of
human industry; and it is very difficult to conceive by what
means a people, neither actuated by the one, nor seconded by the
other, could emerge from the grossest barbarism. ^29
[Footnote 28: Tacit. Germ. 6.]
[Footnote 29: It is said that the Mexicans and Peruvians, without
the use of either money or iron, had made a very great progress
in the arts. Those arts, and the monuments they produced, have
been strangely magnified. See Recherches sur les Americains,
tom. ii. p. 153, &c]
If we contemplate a savage nation in any part of the globe,
a supine indolence and a carelessness of futurity will be found
to constitute their general character. In a civilized state,
every faculty of man is expanded and exercised; and the great
chain of mutual dependence connects and embraces the several
members of society. The most numerous portion of it is employed
in constant and useful labor. The select few, placed by fortune
above that necessity, can, however, fill up their time by the
pursuits of interest or glory, by the improvement of their estate
or of their understanding, by the duties, the pleasures, and even
the follies of social life. The Germans were not possessed of
these varied resources. The care of the house and family, the
management of the land and cattle, were delegated to the old and
the infirm, to women and slaves. The lazy warrior, destitute of
every art that might employ his leisure hours, consumed his days
and nights in the animal gratifications of sleep and food. And
yet, by a wonderful diversity of nature, (according to the remark
of a writer who had pierced into its darkest recesses,) the same
barbarians are by turns the most indolent and the most restless
of mankind. They delight in sloth, they detest tranquility. ^30
The languid soul, oppressed with its own weight, anxiously
required some new and powerful sensation; and war and danger were
the only amusements adequate to its fierce temper. The sound
that summoned the German to arms was grateful to his ear. It
roused him from his uncomfortable lethargy, gave him an active
pursuit, and, by strong exercise of the body, and violent
emotions of the mind, restored him to a more lively sense of his
existence. In the dull intervals of peace, these barbarians were
immoderately addicted to deep gaming and excessive drinking; both
of which, by different means, the one by inflaming their
passions, the other by extinguishing their reason, alike relieved
them from the pain of thinking. They gloried in passing whole
days and nights at table; and the blood of friends and relations
often stained their numerous and drunken assemblies. ^31 Their
debts of honor (for in that light they have transmitted to us
those of play) they discharged with the most romantic fidelity.
The desperate gamester, who had staked his person and liberty on
a last throw of the dice, patiently submitted to the decision of
fortune, and suffered himself to be bound, chastised, and sold
into remote slavery, by his weaker but more lucky antagonist. ^32
[Footnote 30: Tacit. Germ. 15.]
[Footnote 31: Tacit. Germ. 22, 23.]
[Footnote 32: Id. 24. The Germans might borrow the arts of play
from the Romans, but the passion is wonderfully inherent in the
human species.] Strong beer, a liquor extracted with very
little art from wheat or barley, and corrupted (as it is strongly
expressed by Tacitus) into a certain semblance of wine, was
sufficient for the gross purposes of German debauchery. But
those who had tasted the rich wines of Italy, and afterwards of
Gaul, sighed for that more delicious species of intoxication.
They attempted not, however, (as has since been executed with so
much success,) to naturalize the vine on the banks of the Rhine
and Danube; nor did they endeavor to procure by industry the
materials of an advantageous commerce. To solicit by labor what
might be ravished by arms, was esteemed unworthy of the German
spirit. ^33 The intemperate thirst of strong liquors often urged
the barbarians to invade the provinces on which art or nature had
bestowed those much envied presents. The Tuscan who betrayed his
country to the Celtic nations, attracted them into Italy by the
prospect of the rich fruits and delicious wines, the productions
of a happier climate. ^34 And in the same manner the German
auxiliaries, invited into France during the civil wars of the
sixteenth century, were allured by the promise of plenteous
quarters in the provinces of Champaigne and Burgundy. ^35
Drunkenness, the most illiberal, but not the most dangerous of
our vices, was sometimes capable, in a less civilized state of
mankind, of occasioning a battle, a war, or a revolution.
[Footnote 33: Tacit. Germ. 14.]
[Footnote 34: Plutarch. in Camillo. T. Liv. v. 33.]
[Footnote 35: Dubos. Hist. de la Monarchie Francoise, tom. i. p.
193.]
The climate of ancient Germany has been modified, and the
soil fertilized, by the labor of ten centuries from the time of
Charlemagne. The same extent of ground which at present
maintains, in ease and plenty, a million of husbandmen and
artificers, was unable to supply a hundred thousand lazy warriors
with the simple necessaries of life. ^36 The Germans abandoned
their immense forests to the exercise of hunting, employed in
pasturage the most considerable part of their lands, bestowed on
the small remainder a rude and careless cultivation, and then
accused the scantiness and sterility of a country that refused to
maintain the multitude of its inhabitants. When the return of
famine severely admonished them of the importance of the arts,
the national distress was sometimes alleviated by the emigration
of a third, perhaps, or a fourth part of their youth. ^37 The
possession and the enjoyment of property are the pledges which
bind a civilized people to an improved country. But the Germans,
who carried with them what they most valued, their arms, their
cattle, and their women, cheerfully abandoned the vast silence of
their woods for the unbounded hopes of plunder and conquest. The
innumerable swarms that issued, or seemed to issue, from the
great storehouse of nations, were multiplied by the fears of the
vanquished, and by the credulity of succeeding ages. And from
facts thus exaggerated, an opinion was gradually established, and
has been supported by writers of distinguished reputation, that,
in the age of Caesar and Tacitus, the inhabitants of the North
were far more numerous than they are in our days. ^38 A more
serious inquiry into the causes of population seems to have
convinced modern philosophers of the falsehood, and indeed the
impossibility, of the supposition. To the names of Mariana and
of Machiavel, ^39 we can oppose the equal names of Robertson and
Hume. ^40
[Footnote 36: The Helvetian nation, which issued from a country
called Switzerland, contained, of every age and sex, 368,000
persons, (Caesar de Bell. Gal. i. 29.) At present, the number of
people in the Pays de Vaud (a small district on the banks of the
Leman Lake, much more distinguished for politeness than for
industry) amounts to 112,591. See an excellent tract of M.
Muret, in the Memoires de la Societe de Born.]
[Footnote 37: Paul Diaconus, c. 1, 2, 3. Machiavel, Davila, and
the rest of Paul's followers, represent these emigrations too
much as regular and concerted measures.]
[Footnote 38: Sir William Temple and Montesquieu have indulged,
on this subject, the usual liveliness of their fancy.]
[Footnote 39: Machiavel, Hist. di Firenze, l. i. Mariana, Hist.
Hispan. l. v. c. 1]
[Footnote 40: Robertson's Charles V. Hume's Political Essays.
Note: It is a wise observation of Malthus, that these
nations "were not populous in proportion to the land they
occupied, but to the food they produced. They were prolific from
their pure morals and constitutions, but their institutions were
not calculated to produce food for those whom they brought into
being. - M - 1845.]
A warlike nation like the Germans, without either cities,
letters, arts, or money, found some compensation for this savage
state in the enjoyment of liberty. Their poverty secured their
freedom, since our desires and our possessions are the strongest
fetters of despotism. "Among the Suiones (says Tacitus) riches
are held in honor. They are therefore subject to an absolute
monarch, who, instead of intrusting his people with the free use
of arms, as is practised in the rest of Germany, commits them to
the safe custody, not of a citizen, or even of a freedman, but of
a slave. The neighbors of the Suiones, the Sitones, are sunk
even below servitude; they obey a woman." ^41 In the mention of
these exceptions, the great historian sufficiently acknowledges
the general theory of government. We are only at a loss to
conceive by what means riches and despotism could penetrate into
a remote corner of the North, and extinguish the generous flame
that blazed with such fierceness on the frontier of the Roman
provinces, or how the ancestors of those Danes and Norwegians, so
distinguished in latter ages by their unconquered spirit, could
thus tamely resign the great character of German liberty. ^42
Some tribes, however, on the coast of the Baltic, acknowledged
the authority of kings, though without relinquishing the rights
of men, ^43 but in the far greater part of Germany, the form of
government was a democracy, tempered, indeed, and controlled, not
so much by general and positive laws, as by the occasional
ascendant of birth or valor, of eloquence or superstition. ^44
[Footnote 41: Tacit. German. 44, 45. Freinshemius (who dedicated
his supplement to Livy to Christina of Sweden) thinks proper to
be very angry with the Roman who expressed so very little
reverence for Northern queens.
Note: The Suiones and the Sitones are the ancient
inhabitants of Scandinavia, their name may be traced in that of
Sweden; they did not belong to the race of the Suevi, but that of
the non-Suevi or Cimbri, whom the Suevi, in very remote times,
drove back part to the west, part to the north; they were
afterwards mingled with Suevian tribes, among others the Goths,
who have traces of their name and power in the isle of Gothland.
- G]
[Footnote 42: May we not suspect that superstition was the parent
of despotism? The descendants of Odin, (whose race was not
extinct till the year 1060) are said to have reigned in Sweden
above a thousand years. The temple of Upsal was the ancient seat
of religion and empire. In the year 1153 I find a singular law,
prohibiting the use and profession of arms to any except the
king's guards. Is it not probable that it was colored by the
pretence of reviving an old institution? See Dalin's History of
Sweden in the Bibliotheque Raisonneo tom. xl. and xlv.]
[Footnote 43: Tacit. Germ. c. 43.]
[Footnote 44: Id. c. 11, 12, 13, & c.]
Civil governments, in their first institution, are voluntary
associations for mutual defence. To obtain the desired end, it
is absolutely necessary that each individual should conceive
himself obliged to submit his private opinions and actions to the
judgment of the greater number of his associates. The German
tribes were contented with this rude but liberal outline of
political society. As soon as a youth, born of free parents, had
attained the age of manhood, he was introduced into the general
council of his countrymen, solemnly invested with a shield and
spear, and adopted as an equal and worthy member of the military
commonwealth. The assembly of the warriors of the tribe was
convened at stated seasons, or on sudden emergencies. The trial
of public offences, the election of magistrates, and the great
business of peace and war, were determined by its independent
voice. Sometimes indeed, these important questions were
previously considered and prepared in a more select council of
the principal chieftains. ^45 The magistrates might deliberate
and persuade, the people only could resolve and execute; and the
resolutions of the Germans were for the most part hasty and
violent. Barbarians accustomed to place their freedom in
gratifying the present passion, and their courage in overlooking
all future consequences, turned away with indignant contempt from
the remonstrances of justice and policy, and it was the practice
to signify by a hollow murmur their dislike of such timid
counsels. But whenever a more popular orator proposed to
vindicate the meanest citizen from either foreign or domestic
injury, whenever he called upon his fellow-countrymen to assert
the national honor, or to pursue some enterprise full of danger
and glory, a loud clashing of shields and spears expressed the
eager applause of the assembly. For the Germans always met in
arms, and it was constantly to be dreaded, lest an irregular
multitude, inflamed with faction and strong liquors, should use
those arms to enforce, as well as to declare, their furious
resolves. We may recollect how often the diets of Poland have
been polluted with blood, and the more numerous party has been
compelled to yield to the more violent and seditious. ^46
[Footnote 45: Grotius changes an expression of Tacitus,
pertractantur into Proetractantur. The correction is equally
just and ingenious.]
[Footnote 46: Even in our ancient parliament, the barons often
carried a question, not so much by the number of votes, as by
that of their armed followers.]
A general of the tribe was elected on occasions of danger;
and, if the danger was pressing and extensive, several tribes
concurred in the choice of the same general. The bravest warrior
was named to lead his countrymen into the field, by his example
rather than by his commands. But this power, however limited,
was still invidious. It expired with the war, and in time of
peace the German tribes acknowledged not any supreme chief. ^47
Princes were, however, appointed, in the general assembly, to
administer justice, or rather to compose differences, ^48 in
their respective districts. In the choice of these magistrates,
as much regard was shown to birth as to merit. ^49 To each was
assigned, by the public, a guard, and a council of a hundred
persons, and the first of the princes appears to have enjoyed a
preeminence of rank and honor which sometimes tempted the Romans
to compliment him with the regal title. ^50
[Footnote 47: Caesar de Bell. Gal. vi. 23.]
[Footnote 48: Minuunt controversias, is a very happy expression
of Caesar's.]
[Footnote 49: Reges ex nobilitate, duces ex virtute sumunt.
Tacit Germ. 7]
[Footnote 50: Cluver. Germ. Ant. l. i. c. 38.]
The comparative view of the powers of the magistrates, in
two remarkable instances, is alone sufficient to represent the
whole system of German manners. The disposal of the landed
property within their district was absolutely vested in their
hands, and they distributed it every year according to a new
division. ^51 At the same time they were not authorized to punish
with death, to imprison, or even to strike a private citizen. ^52
A people thus jealous of their persons, and careless of their
possessions, must have been totally destitute of industry and the
arts, but animated with a high sense of honor and independence.
[Footnote 51: Caesar, vi. 22. Tacit Germ. 26.]
[Footnote 52: Tacit. Germ. 7.]
Chapter IX: State Of Germany Until The Barbarians.
Part III.
The Germans respected only those duties which they imposed
on themselves. The most obscure soldier resisted with disdain
the authority of the magistrates. "The noblest youths blushed
not to be numbered among the faithful companions of some renowned
chief, to whom they devoted their arms and service. A noble
emulation prevailed among the companions, to obtain the first
place in the esteem of their chief; amongst the chiefs, to
acquire the greatest number of valiant companions. To be ever
surrounded by a band of select youths was the pride and strength
of the chiefs, their ornament in peace, their defence in war.
The glory of such distinguished heroes diffused itself beyond the
narrow limits of their own tribe. Presents and embassies
solicited their friendship, and the fame of their arms often
insured victory to the party which they espoused. In the hour of
danger it was shameful for the chief to be surpassed in valor by
his companions; shameful for the companions not to equal the
valor of their chief. To survive his fall in battle, was
indelible infamy. To protect his person, and to adorn his glory
with the trophies of their own exploits, were the most sacred of
their duties. The chiefs combated for victory, the companions
for the chief. The noblest warriors, whenever their native
country was sunk into the laziness of peace, maintained their
numerous bands in some distant scene of action, to exercise their
restless spirit, and to acquire renown by voluntary dangers.
Gifts worthy of soldiers - the warlike steed, the bloody and even
victorious lance - were the rewards which the companions claimed
from the liberality of their chief. The rude plenty of his
hospitable board was the only pay that he could bestow, or they
would accept. War, rapine, and the free-will offerings of his
friends, supplied the materials of this munificence. ^53 This
institution, however it might accidentally weaken the several
republics, invigorated the general character of the Germans, and
even ripened amongst them all the virtues of which barbarians are
susceptible; the faith and valor, the hospitality and the
courtesy, so conspicuous long afterwards in the ages of chivalry.
The honorable gifts, bestowed by the chief on his brave
companions, have been supposed, by an ingenious writer, to
contain the first rudiments of the fiefs, distributed after the
conquest of the Roman provinces, by the barbarian lords among
their vassals, with a similar duty of homage and military
service. ^54 These conditions are, however, very repugnant to the
maxims of the ancient Germans, who delighted in mutual presents;
but without either imposing, or accepting, the weight of
obligations. ^55
[Footnote 53: Tacit. Germ. 13, 14.]
[Footnote 54: Esprit des Loix, l. xxx. c. 3. The brilliant
imagination of Montesquieu is corrected, however, by the dry,
cold reason of the Abbe de Mably. Observations sur l'Histoire de
France, tom. i. p. 356.]
[Footnote 55: Gaudent muneribus, sed nec data imputant, nec
acceptis obligautur. Tacit. Germ. c. 21.]
"In the days of chivalry, or more properly of romance, all
the men were brave, and all the women were chaste;" and
notwithstanding the latter of these virtues is acquired and
preserved with much more difficulty than the former, it is
ascribed, almost without exception, to the wives of the ancient
Germans. Polygamy was not in use, except among the princes, and
among them only for the sake of multiplying their alliances.
Divorces were prohibited by manners rather than by laws.
Adulteries were punished as rare and inexpiable crimes; nor was
seduction justified by example and fashion. ^56 We may easily
discover that Tacitus indulges an honest pleasure in the contrast
of barbarian virtue with the dissolute conduct of the Roman
ladies; yet there are some striking circumstances that give an
air of truth, or at least probability, to the conjugal faith and
chastity of the Germans.
[Footnote 56: The adulteress was whipped through the village.
Neither wealth nor beauty could inspire compassion, or procure
her a second husband. 18, 19.]
Although the progress of civilization has undoubtedly
contributed to assuage the fiercer passions of human nature, it
seems to have been less favorable to the virtue of chastity,
whose most dangerous enemy is the softness of the mind. The
refinements of life corrupt while they polish the intercourse of
the sexes. The gross appetite of love becomes most dangerous
when it is elevated, or rather, indeed, disguised by sentimental
passion. The elegance of dress, of motion, and of manners, gives
a lustre to beauty, and inflames the senses through the
imagination. Luxurious entertainments, midnight dances, and
licentious spectacles, present at once temptation and opportunity
to female frailty. ^57 From such dangers the unpolished wives of
the barbarians were secured by poverty, solitude, and the painful
cares of a domestic life. The German huts, open, on every side,
to the eye of indiscretion or jealousy, were a better safeguard
of conjugal fidelity, than the walls, the bolts, and the eunuchs
of a Persian haram. To this reason another may be added, of a
more honorable nature. The Germans treated their women with
esteem and confidence, consulted them on every occasion of
importance, and fondly believed, that in their breasts resided a
sanctity and wisdom more than human. Some of the interpreters of
fate, such as Velleda, in the Batavian war, governed, in the name
of the deity, the fiercest nations of Germany. ^58 The rest of
the sex, without being adored as goddesses, were respected as the
free and equal companions of soldiers; associated even by the
marriage ceremony to a life of toil, of danger, and of glory. ^59
In their great invasions, the camps of the barbarians were filled
with a multitude of women, who remained firm and undaunted amidst
the sound of arms, the various forms of destruction, and the
honorable wounds of their sons and husbands. ^60 Fainting armies
of Germans have, more than once, been driven back upon the enemy,
by the generous despair of the women, who dreaded death much less
than servitude. If the day was irrecoverably lost, they well
knew how to deliver themselves and their children, with their own
hands, from an insulting victor. ^61 Heroines of such a cast may
claim our admiration; but they were most assuredly neither
lovely, nor very susceptible of love. Whilst they affected to
emulate the stern virtues of man, they must have resigned that
attractive softness, in which principally consist the charm and
weakness of woman. Conscious pride taught the German females to
suppress every tender emotion that stood in competition with
honor, and the first honor of the sex has ever been that of
chastity. The sentiments and conduct of these high-spirited
matrons may, at once, be considered as a cause, as an effect, and
as a proof of the general character of the nation. Female
courage, however it may be raised by fanaticism, or confirmed by
habit, can be only a faint and imperfect imitation of the manly
valor that distinguishes the age or country in which it may be
found.
[Footnote 57: Ovid employs two hundred lines in the research of
places the most favorable to love. Above all, he considers the
theatre as the best adapted to collect the beauties of Rome, and
to melt them into tenderness and sensuality,]
[Footnote 58: Tacit. Germ. iv. 61, 65.]
[Footnote 59: The marriage present was a yoke of oxen, horses,
and arms. See Germ. c. 18. Tacitus is somewhat too florid on
the subject.]
[Footnote 60: The change of exigere into exugere is a most
excellent correction.]
[Footnote 61: Tacit. Germ. c. 7. Plutarch in Mario. Before the
wives of the Teutones destroyed themselves and their children,
they had offered to surrender, on condition that they should be
received as the slaves of the vestal virgins.]
The religious system of the Germans (if the wild opinions of
savages can deserve that name) was dictated by their wants, their
fears, and their ignorance. ^62 They adored the great visible
objects and agents of nature, the Sun and the Moon, the Fire and
the Earth; together with those imaginary deities, who were
supposed to preside over the most important occupations of human
life. They were persuaded, that, by some ridiculous arts of
divination, they could discover the will of the superior beings,
and that human sacrifices were the most precious and acceptable
offering to their altars. Some applause has been hastily
bestowed on the sublime notion, entertained by that people, of
the Deity, whom they neither confined within the walls of the
temple, nor represented by any human figure; but when we
recollect, that the Germans were unskilled in architecture, and
totally unacquainted with the art of sculpture, we shall readily
assign the true reason of a scruple, which arose not so much from
a superiority of reason, as from a want of ingenuity. The only
temples in Germany were dark and ancient groves, consecrated by
the reverence of succeeding generations. Their secret gloom, the
imagined residence of an invisible power, by presenting no
distinct object of fear or worship, impressed the mind with a
still deeper sense of religious horror; ^63 and the priests, rude
and illiterate as they were, had been taught by experience the
use of every artifice that could preserve and fortify impressions
so well suited to their own interest.
[Footnote 62: Tacitus has employed a few lines, and Cluverius one
hundred and twenty-four pages, on this obscure subject. The
former discovers in Germany the gods of Greece and Rome. The
latter is positive, that, under the emblems of the sun, the moon,
and the fire, his pious ancestors worshipped the Trinity in
unity]
[Footnote 63: The sacred wood, described with such sublime horror
by Lucan, was in the neighborhood of Marseilles; but there were
many of the same kind in Germany.
Note: The ancient Germans had shapeless idols, and, when
they began to build more settled habitations, they raised also
temples, such as that to the goddess Teufana, who presided over
divination. See Adelung, Hist. of Ane Germans, p 296 - G]
The same ignorance, which renders barbarians incapable of
conceiving or embracing the useful restraints of laws, exposes
them naked and unarmed to the blind terrors of superstition. The
German priests, improving this favorable temper of their
countrymen, had assumed a jurisdiction even in temporal concerns,
which the magistrate could not venture to exercise; and the
haughty warrior patiently submitted to the lash of correction,
when it was inflicted, not by any human power, but by the
immediate order of the god of war. ^64 The defects of civil
policy were sometimes supplied by the interposition of
ecclesiastical authority. The latter was constantly exerted to
maintain silence and decency in the popular assemblies; and was
sometimes extended to a more enlarged concern for the national
welfare. A solemn procession was occasionally celebrated in the
present countries of Mecklenburgh and Pomerania. The unknown
symbol of the Earth, covered with a thick veil, was placed on a
carriage drawn by cows; and in this manner the goddess, whose
common residence was in the Isles of Rugen, visited several
adjacent tribes of her worshippers. During her progress the
sound of war was hushed, quarrels were suspended, arms laid
aside, and the restless Germans had an opportunity of tasting the
blessings of peace and harmony. ^65 The truce of God, so often
and so ineffectually proclaimed by the clergy of the eleventh
century, was an obvious imitation of this ancient custom. ^66
[Footnote 64: Tacit. Germania, c. 7.]
[Footnote 65: Tacit. Germania, c. 40.]
[Footnote 66: See Dr. Robertson's History of Charles V. vol. i.
note 10.]
But the influence of religion was far more powerful to
inflame, than to moderate, the fierce passions of the Germans.
Interest and fanaticism often prompted its ministers to sanctify
the most daring and the most unjust enterprises, by the
approbation of Heaven, and full assurances of success. The
consecrated standards, long revered in the groves of
superstition, were placed in the front of the battle; ^67 and the
hostile army was devoted with dire execrations to the gods of war
and of thunder. ^68 In the faith of soldiers (and such were the
Germans) cowardice is the most unpardonable of sins. A brave man
was the worthy favorite of their martial deities; the wretch who
had lost his shield was alike banished from the religious and
civil assemblies of his countrymen. Some tribes of the north
seem to have embraced the doctrine of transmigration, ^69 others
imagined a gross paradise of immortal drunkenness. ^70 All
agreed, that a life spent in arms, and a glorious death in
battle, were the best preparations for a happy futurity, either
in this or in another world.
[Footnote 67: Tacit. Germania, c. 7. These standards were only
the heads of wild beasts.]
[Footnote 68: See an instance of this custom, Tacit. Annal. xiii.
57.]
[Footnote 69: Caesar Diodorus, and Lucan, seem to ascribe this
doctrine to the Gauls, but M. Pelloutier (Histoire des Celtes, l.
iii. c. 18) labors to reduce their expressions to a more orthodox
sense.]
[Footnote 70: Concerning this gross but alluring doctrine of the
Edda, see Fable xx. in the curious version of that book,
published by M. Mallet, in his Introduction to the History of
Denmark.]
The immortality so vainly promised by the priests, was, in
some degree, conferred by the bards. That singular order of men
has most deservedly attracted the notice of all who have
attempted to investigate the antiquities of the Celts, the
Scandinavians, and the Germans. Their genius and character, as
well as the reverence paid to that important office, have been
sufficiently illustrated. But we cannot so easily express, or
even conceive, the enthusiasm of arms and glory which they
kindled in the breast of their audience. Among a polished
people, a taste for poetry is rather an amusement of the fancy,
than a passion of the soul. And yet, when in calm retirement we
peruse the combats described by Homer or Tasso, we are insensibly
seduced by the fiction, and feel a momentary glow of martial
ardor. But how faint, how cold is the sensation which a peaceful
mind can receive from solitary study! It was in the hour of
battle, or in the feast of victory, that the bards celebrated the
glory of the heroes of ancient days, the ancestors of those
warlike chieftains, who listened with transport to their artless
but animated strains. The view of arms and of danger heightened
the effect of the military song; and the passions which it tended
to excite, the desire of fame, and the contempt of death, were
the habitual sentiments of a German mind. ^71 ^*
[Footnote 71: See Tacit. Germ. c. 3. Diod. Sicul. l. v. Strabo,
l. iv. p. 197. The classical reader may remember the rank of
Demodocus in the Phaeacian court, and the ardor infused by
Tyrtaeus into the fainting Spartans. Yet there is little
probability that the Greeks and the Germans were the same people.
Much learned trifling might be spared, if our antiquarians would
condescend to reflect, that similar manners will naturally be
produced by similar situations.]
[Footnote *: Besides these battle songs, the Germans sang at
their festival banquets, (Tac. Ann. i. 65,) and around the bodies
of their slain heroes. King Theodoric, of the tribe of the Goths,
killed in a battle against Attila, was honored by songs while he
was borne from the field of battle. Jornandes, c. 41. The same
honor was paid to the remains of Attila. Ibid. c. 49. According
to some historians, the Germans had songs also at their weddings;
but this appears to me inconsistent with their customs, in which
marriage was no more than the purchase of a wife. Besides, there
is but one instance of this, that of the Gothic king, Ataulph,
who sang himself the nuptial hymn when he espoused Placidia,
sister of the emperors Arcadius and Honorius, (Olympiodor. p. 8.)
But this marriage was celebrated according to the Roman rites, of
which the nuptial songs formed a part. Adelung, p. 382. - G.
Charlemagne is said to have collected the national songs of
the ancient Germans. Eginhard, Vit. Car. Mag. - M.]
Such was the situation, and such were the manners of the
ancient Germans. Their climate, their want of learning, of arts,
and of laws, their notions of honor, of gallantry, and of
religion, their sense of freedom, impatience of peace, and thirst
of enterprise, all contributed to form a people of military
heroes. And yet we find, that during more than two hundred and
fifty years that elapsed from the defeat of Varus to the reign of
Decius, these formidable barbarians made few considerable
attempts, and not any material impression on the luxurious and
enslaved provinces of the empire. Their progress was checked by
their want of arms and discipline, and their fury was diverted by
the intestine divisions of ancient Germany.
I. It has been observed, with ingenuity, and not without
truth, that the command of iron soon gives a nation the command
of gold. But the rude tribes of Germany, alike destitute of both
those valuable metals, were reduced slowly to acquire, by their
unassisted strength, the possession of the one as well as the
other. The face of a German army displayed their poverty of
iron. Swords, and the longer kind of lances, they could seldom
use. Their frameoe (as they called them in their own language)
were long spears headed with a sharp but narrow iron point, and
which, as occasion required, they either darted from a distance,
or pushed in close onset. With this spear, and with a shield,
their cavalry was contented. A multitude of darts, scattered ^72
with incredible force, were an additional resource of the
infantry. Their military dress, when they wore any, was nothing
more than a loose mantle. A variety of colors was the only
ornament of their wooden or osier shields. Few of the chiefs
were distinguished by cuirasses, scarcely any by helmets. Though
the horses of Germany were neither beautiful, swift, nor
practised in the skilful evolutions of the Roman manege, several
of the nations obtained renown by their cavalry; but, in general,
the principal strength of the Germans consisted in their
infantry, ^73 which was drawn up in several deep columns,
according to the distinction of tribes and families. Impatient
of fatigue and delay, these half-armed warriors rushed to battle
with dissonant shouts and disordered ranks; and sometimes, by the
effort of native valor, prevailed over the constrained and more
artificial bravery of the Roman mercenaries. But as the
barbarians poured forth their whole souls on the first onset,
they knew not how to rally or to retire. A repulse was a sure
defeat; and a defeat was most commonly total destruction. When
we recollect the complete armor of the Roman soldiers, their
discipline, exercises, evolutions, fortified camps, and military
engines, it appears a just matter of surprise, how the naked and
unassisted valor of the barbarians could dare to encounter, in
the field, the strength of the legions, and the various troops of
the auxiliaries, which seconded their operations. The contest
was too unequal, till the introduction of luxury had enervated
the vigor, and a spirit of disobedience and sedition had relaxed
the discipline, of the Roman armies. The introduction of
barbarian auxiliaries into those armies, was a measure attended
with very obvious dangers, as it might gradually instruct the
Germans in the arts of war and of policy. Although they were
admitted in small numbers and with the strictest precaution, the
example of Civilis was proper to convince the Romans, that the
danger was not imaginary, and that their precautions were not
always sufficient. ^74 During the civil wars that followed the
death of Nero, that artful and intrepid Batavian, whom his
enemies condescended to compare with Hannibal and Sertorius, ^75
formed a great design of freedom and ambition. Eight Batavian
cohorts renowned in the wars of Britain and Italy, repaired to
his standard. He introduced an army of Germans into Gaul,
prevailed on the powerful cities of Treves and Langres to embrace
his cause, defeated the legions, destroyed their fortified camps,
and employed against the Romans the military knowledge which he
had acquired in their service. When at length, after an
obstinate struggle, he yielded to the power of the empire,
Civilis secured himself and his country by an honorable treaty.
The Batavians still continued to occupy the islands of the Rhine,
^76 the allies, not the servants, of the Roman monarchy.
[Footnote 72: Missilia spargunt, Tacit. Germ. c. 6. Either that
historian used a vague expression, or he meant that they were
thrown at random.]
[Footnote 73: It was their principal distinction from the
Sarmatians, who generally fought on horseback.]
[Footnote 74: The relation of this enterprise occupies a great
part of the fourth and fifth books of the History of Tacitus, and
is more remarkable for its eloquence than perspicuity. Sir Henry
Saville has observed several inaccuracies.]
[Footnote 75: Tacit. Hist. iv. 13. Like them he had lost an
eye.]
[Footnote 76: It was contained between the two branches of the
old Rhine, as they subsisted before the face of the country was
changed by art and nature. See Cluver German. Antiq. l. iii. c.
30, 37.]
II. The strength of ancient Germany appears formidable,
when we consider the effects that might have been produced by its
united effort. The wide extent of country might very possibly
contain a million of warriors, as all who were of age to bear
arms were of a temper to use them. But this fierce multitude,
incapable of concerting or executing any plan of national
greatness, was agitated by various and often hostile intentions.
Germany was divided into more than forty independent states; and,
even in each state, the union of the several tribes was extremely
loose and precarious. The barbarians were easily provoked; they
knew not how to forgive an injury, much less an insult; their
resentments were bloody and implacable. The casual disputes that
so frequently happened in their tumultuous parties of hunting or
drinking, were sufficient to inflame the minds of whole nations;
the private feuds of any considerable chieftains diffused itself
among their followers and allies. To chastise the insolent, or
to plunder the defenceless, were alike causes of war. The most
formidable states of Germany affected to encompass their
territories with a wide frontier of solitude and devastation.
The awful distance preserved by their neighbors attested the
terror of their arms, and in some measure defended them from the
danger of unexpected incursions. ^77
[Footnote 77: Caesar de Bell. Gal. l. vi. 23.]
"The Bructeri ^* (it is Tacitus who now speaks) were totally
exterminated by the neighboring tribes, ^78 provoked by their
insolence, allured by the hopes of spoil, and perhaps inspired by
the tutelar deities of the empire. Above sixty thousand
barbarians were destroyed; not by the Roman arms, but in our
sight, and for our entertainment. May the nations, enemies of
Rome, ever preserve this enmity to each other! We have now
attained the utmost verge of prosperity, ^79 and have nothing
left to demand of fortune, except the discord of the barbarians."
^80 - These sentiments, less worthy of the humanity than of the
patriotism of Tacitus, express the invariable maxims of the
policy of his countrymen. They deemed it a much safer expedient
to divide than to combat the barbarians, from whose defeat they
could derive neither honor nor advantage. The money and
negotiations of Rome insinuated themselves into the heart of
Germany; and every art of seduction was used with dignity, to
conciliate those nations whom their proximity to the Rhine or
Danube might render the most useful friends as well as the most
troublesome enemies. Chiefs of renown and power were flattered
by the most trifling presents, which they received either as
marks of distinction, or as the instruments of luxury. In civil
dissensions the weaker faction endeavored to strengthen its
interest by entering into secret connections with the governors
of the frontier provinces. Every quarrel among the Germans was
fomented by the intrigues of Rome; and every plan of union and
public good was defeated by the stronger bias of private jealousy
and interest. ^81
[Footnote *: The Bructeri were a non-Suevian tribe, who dwelt
below the duchies of Oldenburgh, and Lauenburgh, on the borders
of the Lippe, and in the Hartz Mountains. It was among them that
the priestess Velleda obtained her renown. - G.]
[Footnote 78: They are mentioned, however, in the ivth and vth
centuries by Nazarius, Ammianus, Claudian, &c., as a tribe of
Franks. See Cluver. Germ. Antiq. l. iii. c. 13.]
[Footnote 79: Urgentibus is the common reading; but good sense,
Lipsius, and some Mss. declare for Vergentibus.]
[Footnote 80: Tacit Germania, c. 33. The pious Abbe de la
Bleterie is very angry with Tacitus, talks of the devil, who was
a murderer from the beginning, &c., &c.]
[Footnote 81: Many traces of this policy may be discovered in
Tacitus and Dion: and many more may be inferred from the
principles of human nature.]
The general conspiracy which terrified the Romans under the
reign of Marcus Antoninus, comprehended almost all the nations of
Germany, and even Sarmatia, from the mouth of the Rhine to that
of the Danube. ^82 It is impossible for us to determine whether
this hasty confederation was formed by necessity, by reason, or
by passion; but we may rest assured, that the barbarians were
neither allured by the indolence, nor provoked by the ambition,
of the Roman monarch. This dangerous invasion required all the
firmness and vigilance of Marcus. He fixed generals of ability
in the several stations of attack, and assumed in person the
conduct of the most important province on the Upper Danube.
After a long and doubtful conflict, the spirit of the barbarians
was subdued. The Quadi and the Marcomanni, ^83 who had taken the
lead in the war, were the most severely punished in its
catastrophe. They were commanded to retire five miles ^84 from
their own banks of the Danube, and to deliver up the flower of
the youth, who were immediately sent into Britain, a remote
island, where they might be secure as hostages, and useful as
soldiers. ^85 On the frequent rebellions of the Quadi and
Marcomanni, the irritated emperor resolved to reduce their
country into the form of a province. His designs were
disappointed by death. This formidable league, however, the only
one that appears in the two first centuries of the Imperial
history, was entirely dissipated, without leaving any traces
behind in Germany.
[Footnote 82: Hist. Aug. p. 31. Ammian. Marcellin. l. xxxi. c.
5. Aurel. Victor. The emperor Marcus was reduced to sell the
rich furniture of the palace, and to enlist slaves and robbers.]
[Footnote 83: The Marcomanni, a colony, who, from the banks of
the Rhine occupied Bohemia and Moravia, had once erected a great
and formidable monarchy under their king Maroboduus. See Strabo,
l. vii. [p. 290.] Vell. Pat. ii. 108. Tacit. Annal. ii. 63.
Note: The Mark-manaen, the March-men or borderers. There
seems little doubt that this was an appellation, rather than a
proper name of a part of the great Suevian or Teutonic race. -
M.]
[Footnote 84: Mr. Wotton (History of Rome, p. 166) increases the
prohibition to ten times the distance. His reasoning is
specious, but not conclusive. Five miles were sufficient for a
fortified barrier.]
[Footnote 85: Dion, l. lxxi. and lxxii.]
In the course of this introductory chapter, we have confined
ourselves to the general outlines of the manners of Germany,
without attempting to describe or to distinguish the various
tribes which filled that great country in the time of Caesar, of
Tacitus, or of Ptolemy. As the ancient, or as new tribes
successively present themselves in the series of this history, we
shall concisely mention their origin, their situation, and their
particular character. Modern nations are fixed and permanent
societies, connected among themselves by laws and government,
bound to their native soil by arts and agriculture. The German
tribes were voluntary and fluctuating associations of soldiers,
almost of savages. The same territory often changed its
inhabitants in the tide of conquest and emigration. The same
communities, uniting in a plan of defence or invasion, bestowed a
new title on their new confederacy. The dissolution of an
ancient confederacy restored to the independent tribes their
peculiar but long-forgotten appellation. A victorious state
often communicated its own name to a vanquished people. Sometimes
crowds of volunteers flocked from all parts to the standard of a
favorite leader; his camp became their country, and some
circumstance of the enterprise soon gave a common denomination to
the mixed multitude. The distinctions of the ferocious invaders
were perpetually varied by themselves, and confounded by the
astonished subjects of the Roman empire. ^86
[Footnote 86: See an excellent dissertation on the origin and
migrations of nations, in the Memoires de l'Academie des
Inscriptions, tom. xviii. p. 48 - 71. It is seldom that the
antiquarian and the philosopher are so happily blended.]
Wars, and the administration of public affairs, are the
principal subjects of history; but the number of persons
interested in these busy scenes is very different, according to
the different condition of mankind. In great monarchies, millions
of obedient subjects pursue their useful occupations in peace and
obscurity. The attention of the writer, as well as of the
reader, is solely confined to a court, a capital, a regular army,
and the districts which happen to be the occasional scene of
military operations. But a state of freedom and barbarism, the
season of civil commotions, or the situation of petty republics,
^87 raises almost every member of the community into action, and
consequently into notice. The irregular divisions, and the
restless motions, of the people of Germany, dazzle our
imagination, and seem to multiply their numbers. The profuse
enumeration of kings, of warriors, of armies and nations,
inclines us to forget that the same objects are continually
repeated under a variety of appellations, and that the most
splendid appellations have been frequently lavished on the most
inconsiderable objects.
[Footnote 87: Should we suspect that Athens contained only 21,000
citizens, and Sparta no more than 39,000? See Hume and Wallace
on the number of mankind in ancient and modern times.
Note: This number, though too positively stated, is probably
not far wrong, as an average estimate. On the subject of
Athenian population, see St. Croix, Acad. des Inscrip. xlviii.
Boeckh, Public Economy of Athens, i. 47. Eng Trans, Fynes
Clinton, Fasti Hellenici, vol. i. p. 381. The latter author
estimates the citizens of Sparta at 33,000 - M.]
Chapter X: Emperors Decius, Gallus, Aemilianus, Valerian And
Gallienus.
Part I.
The Emperors Decius, Gallus, Aemilianus, Valerian, And Gallienus.
- The General Irruption Of The Barbari Ans. - The Thirty Tyrants.
From the great secular games celebrated by Philip, to the
death of the emperor Gallienus, there elapsed twenty years of
shame and misfortune. During that calamitous period, every
instant of time was marked, every province of the Roman world was
afflicted, by barbarous invaders, and military tyrants, and the
ruined empire seemed to approach the last and fatal moment of its
dissolution. The confusion of the times, and the scarcity of
authentic memorials, oppose equal difficulties to the historian,
who attempts to preserve a clear and unbroken thread of
narration. Surrounded with imperfect fragments, always concise,
often obscure, and sometimes contradictory, he is reduced to
collect, to compare, and to conjecture: and though he ought never
to place his conjectures in the rank of facts, yet the knowledge
of human nature, and of the sure operation of its fierce and
unrestrained passions, might, on some occasions, supply the want
of historical materials.
There is not, for instance, any difficulty in conceiving,
that the successive murders of so many emperors had loosened all
the ties of allegiance between the prince and people; that all
the generals of Philip were disposed to imitate the example of
their master; and that the caprice of armies, long since
habituated to frequent and violent revolutions, might every day
raise to the throne the most obscure of their fellow-soldiers.
History can only add, that the rebellion against the emperor
Philip broke out in the summer of the year two hundred and
forty-nine, among the legions of Maesia; and that a subaltern
officer, ^1 named Marinus, was the object of their seditious
choice. Philip was alarmed. He dreaded lest the treason of the
Maesian army should prove the first spark of a general
conflagration. Distracted with the consciousness of his guilt and
of his danger, he communicated the intelligence to the senate. A
gloomy silence prevailed, the effect of fear, and perhaps of
disaffection; till at length Decius, one of the assembly,
assuming a spirit worthy of his noble extraction, ventured to
discover more intrepidity than the emperor seemed to possess. He
treated the whole business with contempt, as a hasty and
inconsiderate tumult, and Philip's rival as a phantom of royalty,
who in a very few days would be destroyed by the same inconstancy
that had created him. The speedy completion of the prophecy
inspired Philip with a just esteem for so able a counsellor; and
Decius appeared to him the only person capable of restoring peace
and discipline to an army whose tumultuous spirit did not
immediately subside after the murder of Marinus. Decius, ^2 who
long resisted his own nomination, seems to have insinuated the
danger of presenting a leader of merit to the angry and
apprehensive minds of the soldiers; and his prediction was again
confirmed by the event. The legions of Maesia forced their judge
to become their accomplice. They left him only the alternative
of death or the purple. His subsequent conduct, after that
decisive measure, was unavoidable. He conducted, or followed,
his army to the confines of Italy, whither Philip, collecting all
his force to repel the formidable competitor whom he had raised
up, advanced to meet him. The Imperial troops were superior in
number; but the rebels formed an army of veterans, commanded by
an able and experienced leader. Philip was either killed in the
battle, or put to death a few days afterwards at Verona. His son
and associate in the empire was massacred at Rome by the
Praetorian guards; and the victorious Decius, with more favorable
circumstances than the ambition of that age can usually plead,
was universally acknowledged by the senate and provinces. It is
reported, that, immediately after his reluctant acceptance of the
title of Augustus, he had assured Philip, by a private message,
of his innocence and loyalty, solemnly protesting, that, on his
arrival on Italy, he would resign the Imperial ornaments, and
return to the condition of an obedient subject. His professions
might be sincere; but in the situation where fortune had placed
him, it was scarcely possible that he could either forgive or be
forgiven. ^3
[Footnote 1: The expression used by Zosimus and Zonaras may
signify that Marinus commanded a century, a cohort, or a legion.]
[Footnote 2: His birth at Bubalia, a little village in Pannonia,
(Eutrop. ix. Victor. in Caesarib. et Epitom.,) seems to
contradict, unless it was merely accidental, his supposed descent
from the Decii. Six hundred years had bestowed nobility on the
Decii: but at the commencement of that period, they were only
plebeians of merit, and among the first who shared the consulship
with the haughty patricians. Plebeine Deciorum animae, &c.
Juvenal, Sat. viii. 254. See the spirited speech of Decius, in
Livy. x. 9, 10.]
[Footnote 3: Zosimus, l. i. p. 20, c. 22. Zonaras, l. xii. p.
624, edit. Louvre.]
The emperor Decius had employed a few months in the works of
peace and the administration of justice, when he was summoned to
the banks of the Danube by the invasion of the Goths. This is
the first considerable occasion in which history mentions that
great people, who afterwards broke the Roman power, sacked the
Capitol, and reigned in Gaul, Spain, and Italy. So memorable was
the part which they acted in the subversion of the Western
empire, that the name of Goths is frequently but improperly used
as a general appellation ef rude and warlike barbarism.
In the beginning of the sixth century, and after the
conquest of Italy, the Goths, in possession of present greatness,
very naturally indulged themselves in the prospect of past and of
future glory. They wished to preserve the memory of their
ancestors, and to transmit to posterity their own achievements.
The principal minister of the court of Ravenna, the learned
Cassiodorus, gratified the inclination of the conquerors in a
Gothic history, which consisted of twelve books, now reduced to
the imperfect abridgment of Jornandes. ^4 These writers passed
with the most artful conciseness over the misfortunes of the
nation, celebrated its successful valor, and adorned the triumph
with many Asiatic trophies, that more properly belonged to the
people of Scythia. On the faith of ancient songs, the uncertain,
but the only memorials of barbarians, they deduced the first
origin of the Goths from the vast island, or peninsula, of
Scandinavia. ^5 ^* That extreme country of the North was not
unknown to the conquerors of Italy: the ties of ancient
consanguinity had been strengthened by recent offices of
friendship; and a Scandinavian king had cheerfully abdicated his
savage greatness, that he might pass the remainder of his days in
the peaceful and polished court of Ravenna. ^6 Many vestiges,
which cannot be ascribed to the arts of popular vanity, attest
the ancient residence of the Goths in the countries beyond the
Rhine. From the time of the geographer Ptolemy, the southern
part of Sweden seems to have continued in the possession of the
less enterprising remnant of the nation, and a large territory is
even at present divided into east and west Gothland. During the
middle ages, (from the ninth to the twelfth century,) whilst
Christianity was advancing with a slow progress into the North,
the Goths and the Swedes composed two distinct and sometimes
hostile members of the same monarchy. ^7 The latter of these two
names has prevailed without extinguishing the former. The
Swedes, who might well be satisfied with their own fame in arms,
have, in every age, claimed the kindred glory of the Goths. In a
moment of discontent against the court of Rome, Charles the
Twelfth insinuated, that his victorious troops were not
degenerated from their brave ancestors, who had already subdued
the mistress of the world. ^8
[Footnote 4: See the prefaces of Cassiodorus and Jornandes; it is
surprising that the latter should be omitted in the excellent
edition, published by Grotius, of the Gothic writers.]
[Footnote 5: On the authority of Ablavius, Jornandes quotes some
old Gothic chronicles in verse. De Reb. Geticis, c. 4.]
[Footnote *: The Goths have inhabited Scandinavia, but it was not
their original habitation. This great nation was anciently of
the Suevian race; it occupied, in the time of Tacitus, and long
before, Mecklenburgh, Pomerania Southern Prussia and the
north-west of Poland. A little before the birth of J. C., and in
the first years of that century, they belonged to the kingdom of
Marbod, king of the Marcomanni: but Cotwalda, a young Gothic
prince, delivered them from that tyranny, and established his own
power over the kingdom of the Marcomanni, already much weakened
by the victories of Tiberius. The power of the Goths at that
time must have been great: it was probably from them that the
Sinus Codanus (the Baltic) took this name, as it was afterwards
called Mare Suevicum, and Mare Venedicum, during the superiority
of the proper Suevi and the Venedi. The epoch in which the Goths
passed into Scandinavia is unknown. See Adelung, Hist. of Anc.
Germany, p. 200. Gatterer, Hist. Univ. 458. - G.
M. St. Martin observes, that the Scandinavian descent of the
Goths rests on the authority of Jornandes, who professed to
derive it from the traditions of the Goths. He is supported by
Procopius and Paulus Diaconus. Yet the Goths are unquestionably
the same with the Getae of the earlier historians. St. Martin,
note on Le Beau, Hist. du bas Empire, iii. 324. The identity of
the Getae and Goths is by no means generally admitted. On the
whole, they seem to be one vast branch of the Indo-Teutonic race,
who spread irregularly towards the north of Europe, and at
different periods, and in different regions, came in contact with
the more civilized nations of the south. At this period, there
seems to have been a reflux of these Gothic tribes from the
North.
Malte Brun considers that there are strong grounds for
receiving the Islandic traditions commented by the Danish Varro,
M. Suhm. From these, and the voyage of Pytheas, which Malte Brun
considers genuine, the Goths were in possession of Scandinavia,
Ey-Gothland, 250 years before J. C., and of a tract on the
continent (Reid-Gothland) between the mouths of the Vistula and
the Oder. In their southern migration, they followed the course
of the Vistula; afterwards, of the Dnieper. Malte Brun, Geogr.
i. p. 387, edit. 1832. Geijer, the historian of Sweden, ably
maintains the Scandinavian origin of the Goths. The Gothic
language, according to Bopp, is the link between the Sanscrit and
the modern Teutonic dialects: "I think that I am reading Sanscrit
when I am reading Olphilas." Bopp, Conjugations System der
Sanscrit Sprache, preface, p. x - M.]
[Footnote 6: Jornandes, c. 3.]
[Footnote 7: See in the Prolegomena of Grotius some large
extracts from Adam of Bremen, and Saxo-Grammaticus. The former
wrote in the year 1077, the latter flourished about the year
1200.]
[Footnote 8: Voltaire, Histoire de Charles XII. l. iii. When the
Austrians desired the aid of the court of Rome against Gustavus
Adolphus, they always represented that conqueror as the lineal
successor of Alaric. Harte's History of Gustavus, vol. ii. p.
123.]
Till the end of the eleventh century, a celebrated temple
subsisted at Upsal, the most considerable town of the Swedes and
Goths. It was enriched with the gold which the Scandinavians had
acquired in their piratical adventures, and sanctified by the
uncouth representations of the three principal deities, the god
of war, the goddess of generation, and the god of thunder. In
the general festival, that was solemnized every ninth year, nine
animals of every species (without excepting the human) were
sacrificed, and their bleeding bodies suspended in the sacred
grove adjacent to the temple. ^9 The only traces that now subsist
of this barbaric superstition are contained in the Edda, ^* a
system of mythology, compiled in Iceland about the thirteenth
century, and studied by the learned of Denmark and Sweden, as the
most valuable remains of their ancient traditions.
[Footnote 9: See Adam of Bremen in Grotii Prolegomenis, p. 105.
The temple of Upsal was destroyed by Ingo, king of Sweden, who
began his reign in the year 1075, and about fourscore years
afterwards, a Christian cathedral was erected on its ruins. See
Dalin's History of Sweden, in the Bibliotheque Raisonee.]
[Footnote *: The Eddas have at length been made accessible to
European scholars by the completion of the publication of the
Saemundine Edda by the Arna Magnaean Commission, in 3 vols. 4to.,
with a copious lexicon of northern mythology. - M.]
Notwithstanding the mysterious obscurity of the Edda, we can
easily distinguish two persons confounded under the name of Odin;
the god of war, and the great legislator of Scandinavia. The
latter, the Mahomet of the North, instituted a religion adapted
to the climate and to the people. Numerous tribes on either side
of the Baltic were subdued by the invincible valor of Odin, by
his persuasive eloquence, and by the fame which he acquired of a
most skilful magician. The faith that he had propagated, during
a long and prosperous life, he confirmed by a voluntary death.
Apprehensive of the ignominious approach of disease and
infirmity, he resolved to expire as became a warrior. In a
solemn assembly of the Swedes and Goths, he wounded himself in
nine mortal places, hastening away (as he asserted with his dying
voice) to prepare the feast of heroes in the palace of the God of
war. ^10
[Footnote 10: Mallet, Introduction a l'Histoire du Dannemarc.]
The native and proper habitation of Odin is distinguished by
the appellation of As-gard. The happy resemblance of that name
with As-burg, or As-of, ^11 words of a similar signification, has
given rise to an historical system of so pleasing a contexture,
that we could almost wish to persuade ourselves of its truth. It
is supposed that Odin was the chief of a tribe of barbarians
which dwelt on the banks of the Lake Maeotis, till the fall of
Mithridates and the arms of Pompey menaced the North with
servitude. That Odin, yielding with indignant fury to a power
which he was unable to resist, conducted his tribe from the
frontiers of the Asiatic Sarmatia into Sweden, with the great
design of forming, in that inaccessible retreat of freedom, a
religion and a people, which, in some remote age, might be
subservient to his immortal revenge; when his invincible Goths,
armed with martial fanaticism, should issue in numerous swarms
from the neighborhood of the Polar circle, to chastise the
oppressors of mankind. ^12
[Footnote 11: Mallet, c. iv. p. 55, has collected from Strabo,
Pliny, Ptolemy, and Stephanus Byzantinus, the vestiges of such a
city and people.]
[Footnote 12: This wonderful expedition of Odin, which, by
deducting the enmity of the Goths and Romans from so memorable a
cause, might supply the noble groundwork of an epic poem, cannot
safely be received as authentic history. According to the
obvious sense of the Edda, and the interpretation of the most
skilful critics, As-gard, instead of denoting a real city of the
Asiatic Sarmatia, is the fictitious appellation of the mystic
abode of the gods, the Olympus of Scandinavia; from whence the
prophet was supposed to descend, when he announced his new
religion to the Gothic nations, who were already seated in the
southern parts of Sweden.
Note: A curious letter may be consulted on this subject from
the Swede, Ihre counsellor in the Chancery of Upsal, printed at
Upsal by Edman, in 1772 and translated into German by M.
Schlozer. Gottingen, printed for Dietericht, 1779. - G.
Gibbon, at a later period of his work, recanted his opinion
of the truth of this expedition of Odin. The Asiatic origin of
the Goths is almost certain from the affinity of their language
to the Sanscrit and Persian; but their northern writers, when all
mythology was reduced to hero worship. - M.]
If so many successive generations of Goths were capable of
preserving a faint tradition of their Scandinavian origin, we
must not expect, from such unlettered barbarians, any distinct
account of the time and circumstances of their emigration. To
cross the Baltic was an easy and natural attempt. The
inhabitants of Sweden were masters of a sufficient number of
large vessels, with oars, ^13 and the distance is little more
than one hundred miles from Carlscroon to the nearest ports of
Pomerania and Prussia. Here, at length, we land on firm and
historic ground. At least as early as the Christian aera, ^14
and as late as the age of the Antonines, ^15 the Goths were
established towards the mouth of the Vistula, and in that fertile
province where the commercial cities of Thorn, Elbing,
Koningsberg, and Dantzick, were long afterwards founded. ^16
Westward of the Goths, the numerous tribes of the Vandals were
spread along the banks of the Oder, and the sea-coast of
Pomerania and Mecklenburgh. A striking resemblance of manners,
complexion, religion, and language, seemed to indicate that the
Vandals and the Goths were originally one great people. ^17 The
latter appear to have been subdivided into Ostrogoths, Visigoths,
and Gepidae. ^18 The distinction among the Vandals was more
strongly marked by the independent names of Heruli, Burgundians,
Lombards, and a variety of other petty states, many of which, in
a future age, expanded themselves into powerful monarchies. ^*
[Footnote 13: Tacit. Germania, c. 44.]
[Footnote 14: Tacit. Annal. ii. 62. If we could yield a firm
assent to the navigations of Pytheas of Marseilles, we must allow
that the Goths had passed the Baltic at least three hundred years
before Christ.]
[Footnote 15: Ptolemy, l. ii.]
[Footnote 16: By the German colonies who followed the arms of the
Teutonic knights. The conquest and conversion of Prussia were
completed by those adventurers in the thirteenth century.]
[Footnote 17: Pliny (Hist. Natur. iv. 14) and Procopius (in Bell.
Vandal. l. i. c. l) agree in this opinion. They lived in distant
ages, and possessed different means of investigating the truth.]
[Footnote 18: The Ostro and Visi, the eastern and western Goths,
obtained those denominations from their original seats in
Scandinavia. In all their future marches and settlements they
preserved, with their names, the same relative situation. When
they first departed from Sweden, the infant colony was contained
in three vessels. The third, being a heavy sailer, lagged
behind, and the crew, which afterwards swelled into a nation,
received from that circumstance the appellation of Gepidae or
Loiterers. Jornandes, c. 17.
Note: It was not in Scandinavia that the Goths were divided
into Ostrogoths and Visigoths; that division took place after
their irruption into Dacia in the third century: those who came
from Mecklenburgh and Pomerania were called Visigoths; those who
came from the south of Prussia, and the northwest of Poland,
called themselves Ostrogoths. Adelung, Hist. All. p. 202
Gatterer, Hist. Univ. 431. - G.]
[Footnote *: This opinion is by no means probable. The Vandals
and the Goths equally belonged to the great division of the
Suevi, but the two tribes were very different. Those who have
treated on this part of history, appear to me to have neglected
to remark that the ancients almost always gave the name of the
dominant and conquering people to all the weaker and conquered
races. So Pliny calls Vindeli, Vandals, all the people of the
north-east of Europe, because at that epoch the Vandals were
doubtless the conquering tribe. Caesar, on the contrary, ranges
under the name of Suevi, many of the tribes whom Pliny reckons as
Vandals, because the Suevi, properly so called, were then the
most powerful tribe in Germany. When the Goths, become in their
turn conquerors, had subjugated the nations whom they encountered
on their way, these nations lost their name with their liberty,
and became of Gothic origin. The Vandals themselves were then
considered as Goths; the Heruli, the Gepidae, &c., suffered the
same fate. A common origin was thus attributed to tribes who had
only been united by the conquests of some dominant nation, and
this confusion has given rise to a number of historical errors. -
G.
M. St. Martin has a learned note (to Le Beau, v. 261) on the
origin of the Vandals. The difficulty appears to be in rejecting
the close analogy of the name with the Vend or Wendish race, who
were of Sclavonian, not of Suevian or German, origin. M. St.
Martin supposes that the different races spread from the head of
the Adriatic to the Baltic, and even the Veneti, on the shores of
the Adriatic, the Vindelici, the tribes which gave their name to
Vindobena, Vindoduna, Vindonissa, were branches of the same stock
with the Sclavonian Venedi, who at one time gave their name to
the Baltic; that they all spoke dialects of the Wendish language,
which still prevails in Carinthia, Carniola, part of Bohemia, and
Lusatia, and is hardly extinct in Mecklenburgh and Pomerania.
The Vandal race, once so fearfully celebrated in the annals of
mankind, has so utterly perished from the face of the earth, that
we are not aware that any vestiges of their language can be
traced, so as to throw light on the disputed question of their
German, their Sclavonian, or independent origin. The weight of
ancient authority seems against M. St. Martin's opinion.
Compare, on the Vandals, Malte Brun. 394. Also Gibbon's note, c.
xli. n. 38. - M.]
In the age of the Antonines, the Goths were still seated in
Prussia. About the reign of Alexander Severus, the Roman province
of Dacia had already experienced their proximity by frequent and
destructive inroads. ^19 In this interval, therefore, of about
seventy years, we must place the second migration of about
seventy years, we must place the second migration of the Goths
from the Baltic to the Euxine; but the cause that produced it
lies concealed among the various motives which actuate the
conduct of unsettled barbarians. Either a pestilence or a
famine, a victory or a defeat, an oracle of the gods or the
eloquence of a daring leader, were sufficient to impel the Gothic
arms on the milder climates of the south. Besides the influence
of a martial religion, the numbers and spirit of the Goths were
equal to the most dangerous adventures. The use of round
bucklers and short swords rendered them formidable in a close
engagement; the manly obedience which they yielded to hereditary
kings, gave uncommon union and stability to their councils; ^20
and the renowned Amala, the hero of that age, and the tenth
ancestor of Theodoric, king of Italy, enforced, by the ascendant
of personal merit, the prerogative of his birth, which he derived
from the Anses, or demi gods of the Gothic nation. ^21
[Footnote 19: See a fragment of Peter Patricius in the Excerpta
Legationum and with regard to its probable date, see Tillemont,
Hist, des Empereurs, tom. iii. p. 346.]
[Footnote 20: Omnium harum gentium insigne, rotunda scuta, breves
gladii, et erga rages obsequium. Tacit. Germania, c. 43. The
Goths probably acquired their iron by the commerce of amber.]
[Footnote 21: Jornandes, c. 13, 14.]
The fame of a great enterprise excited the bravest warriors
from all the Vandalic states of Germany, many of whom are seen a
few years afterwards combating under the common standard of the
Goths. ^22 The first motions of the emigrants carried them to the
banks of the Prypec, a river universally conceived by the
ancients to be the southern branch of the Borysthenes. ^23 The
windings of that great stream through the plains of Poland and
Russia gave a direction to their line of march, and a constant
supply of fresh water and pasturage to their numerous herds of
cattle. They followed the unknown course of the river, confident
in their valor, and careless of whatever power might oppose their
progress. The Bastarnae and the Venedi were the first who
presented themselves; and the flower of their youth, either from
choice or compulsion, increased the Gothic army. The Bastarnae
dwelt on the northern side of the Carpathian Mountains: the
immense tract of land that separated the Bastarnae from the
savages of Finland was possessed, or rather wasted, by the
Venedi; ^24 we have some reason to believe that the first of
these nations, which distinguished itself in the Macedonian war,
^25 and was afterwards divided into the formidable tribes of the
Peucini, the Borani, the Carpi, &c., derived its origin from the
Germans. ^* With better authority, a Sarmatian extraction may be
assigned to the Venedi, who rendered themselves so famous in the
middle ages. ^26 But the confusion of blood and manners on that
doubtful frontier often perplexed the most accurate observers.
^27 As the Goths advanced near the Euxine Sea, they encountered a
purer race of Sarmatians, the Jazyges, the Alani, ^!! and the
Roxolani; and they were probably the first Germans who saw the
mouths of the Borysthenes, and of the Tanais. If we inquire into
the characteristic marks of the people of Germany and of
Sarmatia, we shall discover that those two great portions of
human kind were principally distinguished by fixed huts or
movable tents, by a close dress or flowing garments, by the
marriage of one or of several wives, by a military force,
consisting, for the most part, either of infantry or cavalry; and
above all, by the use of the Teutonic, or of the Sclavonian
language; the last of which has been diffused by conquest, from
the confines of Italy to the neighborhood of Japan.
[Footnote 22: The Heruli, and the Uregundi or Burgundi, are
particularly mentioned. See Mascou's History of the Germans, l.
v. A passage in the Augustan History, p. 28, seems to allude to
this great emigration. The Marcomannic war was partly occasioned
by the pressure of barbarous tribes, who fled before the arms of
more northern barbarians.]
[Footnote 23: D'Anville, Geographie Ancienne, and the third part
of his incomparable map of Europe.]
[Footnote 24: Tacit. Germania, c. 46.]
[Footnote 25: Cluver. Germ. Antiqua, l. iii. c. 43.]
[Footnote *: The Bastarnae cannot be considered original
inhabitants of Germany Strabo and Tacitus appear to doubt it;
Pliny alone calls them Germans: Ptolemy and Dion treat them as
Scythians, a vague appellation at this period of history; Livy,
Plutarch, and Diodorus Siculus, call them Gauls, and this is the
most probable opinion. They descended from the Gauls who entered
Germany under Signoesus. They are always found associated with
other Gaulish tribes, such as the Boll, the Taurisci, &c., and
not to the German tribes. The names of their chiefs or princes,
Chlonix, Chlondicus. Deldon, are not German names. Those who
were settled in the island of Peuce in the Danube, took the name
of Peucini.
The Carpi appear in 237 as a Suevian tribe who had made an
irruption into Maesia. Afterwards they reappear under the
Ostrogoths, with whom they were probably blended. Adelung, p.
236, 278. - G.]
[Footnote 26: The Venedi, the Slavi, and the Antes, were the
three great tribes of the same people. Jornandes, 24.
Note Dagger: They formed the great Sclavonian nation. - G.]
[Footnote 27: Tacitus most assuredly deserves that title, and
even his cautious suspense is a proof of his diligent inquiries.]
[Footnote !!: Jac. Reineggs supposed that he had found, in the
mountains of Caucasus, some descendants of the Alani. The
Tartars call them Edeki-Alan: they speak a peculiar dialect of
the ancient language of the Tartars of Caucasus. See J.
Reineggs' Descr. of Caucasus, p. 11, 13. - G.
According to Klaproth, they are the Ossetes of the present
day in Mount Caucasus and were the same with the Albanians of
antiquity. Klaproth, Hist. de l'Asie, p. 180. - M.]
Chapter X: Emperors Decius, Gallus, Aemilianus, Valerian And
Gallienus.
Part II.
The Goths were now in possession of the Ukraine, a country
of considerable extent and uncommon fertility, intersected with
navigable rivers, which, from either side, discharge themselves
into the Borysthenes; and interspersed with large and leafy
forests of oaks. The plenty of game and fish, the innumerable
bee-hives deposited in the hollow of old trees, and in the
cavities of rocks, and forming, even in that rude age, a valuable
branch of commerce, the size of the cattle, the temperature of
the air, the aptness of the soil for every species of gain, and
the luxuriancy of the vegetation, all displayed the liberality of
Nature, and tempted the industry of man. ^28 But the Goths
withstood all these temptations, and still adhered to a life of
idleness, of poverty, and of rapine.
[Footnote 28: Genealogical History of the Tartars, p. 593. Mr.
Bell (vol. ii. p 379) traversed the Ukraine, in his journey from
Petersburgh to Constantinople. The modern face of the country is
a just representation of the ancient, since, in the hands of the
Cossacks, it still remains in a state of nature.]
The Scythian hordes, which, towards the east, bordered on
the new settlements of the Goths, presented nothing to their
arms, except the doubtful chance of an unprofitable victory. But
the prospect of the Roman territories was far more alluring; and
the fields of Dacia were covered with rich harvests, sown by the
hands of an industrious, and exposed to be gathered by those of a
warlike, people. It is probable that the conquests of Trajan,
maintained by his successors, less for any real advantage than
for ideal dignity, had contributed to weaken the empire on that
side. The new and unsettled province of Dacia was neither strong
enough to resist, nor rich enough to satiate, the rapaciousness
of the barbarians. As long as the remote banks of the Niester
were considered as the boundary of the Roman power, the
fortifications of the Lower Danube were more carelessly guarded,
and the inhabitants of Maesia lived in supine security, fondly
conceiving themselves at an inaccessible distance from any
barbarian invaders. The irruptions of the Goths, under the reign
of Philip, fatally convinced them of their mistake. The king, or
leader, of that fierce nation, traversed with contempt the
province of Dacia, and passed both the Niester and the Danube
without encountering any opposition capable of retarding his
progress. The relaxed discipline of the Roman troops betrayed
the most important posts, where they were stationed, and the fear
of deserved punishment induced great numbers of them to enlist
under the Gothic standard. The various multitude of barbarians
appeared, at length, under the walls of Marcianopolis, a city
built by Trajan in honor of his sister, and at that time the
capital of the second Maesia. ^29 The inhabitants consented to
ransom their lives and property by the payment of a large sum of
money, and the invaders retreated back into their deserts,
animated, rather than satisfied, with the first success of their
arms against an opulent but feeble country. Intelligence was
soon transmitted to the emperor Decius, that Cniva, king of the
Goths, had passed the Danube a second time, with more
considerable forces; that his numerous detachments scattered
devastation over the province of Maesia, whilst the main body of
the army, consisting of seventy thousand Germans and Sarmatians,
a force equal to the most daring achievements, required the
presence of the Roman monarch, and the exertion of his military
power.
[Footnote 29: In the sixteenth chapter of Jornandes, instead of
secundo Maesiam we may venture to substitute secundam, the second
Maesia, of which Marcianopolis was certainly the capital. (See
Hierocles de Provinciis, and Wesseling ad locum, p. 636.
Itinerar.) It is surprising how this palpable error of the scribe
should escape the judicious correction of Grotius.
Note: Luden has observed that Jornandes mentions two
passages over the Danube; this relates to the second irruption
into Maesia. Geschichte des T V. ii. p. 448. - M.]
Decius found the Goths engaged before Nicopolis, one of the
many monuments of Trajan's victories. ^30 On his approach they
raised the siege, but with a design only of marching away to a
conquest of greater importance, the siege of Philippopolis, a
city of Thrace, founded by the father of Alexander, near the foot
of Mount Haemus. ^31 Decius followed them through a difficult
country, and by forced marches; but when he imagined himself at a
considerable distance from the rear of the Goths, Cniva turned
with rapid fury on his pursuers. The camp of the Romans was
surprised and pillaged, and, for the first time, their emperor
fled in disorder before a troop of half-armed barbarians. After
a long resistance, Philoppopolis, destitute of succor, was taken
by storm. A hundred thousand persons are reported to have been
massacred in the sack of that great city. ^32 Many prisoners of
consequence became a valuable accession to the spoil; and
Priscus, a brother of the late emperor Philip, blushed not to
assume the purple, under the protection of the barbarous enemies
of Rome. ^33 The time, however, consumed in that tedious siege,
enabled Decius to revive the courage, restore the discipline, and
recruit the numbers of his troops. He intercepted several
parties of Carpi, and other Germans, who were hastening to share
the victory of their countrymen, ^34 intrusted the passes of the
mountains to officers of approved valor and fidelity, ^35
repaired and strengthened the fortifications of the Danube, and
exerted his utmost vigilance to oppose either the progress or the
retreat of the Goths. Encouraged by the return of fortune, he
anxiously waited for an opportunity to retrieve, by a great and
decisive blow, his own glory, and that of the Roman arms. ^36
[Footnote 30: The place is still called Nicop. D'Anville,
Geographie Ancienne, tom. i. p. 307. The little stream, on whose
banks it stood, falls into the Danube.]
[Footnote 31: Stephan. Byzant. de Urbibus, p. 740. Wesseling,
Itinerar. p. 136. Zonaras, by an odd mistake, ascribes the
foundation of Philippopolis to the immediate predecessor of
Decius.
Note: Now Philippopolis or Philiba; its situation among the
hills caused it to be also called Trimontium. D'Anville, Geog.
Anc. i. 295. - G.]
[Footnote 32: Ammian. xxxi. 5.]
[Footnote 33: Aurel. Victor. c. 29.]
[Footnote 34: Victorioe Carpicoe, on some medals of Decius,
insinuate these advantages.]
[Footnote 35: Claudius (who afterwards reigned with so much
glory) was posted in the pass of Thermopylae with 200 Dardanians,
100 heavy and 160 light horse, 60 Cretan archers, and 1000
well-armed recruits. See an original letter from the emperor to
his officer, in the Augustan History, p. 200.]
[Footnote 36: Jornandes, c. 16 - 18. Zosimus, l. i. p. 22. In
the general account of this war, it is easy to discover the
opposite prejudices of the Gothic and the Grecian writer. In
carelessness alone they are alike.]
At the same time when Decius was struggling with the
violence of the tempest, his mind, calm and deliberate amidst the
tumult of war, investigated the more general causes, that, since
the age of the Antonines, had so impetuously urged the decline of
the Roman greatness. He soon discovered that it was impossible
to replace that greatness on a permanent basis, without restoring
public virtue, ancient principles and manners, and the oppressed
majesty of the laws. To execute this noble but arduous design,
he first resolved to revive the obsolete office of censor; an
office which, as long as it had subsisted in its pristine
integrity, had so much contributed to the perpetuity of the
state, ^37 till it was usurped and gradually neglected by the
Caesars. ^38 Conscious that the favor of the sovereign may confer
power, but that the esteem of the people can alone bestow
authority, he submitted the choice of the censor to the unbiased
voice of the senate. By their unanimous votes, or rather
acclamations, Valerian, who was afterwards emperor, and who then
served with distinction in the army of Decius, was declared the
most worthy of that exalted honor. As soon as the decree of the
senate was transmitted to the emperor, he assembled a great
council in his camp, and before the investiture of the censor
elect, he apprised him of the difficulty and importance of his
great office. "Happy Valerian," said the prince to his
distinguished subject, "happy in the general approbation of the
senate and of the Roman republic! Accept the censorship of
mankind; and judge of our manners. You will select those who
deserve to continue members of the senate; you will restore the
equestrian order to its ancient splendor; you will improve the
revenue, yet moderate the public burdens. You will distinguish
into regular classes the various and infinite multitude of
citizens, and accurately view the military strength, the wealth,
the virtue, and the resources of Rome. Your decisions shall
obtain the force of laws. The army, the palace, the ministers of
justice, and the great officers of the empire, are all subject to
your tribunal. None are exempted, excepting only the ordinary
consuls, ^39 the praefect of the city, the king of the
sacrifices, and (as long as she preserves her chastity inviolate)
the eldest of the vestal virgins. Even these few, who may not
dread the severity, will anxiously solicit the esteem, of the
Roman censor." ^40
[Footnote 37: Montesquieu, Grandeur et Decadence des Romains, c.
viii. He illustrates the nature and use of the censorship with
his usual ingenuity, and with uncommon precision.]
[Footnote 38: Vespasian and Titus were the last censors, (Pliny,
Hist. Natur vii. 49. Censorinus de Die Natali.) The modesty of
Trajan refused an honor which he deserved, and his example became
a law to the Antonines. See Pliny's Panegyric, c. 45 and 60.]
[Footnote 39: Yet in spite of his exemption, Pompey appeared
before that tribunal during his consulship. The occasion,
indeed, was equally singular and honorable. Plutarch in Pomp. p.
630.]
[Footnote 40: See the original speech in the Augustan Hist. p.
173-174.]
A magistrate, invested with such extensive powers, would
have appeared not so much the minister, as the colleague of his
sovereign. ^41 Valerian justly dreaded an elevation so full of
envy and of suspicion. He modestly argued the alarming greatness
of the trust, his own insufficiency, and the incurable corruption
of the times. He artfully insinuated, that the office of censor
was inseparable from the Imperial dignity, and that the feeble
hands of a subject were unequal to the support of such an immense
weight of cares and of power. ^42 The approaching event of war
soon put an end to the prosecution of a project so specious, but
so impracticable; and whilst it preserved Valerian from the
danger, saved the emperor Decius from the disappointment, which
would most probably have attended it. A censor may maintain, he
can never restore, the morals of a state. It is impossible for
such a magistrate to exert his authority with benefit, or even
with effect, unless he is supported by a quick sense of honor and
virtue in the minds of the people, by a decent reverence for the
public opinion, and by a train of useful prejudices combating on
the side of national manners. In a period when these principles
are annihilated, the censorial jurisdiction must either sink into
empty pageantry, or be converted into a partial instrument of
vexatious oppression. ^43 It was easier to vanquish the Goths
than to eradicate the public vices; yet even in the first of
these enterprises, Decius lost his army and his life.
[Footnote 41: This transaction might deceive Zonaras, who
supposes that Valerian was actually declared the colleague of
Decius, l. xii. p. 625.]
[Footnote 42: Hist. August. p. 174. The emperor's reply is
omitted.]
[Footnote 43: Such as the attempts of Augustus towards a
reformation of manness. Tacit. Annal. iii. 24.]
The Goths were now, on every side, surrounded and pursued by
the Roman arms. The flower of their troops had perished in the
long siege of Philippopolis, and the exhausted country could no
longer afford subsistence for the remaining multitude of
licentious barbarians. Reduced to this extremity, the Goths
would gladly have purchased, by the surrender of all their booty
and prisoners, the permission of an undisturbed retreat. But the
emperor, confident of victory, and resolving, by the chastisement
of these invaders, to strike a salutary terror into the nations
of the North, refused to listen to any terms of accommodation.
The high-spirited barbarians preferred death to slavery. An
obscure town of Maesia, called Forum Terebronii, ^44 was the
scene of the battle. The Gothic army was drawn up in three
lines, and either from choice or accident, the front of the third
line was covered by a morass. In the beginning of the action,
the son of Decius, a youth of the fairest hopes, and already
associated to the honors of the purple, was slain by an arrow, in
the sight of his afflicted father; who, summoning all his
fortitude, admonished the dismayed troops, that the loss of a
single soldier was of little importance to the republic. ^45 The
conflict was terrible; it was the combat of despair against grief
and rage. The first line of the Goths at length gave way in
disorder; the second, advancing to sustain it, shared its fate;
and the third only remained entire, prepared to dispute the
passage of the morass, which was imprudently attempted by the
presumption of the enemy. "Here the fortune of the day turned,
and all things became adverse to the Romans; the place deep with
ooze, sinking under those who stood, slippery to such as
advanced; their armor heavy, the waters deep; nor could they
wield, in that uneasy situation, their weighty javelins. The
barbarians, on the contrary, were inured to encounter in the
bogs, their persons tall, their spears long, such as could wound
at a distance." ^46 In this morass the Roman army, after an
ineffectual struggle, was irrecoverably lost; nor could the body
of the emperor ever be found. ^47 Such was the fate of Decius, in
the fiftieth year of his age; an accomplished prince, active in
war and affable in peace; ^48 who, together with his son, has
deserved to be compared, both in life and death, with the
brightest examples of ancient virtue. ^49
[Footnote 44: Tillemont, Histoire des Empereurs, tom. iii. p.
598. As Zosimus and some of his followers mistake the Danube for
the Tanais, they place the field of battle in the plains of
Scythia.]
[Footnote 45: Aurelius Victor allows two distinct actions for the
deaths of the two Decii; but I have preferred the account of
Jornandes.]
[Footnote 46: I have ventured to copy from Tacitus (Annal. i. 64)
the picture of a similar engagement between a Roman army and a
German tribe.]
[Footnote 47: Jornandes, c. 18. Zosimus, l. i. p. 22, [c. 23.]
Zonaras, l. xii. p. 627. Aurelius Victor.]
[Footnote 48: The Decii were killed before the end of the year
two hundred and fifty-one, since the new princes took possession
of the consulship on the ensuing calends of January.]
[Footnote 49: Hist. August. p. 223, gives them a very honorable
place among the small number of good emperors who reigned between
Augustus and Diocletian.]
This fatal blow humbled, for a very little time, she
insolence of the legions. They appeared to have patiently
expected, and submissively obeyed, the decree of the senate which
regulated the succession to the throne. From a just regard for
the memory of Decius, the Imperial title was conferred on
Hostilianus, his only surviving son; but an equal rank, with more
effectual power, was granted to Gallus, whose experience and
ability seemed equal to the great trust of guardian to the young
prince and the distressed empire. ^50 The first care of the new
emperor was to deliver the Illyrian provinces from the
intolerable weight of the victorious Goths. He consented to
leave in their hands the rich fruits of their invasion, an
immense booty, and what was still more disgraceful, a great
number of prisoners of the highest merit and quality. He
plentifully supplied their camp with every conveniency that could
assuage their angry spirits or facilitate their so much
wished-for departure; and he even promised to pay them annually a
large sum of gold, on condition they should never afterwards
infest the Roman territories by their incursions. ^51
[Footnote 50: Haec ubi Patres comperere . . . . decernunt.
Victor in Caesaribus.]
[Footnote 51: Zonaras, l. xii. p. 628.]
In the age of the Scipios, the most opulent kings of the
earth, who courted the protection of the victorious commonwealth,
were gratified with such trifling presents as could only derive a
value from the hand that bestowed them; an ivory chair, a coarse
garment of purple, an inconsiderable piece of plate, or a
quantity of copper coin. ^52 After the wealth of nations had
centred in Rome, the emperors displayed their greatness, and even
their policy, by the regular exercise of a steady and moderate
liberality towards the allies of the state. They relieved the
poverty of the barbarians, honored their merit, and recompensed
their fidelity. These voluntary marks of bounty were understood
to flow, not from the fears, but merely from the generosity or
the gratitude of the Romans; and whilst presents and subsidies
were liberally distributed among friends and suppliants, they
were sternly refused to such as claimed them as a debt. ^53 But
this stipulation, of an annual payment to a victorious enemy,
appeared without disguise in the light of an ignominious tribute;
the minds of the Romans were not yet accustomed to accept such
unequal laws from a tribe of barbarians; and the prince, who by a
necessary concession had probably saved his country, became the
object of the general contempt and aversion. The death of
Hostiliamus, though it happened in the midst of a raging
pestilence, was interpreted as the personal crime of Gallus; ^54
and even the defeat of the later emperor was ascribed by the
voice of suspicion to the perfidious counsels of his hated
successor. ^55 The tranquillity which the empire enjoyed during
the first year of his administration, ^56 served rather to
inflame than to appease the public discontent; and as soon as the
apprehensions of war were removed, the infamy of the peace was
more deeply and more sensibly felt.
[Footnote 52: A Sella, a Toga, and a golden Patera of five pounds
weight, were accepted with joy and gratitude by the wealthy king
of Egypt. (Livy, xxvii. 4.) Quina millia Aeris, a weight of
copper, in value about eighteen pounds sterling, was the usual
present made to foreign are ambassadors. (Livy, xxxi. 9.)]
[Footnote 53: See the firmness of a Roman general so late as the
time of Alexander Severus, in the Excerpta Legationum, p. 25,
edit. Louvre.]
[Footnote 54: For the plague, see Jornandes, c. 19, and Victor in
Caesaribus.]
[Footnote 55: These improbable accusations are alleged by
Zosimus, l. i. p. 28, 24.]
[Footnote 56: Jornandes, c. 19. The Gothic writer at least
observed the peace which his victorious countrymen had sworn to
Gallus.]
But the Romans were irritated to a still higher degree, when
they discovered that they had not even secured their repose,
though at the expense of their honor. The dangerous secret of
the wealth and weakness of the empire had been revealed to the
world. New swarms of barbarians, encouraged by the success, and
not conceiving themselves bound by the obligation of their
brethren, spread devastation though the Illyrian provinces, and
terror as far as the gates of Rome. The defence of the monarchy,
which seemed abandoned by the pusillanimous emperor, was assumed
by Aemilianus, governor of Pannonia and Maesia; who rallied the
scattered forces, and revived the fainting spirits of the troops.
The barbarians were unexpectedly attacked, routed, chased, and
pursued beyond the Danube. The victorious leader distributed as
a donative the money collected for the tribute, and the
acclamations of the soldiers proclaimed him emperor on the field
of battle. ^57 Gallus, who, careless of the general welfare,
indulged himself in the pleasures of Italy, was almost in the
same instant informed of the success, of the revolt, and of the
rapid approach of his aspiring lieutenant. He advanced to meet
him as far as the plains of Spoleto. When the armies came in
right of each other, the soldiers of Gallus compared the
ignominious conduct of their sovereign with the glory of his
rival. They admired the valor of Aemilianus; they were attracted
by his liberality, for he offered a considerable increase of pay
to all deserters. ^58 The murder of Gallus, and of his son
Volusianus, put an end to the civil war; and the senate gave a
legal sanction to the rights of conquest. The letters of
Aemilianus to that assembly displayed a mixture of moderation and
vanity. He assured them, that he should resign to their wisdom
the civil administration; and, contenting himself with the
quality of their general, would in a short time assert the glory
of Rome, and deliver the empire from all the barbarians both of
the North and of the East. ^59 His pride was flattered by the
applause of the senate; and medals are still extant, representing
him with the name and attributes of Hercules the Victor, and Mars
the Avenger. ^60
[Footnote 57: Zosimus, l. i. p. 25, 26.]
[Footnote 58: Victor in Caesaribus.]
[Footnote 59: Zonaras, l. xii. p. 628.]
[Footnote 60: Banduri Numismata, p. 94.]
If the new monarch possessed the abilities, he wanted the
time, necessary to fulfil these splendid promises. Less than
four months intervened between his victory and his fall. ^61 He
had vanquished Gallus: he sunk under the weight of a competitor
more formidable than Gallus. That unfortunate prince had sent
Valerian, already distinguished by the honorable title of censor,
to bring the legions of Gaul and Germany ^62 to his aid. Valerian
executed that commission with zeal and fidelity; and as he
arrived too late to save his sovereign, he resolved to revenge
him. The troops of Aemilianus, who still lay encamped in the
plains of Spoleto, were awed by the sanctity of his character,
but much more by the superior strength of his army; and as they
were now become as incapable of personal attachment as they had
always been of constitutional principle, they readily imbrued
their hands in the blood of a prince who so lately had been the
object of their partial choice. The guilt was theirs, ^* but the
advantage of it was Valerian's; who obtained the possession of
the throne by the means indeed of a civil war, but with a degree
of innocence singular in that age of revolutions; since he owed
neither gratitude nor allegiance to his predecessor, whom he
dethroned.
[Footnote 61: Eutropius, l. ix. c. 6, says tertio mense. Eusebio
this emperor.]
[Footnote 62: Zosimus, l. i. p. 28. Eutropius and Victor station
Valerian's army in Rhaetia.]
[Footnote *: Aurelius Victor says that Aemilianus died of a
natural disorder. Tropius, in speaking of his death, does not say
that he was assassinated - G.]
Valerian was about sixty years of age ^63 when he was
invested with the purple, not by the caprice of the populace, or
the clamors of the army, but by the unanimous voice of the Roman
world. In his gradual ascent through the honors of the state, he
had deserved the favor of virtuous princes, and had declared
himself the enemy of tyrants. ^64 His noble birth, his mild but
unblemished manners, his learning, prudence, and experience, were
revered by the senate and people; and if mankind (according to
the observation of an ancient writer) had been left at liberty to
choose a master, their choice would most assuredly have fallen on
Valerian. ^65 Perhaps the merit of this emperor was inadequate to
his reputation; perhaps his abilities, or at least his spirit,
were affected by the languor and coldness of old age. The
consciousness of his decline engaged him to share the throne with
a younger and more active associate; ^66 the emergency of the
times demanded a general no less than a prince; and the
experience of the Roman censor might have directed him where to
bestow the Imperial purple, as the reward of military merit. But
instead of making a judicious choice, which would have confirmed
his reign and endeared his memory, Valerian, consulting only the
dictates of affection or vanity, immediately invested with the
supreme honors his son Gallienus, a youth whose effeminate vices
had been hitherto concealed by the obscurity of a private
station. The joint government of the father and the son
subsisted about seven, and the sole administration of Gallien
continued about eight, years. But the whole period was one
uninterrupted series of confusion and calamity. As the Roman
empire was at the same time, and on every side, attacked by the
blind fury of foreign invaders, and the wild ambition of domestic
usurpers, we shall consult order and perspicuity, by pursuing,
not so much the doubtful arrangement of dates, as the more
natural distribution of subjects. The most dangerous enemies of
Rome, during the reigns of Valerian and Gallienus, were, 1. The
Franks; 2. The Alemanni; 3. The Goths; and, 4. The Persians.
Under these general appellations, we may comprehend the
adventures of less considerable tribes, whose obscure and uncouth
names would only serve to oppress the memory and perplex the
attention of the reader.
[Footnote 63: He was about seventy at the time of his accession,
or, as it is more probable, of his death. Hist. August. p. 173.
Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, tom. iii. p. 893, note 1.]
[Footnote 64: Inimicus tyrannorum. Hist. August. p. 173. In the
glorious struggle of the senate against Maximin, Valerian acted a
very spirited part. Hist. August. p. 156.]
[Footnote 65: According to the distinction of Victor, he seems to
have received the title of Imperator from the army, and that of
Augustus from the senate.]
[Footnote 66: From Victor and from the medals, Tillemont (tom.
iii. p. 710) very justly infers, that Gallienus was associated to
the empire about the month of August of the year 253.]
I. As the posterity of the Franks compose one of the
greatest and most enlightened nations of Europe, the powers of
learning and ingenuity have been exhausted in the discovery of
their unlettered ancestors. To the tales of credulity have
succeeded the systems of fancy. Every passage has been sifted,
every spot has been surveyed, that might possibly reveal some
faint traces of their origin. It has been supposed that
Pannonia, ^67 that Gaul, that the northern parts of Germany, ^68
gave birth to that celebrated colony of warriors. At length the
most rational critics, rejecting the fictitious emigrations of
ideal conquerors, have acquiesced in a sentiment whose simplicity
persuades us of its truth. ^69 They suppose, that about the year
two hundred and forty, ^70 a new confederacy was formed under the
name of Franks, by the old inhabitants of the Lower Rhine and the
Weser. ^* The present circle of Westphalia, the Landgraviate of
Hesse, and the duchies of Brunswick and Luneburg, were the
ancient of the Chauci who, in their inaccessible morasses, defied
the Roman arms; ^71 of the Cherusci, proud of the fame of
Arminius; of the Catti, formidable by their firm and intrepid
infantry; and of several other tribes of inferior power and
renown. ^72 The love of liberty was the ruling passion of these
Germans; the enjoyment of it their best treasure; the word that
expressed that enjoyment, the most pleasing to their ear. They
deserved, they assumed, they maintained the honorable appellation
of Franks, or Freemen; which concealed, though it did not
extinguish, the peculiar names of the several states of the
confederacy. ^73 Tacit consent, and mutual advantage, dictated
the first laws of the union; it was gradually cemented by habit
and experience. The league of the Franks may admit of some
comparison with the Helvetic body; in which every canton,
retaining its independent sovereignty, consults with its brethren
in the common cause, without acknowledging the authority of any
supreme head, or representative assembly. ^74 But the principle
of the two confederacies was extremely different. A peace of two
hundred years has rewarded the wise and honest policy of the
Swiss. An inconstant spirit, the thirst of rapine, and a
disregard to the most solemn treaties, disgraced the character of
the Franks.
[Footnote 67: Various systems have been formed to explain a
difficult passage in Gregory of Tours, l. ii. c. 9.]
[Footnote 68: The Geographer of Ravenna, i. 11, by mentioning
Mauringania, on the confines of Denmark, as the ancient seat of
the Franks, gave birth to an ingenious system of Leibritz.]
[Footnote 69: See Cluver. Germania Antiqua, l. iii. c. 20. M.
Freret, in the Memoires de l'Academie des Inscriptions, tom.
xviii.]
[Footnote 70: Most probably under the reign of Gordian, from an
accidental circumstance fully canvassed by Tillemont, tom. iii.
p. 710, 1181.]
[Footnote *: The confederation of the Franks appears to have been
formed, 1. Of the Chauci. 2. Of the Sicambri, the inhabitants of
the duchy of Berg. 3. Of the Attuarii, to the north of the
Sicambri, in the principality of Waldeck, between the Dimel and
the Eder. 4. Of the Bructeri, on the banks of the Lippe, and in
the Hartz. 5. Of the Chamavii, the Gambrivii of Tacitua, who were
established, at the time of the Frankish confederation, in the
country of the Bructeri. 6. Of the Catti, in Hessia. - G. The
Salii and Cherasci are added. Greenwood's Hist. of Germans, i
193. - M.]
[Footnote 71: Plin. Hist. Natur. xvi. l. The Panegyrists
frequently allude to the morasses of the Franks.]
[Footnote 72: Tacit. Germania, c. 30, 37.]
[Footnote 73: In a subsequent period, most of those old names are
occasionally mentioned. See some vestiges of them in Cluver.
Germ. Antiq. l. iii.]
[Footnote 74: Simler de Republica Helvet. cum notis Fuselin.]
Chapter X: Emperors Decius, Gallus, Aemilianus, Valerian And
Gallienus.
Part III.
The Romans had long experienced the daring valor of the
people of Lower Germany. The union of their strength threatened
Gaul with a more formidable invasion, and required the presence
of Gallienus, the heir and colleague of Imperial power. ^75
Whilst that prince, and his infant son Salonius, displayed, in
the court of Treves, the majesty of the empire its armies were
ably conducted by their general, Posthumus, who, though he
afterwards betrayed the family of Valerian, was ever faithful to
the great interests of the monarchy. The treacherous language of
panegyrics and medals darkly announces a long series of
victories. Trophies and titles attest (if such evidence can
attest) the fame of Posthumus, who is repeatedly styled the
Conqueror of the Germans, and the Savior of Gaul. ^76
[Footnote 75: Zosimus, l. i. p. 27.]
[Footnote 76: M. de Brequigny (in the Memoires de l'Academie,
tom. xxx.) has given us a very curious life of Posthumus. A
series of the Augustan History from Medals and Inscriptions has
been more than once planned, and is still much wanted.
Note: M. Eckhel, Keeper of the Cabinet of Medals, and
Professor of Antiquities at Vienna, lately deceased, has supplied
this want by his excellent work, Doctrina veterum Nummorum,
conscripta a Jos. Eckhel, 8 vol. in 4to Vindobona, 1797. - G.
Captain Smyth has likewise printed (privately) a valuable
Descriptive Catologue of a series of Large Brass Medals of this
period Bedford, 1834. - M. 1845.]
But a single fact, the only one indeed of which we have any
distinct knowledge, erases, in a great measure, these monuments
of vanity and adulation. The Rhine, though dignified with the
title of Safeguard of the provinces, was an imperfect barrier
against the daring spirit of enterprise with which the Franks
were actuated. Their rapid devastations stretched from the river
to the foot of the Pyrenees; nor were they stopped by those
mountains. Spain, which had never dreaded, was unable to resist,
the inroads of the Germans. During twelve years, the greatest
part of the reign of Gallie nus, that opulent country was the
theatre of unequal and destructive hostilities. Tarragona, the
flourishing capital of a peaceful province, was sacked and almost
destroyed; ^77 and so late as the days of Orosius, who wrote in
the fifth century, wretched cottages, scattered amidst the ruins
of magnificent cities, still recorded the rage of the barbarians.
^78 When the exhausted country no longer supplied a variety of
plunder, the Franks seized on some vessels in the ports of Spain,
^79 and transported themselves into Mauritania. The distant
province was astonished with the fury of these barbarians, who
seemed to fall from a new world, as their name, manners, and
complexion, were equally unknown on the coast of Africa. ^80
[Footnote 77: Aurel. Victor, c. 33. Instead of Poene direpto,
both the sense and the expression require deleto; though indeed,
for different reasons, it is alike difficult to correct the text
of the best, and of the worst, writers.]
[Footnote 78: In the time of Ausonius (the end of the fourth
century) Ilerda or Lerida was in a very ruinous state, (Auson.
Epist. xxv. 58,) which probably was the consequence of this
invasion.]
[Footnote 79: Valesius is therefore mistaken in supposing that
the Franks had invaded Spain by sea.]
[Footnote 80: Aurel. Victor. Eutrop. ix. 6.]
II. In that part of Upper Saxony, beyond the Elbe, which is
at present called the Marquisate of Lusace, there existed, in
ancient times, a sacred wood, the awful seat of the superstition
of the Suevi. None were permitted to enter the holy precincts,
without confessing, by their servile bonds and suppliant posture,
the immediate presence of the sovereign Deity. ^81 Patriotism
contributed, as well as devotion, to consecrate the Sonnenwald,
or wood of the Semnones. ^82 It was universally believed, that
the nation had received its first existence on that sacred spot.
At stated periods, the numerous tribes who gloried in the Suevic
blood, resorted thither by their ambassadors; and the memory of
their common extraction was perpetrated by barbaric rites and
human sacrifices. The wide-extended name of Suevi filled the
interior countries of Germany, from the banks of the Oder to
those of the Danube. They were distinguished from the other
Germans by their peculiar mode of dressing their long hair, which
they gathered into a rude knot on the crown of the head; and they
delighted in an ornament that showed their ranks more lofty and
terrible in the eyes of the enemy. ^83 Jealous as the Germans
were of military renown, they all confessed the superior valor of
the Suevi; and the tribes of the Usipetes and Tencteri, who, with
a vast army, encountered the dictator Caesar, declared that they
esteemed it not a disgrace to have fled before a people to whose
arms the immortal gods themselves were unequal. ^84
[Footnote 81: Tacit. Germania, 38.]
[Footnote 82: Cluver. Germ. Antiq. iii. 25.]
[Footnote 83: Sic Suevi a ceteris Germanis, sic Suerorum ingenui
a servis separantur. A proud separation!]
[Footnote 84: Caesar in Bello Gallico, iv. 7.]
In the reign of the emperor Caracalla, an innumerable swarm
of Suevi appeared on the banks of the Mein, and in the
neighborhood of the Roman provinces, in quest either of food, of
plunder, or of glory. ^85 The hasty army of volunteers gradually
coalesced into a great and permanent nation, and as it was
composed from so many different tribes, assumed the name of
Alemanni, ^* or Allmen; to denote at once their various lineage
and their common bravery. ^86 The latter was soon felt by the
Romans in many a hostile inroad. The Alemanni fought chiefly on
horseback; but their cavalry was rendered still more formidable
by a mixture of light infantry, selected from the bravest and
most active of the youth, whom frequent exercise had inured to
accompany the horsemen in the longest march, the most rapid
charge, or the most precipitate retreat. ^87
[Footnote 85: Victor in Caracal. Dion Cassius, lxvii. p. 1350.]
[Footnote *: The nation of the Alemanni was not originally formed
by the Suavi properly so called; these have always preserved
their own name. Shortly afterwards they made (A. D. 357) an
irruption into Rhaetia, and it was not long after that they were
reunited with the Alemanni. Still they have always been a
distinct people; at the present day, the people who inhabit the
north-west of the Black Forest call themselves Schwaben,
Suabians, Sueves, while those who inhabit near the Rhine, in
Ortenau, the Brisgaw, the Margraviate of Baden, do not consider
themselves Suabians, and are by origin Alemanni.
The Teucteri and the Usipetae, inhabitants of the interior
and of the north of Westphalia, formed, says Gatterer, the
nucleus of the Alemannic nation; they occupied the country where
the name of the Alemanni first appears, as conquered in 213, by
Caracalla. They were well trained to fight on horseback,
(according to Tacitus, Germ. c. 32;) and Aurelius Victor gives
the same praise to the Alemanni: finally, they never made part of
the Frankish league. The Alemanni became subsequently a centre
round which gathered a multitude of German tribes, See Eumen.
Panegyr. c. 2. Amm. Marc. xviii. 2, xxix. 4. - G.
The question whether the Suevi was a generic name
comprehending the clans which peopled central Germany, is rather
hastily decided by M. Guizot Mr. Greenwood, who has studied the
modern German writers on their own origin, supposes the Suevi,
Alemanni, and Marcomanni, one people, under different
appellations. History of Germany, vol i. - M.]
[Footnote 86: This etymology (far different from those which
amuse the fancy of the learned) is preserved by Asinius
Quadratus, an original historian, quoted by Agathias, i. c. 5.]
[Footnote 87: The Suevi engaged Caesar in this manner, and the
manoeuvre deserved the approbation of the conqueror, (in Bello
Gallico, i. 48.)]
This warlike people of Germans had been astonished by the
immense preparations of Alexander Severus; they were dismayed by
the arms of his successor, a barbarian equal in valor and
fierceness to themselves. But still hovering on the frontiers of
the empire, they increased the general disorder that ensued after
the death of Decius. They inflicted severe wounds on the rich
provinces of Gaul; they were the first who removed the veil that
covered the feeble majesty of Italy. A numerous body of the
Alemanni penetrated across the Danube and through the Rhaetian
Alps into the plains of Lombardy, advanced as far as Ravenna, and
displayed the victorious banners of barbarians almost in sight of
Rome. ^88
[Footnote 88: Hist. August. p. 215, 216. Dexippus in the
Excerpts. Legationam, p. 8. Hieronym. Chron. Orosius, vii. 22.]
The insult and the danger rekindled in the senate some
sparks of their ancient virtue. Both the emperors were engaged
in far distant wars, Valerian in the East, and Gallienus on the
Rhine. All the hopes and resources of the Romans were in
themselves. In this emergency, the senators resumed he defence
of the republic, drew out the Praetorian guards, who had been
left to garrison the capital, and filled up their numbers, by
enlisting into the public service the stoutest and most willing
of the Plebeians. The Alemanni, astonished with the sudden
appearance of an army more numerous than their own, retired into
Germany, laden with spoil; and their retreat was esteemed as a
victory by the unwarlike Romans. ^89
[Footnote 89: Zosimus, l. i. p. 34.]
When Gallienus received the intelligence that his capital
was delivered from the barbarians, he was much less delighted
than alarmed with the courage of the senate, since it might one
day prompt them to rescue the public from domestic tyranny as
well as from foreign invasion. His timid ingratitude was
published to his subjects, in an edict which prohibited the
senators from exercising any military employment, and even from
approaching the camps of the legions. But his fears were
groundless. The rich and luxurious nobles, sinking into their
natural character, accepted, as a favor, this disgraceful
exemption from military service; and as long as they were
indulged in the enjoyment of their baths, their theatres, and
their villas, they cheerfully resigned the more dangerous cares
of empire to the rough hands of peasants and soldiers. ^90
[Footnote 90: Aurel. Victor, in Gallieno et Probo. His
complaints breathe as uncommon spirit of freedom.]
Another invasion of the Alemanni, of a more formidable
aspect, but more glorious event, is mentioned by a writer of the
lower empire. Three hundred thousand are said to have been
vanquished, in a battle near Milan, by Gallienus in person, at
the head of only ten thousand Romans. ^91 We may, however, with
great probability, ascribe this incredible victory either to the
credulity of the historian, or to some exaggerated exploits of
one of the emperor's lieutenants. It was by arms of a very
different nature, that Gallienus endeavored to protect Italy from
the fury of the Germans. He espoused Pipa, the daughter of a
king of the Marcomanni, a Suevic tribe, which was often
confounded with the Alemanni in their wars and conquests. ^92 To
the father, as the price of his alliance, he granted an ample
settlement in Pannonia. The native charms of unpolished beauty
seem to have fixed the daughter in the affections of the
inconstant emperor, and the bands of policy were more firmly
connected by those of love. But the haughty prejudice of Rome
still refused the name of marriage to the profane mixture of a
citizen and a barbarian; and has stigmatized the German princess
with the opprobrious title of concubine of Gallienus. ^93
[Footnote 91: Zonaras, l. xii. p. 631.]
[Footnote 92: One of the Victors calls him king of the
Marcomanni; the other of the Germans.]
[Footnote 93: See Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, tom. iii. p.
398, &c.]
III. We have already traced the emigration of the Goths
from Scandinavia, or at least from Prussia, to the mouth of the
Borysthenes, and have followed their victorious arms from the
Borysthenes to the Danube. Under the reigns of Valerian and
Gallienus, the frontier of the last- mentioned river was
perpetually infested by the inroads of Germans and Sarmatians;
but it was defended by the Romans with more than usual firmness
and success. The provinces that were the seat of war, recruited
the armies of Rome with an inexhaustible supply of hardy
soldiers; and more than one of these Illyrian peasants attained
the station, and displayed the abilities, of a general. Though
flying parties of the barbarians, who incessantly hovered on the
banks of the Danube, penetrated sometimes to the confines of
Italy and Macedonia, their progress was commonly checked, or
their return intercepted, by the Imperial lieutenants. ^94 But
the great stream of the Gothic hostilities was diverted into a
very different channel. The Goths, in their new settlement of
the Ukraine, soon became masters of the northern coast of the
Euxine: to the south of that inland sea were situated the soft
and wealthy provinces of Asia Minor, which possessed all that
could attract, and nothing that could resist, a barbarian
conqueror.
[Footnote 94: See the lives of Claudius, Aurelian, and Probus, in
the Augustan History.]
The banks of the Borysthenes are only sixty miles distant
from the narrow entrance ^95 of the peninsula of Crim Tartary,
known to the ancients under the name of Chersonesus Taurica. ^96
On that inhospitable shore, Euripides, embellishing with
exquisite art the tales of antiquity, has placed the scene of one
of his most affecting tragedies. ^97 The bloody sacrifices of
Diana, the arrival of Orestes and Pylades, and the triumph of
virtue and religion over savage fierceness, serve to represent an
historical truth, that the Tauri, the original inhabitants of the
peninsula, were, in some degree, reclaimed from their brutal
manners by a gradual intercourse with the Grecian colonies, which
settled along the maritime coast. The little kingdom of
Bosphorus, whose capital was situated on the Straits, through
which the Maeotis communicates itself to the Euxine, was composed
of degenerate Greeks and half-civilized barbarians. It
subsisted, as an independent state, from the time of the
Peloponnesian war, ^98 was at last swallowed up by the ambition
of Mithridates, ^99 and, with the rest of his dominions, sunk
under the weight of the Roman arms. From the reign of Augustus,
^100 the kings of Bosphorus were the humble, but not useless,
allies of the empire. By presents, by arms, and by a slight
fortification drawn across the Isthmus, they effectually guarded
against the roving plunderers of Sarmatia, the access of a
country, which, from its peculiar situation and convenient
harbors, commanded the Euxine Sea and Asia Minor. ^101 As long as
the sceptre was possessed by a lineal succession of kings, they
acquitted themselves of their important charge with vigilance and
success. Domestic factions, and the fears, or private interest,
of obscure usurpers, who seized on the vacant throne, admitted
the Goths into the heart of Bosphorus. With the acquisition of a
superfluous waste of fertile soil, the conquerors obtained the
command of a naval force, sufficient to transport their armies to
the coast of Asia. ^102 This ships used in the navigation of the
Euxine were of a very singular construction. They were slight
flat-bottomed barks framed of timber only, without the least
mixture of iron, and occasionally covered with a shelving roof,
on the appearance of a tempest. ^103 In these floating houses,
the Goths carelessly trusted themselves to the mercy of an
unknown sea, under the conduct of sailors pressed into the
service, and whose skill and fidelity were equally suspicious.
But the hopes of plunder had banished every idea of danger, and a
natural fearlessness of temper supplied in their minds the more
rational confidence, which is the just result of knowledge and
experience. Warriors of such a daring spirit must have often
murmured against the cowardice of their guides, who required the
strongest assurances of a settled calm before they would venture
to embark; and would scarcely ever be tempted to lose sight of
the land. Such, at least, is the practice of the modern Turks;
^104 and they are probably not inferior, in the art of
navigation, to the ancient inhabitants of Bosphorus.
[Footnote 95: It is about half a league in breadth. Genealogical
History of the Tartars, p 598.]
[Footnote 96: M. de Peyssonel, who had been French Consul at
Caffa, in his Observations sur les Peuples Barbares, que ont
habite les bords du Danube]
[Footnote 97: Eeripides in Iphigenia in Taurid.]
[Footnote 98: Strabo, l. vii. p. 309. The first kings of
Bosphorus were the allies of Athens.]
[Footnote 99: Appian in Mithridat.]
[Footnote 100: It was reduced by the arms of Agrippa. Orosius,
vi. 21. Eu tropius, vii. 9. The Romans once advanced within
three days' march of the Tanais. Tacit. Annal. xii. 17.]
[Footnote 101: See the Toxaris of Lucian, if we credit the
sincerity and the virtues of the Scythian, who relates a great
war of his nation against the kings of Bosphorus.]
[Footnote 102: Zosimus, l. i. p. 28.]
[Footnote 103: Strabo, l. xi. Tacit. Hist. iii. 47. They were
called Camaroe.]
[Footnote 104: See a very natural picture of the Euxine
navigation, in the xvith letter of Tournefort.]
The fleet of the Goths, leaving the coast of Circassia on
the left hand, first appeared before Pityus, ^105 the utmost
limits of the Roman provinces; a city provided with a convenient
port, and fortified with a strong wall. Here they met with a
resistance more obstinate than they had reason to expect from the
feeble garrison of a distant fortress. They were repulsed; and
their disappointment seemed to diminish the terror of the Gothic
name. As long as Successianus, an officer of superior rank and
merit, defended that frontier, all their efforts were
ineffectual; but as soon as he was removed by Valerian to a more
honorable but less important station, they resumed the attack of
Pityus; and by the destruction of that city, obliterated the
memory of their former disgrace. ^106
[Footnote 105: Arrian places the frontier garrison at Dioscurias,
or Sebastopolis, forty-four miles to the east of Pityus. The
garrison of Phasis consisted in his time of only four hundred
foot. See the Periplus of the Euxine.
Note: Pityus is Pitchinda, according to D'Anville, ii. 115.
- G. Rather Boukoun. - M. Dioscurias is Iskuriah. - G.]
[Footnote 106: Zosimus, l. i. p. 30.]
Circling round the eastern extremity of the Euxine Sea, the
navigation from Pityus to Trebizond is about three hundred miles.
^107 The course of the Goths carried them in sight of the country
of Colchis, so famous by the expedition of the Argonauts; and
they even attempted, though without success, to pillage a rich
temple at the mouth of the River Phasis. Trebizond, celebrated
in the retreat of the ten thousand as an ancient colony of
Greeks, ^108 derived its wealth and splendor from the
magnificence of the emperor Hadrian, who had constructed an
artificial port on a coast left destitute by nature of secure
harbors. ^109 The city was large and populous; a double enclosure
of walls seemed to defy the fury of the Goths, and the usual
garrison had been strengthened by a reenforcement of ten thousand
men. But there are not any advantages capable of supplying the
absence of discipline and vigilance. The numerous garrison of
Trebizond, dissolved in riot and luxury, disdained to guard their
impregnable fortifications. The Goths soon discovered the supine
negligence of the besieged, erected a lofty pile of fascines,
ascended the walls in the silence of the night, and entered the
defenceless city sword in hand. A general massacre of the people
ensued, whilst the affrighted soldiers escaped through the
opposite gates of the town. The most holy temples, and the most
splendid edifices, were involved in a common destruction. The
booty that fell into the hands of the Goths was immense: the
wealth of the adjacent countries had been deposited in Trebizond,
as in a secure place of refuge. The number of captives was
incredible, as the victorious barbarians ranged without
opposition through the extensive province of Pontus. ^110 The
rich spoils of Trebizond filled a great fleet of ships that had
been found in the port. The robust youth of the sea-coast were
chained to the oar; and the Goths, satisfied with the success of
their first naval expedition, returned in triumph to their new
establishment in the kingdom of Bosphorus. ^111
[Footnote 107: Arrian (in Periplo Maris Euxine, p. 130) calls the
distance 2610 stadia.]
[Footnote 108: Xenophon, Anabasis, l. iv. p. 348, edit.
Hutchinson.
Note: Fallmerayer (Geschichte des Kaiserthums von Trapezunt,
p. 6, &c) assigns a very ancient date to the first (Pelasgic)
foundation of Trapezun (Trebizond) - M.]
[Footnote 109: Arrian, p. 129. The general observation is
Tournefort's.]
[Footnote 110: See an epistle of Gregory Thaumaturgus, bishop of
Neo- Caeoarea, quoted by Mascou, v. 37.]
[Footnote 111: Zosimus, l. i. p. 32, 33.]
The second expedition of the Goths was undertaken with
greater powers of men and ships; but they steered a different
course, and, disdaining the exhausted provinces of Pontus,
followed the western coast of the Euxine, passed before the wide
mouths of the Borysthenes, the Niester, and the Danube, and
increasing their fleet by the capture of a great number of
fishing barks, they approached the narrow outlet through which
the Euxine Sea pours its waters into the Mediterranean, and
divides the continents of Europe and Asia. The garrison of
Chalcedon was encamped near the temple of Jupiter Urius, on a
promontory that commanded the entrance of the Strait; and so
inconsiderable were the dreaded invasions of the barbarians that
this body of troops surpassed in number the Gothic army. But it
was in numbers alone that they surpassed it. They deserted with
precipitation their advantageous post, and abandoned the town of
Chalcedon, most plentifully stored with arms and money, to the
discretion of the conquerors. Whilst they hesitated whether they
should prefer the sea or land Europe or Asia, for the scene of
their hostilities, a perfidious fugitive pointed out Nicomedia,
^* once the capital of the kings of Bithynia, as a rich and easy
conquest. He guided the march which was only sixty miles from
the camp of Chalcedon, ^112 directed the resistless attack, and
partook of the booty; for the Goths had learned sufficient policy
to reward the traitor whom they detested. Nice, Prusa, Apamaea,
Cius, ^! cities that had sometimes rivalled, or imitated, the
splendor of Nicomedia, were involved in the same calamity, which,
in a few weeks, raged without control through the whole province
of Bithynia. Three hundred years of peace, enjoyed by the soft
inhabitants of Asia, had abolished the exercise of arms, and
removed the apprehension of danger. The ancient walls were
suffered to moulder away, and all the revenue of the most opulent
cities was reserved for the construction of baths, temples, and
theatres. ^113
[Footnote *: It has preserved its name, joined to the preposition
of place in that of Nikmid. D'Anv. Geog. Anc. ii. 28. - G.]
[Footnote 112: Itiner. Hierosolym. p. 572. Wesseling.]
[Footnote !: Now Isnik, Bursa, Mondania Ghio or Kemlik D'Anv. ii.
23. - G.]
[Footnote 113: Zosimus, l. . p. 32, 33.]
When the city of Cyzicus withstood the utmost effort of
Mithridates, ^114 it was distinguished by wise laws, a nava power
of two hundred galleys, and three arsenals, of arms, of military
engines, and of corn. ^115 It was still the seat of wealth and
luxury; but of its ancient strength, nothing remained except the
situation, in a little island of the Propontis, connected with
the continent of Asia only by two bridges. From the recent sack
of Prusa, the Goths advanced within eighteen miles. ^116 of the
city, which they had devoted to destruction; but the ruin of
Cyzicus was delayed by a fortunate accident. The season was
rainy, and the Lake Apolloniates, the reservoir of all the
springs of Mount Olympus, rose to an uncommon height. The little
river of Rhyndacus, which issues from the lake, swelled into a
broad and rapid stream, and stopped the progress of the Goths.
Their retreat to the maritime city of Heraclea, where the fleet
had probably been stationed, was attended by a long train of
wagons, laden with the spoils of Bithynia, and was marked by the
flames of Nico and Nicomedia, which they wantonly burnt. ^117
Some obscure hints are mentioned of a doubtful combat that
secured their retreat. ^118 But even a complete victory would
have been of little moment, as the approach of the autumnal
equinox summoned them to hasten their return. To navigate the
Euxine before the month of May, or after that of September, is
esteemed by the modern Turks the most unquestionable instance of
rashness and folly. ^119
[Footnote 114: He besieged the place with 400 galleys, 150,000
foot, and a numerous cavalry. See Plutarch in Lucul. Appian in
Mithridat Cicero pro Lege Manilia, c. 8.]
[Footnote 115: Strabo, l. xii. p. 573.]
[Footnote 116: Pocock's Description of the East, l. ii. c. 23,
24.]
[Footnote 117: Zosimus, l. i. p. 33.]
[Footnote 118: Syncellus tells an unintelligible story of Prince
Odenathus, who defeated the Goths, and who was killed by Prince
Odenathus.]
[Footnote 119: Voyages de Chardin, tom. i. p. 45. He sailed with
the Turks from Constantinople to Caffa.]
When we are informed that the third fleet, equipped by the
Goths in the ports of Bosphorus, consisted of five hundred sails
of ships, ^120 our ready imagination instantly computes and
multiplies the formidable armament; but, as we are assured by the
judicious Strabo, ^121 that the piratical vessels used by the
barbarians of Pontus and the Lesser Scythia, were not capable of
containing more than twenty-five or thirty men we may safely
affirm, that fifteen thousand warriors, at the most, embarked in
this great expedition. Impatient of the limits of the Euxine,
they steered their destructive course from the Cimmerian to the
Thracian Bosphorus. When they had almost gained the middle of
the Straits, they were suddenly driven back to the entrance of
them; till a favorable wind, springing up the next day, carried
them in a few hours into the placid sea, or rather lake, of the
Propontis. Their landing on the little island of Cyzicus was
attended with the ruin of that ancient and noble city. From
thence issuing again through the narrow passage of the
Hellespont, they pursued their winding navigation amidst the
numerous islands scattered over the Archipelago, or the Aegean
Sea. The assistance of captives and deserters must have been
very necessary to pilot their vessels, and to direct their
various incursions, as well on the coast of Greece as on that of
Asia. At length the Gothic fleet anchored in the port of
Piraeus, five miles distant from Athens, ^122 which had attempted
to make some preparations for a vigorous defence. Cleodamus, one
of the engineers employed by the emperor's orders to fortify the
maritime cities against the Goths, had already begun to repair
the ancient walls, fallen to decay since the time of Scylla. The
efforts of his skill were ineffectual, and the barbarians became
masters of the native seat of the muses and the arts. But while
the conquerors abandoned themselves to the license of plunder and
intemperance, their fleet, that lay with a slender guard in the
harbor of Piraeus, was unexpectedly attacked by the brave
Dexippus, who, flying with the engineer Cleodamus from the sack
of Athens, collected a hasty band of volunteers, peasants as well
as soldiers, and in some measure avenged the calamities of his
country. ^123
[Footnote 120: Syncellus (p. 382) speaks of this expedition, as
undertaken by the Heruli.]
[Footnote 121: Strabo, l. xi. p. 495.]
[Footnote 122: Plin. Hist. Natur. iii. 7.]
[Footnote 123: Hist. August. p. 181. Victor, c. 33. Orosius,
vii. 42. Zosimus, l. i. p. 35. Zonaras, l. xii. 635. Syncellus,
p. 382. It is not without some attention, that we can explain
and conciliate their imperfect hints. We can still discover some
traces of the partiality of Dexippus, in the relation of his own
and his countrymen's exploits.
Note: According to a new fragment of Dexippus, published by
Mai, he 2000 men. He took up a strong position in a mountainous
and woods district, and kept up a harassing warfare. He
expresses a hope of being speedily joined by the Imperial fleet.
Dexippus in rov. Byzantinorum Collect a Niebuhr, p. 26, 8 - M.]
But this exploit, whatever lustre it might shed on the
declining age of Athens, served rather to irritate than to subdue
the undaunted spirit of the northern invaders. A general
conflagration blazed out at the same time in every district of
Greece. Thebes and Argos, Corinth and Sparta, which had formerly
waged such memorable wars against each other, were now unable to
bring an army into the field, or even to defend their ruined
fortifications. The rage of war, both by land and by sea, spread
from the eastern point of Sunium to the western coast of Epirus.
The Goths had already advanced within sight of Italy, when the
approach of such imminent danger awakened the indolent Gallienus
from his dream of pleasure. The emperor appeared in arms; and
his presence seems to have checked the ardor, and to have divided
the strength, of the enemy. Naulobatus, a chief of the Heruli,
accepted an honorable capitulation, entered with a large body of
his countrymen into the service of Rome, and was invested with
the ornaments of the consular dignity, which had never before
been profaned by the hands of a barbarian. ^124 Great numbers of
the Goths, disgusted with the perils and hardships of a tedious
voyage, broke into Maesia, with a design of forcing their way
over the Danube to their settlements in the Ukraine. The wild
attempt would have proved inevitable destruction, if the discord
of the Roman generals had not opened to the barbarians the means
of an escape. ^125 The small remainder of this destroying host
returned on board their vessels; and measuring back their way
through the Hellespont and the Bosphorus, ravaged in their
passage the shores of Troy, whose fame, immortalized by Homer,
will probably survive the memory of the Gothic conquests. As
soon as they found themselves in safety within the basin of the
Euxine, they landed at Anchialus in Thrace, near the foot of
Mount Haemus; and, after all their toils, indulged themselves in
the use of those pleasant and salutary hot baths. What remained
of the voyage was a short and easy navigation. ^126 Such was the
various fate of this third and greatest of their naval
enterprises. It may seem difficult to conceive how the original
body of fifteen thousand warriors could sustain the losses and
divisions of so bold an adventure. But as their numbers were
gradually wasted by the sword, by shipwrecks, and by the
influence of a warm climate, they were perpetually renewed by
troops of banditti and deserters, who flocked to the standard of
plunder, and by a crowd of fugitive slaves, often of German or
Sarmatian extraction, who eagerly seized the glorious opportunity
of freedom and revenge. In these expeditions, the Gothic nation
claimed a superior share of honor and danger; but the tribes that
fought under the Gothic banners are sometimes distinguished and
sometimes confounded in the imperfect histories of that age; and
as the barbarian fleets seemed to issue from the mouth of the
Tanais, the vague but familiar appellation of Scythians was
frequently bestowed on the mixed multitude. ^127
[Footnote 124: Syncellus, p. 382. This body of Heruli was for a
long time faithful and famous.]
[Footnote 125: Claudius, who commanded on the Danube, thought
with propriety and acted with spirit. His colleague was jealous
of his fame Hist. August. p. 181.]
[Footnote 126: Jornandes, c. 20.]
[Footnote 127: Zosimus and the Greeks (as the author of the
Philopatris) give the name of Scythians to those whom Jornandes,
and the Latin writers, constantly represent as Goths.]
Chapter X: Emperors Decius, Gallus, Aemilianus, Valerian And
Gallienus.
Part IV.
In the general calamities of mankind, the death of an
individual, however exalted, the ruin of an edifice, however
famous, are passed over with careless inattention. Yet we cannot
forget that the temple of Diana at Ephesus, after having risen
with increasing splendor from seven repeated misfortunes, ^128
was finally burnt by the Goths in their third naval invasion.
The arts of Greece, and the wealth of Asia, had conspired to
erect that sacred and magnificent structure. It was supported by
a hundred and twenty-seven marble columns of the Ionic order.
They were the gifts of devout monarchs, and each was sixty feet
high. The altar was adorned with the masterly sculptures of
Praxiteles, who had, perhaps, selected from the favorite legends
of the place the birth of the divine children of Latona, the
concealment of Apollo after the slaughter of the Cyclops, and the
clemency of Bacchus to the vanquished Amazons. ^129 Yet the
length of the temple of Ephesus was only four hundred and
twenty-five feet, about two thirds of the measure of the church
of St. Peter's at Rome. ^130 In the other dimensions, it was
still more inferior to that sublime production of modern
architecture. The spreading arms of a Christian cross require a
much greater breadth than the oblong temples of the Pagans; and
the boldest artists of antiquity would have been startled at the
proposal of raising in the air a dome of the size and proportions
of the Pantheon. The temple of Diana was, however, admired as
one of the wonders of the world. Successive empires, the
Persian, the Macedonian, and the Roman, had revered its sanctity
and enriched its splendor. ^131 But the rude savages of the
Baltic were destitute of a taste for the elegant arts, and they
despised the ideal terrors of a foreign superstition. ^132
[Footnote 128: Hist. Aug. p. 178. Jornandes, c. 20.]
[Footnote 129: Strabo, l. xiv. p. 640. Vitruvius, l. i. c. i.
praefat l vii. Tacit Annal. iii. 61. Plin. Hist. Nat. xxxvi.
14.]
[Footnote 130: The length of St. Peter's is 840 Roman palms; each
palm is very little short of nine English inches. See Greaves's
Miscellanies vol. i. p. 233; on the Roman Foot.
Note: St. Paul's Cathedral is 500 feet. Dallaway on
Architecture - M.]
[Footnote 131: The policy, however, of the Romans induced them to
abridge the extent of the sanctuary or asylum, which by
successive privileges had spread itself two stadia round the
temple. Strabo, l. xiv. p. 641. Tacit. Annal. iii. 60, &c.]
[Footnote 132: They offered no sacrifices to the Grecian gods.
See Epistol Gregor. Thaumat.]
Another circumstance is related of these invasions, which
might deserve our notice, were it not justly to be suspected as
the fanciful conceit of a recent sophist. We are told, that in
the sack of Athens the Goths had collected all the libraries, and
were on the point of setting fire to this funeral pile of Grecian
learning, had not one of their chiefs, of more refined policy
than his brethren, dissuaded them from the design; by the
profound observation, that as long as the Greeks were addicted to
the study of books, they would never apply themselves to the
exercise of arms. ^133 The sagacious counsellor (should the truth
of the fact be admitted) reasoned like an ignorant barbarian. In
the most polite and powerful nations, genius of every kind has
displayed itself about the same period; and the age of science
has generally been the age of military virtue and success.
[Footnote 133: Zonaras, l. xii. p. 635. Such an anecdote was
perfectly suited to the taste of Montaigne. He makes use of it
in his agreeable Essay on Pedantry, l. i. c. 24.]
IV. The new sovereign of Persia, Artaxerxes and his son
Sapor, had triumphed (as we have already seen) over the house of
Arsaces. Of the many princes of that ancient race. Chosroes,
king of Armenia, had alone preserved both his life and his
independence. He defended himself by the natural strength of his
country; by the perpetual resort of fugitives and malecontents;
by the alliance of the Romans, and above all, by his own courage.
Invincible in arms, during a thirty years' war, he was at length
assassinated by the emissaries of Sapor, king of Persia. The
patriotic satraps of Armenia, who asserted the freedom and
dignity of the crown, implored the protection of Rome in favor of
Tiridates, the lawful heir. But the son of Chosroes was an
infant, the allies were at a distance, and the Persian monarch
advanced towards the frontier at the head of an irresistible
force. Young Tiridates, the future hope of his country, was
saved by the fidelity of a servant, and Armenia continued above
twenty-seven years a reluctant province of the great monarchy of
Persia. ^134 Elated with this easy conquest, and presuming on the
distresses or the degeneracy of the Romans, Sapor obliged the
strong garrisons of Carrhae and Nisibis ^* to surrender, and
spread devastation and terror on either side of the Euphrates.
[Footnote 134: Moses Chorenensis, l. ii. c. 71, 73, 74. Zonaras,
l. xii. p. 628. The anthentic relation of the Armenian historian
serves to rectify the confused account of the Greek. The latter
talks of the children of Tiridates, who at that time was himself
an infant. (Compare St Martin Memoires sur l'Armenie, i. p. 301.
- M.)]
[Footnote *: Nisibis, according to Persian authors, was taken by
a miracle, the wall fell, in compliance with the prayers of the
army. Malcolm's Persia, l. 76. - M]
The loss of an important frontier, the ruin of a faithful
and natural ally, and the rapid success of Sapor's ambition,
affected Rome with a deep sense of the insult as well as of the
danger. Valerian flattered himself, that the vigilance of his
lieutenants would sufficiently provide for the safety of the
Rhine and of the Danube; but he resolved, notwithstanding his
advanced age, to march in person to the defence of the Euphrates.
During his progress through Asia Minor, the naval enterprises of
the Goths were suspended, and the afflicted province enjoyed a
transient and fallacious calm. He passed the Euphrates,
encountered the Persian monarch near the walls of Edessa, was
vanquished, and taken prisoner by Sapor. The particulars of this
great event are darkly and imperfectly represented; yet, by the
glimmering light which is afforded us, we may discover a long
series of imprudence, of error, and of deserved misfortunes on
the side of the Roman emperor. He reposed an implicit confidence
in Macrianus, his Praetorian praefect. ^135 That worthless
minister rendered his master formidable only to the oppressed
subjects, and contemptible to the enemies of Rome. ^136 By his
weak or wicked counsels, the Imperial army was betrayed into a
situation where valor and military skill were equally unavailing.
^137 The vigorous attempt of the Romans to cut their way through
the Persian host was repulsed with great slaughter; ^138 and
Sapor, who encompassed the camp with superior numbers, patiently
waited till the increasing rage of famine and pestilence had
insured his victory. The licentious murmurs of the legions soon
accused Valerian as the cause of their calamities; their
seditious clamors demanded an instant capitulation. An immense
sum of gold was offered to purchase the permission of a
disgraceful retreat. But the Persian, conscious of his
superiority, refused the money with disdain; and detaining the
deputies, advanced in order of battle to the foot of the Roman
rampart, and insisted on a personal conference with the emperor.
Valerian was reduced to the necessity of intrusting his life and
dignity to the faith of an enemy. The interview ended as it was
natural to expect. The emperor was made a prisoner, and his
astonished troops laid down their arms. ^139 In such a moment of
triumph, the pride and policy of Sapor prompted him to fill the
vacant throne with a successor entirely dependent on his
pleasure. Cyriades, an obscure fugitive of Antioch, stained with
every vice, was chosen to dishonor the Roman purple; and the will
of the Persian victor could not fail of being ratified by the
acclamations, however reluctant, of the captive army. ^140
[Footnote 135: Hist. Aug. p. 191. As Macrianus was an enemy to
the Christians, they charged him with being a magician.]
[Footnote 136: Zosimus, l. i. p. 33.]
[Footnote 137: Hist. Aug. p. 174.]
[Footnote 138: Victor in Caesar. Eutropius, ix. 7.]
[Footnote 139: Zosimus, l. i. p. 33. Zonaras, l. xii. p. 630.
Peter Patricius, in the Excerpta Legat. p. 29.]
[Footnote 140: Hist. August. p. 185. The reign of Cyriades
appears in that collection prior to the death of Valerian; but I
have preferred a probable series of events to the doubtful
chronology of a most inaccurate writer]
The Imperial slave was eager to secure the favor of his
master by an act of treason to his native country. He conducted
Sapor over the Euphrates, and, by the way of Chalcis, to the
metropolis of the East. So rapid were the motions of the Persian
cavalry, that, if we may credit a very judicious historian, ^141
the city of Antioch was surprised when the idle multitude was
fondly gazing on the amusements of the theatre. The splendid
buildings of Antioch, private as well as public, were either
pillaged or destroyed; and the numerous inhabitants were put to
the sword, or led away into captivity. ^142 The tide of
devastation was stopped for a moment by the resolution of the
high priest of Emesa. Arrayed in his sacerdotal robes, he
appeared at the head of a great body of fanatic peasants, armed
only with slings, and defended his god and his property from the
sacrilegious hands of the followers of Zoroaster. ^143 But the
ruin of Tarsus, and of many other cities, furnishes a melancholy
proof that, except in this singular instance, the conquest of
Syria and Cilicia scarcely interrupted the progress of the
Persian arms. The advantages of the narrow passes of Mount
Taurus were abandoned, in which an invader, whose principal force
consisted in his cavalry, would have been engaged in a very
unequal combat: and Sapor was permitted to form the siege of
Caesarea, the capital of Cappadocia; a city, though of the second
rank, which was supposed to contain four hundred thousand
inhabitants. Demosthenes commanded in the place, not so much by
the commission of the emperor, as in the voluntary defence of his
country. For a long time he deferred its fate; and when at last
Caesarea was betrayed by the perfidy of a physician, he cut his
way through the Persians, who had been ordered to exert their
utmost diligence to take him alive. This heroic chief escaped
the power of a foe who might either have honored or punished his
obstinate valor; but many thousands of his fellow-citizens were
involved in a general massacre, and Sapor is accused of treating
his prisoners with wanton and unrelenting cruelty. ^144 Much
should undoubtedly be allowed for national animosity, much for
humbled pride and impotent revenge; yet, upon the whole, it is
certain, that the same prince, who, in Armenia, had displayed the
mild aspect of a legislator, showed himself to the Romans under
the stern features of a conqueror. He despaired of making any
permanent establishment in the empire, and sought only to leave
behind him a wasted desert, whilst he transported into Persia the
people and the treasures of the provinces. ^145
[Footnote 141: The sack of Antioch, anticipated by some
historians, is assigned, by the decisive testimony of Ammianus
Marcellinus, to the reign of Gallienus, xxiii. 5.
Note: Heyne, in his note on Zosimus, contests this opinion
of Gibbon and observes, that the testimony of Ammianus is in fact
by no means clear, decisive. Gallienus and Valerian reigned
together. Zosimus, in a passage, l. iiii. 32, 8, distinctly
places this event before the capture of Valerian. - M.]
[Footnote 142: Zosimus, l. i. p. 35.]
[Footnote 143: John Malala, tom. i. p. 391. He corrupts this
probable event by some fabulous circumstances.]
[Footnote 144: Zonaras, l. xii. p. 630. Deep valleys were filled
up with the slain. Crowds of prisoners were driven to water like
beasts, and many perished for want of food.]
[Footnote 145: Zosimus, l. i. p. 25 asserts, that Sapor, had he
not preferred spoil to conquest, might have remained master of
Asia.]
At the time when the East trembled at the name of Sapor, he
received a present not unworthy of the greatest kings; a long
train of camels, laden with the most rare and valuable
merchandises. The rich offering was accompanied with an epistle,
respectful, but not servile, from Odenathus, one of the noblest
and most opulent senators of Palmyra. "Who is this Odenathus,"
(said the haughty victor, and he commanded that the present
should be cast into the Euphrates,) "that he thus insolently
presumes to write to his lord? If he entertains a hope of
mitigating his punishment, let him fall prostrate before the foot
of our throne, with his hands bound behind his back. Should he
hesitate, swift destruction shall be poured on his head, on his
whole race, and on his country." ^146 The desperate extremity to
which the Palmyrenian was reduced, called into action all the
latent powers of his soul. He met Sapor; but he met him in arms.
Infusing his own spirit into a little army collected from the
villages of Syria ^147 and the tents of the desert, ^148 he
hovered round the Persian host, harassed their retreat, carried
off part of the treasure, and, what was dearer than any treasure,
several of the women of the great king; who was at last obliged
to repass the Euphrates with some marks of haste and confusion.
^149 By this exploit, Odenathus laid the foundations of his
future fame and fortunes. The majesty of Rome, oppressed by a
Persian, was protected by a Syrian or Arab of Palmyra.
[Footnote 146: Peter Patricius in Excerpt. Leg. p. 29.]
[Footnote 147: Syrorum agrestium manu. Sextus Rufus, c. 23.
Rufus Victor the Augustan History, (p. 192,) and several
inscriptions, agree in making Odenathus a citizen of Palmyra.]
[Footnote 148: He possessed so powerful an interest among the
wandering tribes, that Procopius (Bell. Persic. l. ii. c. 5) and
John Malala, (tom. i. p. 391) style him Prince of the Saracens.]
[Footnote 149: Peter Patricius, p. 25.]
The voice of history, which is often little more than the
organ of hatred or flattery, reproaches Sapor with a proud abuse
of the rights of conquest. We are told that Valerian, in chains,
but invested with the Imperial purple, was exposed to the
multitude, a constant spectacle of fallen greatness; and that
whenever the Persian monarch mounted on horseback, he placed his
foot on the neck of a Roman emperor. Notwithstanding all the
remonstrances of his allies, who repeatedly advised him to
remember the vicissitudes of fortune, to dread the returning
power of Rome, and to make his illustrious captive the pledge of
peace, not the object of insult, Sapor still remained inflexible.
When Valerian sunk under the weight of shame and grief, his skin,
stuffed with straw, and formed into the likeness of a human
figure, was preserved for ages in the most celebrated temple of
Persia; a more real monument of triumph, than the fancied
trophies of brass and marble so often erected by Roman vanity.
^150 The tale is moral and pathetic, but the truth ^! of it may
very fairly be called in question. The letters still extant from
the princes of the East to Sapor are manifest forgeries; ^151 nor
is it natural to suppose that a jealous monarch should, even in
the person of a rival, thus publicly degrade the majesty of
kings. Whatever treatment the unfortunate Valerian might
experience in Persia, it is at least certain that the only
emperor of Rome who had ever fallen into the hands of the enemy,
languished away his life in hopeless captivity.
[Footnote 150: The Pagan writers lament, the Christian insult,
the misfortunes of Valerian. Their various testimonies are
accurately collected by Tillemont, tom. iii. p. 739, &c. So
little has been preserved of eastern history before Mahomet, that
the modern Persians are totally ignorant of the victory Sapor, an
event so glorious to their nation. See Bibliotheque Orientale.
Note: Malcolm appears to write from Persian authorities, i.
76. - M.]
[Footnote !: Yet Gibbon himself records a speech of the emperor
Galerius, which alludes to the cruelties exercised against the
living, and the indignities to which they exposed the dead
Valerian, vol. ii. ch. 13. Respect for the kingly character would
by no means prevent an eastern monarch from ratifying his pride
and his vengeance on a fallen foe. - M.]
[Footnote 151: One of these epistles is from Artavasdes, king of
Armenia; since Armenia was then a province of Persia, the king,
the kingdom, and the epistle must be fictitious.]
The emperor Gallienus, who had long supported with
impatience the censorial severity of his father and colleague,
received the intelligence of his misfortunes with secret pleasure
and avowed indifference. "I knew that my father was a mortal,"
said he; "and since he has acted as it becomes a brave man, I am
satisfied." Whilst Rome lamented the fate of her sovereign, the
savage coldness of his son was extolled by the servile courtiers
as the perfect firmness of a hero and a stoic. ^152 It is
difficult to paint the light, the various, the inconstant
character of Gallienus, which he displayed without constraint, as
soon as he became sole possessor of the empire. In every art
that he attempted, his lively genius enabled him to succeed; and
as his genius was destitute of judgment, he attempted every art,
except the important ones of war and government. He was a master
of several curious, but useless sciences, a ready orator, an
elegant poet, ^153 a skilful gardener, an excellent cook, and
most contemptible prince. When the great emergencies of the
state required his presence and attention, he was engaged in
conversation with the philosopher Plotinus, ^154 wasting his time
in trifling or licentious pleasures, preparing his initiation to
the Grecian mysteries, or soliciting a place in the Arcopagus of
Athens. His profuse magnificence insulted the general poverty;
the solemn ridicule of his triumphs impressed a deeper sense of
the public disgrace. ^155 The repeated intelligence of invasions,
defeats, and rebellions, he received with a careless smile; and
singling out, with affected contempt, some particular production
of the lost province, he carelessly asked, whether Rome must be
ruined, unless it was supplied with linen from Egypt, and arras
cloth from Gaul. There were, however, a few short moments in the
life of Gallienus, when, exasperated by some recent injury, he
suddenly appeared the intrepid soldier and the cruel tyrant;
till, satiated with blood, or fatigued by resistance, he
insensibly sunk into the natural mildness and indolence of his
character. ^156
[Footnote 152: See his life in the Augustan History.]
[Footnote 153: There is still extant a very pretty Epithalamium,
composed by Gallienus for the nuptials of his nephews: -
"Ite ait, O juvenes, pariter sudate medullis
Omnibus, inter vos: non murmura vestra columbae,
Brachia non hederae, non vincant oscula conchae."]
[Footnote 154: He was on the point of giving Plotinus a ruined
city of Campania to try the experiment of realizing Plato's
Republic. See the Life of Plotinus, by Porphyry, in Fabricius's
Biblioth. Graec. l. iv.]
[Footnote 155: A medal which bears the head of Gallienus has
perplexed the antiquarians by its legend and reverse; the former
Gallienoe Augustoe, the latter Ubique Pax. M. Spanheim supposes
that the coin was struck by some of the enemies of Gallienus, and
was designed as a severe satire on that effeminate prince. But
as the use of irony may seem unworthy of the gravity of the Roman
mint, M. de Vallemont has deduced from a passage of Trebellius
Pollio (Hist. Aug. p. 198) an ingenious and natural solution.
Galliena was first cousin to the emperor. By delivering Africa
from the usurper Celsus, she deserved the title of Augusta. On a
medal in the French king's collection, we read a similar
inscription of Faustina Augusta round the head of Marcus
Aurelius. With regard to the Ubique Pax, it is easily explained
by the vanity of Gallienus, who seized, perhaps, the occasion of
some momentary calm. See Nouvelles de la Republique des Lettres,
Janvier, 1700, p. 21 - 34.]
[Footnote 156: This singular character has, I believe, been
fairly transmitted to us. The reign of his immediate successor
was short and busy; and the historians who wrote before the
elevation of the family of Constantine could not have the most
remote interest to misrepresent the character of Gallienus.]
At the time when the reins of government were held with so
loose a hand, it is not surprising, that a crowd of usurpers
should start up in every province of the empire against the son
of Valerian. It was probably some ingenious fancy, of comparing
the thirty tyrants of Rome with the thirty tyrants of Athens,
that induced the writers of the Augustan History to select that
celebrated number, which has been gradually received into a
popular appellation. ^157 But in every light the parallel is idle
and defective. What resemblance can we discover between a council
of thirty persons, the united oppressors of a single city, and an
uncertain list of independent rivals, who rose and fell in
irregular succession through the extent of a vast empire? Nor
can the number of thirty be completed, unless we include in the
account the women and children who were honored with the Imperial
title. The reign of Gallienus, distracted as it was, produced
only nineteen pretenders to the throne: Cyriades, Macrianus,
Balista, Odenathus, and Zenobia, in the East; in Gaul, and the
western provinces, Posthumus, Lollianus, Victorinus, and his
mother Victoria, Marius, and Tetricus; in Illyricum and the
confines of the Danube, Ingenuus, Regillianus, and Aureolus; in
Pontus, ^158 Saturninus; in Isauria, Trebellianus; Piso in
Thessaly; Valens in Achaia; Aemilianus in Egypt; and Celsus in
Africa. ^* To illustrate the obscure monuments of the life and
death of each individual, would prove a laborious task, alike
barren of instruction and of amusement. We may content ourselves
with investigating some general characters, that most strongly
mark the condition of the times, and the manners of the men,
their pretensions, their motives, their fate, and their
destructive consequences of their usurpation. ^159
[Footnote 157: Pollio expresses the most minute anxiety to
complete the number.
Note: Compare a dissertation of Manso on the thirty tyrants
at the end of his Leben Constantius des Grossen. Breslau, 1817.
- M.]
[Footnote 158: The place of his reign is somewhat doubtful; but
there was a tyrant in Pontus, and we are acquainted with the seat
of all the others.]
[Footnote *: Captain Smyth, in his "Catalogue of Medals," p. 307,
substitutes two new names to make up the number of nineteen, for
those of Odenathus and Zenobia. He subjoins this list: -
1. 2. 3. Of
those whose coins Those whose coins Those of whom no
are undoubtedly true. are suspected. coins are
known. Posthumus. Cyriades.
Valens. Laelianus, (Lollianus, G.) Ingenuus.
Balista Victorinus Celsus.
Saturninus. Marius. Piso Frugi.
Trebellianus. Tetricus.
- M. 1815 Macrianus.
Quietus.
Regalianus (Regillianus, G.)
Alex. Aemilianus.
Aureolus.
Sulpicius Antoninus]
[Footnote 159: Tillemont, tom. iii. p. 1163, reckons them
somewhat differently.]
It is sufficiently known, that the odious appellation of
Tyrant was often employed by the ancients to express the illegal
seizure of supreme power, without any reference to the abuse of
it. Several of the pretenders, who raised the standard of
rebellion against the emperor Gallienus, were shining models of
virtue, and almost all possessed a considerable share of vigor
and ability. Their merit had recommended them to the favor of
Valerian, and gradually promoted them to the most important
commands of the empire. The generals, who assumed the title of
Augustus, were either respected by their troops for their able
conduct and severe discipline, or admired for valor and success
in war, or beloved for frankness and generosity. The field of
victory was often the scene of their election; and even the
armorer Marius, the most contemptible of all the candidates for
the purple, was distinguished, however by intrepid courage,
matchless strength, and blunt honesty. ^160 His mean and recent
trade cast, indeed, an air of ridicule on his elevation; ^* but
his birth could not be more obscure than was that of the greater
part of his rivals, who were born of peasants, and enlisted in
the army as private soldiers. In times of confusion, every
active genius finds the place assigned him by nature: in a
general state of war, military merit is the road to glory and to
greatness. Of the nineteen tyrants Tetricus only was a senator;
Piso alone was a noble. The blood of Numa, through twenty-eight
successive generations, ran in the veins of Calphurnius Piso,
^161 who, by female alliances, claimed a right of exhibiting, in
his house, the images of Crassus and of the great Pompey. ^162
His ancestors had been repeatedly dignified with all the honors
which the commonwealth could bestow; and of all the ancient
families of Rome, the Calphurnian alone had survived the tyranny
of the Caesars. The personal qualities of Piso added new lustre
to his race. The usurper Valens, by whose order he was killed,
confessed, with deep remorse, that even an enemy ought to have
respected the sanctity of Piso; and although he died in arms
against Gallienus, the senate, with the emperor's generous
permission, decreed the triumphal ornaments to the memory of so
virtuous a rebel. ^163
[See Roman Coins: From The British Museum. Number four depicts
Crassus.]
[Footnote 160: See the speech of Marius in the Augustan History,
p. 197. The accidental identity of names was the only
circumstance that could tempt Pollio to imitate Sallust.]
[Footnote *: Marius was killed by a soldier, who had formerly
served as a workman in his shop, and who exclaimed, as he struck,
"Behold the sword which thyself hast forged." Trob vita. - G.]
[Footnote 161: "Vos, O Pompilius sanguis!" is Horace's address to
the Pisos See Art. Poet. v. 292, with Dacier's and Sanadon's
notes.]
[Footnote 162: Tacit. Annal. xv. 48. Hist. i. 15. In the former
of these passages we may venture to change paterna into materna.
In every generation from Augustus to Alexander Severus, one or
more Pisos appear as consuls. A Piso was deemed worthy of the
throne by Augustus, (Tacit. Annal. i. 13;) a second headed a
formidable conspiracy against Nero; and a third was adopted, and
declared Caesar, by Galba.]
[Footnote 163: Hist. August. p. 195. The senate, in a moment of
enthusiasm, seems to have presumed on the approbation of
Gallienus.]
The lieutenants of Valerian were grateful to the father,
whom they esteemed. They disdained to serve the luxurious
indolence of his unworthy son. The throne of the Roman world was
unsupported by any principle of loyalty; and treason against such
a prince might easily be considered as patriotism to the state.
Yet if we examine with candor the conduct of these usurpers, it
will appear, that they were much oftener driven into rebellion by
their fears, than urged to it by their ambition. They dreaded
the cruel suspicions of Gallienus; they equally dreaded the
capricious violence of their troops. If the dangerous favor of
the army had imprudently declared them deserving of the purple,
they were marked for sure destruction; and even prudence would
counsel them to secure a short enjoyment of empire, and rather to
try the fortune of war than to expect the hand of an executioner.
When the clamor of the soldiers invested the reluctant victims
with the ensigns of sovereign authority, they sometimes mourned
in secret their approaching fate. "You have lost," said
Saturninus, on the day of his elevation, "you have lost a useful
commander, and you have made a very wretched emperor." ^164
[Footnote 164: Hist. August p. 196.]
The apprehensions of Saturninus were justified by the
repeated experience of revolutions. Of the nineteen tyrants who
started up under the reign of Gallienus, there was not one who
enjoyed a life of peace, or a natural death. As soon as they
were invested with the bloody purple, they inspired their
adherents with the same fears and ambition which had occasioned
their own revolt. Encompassed with domestic conspiracy, military
sedition, and civil war, they trembled on the edge of precipices,
in which, after a longer or shorter term of anxiety, they were
inevitably lost. These precarious monarchs received, however,
such honors as the flattery of their respective armies and
provinces could bestow; but their claim, founded on rebellion,
could never obtain the sanction of law or history. Italy, Rome,
and the senate, constantly adhered to the cause of Gallienus, and
he alone was considered as the sovereign of the empire. That
prince condescended, indeed, to acknowledge the victorious arms
of Odenathus, who deserved the honorable distinction, by the
respectful conduct which he always maintained towards the son of
Valerian. With the general applause of the Romans, and the
consent of Gallienus, the senate conferred the title of Augustus
on the brave Palmyrenian; and seemed to intrust him with the
government of the East, which he already possessed, in so
independent a manner, that, like a private succession, he
bequeathed it to his illustrious widow, Zenobia. ^165
[Footnote 165: The association of the brave Palmyrenian was the
most popular act of the whole reign of Gallienus. Hist. August.
p. 180.]
The rapid and perpetual transitions from the cottage to the
throne, and from the throne to the grave, might have amused an
indifferent philosopher; were it possible for a philosopher to
remain indifferent amidst the general calamities of human kind.
The election of these precarious emperors, their power and their
death, were equally destructive to their subjects and adherents.
The price of their fatal elevation was instantly discharged to
the troops by an immense donative, drawn from the bowels of the
exhausted people. However virtuous was their character, however
pure their intentions, they found themselves reduced to the hard
necessity of supporting their usurpation by frequent acts of
rapine and cruelty. When they fell, they involved armies and
provinces in their fall. There is still extant a most savage
mandate from Gallienus to one of his ministers, after the
suppression of Ingenuus, who had assumed the purple in Illyricum.
"It is not enough," says that soft but inhuman prince, "that you
exterminate such as have appeared in arms; the chance of battle
might have served me as effectually. The male sex of every age
must be extirpated; provided that, in the execution of the
children and old men, you can contrive means to save our
reputation. Let every one die who has dropped an expression, who
has entertained a thought against me, against me, the son of
Valerian, the father and brother of so many princes. ^166
Remember that Ingenuus was made emperor: tear, kill, hew in
pieces. I write to you with my own hand, and would inspire you
with my own feelings." ^167 Whilst the public forces of the state
were dissipated in private quarrels, the defenceless provinces
lay exposed to every invader. The bravest usurpers were
compelled, by the perplexity of their situation, to conclude
ignominious treaties with the common enemy, to purchase with
oppressive tributes the neutrality or services of the Barbarians,
and to introduce hostile and independent nations into the heart
of the Roman monarchy. ^168
[Footnote 166: Gallienus had given the titles of Caesar and
Augustus to his son Saloninus, slain at Cologne by the usurper
Posthumus. A second son of Gallienus succeeded to the name and
rank of his elder brother Valerian, the brother of Gallienus, was
also associated to the empire: several other brothers, sisters,
nephews, and nieces of the emperor formed a very numerous royal
family. See Tillemont, tom iii, and M. de Brequigny in the
Memoires de l'Academie, tom xxxii p. 262.]
[Footnote 167: Hist. August. p. 188.]
[Footnote 168: Regillianus had some bands of Roxolani in his
service; Posthumus a body of Franks. It was, perhaps, in the
character of auxiliaries that the latter introduced themselves
into Spain.]
Such were the barbarians, and such the tyrants, who, under
the reigns of Valerian and Gallienus, dismembered the provinces,
and reduced the empire to the lowest pitch of disgrace and ruin,
from whence it seemed impossible that it should ever emerge. As
far as the barrenness of materials would permit, we have
attempted to trace, with order and perspicuity, the general
events of that calamitous period. There still remain some
particular facts; I. The disorders of Sicily; II. The tumults
of Alexandria; and, III. The rebellion of the Isaurians, which
may serve to reflect a strong light on the horrid picture.
I. Whenever numerous troops of banditti, multiplied by
success and impunity, publicly defy, instead of eluding the
justice of their country, we may safely infer, that the excessive
weakness of the government is felt and abused by the lowest ranks
of the community. The situation of Sicily preserved it from the
Barbarians; nor could the disarmed province have supported a
usurper. The sufferings of that once flourishing and still
fertile island were inflicted by baser hands. A licentious crowd
of slaves and peasants reigned for a while over the plundered
country, and renewed the memory of the servile wars of more
ancient times. ^169 Devastations, of which the husbandman was
either the victim or the accomplice, must have ruined the
agriculture of Sicily; and as the principal estates were the
property of the opulent senators of Rome, who often enclosed
within a farm the territory of an old republic, it is not
improbable, that this private injury might affect the capital
more deeply, than all the conquests of the Goths or the Persians.
[Footnote 169: The Augustan History, p. 177. See Diodor. Sicul.
l. xxxiv.]
II. The foundation of Alexandria was a noble design, at
once conceived and executed by the son of Philip. The beautiful
and regular form of that great city, second only to Rome itself,
comprehended a circumference of fifteen miles; ^170 it was
peopled by three hundred thousand free inhabitants, besides at
least an equal number of slaves. ^171 The lucrative trade of
Arabia and India flowed through the port of Alexandria, to the
capital and provinces of the empire. ^* Idleness was unknown.
Some were employed in blowing of glass, others in weaving of
linen, others again manufacturing the papyrus. Either sex, and
every age, was engaged in the pursuits of industry, nor did even
the blind or the lame want occupations suited to their condition.
^172 But the people of Alexandria, a various mixture of nations,
united the vanity and inconstancy of the Greeks with the
superstition and obstinacy of the Egyptians. The most trifling
occasion, a transient scarcity of flesh or lentils, the neglect
of an accustomed salutation, a mistake of precedency in the
public baths, or even a religious dispute, ^173 were at any time
sufficient to kindle a sedition among that vast multitude, whose
resentments were furious and implacable. ^174 After the captivity
of Valerian and the insolence of his son had relaxed the
authority of the laws, the Alexandrians abandoned themselves to
the ungoverned rage of their passions, and their unhappy country
was the theatre of a civil war, which continued (with a few short
and suspicious truces) above twelve years. ^175 All intercourse
was cut off between the several quarters of the afflicted city,
every street was polluted with blood, every building of strength
converted into a citadel; nor did the tumults subside till a
considerable part of Alexandria was irretrievably ruined. The
spacious and magnificent district of Bruchion, ^* with its
palaces and musaeum, the residence of the kings and philosophers
of Egypt, is described above a century afterwards, as already
reduced to its present state of dreary solitude. ^176
[Footnote 170: Plin. Hist. Natur. v. 10.]
[Footnote 171: Diodor. Sicul. l. xvii. p. 590, edit. Wesseling.]
[Footnote *: Berenice, or Myos-Hormos, on the Red Sea, received
the eastern commodities. From thence they were transported to
the Nile, and down the Nile to Alexandria. - M.]
[Footnote 172: See a very curious letter of Hadrian, in the
Augustan History, p. 245.]
[Footnote 173: Such as the sacrilegious murder of a divine cat.
See Diodor. Sicul. l. i.
Note: The hostility between the Jewish and Grecian part of
the population afterwards between the two former and the
Christian, were unfailing causes of tumult, sedition, and
massacre. In no place were the religious disputes, after the
establishment of Christianity, more frequent or more sanguinary.
See Philo. de Legat. Hist. of Jews, ii. 171, iii. 111, 198.
Gibbon, iii c. xxi. viii. c. xlvii. - M.]
[Footnote 174: Hist. August. p. 195. This long and terrible
sedition was first occasioned by a dispute between a soldier and
a townsman about a pair of shoes.]
[Footnote 175: Dionysius apud. Euses. Hist. Eccles. vii. p. 21.
Ammian xxii. 16.]
[Footnote *: The Bruchion was a quarter of Alexandria which
extended along the largest of the two ports, and contained many
palaces, inhabited by the Ptolemies. D'Anv. Geogr. Anc. iii. 10.
- G.]
[Footnote 176: Scaliger. Animadver. ad Euseb. Chron. p. 258.
Three dissertations of M. Bonamy, in the Mem. de l'Academie, tom.
ix.]
III. The obscure rebellion of Trebellianus, who assumed the
purple in Isauria, a petty province of Asia Minor, was attended
with strange and memorable consequences. The pageant of royalty
was soon destroyed by an officer of Gallienus; but his followers,
despairing of mercy, resolved to shake off their allegiance, not
only to the emperor, but to the empire, and suddenly returned to
the savage manners from which they had never perfectly been
reclaimed. Their craggy rocks, a branch of the wide-extended
Taurus, protected their inaccessible retreat. The tillage of
some fertile valleys ^177 supplied them with necessaries, and a
habit of rapine with the luxuries of life. In the heart of the
Roman monarchy, the Isaurians long continued a nation of wild
barbarians. Succeeding princes, unable to reduce them to
obedience, either by arms or policy, were compelled to
acknowledge their weakness, by surrounding the hostile and
independent spot with a strong chain of fortifications, ^178
which often proved insufficient to restrain the incursions of
these domestic foes. The Isaurians, gradually extending their
territory to the sea-coast, subdued the western and mountainous
part of Cilicia, formerly the nest of those daring pirates,
against whom the republic had once been obliged to exert its
utmost force, under the conduct of the great Pompey. ^179
[Footnote 177: Strabo, l. xiii. p. 569.]
[Footnote 178: Hist. August. p. 197.]
[Footnote 179: See Cellarius, Geogr Antiq. tom. ii. p. 137, upon
the limits of Isauria.]
Our habits of thinking so fondly connect the order of the
universe with the fate of man, that this gloomy period of history
has been decorated with inundations, earthquakes, uncommon
meteors, preternatural darkness, and a crowd of prodigies
fictitious or exaggerated. ^180 But a long and general famine was
a calamity of a more serious kind. It was the inevitable
consequence of rapine and oppression, which extirpated the
produce of the present, and the hope of future harvests. Famine
is almost always followed by epidemical diseases, the effect of
scanty and unwholesome food. Other causes must, however, have
contributed to the furious plague, which, from the year two
hundred and fifty to the year two hundred and sixty-five, raged
without interruption in every province, every city, and almost
every family, of the Roman empire. During some time five
thousand persons died daily in Rome; and many towns, that had
escaped the hands of the Barbarians, were entirely depopulated.
^181
[Footnote 180: Hist August p 177.]
[Footnote 181: Hist. August. p. 177. Zosimus, l. i. p. 24.
Zonaras, l. xii. p. 623. Euseb. Chronicon. Victor in Epitom.
Victor in Caesar. Eutropius, ix. 5. Orosius, vii. 21.]
We have the knowledge of a very curious circumstance, of
some use perhaps in the melancholy calculation of human
calamities. An exact register was kept at Alexandria of all the
citizens entitled to receive the distribution of corn. It was
found, that the ancient number of those comprised between the
ages of forty and seventy, had been equal to the whole sum of
claimants, from fourteen to fourscore years of age, who remained
alive after the reign of Gallienus. ^182 Applying this authentic
fact to the most correct tables of mortality, it evidently
proves, that above half the people of Alexandria had perished;
and could we venture to extend the analogy to the other
provinces, we might suspect, that war, pestilence, and famine,
had consumed, in a few years, the moiety of the human species.
^183
[Footnote 182: Euseb. Hist. Eccles. vii. 21. The fact is taken
from the Letters of Dionysius, who, in the time of those
troubles, was bishop of Alexandria.]
[Footnote 183: In a great number of parishes, 11,000 persons were
found between fourteen and eighty; 5365 between forty and
seventy. See Buffon, Histoire Naturelle, tom. ii. p. 590.]
Chapter XI: Reign Of Claudius, Defeat Of The Goths.
Part I.
Reign Of Claudius. - Defeat Of The Goths. - Victories, Triumph,
And Death Of Aurelian.
Under the deplorable reigns of Valerian and Gallienus, the
empire was oppressed and almost destroyed by the soldiers, the
tyrants, and the barbarians. It was saved by a series of great
princes, who derived their obscure origin from the martial
provinces of Illyricum. Within a period of about thirty years,
Claudius, Aurelian, Probus, Diocletian and his colleagues,
triumphed over the foreign and domestic enemies of the state,
reestablished, with the military discipline, the strength of the
frontiers, and deserved the glorious title of Restorers of the
Roman world.
The removal of an effeminate tyrant made way for a
succession of heroes. The indignation of the people imputed all
their calamities to Gallienus, and the far greater part were
indeed, the consequence of his dissolute manners and careless
administration. He was even destitute of a sense of honor, which
so frequently supplies the absence of public virtue; and as long
as he was permitted to enjoy the possession of Italy, a victory
of the barbarians, the loss of a province, or the rebellion of a
general, seldom disturbed the tranquil course of his pleasures.
At length, a considerable army, stationed on the Upper Danube,
invested with the Imperial purple their leader Aureolus; who,
disdaining a confined and barren reign over the mountains of
Rhaetia, passed the Alps, occupied Milan, threatened Rome, and
challenged Gallienus to dispute in the field the sovereignty of
Italy. The emperor, provoked by the insult, and alarmed by the
instant danger, suddenly exerted that latent vigor which
sometimes broke through the indolence of his temper. Forcing
himself from the luxury of the palace, he appeared in arms at the
head of his legions, and advanced beyond the Po to encounter his
competitor. The corrupted name of Pontirolo ^1 still preserves
the memory of a bridge over the Adda, which, during the action,
must have proved an object of the utmost importance to both
armies. The Rhaetian usurper, after receiving a total defeat and
a dangerous wound, retired into Milan. The siege of that great
city was immediately formed; the walls were battered with every
engine in use among the ancients; and Aureolus, doubtful of his
internal strength, and hopeless of foreign succors already
anticipated the fatal consequences of unsuccessful rebellion.
[Footnote 1: Pons Aureoli, thirteen miles from Bergamo, and
thirty-two from Milan. See Cluver. Italia, Antiq. tom. i. p.
245. Near this place, in the year 1703, the obstinate battle of
Cassano was fought between the French and Austrians. The
excellent relation of the Chevalier de Folard, who was present,
gives a very distinct idea of the ground. See Polybe de Folard,
tom. iii. p. 233-248.]
His last resource was an attempt to seduce the loyalty of
the besiegers. He scattered libels through the camp, inviting the
troops to desert an unworthy master, who sacrificed the public
happiness to his luxury, and the lives of his most valuable
subjects to the slightest suspicions. The arts of Aureolus
diffused fears and discontent among the principal officers of his
rival. A conspiracy was formed by Heraclianus the Praetorian
praefect, by Marcian, a general of rank and reputation, and by
Cecrops, who commanded a numerous body of Dalmatian guards. The
death of Gallienus was resolved; and notwithstanding their desire
of first terminating the siege of Milan, the extreme danger which
accompanied every moment's delay obliged them to hasten the
execution of their daring purpose. At a late hour of the night,
but while the emperor still protracted the pleasures of the
table, an alarm was suddenly given, that Aureolus, at the head of
all his forces, had made a desperate sally from the town;
Gallienus, who was never deficient in personal bravery, started
from his silken couch, and without allowing himself time either
to put on his armor, or to assemble his guards, he mounted on
horseback, and rode full speed towards the supposed place of the
attack. Encompassed by his declared or concealed enemies, he
soon, amidst the nocturnal tumult, received a mortal dart from an
uncertain hand. Before he expired, a patriotic sentiment using
in the mind of Gallienus, induced him to name a deserving
successor; and it was his last request, that the Imperial
ornaments should be delivered to Claudius, who then commanded a
detached army in the neighborhood of Pavia. The report at least
was diligently propagated, and the order cheerfully obeyed by the
conspirators, who had already agreed to place Claudius on the
throne. On the first news of the emperor's death, the troops
expressed some suspicion and resentment, till the one was
removed, and the other assuaged, by a donative of twenty pieces
of gold to each soldier. They then ratified the election, and
acknowledged the merit of their new sovereign. ^2
[Footnote 2: On the death of Gallienus, see Trebellius Pollio in
Hist. August. p. 181. Zosimus, l. i. p. 37. Zonaras, l. xii. p.
634. Eutrop. ix. ll. Aurelius Victor in Epitom. Victor in
Caesar. I have compared and blended them all, but have chiefly
followed Aurelius Victor, who seems to have had the best
memoirs.]
The obscurity which covered the origin of Claudius, though
it was afterwards embellished by some flattering fictions, ^3
sufficiently betrays the meanness of his birth. We can only
discover that he was a native of one of the provinces bordering
on the Danube; that his youth was spent in arms, and that his
modest valor attracted the favor and confidence of Decius. The
senate and people already considered him as an excellent officer,
equal to the most important trusts; and censured the inattention
of Valerian, who suffered him to remain in the subordinate
station of a tribune. But it was not long before that emperor
distinguished the merit of Claudius, by declaring him general and
chief of the Illyrian frontier, with the command of all the
troops in Thrace, Maesia, Dacia, Pannonia, and Dalmatia, the
appointments of the praefect of Egypt, the establishment of the
proconsul of Africa, and the sure prospect of the consulship. By
his victories over the Goths, he deserved from the senate the
honor of a statue, and excited the jealous apprehensions of
Gallienus. It was impossible that a soldier could esteem so
dissolute a sovereign, nor is it easy to conceal a just contempt.
Some unguarded expressions which dropped from Claudius were
officiously transmitted to the royal ear. The emperor's answer
to an officer of confidence describes in very lively colors his
own character, and that of the times. "There is not any thing
capable of giving me more serious concern, than the intelligence
contained in your last despatch; ^4 that some malicious
suggestions have indisposed towards us the mind of our friend and
parent Claudius. As you regard your allegiance, use every means
to appease his resentment, but conduct your negotiation with
secrecy; let it not reach the knowledge of the Dacian troops;
they are already provoked, and it might inflame their fury. I
myself have sent him some presents: be it your care that he
accept them with pleasure. Above all, let him not suspect that I
am made acquainted with his imprudence. The fear of my anger
might urge him to desperate counsels." ^5 The presents which
accompanied this humble epistle, in which the monarch solicited a
reconciliation with his discontented subject, consisted of a
considerable sum of money, a splendid wardrobe, and a valuable
service of silver and gold plate. By such arts Gallienus
softened the indignation and dispelled the fears of his Illyrian
general; and during the remainder of that reign, the formidable
sword of Claudius was always drawn in the cause of a master whom
he despised. At last, indeed, he received from the conspirators
the bloody purple of Gallienus: but he had been absent from their
camp and counsels; and however he might applaud the deed, we may
candidly presume that he was innocent of the knowledge of it. ^6
When Claudius ascended the throne, he was about fifty-four years
of age.
[Footnote 3: Some supposed him, oddly enough, to be a bastard of
the younger Gordian. Others took advantage of the province of
Dardania, to deduce his origin from Dardanus, and the ancient
kings of Troy.]
[Footnote 4: Notoria, a periodical and official despatch which
the emperor received from the frumentarii, or agents dispersed
through the provinces. Of these we may speak hereafter.]
[Footnote 5: Hist. August. p. 208. Gallienus describes the
plate, vestments, etc., like a man who loved and understood those
splendid trifles.]
[Footnote 6: Julian (Orat. i. p. 6) affirms that Claudius
acquired the empire in a just and even holy manner. But we may
distrust the partiality of a kinsman.]
The siege of Milan was still continued, and Aureolus soon
discovered that the success of his artifices had only raised up a
more determined adversary. He attempted to negotiate with
Claudius a treaty of alliance and partition. "Tell him," replied
the intrepid emperor, "that such proposals should have been made
to Gallienus; he, perhaps, might have listened to them with
patience, and accepted a colleague as despicable as himself." ^7
This stern refusal, and a last unsuccessful effort, obliged
Aureolus to yield the city and himself to the discretion of the
conqueror. The judgment of the army pronounced him worthy of
death; and Claudius, after a feeble resistance, consented to the
execution of the sentence. Nor was the zeal of the senate less
ardent in the cause of their new sovereign. They ratified,
perhaps with a sincere transport of zeal, the election of
Claudius; and, as his predecessor had shown himself the personal
enemy of their order, they exercised, under the name of justice,
a severe revenge against his friends and family. The senate was
permitted to discharge the ungrateful office of punishment, and
the emperor reserved for himself the pleasure and merit of
obtaining by his intercession a general act of indemnity. ^8
[Footnote 7: Hist. August. p. 203. There are some trifling
differences concerning the circumstances of the last defeat and
death of Aureolus]
[Footnote 8: Aurelius Victor in Gallien. The people loudly
prayed for the damnation of Gallienus. The senate decreed that
his relations and servants should be thrown down headlong from
the Gemonian stairs. An obnoxious officer of the revenue had his
eyes torn out whilst under examination.
Note: The expression is curious, "terram matrem deosque
inferos impias uti Gallieno darent." - M.]
Such ostentatious clemency discovers less of the real
character of Claudius, than a trifling circumstance in which he
seems to have consulted only the dictates of his heart. The
frequent rebellions of the provinces had involved almost every
person in the guilt of treason, almost every estate in the case
of confiscation; and Gallienus often displayed his liberality by
distributing among his officers the property of his subjects. On
the accession of Claudius, an old woman threw herself at his
feet, and complained that a general of the late emperor had
obtained an arbitrary grant of her patrimony. This general was
Claudius himself, who had not entirely escaped the contagion of
the times. The emperor blushed at the reproach, but deserved the
confidence which she had reposed in his equity. The confession
of his fault was accompanied with immediate and ample
restitution. ^9
[Footnote 9: Zonaras, l. xii. p. 137.]
In the arduous task which Claudius had undertaken, of
restoring the empire to its ancient splendor, it was first
necessary to revive among his troops a sense of order and
obedience. With the authority of a veteran commander, he
represented to them that the relaxation of discipline had
introduced a long train of disorders, the effects of which were
at length experienced by the soldiers themselves; that a people
ruined by oppression, and indolent from despair, could no longer
supply a numerous army with the means of luxury, or even of
subsistence; that the danger of each individual had increased
with the despotism of the military order, since princes who
tremble on the throne will guard their safety by the instant
sacrifice of every obnoxious subject. The emperor expiated on
the mischiefs of a lawless caprice, which the soldiers could only
gratify at the expense of their own blood; as their seditious
elections had so frequently been followed by civil wars, which
consumed the flower of the legions either in the field of battle,
or in the cruel abuse of victory. He painted in the most lively
colors the exhausted state of the treasury, the desolation of the
provinces, the disgrace of the Roman name, and the insolent
triumph of rapacious barbarians. It was against those barbarians,
he declared, that he intended to point the first effort of their
arms. Tetricus might reign for a while over the West, and even
Zenobia might preserve the dominion of the East. ^10 These
usurpers were his personal adversaries; nor could he think of
indulging any private resentment till he had saved an empire,
whose impending ruin would, unless it was timely prevented, crush
both the army and the people.
[Footnote 10: Zonaras on this occasion mentions Posthumus but the
registers of the senate (Hist. August. p. 203) prove that
Tetricus was already emperor of the western provinces.]
The various nations of Germany and Sarmatia, who fought
under the Gothic standard, had already collected an armament more
formidable than any which had yet issued from the Euxine. On the
banks of the Niester, one of the great rivers that discharge
themselves into that sea, they constructed a fleet of two
thousand, or even of six thousand vessels; ^11 numbers which,
however incredible they may seem, would have been insufficient to
transport their pretended army of three hundred and twenty
thousand barbarians. Whatever might be the real strength of the
Goths, the vigor and success of the expedition were not adequate
to the greatness of the preparations. In their passage through
the Bosphorus, the unskilful pilots were overpowered by the
violence of the current; and while the multitude of their ships
were crowded in a narrow channel, many were dashed against each
other, or against the shore. The barbarians made several
descents on the coasts both of Europe and Asia; but the open
country was already plundered, and they were repulsed with shame
and loss from the fortified cities which they assaulted. A
spirit of discouragement and division arose in the fleet, and
some of their chiefs sailed away towards the islands of Crete and
Cyprus; but the main body, pursuing a more steady course,
anchored at length near the foot of Mount Athos, and assaulted
the city of Thessalonica, the wealthy capital of all the
Macedonian provinces. Their attacks, in which they displayed a
fierce but artless bravery, were soon interrupted by the rapid
approach of Claudius, hastening to a scene of action that
deserved the presence of a warlike prince at the head of the
remaining powers of the empire. Impatient for battle, the Goths
immediately broke up their camp, relinquished the siege of
Thessalonica, left their navy at the foot of Mount Athos,
traversed the hills of Macedonia, and pressed forwards to engage
the last defence of Italy.
[Footnote 11: The Augustan History mentions the smaller, Zonaras
the larger number; the lively fancy of Montesquieu induced him to
prefer the latter.]
We still posses an original letter addressed by Claudius to
the senate and people on this memorable occasion. "Conscript
fathers," says the emperor, "know that three hundred and twenty
thousand Goths have invaded the Roman territory. If I vanquish
them, your gratitude will reward my services. Should I fall,
remember that I am the successor of Gallienus. The whole
republic is fatigued and exhausted. We shall fight after
Valerian, after Ingenuus, Regillianus, Lollianus, Posthumus,
Celsus, and a thousand others, whom a just contempt for Gallienus
provoked into rebellion. We are in want of darts, of spears, and
of shields. The strength of the empire, Gaul, and Spain, are
usurped by Tetricus, and we blush to acknowledge that the archers
of the East serve under the banners of Zenobia. Whatever we
shall perform will be sufficiently great." ^12 The melancholy
firmness of this epistle announces a hero careless of his fate,
conscious of his danger, but still deriving a well-grounded hope
from the resources of his own mind.
[Footnote 12: Trebell. Pollio in Hist. August. p. 204.]
The event surpassed his own expectations and those of the
world. By the most signal victories he delivered the empire from
this host of barbarians, and was distinguished by posterity under
the glorious appellation of the Gothic Claudius. The imperfect
historians of an irregular war ^13 do not enable as to describe
the order and circumstances of his exploits; but, if we could be
indulged in the allusion, we might distribute into three acts
this memorable tragedy. I. The decisive battle was fought near
Naissus, a city of Dardania. The legions at first gave way,
oppressed by numbers, and dismayed by misfortunes. Their ruin
was inevitable, had not the abilities of their emperor prepared a
seasonable relief. A large detachment, rising out of the secret
and difficult passes of the mountains, which, by his order, they
had occupied, suddenly assailed the rear of the victorious Goths.
The favorable instant was improved by the activity of Claudius.
He revived the courage of his troops, restored their ranks, and
pressed the barbarians on every side. Fifty thousand men are
reported to have been slain in the battle of Naissus. Several
large bodies of barbarians, covering their retreat with a movable
fortification of wagons, retired, or rather escaped, from the
field of slaughter. II. We may presume that some insurmountable
difficulty, the fatigue, perhaps, or the disobedience, of the
conquerors, prevented Claudius from completing in one day the
destruction of the Goths. The war was diffused over the province
of Maesia, Thrace, and Macedonia, and its operations drawn out
into a variety of marches, surprises, and tumultuary engagements,
as well by sea as by land. When the Romans suffered any loss, it
was commonly occasioned by their own cowardice or rashness; but
the superior talents of the emperor, his perfect knowledge of the
country, and his judicious choice of measures as well as
officers, assured on most occasions the success of his arms. The
immense booty, the fruit of so many victories, consisted for the
greater part of cattle and slaves. A select body of the Gothic
youth was received among the Imperial troops; the remainder was
sold into servitude; and so considerable was the number of female
captives, that every soldier obtained to his share two or three
women. A circumstance from which we may conclude, that the
invaders entertained some designs of settlement as well as of
plunder; since even in a naval expedition, they were accompanied
by their families. III. The loss of their fleet, which was
either taken or sunk, had intercepted the retreat of the Goths.
A vast circle of Roman posts, distributed with skill, supported
with firmness, and gradually closing towards a common centre,
forced the barbarians into the most inaccessible parts of Mount
Haemus, where they found a safe refuge, but a very scanty
subsistence. During the course of a rigorous winter in which
they were besieged by the emperor's troops, famine and
pestilence, desertion and the sword, continually diminished the
imprisoned multitude. On the return of spring, nothing appeared
in arms except a hardy and desperate band, the remnant of that
mighty host which had embarked at the mouth of the Niester.
[Footnote 13: Hist. August. in Claud. Aurelian. et Prob.
Zosimus, l. i. p. 38-42. Zonaras, l. xii. p. 638. Aurel. Victor
in Epitom. Victor Junior in Caesar. Eutrop. ix ll. Euseb. in
Chron.]
The pestilence which swept away such numbers of the
barbarians, at length proved fatal to their conqueror. After a
short but glorious reign of two years, Claudius expired at
Sirmium, amidst the tears and acclamations of his subjects. In
his last illness, he convened the principal officers of the state
and army, and in their presence recommended Aurelian, ^14 one of
his generals, as the most deserving of the throne, and the best
qualified to execute the great design which he himself had been
permitted only to undertake. The virtues of Claudius, his valor,
affability, justice, and temperance, his love of fame and of his
country, place him in that short list of emperors who added
lustre to the Roman purple. Those virtues, however, were
celebrated with peculiar zeal and complacency by the courtly
writers of the age of Constantine, who was the great grandson of
Crispus, the elder brother of Claudius. The voice of flattery
was soon taught to repeat, that gods, who so hastily had snatched
Claudius from the earth, rewarded his merit and piety by the
perpetual establishment of the empire in his family. ^15
[Footnote 14: According to Zonaras, (l. xii. p. 638,) Claudius,
before his death, invested him with the purple; but this singular
fact is rather contradicted than confirmed by other writers.]
[Footnote 15: See the Life of Claudius by Pollio, and the
Orations of Mamertinus, Eumenius, and Julian. See likewise the
Caesars of Julian p. 318. In Julian it was not adulation, but
superstition and vanity.]
Notwithstanding these oracles, the greatness of the Flavian
family (a name which it had pleased them to assume) was deferred
above twenty years, and the elevation of Claudius occasioned the
immediate ruin of his brother Quintilius, who possessed not
sufficient moderation or courage to descend into the private
station to which the patriotism of the late emperor had condemned
him. Without delay or reflection, he assumed the purple at
Aquileia, where he commanded a considerable force; and though his
reign lasted only seventeen days, ^* he had time to obtain the
sanction of the senate, and to experience a mutiny of the troops.
As soon as he was informed that the great army of the Danube had
invested the well-known valor of Aurelian with Imperial power, he
sunk under the fame and merit of his rival; and ordering his
veins to be opened, prudently withdrew himself from the unequal
contest. ^16
[Footnote *: Such is the narrative of the greater part of the
older historians; but the number and the variety of his medals
seem to require more time, and give probability to the report of
Zosimus, who makes him reign some months. - G.]
[Footnote 16: Zosimus, l. i. p. 42. Pollio (Hist. August. p.
107) allows him virtues, and says, that, like Pertinax, he was
killed by the licentious soldiers. According to Dexippus, he
died of a disease.]
The general design of this work will not permit us minutely
to relate the actions of every emperor after he ascended the
throne, much less to deduce the various fortunes of his private
life. We shall only observe, that the father of Aurelian was a
peasant of the territory of Sirmium, who occupied a small farm,
the property of Aurelius, a rich senator. His warlike son
enlisted in the troops as a common soldier, successively rose to
the rank of a centurion, a tribune, the praefect of a legion, the
inspector of the camp, the general, or, as it was then called,
the duke, of a frontier; and at length, during the Gothic war,
exercised the important office of commander- in-chief of the
cavalry. In every station he distinguished himself by matchless
valor, ^17 rigid discipline, and successful conduct. He was
invested with the consulship by the emperor Valerian, who styles
him, in the pompous language of that age, the deliverer of
Illyricum, the restorer of Gaul, and the rival of the Scipios.
At the recommendation of Valerian, a senator of the highest rank
and merit, Ulpius Crinitus, whose blood was derived from the same
source as that of Trajan, adopted the Pannonian peasant, gave him
his daughter in marriage, and relieved with his ample fortune the
honorable poverty which Aurelian had preserved inviolate. ^18
[Footnote 17: Theoclius (as quoted in the Augustan History, p.
211) affirms that in one day he killed with his own hand
forty-eight Sarmatians, and in several subsequent engagements
nine hundred and fifty. This heroic valor was admired by the
soldiers, and celebrated in their rude songs, the burden of which
was, mille, mile, mille, occidit.]
[Footnote 18: Acholius (ap. Hist. August. p. 213) describes the
ceremony of the adoption, as it was performed at Byzantium, in
the presence of the emperor and his great officers.]
The reign of Aurelian lasted only four years and about nine
months; but every instant of that short period was filled by some
memorable achievement. He put an end to the Gothic war, chastised
the Germans who invaded Italy, recovered Gaul, Spain, and Britain
out of the hands of Tetricus, and destroyed the proud monarchy
which Zenobia had erected in the East on the ruins of the
afflicted empire.
It was the rigid attention of Aurelian, even to the minutest
articles of discipline, which bestowed such uninterrupted success
on his arms. His military regulations are contained in a very
concise epistle to one of his inferior officers, who is commanded
to enforce them, as he wishes to become a tribune, or as he is
desirous to live. Gaming, drinking, and the arts of divination,
were severely prohibited. Aurelian expected that his soldiers
should be modest, frugal, and laborous; that their armor should
be constantly kept bright, their weapons sharp, their clothing
and horses ready for immediate service; that they should live in
their quarters with chastity and sobriety, without damaging the
cornfields, without stealing even a sheep, a fowl, or a bunch of
grapes, without exacting from their landlords, either salt, or
oil, or wood. "The public allowance," continues the emperor, "is
sufficient for their support; their wealth should be collected
from the spoils of the enemy, not from the tears of the
provincials." ^19 A single instance will serve to display the
rigor, and even cruelty, of Aurelian. One of the soldiers had
seduced the wife of his host. The guilty wretch was fastened to
two trees forcibly drawn towards each other, and his limbs were
torn asunder by their sudden separation. A few such examples
impressed a salutary consternation. The punishments of Aurelian
were terrible; but he had seldom occasion to punish more than
once the same offence. His own conduct gave a sanction to his
laws, and the seditious legions dreaded a chief who had learned
to obey, and who was worthy to command.
[Footnote 19: Hist. August, p. 211 This laconic epistle is truly
the work of a soldier; it abounds with military phrases and
words, some of which cannot be understood without difficulty.
Ferramenta samiata is well explained by Salmasius. The former of
the words means all weapons of offence, and is contrasted with
Arma, defensive armor The latter signifies keen and well
sharpened.]
Chapter XI: Reign Of Claudius, Defeat Of The Goths.
Part II.
The death of Claudius had revived the fainting spirit of the
Goths. The troops which guarded the passes of Mount Haemus, and
the banks of the Danube, had been drawn away by the apprehension
of a civil war; and it seems probable that the remaining body of
the Gothic and Vandalic tribes embraced the favorable
opportunity, abandoned their settlements of the Ukraine,
traversed the rivers, and swelled with new multitudes the
destroying host of their countrymen. Their united numbers were
at length encountered by Aurelian, and the bloody and doubtful
conflict ended only with the approach of night. ^20 Exhausted by
so many calamities, which they had mutually endured and inflicted
during a twenty years' war, the Goths and the Romans consented to
a lasting and beneficial treaty. It was earnestly solicited by
the barbarians, and cheerfully ratified by the legions, to whose
suffrage the prudence of Aurelian referred the decision of that
important question. The Gothic nation engaged to supply the
armies of Rome with a body of two thousand auxiliaries,
consisting entirely of cavalry, and stipulated in return an
undisturbed retreat, with a regular market as far as the Danube,
provided by the emperor's care, but at their own expense. The
treaty was observed with such religious fidelity, that when a
party of five hundred men straggled from the camp in quest of
plunder, the king or general of the barbarians commanded that the
guilty leader should be apprehended and shot to death with darts,
as a victim devoted to the sanctity of their engagements. ^* It
is, however, not unlikely, that the precaution of Aurelian, who
had exacted as hostages the sons and daughters of the Gothic
chiefs, contributed something to this pacific temper. The youths
he trained in the exercise of arms, and near his own person: to
the damsels he gave a liberal and Roman education, and by
bestowing them in marriage on some of his principal officers,
gradually introduced between the two nations the closest and most
endearing connections. ^21
[Footnote 20: Zosimus, l. i. p. 45.]
[Footnote *: The five hundred stragglers were all slain. - M.]
[Footnote 21: Dexipphus (ap. Excerpta Legat. p. 12) relates the
whole transaction under the name of Vandals. Aurelian married
one of the Gothic ladies to his general Bonosus, who was able to
drink with the Goths and discover their secrets. Hist. August.
p. 247.]
But the most important condition of peace was understood
rather than expressed in the treaty. Aurelian withdrew the Roman
forces from Dacia, and tacitly relinquished that great province
to the Goths and Vandals. ^22 His manly judgment convinced him of
the solid advantages, and taught him to despise the seeming
disgrace, of thus contracting the frontiers of the monarchy. The
Dacian subjects, removed from those distant possessions which
they were unable to cultivate or defend, added strength and
populousness to the southern side of the Danube. A fertile
territory, which the repetition of barbarous inroads had changed
into a desert, was yielded to their industry, and a new province
of Dacia still preserved the memory of Trajan's conquests. The
old country of that name detained, however, a considerable number
of its inhabitants, who dreaded exile more than a Gothic master.
^23 These degenerate Romans continued to serve the empire, whose
allegiance they had renounced, by introducing among their
conquerors the first notions of agriculture, the useful arts, and
the conveniences of civilized life. An intercourse of commerce
and language was gradually established between the opposite banks
of the Danube; and after Dacia became an independent state, it
often proved the firmest barrier of the empire against the
invasions of the savages of the North. A sense of interest
attached these more settled barbarians to the alliance of Rome,
and a permanent interest very frequently ripens into sincere and
useful friendship. This various colony, which filled the ancient
province, and was insensibly blended into one great people, still
acknowledged the superior renown and authority of the Gothic
tribe, and claimed the fancied honor of a Scandinavian origin.
At the same time, the lucky though accidental resemblance of the
name of Getae, ^* infused among the credulous Goths a vain
persuasion, that in a remote age, their own ancestors, already
seated in the Dacian provinces, had received the instructions of
Zamolxis, and checked the victorious arms of Sesostris and
Darius. ^24
[Footnote 22: Hist. August. p. 222. Eutrop. ix. 15. Sextus
Rufus, c. 9. de Mortibus Persecutorum, c. 9.]
[Footnote 23: The Walachians still preserve many traces of the
Latin language and have boasted, in every age, of their Roman
descent. They are surrounded by, but not mixed with, the
barbarians. See a Memoir of M. d'Anville on ancient Dacia, in
the Academy of Inscriptions, tom. xxx.]
[Footnote *: The connection between the Getae and the Goths is
still in my opinion incorrectly maintained by some learned
writers - M.]
[Footnote 24: See the first chapter of Jornandes. The Vandals,
however, (c. 22,) maintained a short independence between the
Rivers Marisia and Crissia, (Maros and Keres,) which fell into
the Teiss.]
While the vigorous and moderate conduct of Aurelian restored
the Illyrian frontier, the nation of the Alemanni ^25 violated
the conditions of peace, which either Gallienus had purchased, or
Claudius had imposed, and, inflamed by their impatient youth,
suddenly flew to arms. Forty thousand horse appeared in the
field, ^26 and the numbers of the infantry doubled those of the
cavalry. ^27 The first objects of their avarice were a few cities
of the Rhaetian frontier; but their hopes soon rising with
success, the rapid march of the Alemanni traced a line of
devastation from the Danube to the Po. ^28
[Footnote 25: Dexippus, p. 7 - 12. Zosimus, l. i. p. 43.
Vopiscus in Aurelian in Hist. August. However these historians
differ in names,) Alemanni Juthungi, and Marcomanni,) it is
evident that they mean the same people, and the same war; but it
requires some care to conciliate and explain them.]
[Footnote 26: Cantoclarus, with his usual accuracy, chooses to
translate three hundred thousand: his version is equally
repugnant to sense and to grammar.]
[Footnote 27: We may remark, as an instance of bad taste, that
Dexippus applies to the light infantry of the Alemanni the
technical terms proper only to the Grecian phalanx.]
[Footnote 28: In Dexippus, we at present read Rhodanus: M. de
Valois very judiciously alters the word to Eridanus.]
The emperor was almost at the same time informed of the
irruption, and of the retreat, of the barbarians. Collecting an
active body of troops, he marched with silence and celerity along
the skirts of the Hercynian forest; and the Alemanni, laden with
the spoils of Italy, arrived at the Danube, without suspecting,
that on the opposite bank, and in an advantageous post, a Roman
army lay concealed and prepared to intercept their return.
Aurelian indulged the fatal security of the barbarians, and
permitted about half their forces to pass the river without
disturbance and without precaution. Their situation and
astonishment gave him an easy victory; his skilful conduct
improved the advantage. Disposing the legions in a semicircular
form, he advanced the two horns of the crescent across the
Danube, and wheeling them on a sudden towards the centre,
enclosed the rear of the German host. The dismayed barbarians,
on whatsoever side they cast their eyes, beheld, with despair, a
wasted country, a deep and rapid stream, a victorious and
implacable enemy.
Reduced to this distressed condition, the Alemanni no longer
disdained to sue for peace. Aurelian received their ambassadors
at the head of his camp, and with every circumstance of martial
pomp that could display the greatness and discipline of Rome.
The legions stood to their arms in well- ordered ranks and awful
silence. The principal commanders, distinguished by the ensigns
of their rank, appeared on horseback on either side of the
Imperial throne. Behind the throne the consecrated images of the
emperor, and his predecessors, ^29 the golden eagles, and the
various titles of the legions, engraved in letters of gold, were
exalted in the air on lofty pikes covered with silver. When
Aurelian assumed his seat, his manly grace and majestic figure
^30 taught the barbarians to revere the person as well as the
purple of their conqueror. The ambassadors fell prostrate on the
ground in silence. They were commanded to rise, and permitted to
speak. By the assistance of interpreters they extenuated their
perfidy, magnified their exploits, expatiated on the vicissitudes
of fortune and the advantages of peace, and, with an ill-timed
confidence, demanded a large subsidy, as the price of the
alliance which they offered to the Romans. The answer of the
emperor was stern and imperious. He treated their offer with
contempt, and their demand with indignation, reproached the
barbarians, that they were as ignorant of the arts of war as of
the laws of peace, and finally dismissed them with the choice
only of submitting to this unconditional mercy, or awaiting the
utmost severity of his resentment. ^31 Aurelian had resigned a
distant province to the Goths; but it was dangerous to trust or
to pardon these perfidious barbarians, whose formidable power
kept Italy itself in perpetual alarms.
[Footnote 29: The emperor Claudius was certainly of the number;
but we are ignorant how far this mark of respect was extended; if
to Caesar and Augustus, it must have produced a very awful
spectacle; a long line of the masters of the world.]
[Footnote 30: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 210.]
[Footnote 31: Dexippus gives them a subtle and prolix oration,
worthy of a Grecian sophist.]
Immediately after this conference, it should seem that some
unexpected emergency required the emperor's presence in Pannonia.
He devolved on his lieutenants the care of finishing the
destruction of the Alemanni, either by the sword, or by the surer
operation of famine. But an active despair has often triumphed
over the indolent assurance of success. The barbarians, finding
it impossible to traverse the Danube and the Roman camp, broke
through the posts in their rear, which were more feebly or less
carefully guarded; and with incredible diligence, but by a
different road, returned towards the mountains of Italy. ^32
Aurelian, who considered the war as totally extinguished,
received the mortifying intelligence of the escape of the
Alemanni, and of the ravage which they already committed in the
territory of Milan. The legions were commanded to follow, with
as much expedition as those heavy bodies were capable of
exerting, the rapid flight of an enemy whose infantry and cavalry
moved with almost equal swiftness. A few days afterwards, the
emperor himself marched to the relief of Italy, at the head of a
chosen body of auxiliaries, (among whom were the hostages and
cavalry of the Vandals,) and of all the Praetorian guards who had
served in the wars on the Danube. ^33
[Footnote 32: Hist. August. p. 215.]
[Footnote 33: Dexippus, p. 12.]
As the light troops of the Alemanni had spread themselves
from the Alps to the Apennine, the incessant vigilance of
Aurelian and his officers was exercised in the discovery, the
attack, and the pursuit of the numerous detachments.
Notwithstanding this desultory war, three considerable battles
are mentioned, in which the principal force of both armies was
obstinately engaged. ^34 The success was various. In the first,
fought near Placentia, the Romans received so severe a blow,
that, according to the expression of a writer extremely partial
to Aurelian, the immediate dissolution of the empire was
apprehended. ^35 The crafty barbarians, who had lined the woods,
suddenly attacked the legions in the dusk of the evening, and, it
is most probable, after the fatigue and disorder of a long march.
The fury of their charge was irresistible; but, at length, after
a dreadful slaughter, the patient firmness of the emperor rallied
his troops, and restored, in some degree, the honor of his arms.
The second battle was fought near Fano in Umbria; on the spot
which, five hundred years before, had been fatal to the brother
of Hannibal. ^36 Thus far the successful Germans had advanced
along the Aemilian and Flaminian way, with a design of sacking
the defenceless mistress of the world. But Aurelian, who,
watchful for the safety of Rome, still hung on their rear, found
in this place the decisive moment of giving them a total and
irretrievable defeat. ^37 The flying remnant of their host was
exterminated in a third and last battle near Pavia; and Italy was
delivered from the inroads of the Alemanni.
[Footnote 34: Victor Junior in Aurelian.]
[Footnote 35: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 216.]
[Footnote 36: The little river, or rather torrent, of, Metaurus,
near Fano, has been immortalized, by finding such an historian as
Livy, and such a poet as Horace.]
[Footnote 37: It is recorded by an inscription found at Pesaro.
See Gruter cclxxvi. 3.]
Fear has been the original parent of superstition, and every
new calamity urges trembling mortals to deprecate the wrath of
their invisible enemies. Though the best hope of the republic
was in the valor and conduct of Aurelian, yet such was the public
consternation, when the barbarians were hourly expected at the
gates of Rome, that, by a decree of the senate the Sibylline
books were consulted. Even the emperor himself from a motive
either of religion or of policy, recommended this salutary
measure, chided the tardiness of the senate, ^38 and offered to
supply whatever expense, whatever animals, whatever captives of
any nation, the gods should require. Notwithstanding this liberal
offer, it does not appear, that any human victims expiated with
their blood the sins of the Roman people. The Sibylline books
enjoined ceremonies of a more harmless nature, processions of
priests in white robes, attended by a chorus of youths and
virgins; lustrations of the city and adjacent country; and
sacrifices, whose powerful influence disabled the barbarians from
passing the mystic ground on which they had been celebrated.
However puerile in themselves, these superstitious arts were
subservient to the success of the war; and if, in the decisive
battle of Fano, the Alemanni fancied they saw an army of spectres
combating on the side of Aurelian, he received a real and
effectual aid from this imaginary reenforcement. ^39
[Footnote 38: One should imagine, he said, that you were
assembled in a Christian church, not in the temple of all the
gods.]
[Footnote 39: Vopiscus, in Hist. August. p. 215, 216, gives a
long account of these ceremonies from the Registers of the
senate.]
But whatever confidence might be placed in ideal ramparts,
the experience of the past, and the dread of the future, induced
the Romans to construct fortifications of a grosser and more
substantial kind. The seven hills of Rome had been surrounded,
by the successors of Romulus, with an ancient wall of more than
thirteen miles. ^40 The vast enclosure may seem disproportioned
to the strength and numbers of the infant state. But it was
necessary to secure an ample extent of pasture and arable land,
against the frequent and sudden incursions of the tribes of
Latium, the perpetual enemies of the republic. With the progress
of Roman greatness, the city and its inhabitants gradually
increased, filled up the vacant space, pierced through the
useless walls, covered the field of Mars, and, on every side,
followed the public highways in long and beautiful suburbs. ^41
The extent of the new walls, erected by Aurelian, and finished in
the reign of Probus, was magnified by popular estimation to near
fifty, ^42 but is reduced by accurate measurement to about
twenty-one miles. ^43 It was a great but a melancholy labor,
since the defence of the capital betrayed the decline of the
monarchy. The Romans of a more prosperous age, who trusted to the
arms of the legions the safety of the frontier camps, ^44 were
very far from entertaining a suspicion, that it would ever become
necessary to fortify the seat of empire against the inroads of
the barbarians. ^45
[Footnote 40: Plin. Hist. Natur. iii. 5. To confirm our idea, we
may observe, that for a long time Mount Caelius was a grove of
oaks, and Mount Viminal was overrun with osiers; that, in the
fourth century, the Aventine was a vacant and solitary
retirement; that, till the time of Augustus, the Esquiline was an
unwholesome burying-ground; and that the numerous inequalities,
remarked by the ancients in the Quirinal, sufficiently prove that
it was not covered with buildings. Of the seven hills, the
Capitoline and Palatine only, with the adjacent valleys, were the
primitive habitations of the Roman people. But this subject
would require a dissertation.]
[Footnote 41: Exspatiantia tecta multas addidere urbes, is the
expression of Pliny.]
[Footnote 42: Hist. August. p. 222. Both Lipsius and Isaac
Vossius have eagerly embraced this measure.]
[Footnote 43: See Nardini, Roman Antica, l. i. c. 8.
Note: But compare Gibbon, ch. xli. note 77. - M.]
[Footnote 44: Tacit. Hist. iv. 23.]
[Footnote 45: For Aurelian's walls, see Vopiscus in Hist. August.
p. 216, 222. Zosimus, l. i. p. 43. Eutropius, ix. 15. Aurel.
Victor in Aurelian Victor Junior in Aurelian. Euseb. Hieronym.
et Idatius in Chronic]
The victory of Claudius over the Goths, and the success of
Aurelian against the Alemanni, had already restored to the arms
of Rome their ancient superiority over the barbarous nations of
the North. To chastise domestic tyrants, and to reunite the
dismembered parts of the empire, was a task reserved for the
second of those warlike emperors. Though he was acknowledged by
the senate and people, the frontiers of Italy, Africa, Illyricum,
and Thrace, confined the limits of his reign. Gaul, Spain, and
Britain, Egypt, Syria, and Asia Minor, were still possessed by
two rebels, who alone, out of so numerous a list, had hitherto
escaped the dangers of their situation; and to complete the
ignominy of Rome, these rival thrones had been usurped by women.
A rapid succession of monarchs had arisen and fallen in the
provinces of Gaul. The rigid virtues of Posthumus served only to
hasten his destruction. After suppressing a competitor, who had
assumed the purple at Mentz, he refused to gratify his troops
with the plunder of the rebellious city; and in the seventh year
of his reign, became the victim of their disappointed avarice.
^46 The death of Victorinus, his friend and associate, was
occasioned by a less worthy cause. The shining accomplishments
^47 of that prince were stained by a licentious passion, which he
indulged in acts of violence, with too little regard to the laws
of society, or even to those of love. ^48 He was slain at
Cologne, by a conspiracy of jealous husbands, whose revenge would
have appeared more justifiable, had they spared the innocence of
his son. After the murder of so many valiant princes, it is
somewhat remarkable, that a female for a long time controlled the
fierce legions of Gaul, and still more singular, that she was the
mother of the unfortunate Victorinus. The arts and treasures of
Victoria enabled her successively to place Marius and Tetricus on
the throne, and to reign with a manly vigor under the name of
those dependent emperors. Money of copper, of silver, and of
gold, was coined in her name; she assumed the titles of Augusta
and Mother of the Camps: her power ended only with her life; but
her life was perhaps shortened by the ingratitude of Tetricus.
^49
[Footnote 46: His competitor was Lollianus, or Aelianus, if,
indeed, these names mean the same person. See Tillemont, tom.
iii. p. 1177.
Note: The medals which bear the name of Lollianus are
considered forgeries except one in the museum of the Prince of
Waldeck there are many extent bearing the name of Laelianus,
which appears to have been that of the competitor of Posthumus.
Eckhel. Doct. Num. t. vi. 149 - G.]
[Footnote 47: The character of this prince by Julius Aterianus
(ap. Hist. August. p. 187) is worth transcribing, as it seems
fair and impartial Victorino qui Post Junium Posthumium Gallias
rexit neminem existemo praeferendum; non in virtute Trajanum; non
Antoninum in clementia; non in gravitate Nervam; non in
gubernando aerario Vespasianum; non in Censura totius vitae ac
severitate militari Pertinacem vel Severum. Sed omnia haec
libido et cupiditas voluptatis mulierriae sic perdidit, ut nemo
audeat virtutes ejus in literas mittere quem constat omnium
judicio meruisse puniri.]
[Footnote 48: He ravished the wife of Attitianus, an actuary, or
army agent, Hist. August. p. 186. Aurel. Victor in Aurelian.]
[Footnote 49: Pollio assigns her an article among the thirty
tyrants. Hist. August. p. 200.]
When, at the instigation of his ambitious patroness,
Tetricus assumed the ensigns of royalty, he was governor of the
peaceful province of Aquitaine, an employment suited to his
character and education. He reigned four or five years over
Gaul, Spain, and Britain, the slave and sovereign of a licentious
army, whom he dreaded, and by whom he was despised. The valor
and fortune of Aurelian at length opened the prospect of a
deliverance. He ventured to disclose his melancholy situation,
and conjured the emperor to hasten to the relief of his unhappy
rival. Had this secret correspondence reached the ears of the
soldiers, it would most probably have cost Tetricus his life; nor
could he resign the sceptre of the West without committing an act
of treason against himself. He affected the appearances of a
civil war, led his forces into the field, against Aurelian,
posted them in the most disadvantageous manner, betrayed his own
counsels to his enemy, and with a few chosen friends deserted in
the beginning of the action. The rebel legions, though
disordered and dismayed by the unexpected treachery of their
chief, defended themselves with desperate valor, till they were
cut in pieces almost to a man, in this bloody and memorable
battle, which was fought near Chalons in Champagne. ^50 The
retreat of the irregular auxiliaries, Franks and Batavians, ^51
whom the conqueror soon compelled or persuaded to repass the
Rhine, restored the general tranquillity, and the power of
Aurelian was acknowledged from the wall of Antoninus to the
columns of Hercules.
[Footnote 50: Pollio in Hist. August. p. 196. Vopiscus in Hist.
August. p. 220. The two Victors, in the lives of Gallienus and
Aurelian. Eutrop. ix. 13. Euseb. in Chron. Of all these
writers, only the two last (but with strong probability) place
the fall of Tetricus before that of Zenobia. M. de Boze (in the
Academy of Inscriptions, tom. xxx.) does not wish, and Tillemont
(tom. iii. p. 1189) does not dare to follow them. I have been
fairer than the one, and bolder than the other.]
[Footnote 51: Victor Junior in Aurelian. Eumenius mentions
Batavicoe; some critics, without any reason, would fain alter the
word to Bagandicoe.]
As early as the reign of Claudius, the city of Autun, alone
and unassisted, had ventured to declare against the legions of
Gaul. After a siege of seven months, they stormed and plundered
that unfortunate city, already wasted by famine. ^52 Lyons, on
the contrary, had resisted with obstinate disaffection the arms
of Aurelian. We read of the punishment of Lyons, ^53 but there
is not any mention of the rewards of Autun. Such, indeed, is the
policy of civil war; severely to remember injuries, and to forget
the most important services. Revenge is profitable, gratitude is
expensive.
[Footnote 52: Eumen. in Vet. Panegyr. iv. 8.]
[Footnote 53: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 246. Autun was not
restored till the reign of Diocletian. See Eumenius de
restaurandis scholis.]
Aurelian had no sooner secured the person and provinces of
Tetricus, than he turned his arms against Zenobia, the celebrated
queen of Palmyra and the East. Modern Europe has produced
several illustrious women who have sustained with glory the
weight of empire; nor is our own age destitute of such
distinguished characters. But if we except the doubtful
achievements of Semiramis, Zenobia is perhaps the only female
whose superior genius broke through the servile indolence imposed
on her sex by the climate and manners of Asia. ^54 She claimed
her descent from the Macedonian kings of Egypt, ^* equalled in
beauty her ancestor Cleopatra, and far surpassed that princess in
chastity ^55 and valor. Zenobia was esteemed the most lovely as
well as the most heroic of her sex. She was of a dark
complexion, (for in speaking of a lady these trifles become
important.) Her teeth were of a pearly whiteness, and her large
black eyes sparkled with uncommon fire, tempered by the most
attractive sweetness. Her voice was strong and harmonious. Her
manly understanding was strengthened and adorned by study. She
was not ignorant of the Latin tongue, but possessed in equal
perfection the Greek, the Syriac, and the Egyptian languages.
She had drawn up for her own use an epitome of oriental history,
and familiarly compared the beauties of Homer and Plato under the
tuition of the sublime Longinus.
[Footnote 54: Almost everything that is said of the manners of
Odenathus and Zenobia is taken from their lives in the Augustan
History, by Trebeljus Pollio; see p. 192, 198.]
[Footnote *: According to some Christian writers, Zenobia was a
Jewess. (Jost Geschichte der Israel. iv. 16. Hist. of Jews, iii.
175.) - M.]
[Footnote 55: She never admitted her husband's embraces but for
the sake of posterity. If her hopes were baffled, in the ensuing
month she reiterated the experiment.]
This accomplished woman gave her hand to Odenathus, ^! who,
from a private station, raised himself to the dominion of the
East. She soon became the friend and companion of a hero. In
the intervals of war, Odenathus passionately delighted in the
exercise of hunting; he pursued with ardor the wild beasts of the
desert, lions, panthers, and bears; and the ardor of Zenobia in
that dangerous amusement was not inferior to his own. She had
inured her constitution to fatigue, disdained the use of a
covered carriage, generally appeared on horseback in a military
habit, and sometimes marched several miles on foot at the head of
the troops. The success of Odenathus was in a great measure
ascribed to her incomparable prudence and fortitude. Their
splendid victories over the Great King, whom they twice pursued
as far as the gates of Ctesiphon, laid the foundations of their
united fame and power. The armies which they commanded, and the
provinces which they had saved, acknowledged not any other
sovereigns than their invincible chiefs. The senate and people of
Rome revered a stranger who had avenged their captive emperor,
and even the insensible son of Valerian accepted Odenathus for
his legitimate colleague.
[Footnote !: According to Zosimus, Odenathus was of a noble
family in Palmyra and according to Procopius, he was prince of
the Saracens, who inhabit the ranks of the Euphrates. Echhel.
Doct. Num. vii. 489. - G.]
Chapter XI: Reign Of Claudius, Defeat Of The Goths.
Part III.
After a successful expedition against the Gothic plunderers
of Asia, the Palmyrenian prince returned to the city of Emesa in
Syria. Invincible in war, he was there cut off by domestic
treason, and his favorite amusement of hunting was the cause, or
at least the occasion, of his death. ^56 His nephew Maeonius
presumed to dart his javelin before that of his uncle; and though
admonished of his error, repeated the same insolence. As a
monarch, and as a sportsman, Odenathus was provoked, took away
his horse, a mark of ignominy among the barbarians, and chastised
the rash youth by a short confinement. The offence was soon
forgot, but the punishment was remembered; and Maeonius, with a
few daring associates, assassinated his uncle in the midst of a
great entertainment. Herod, the son of Odenathus, though not of
Zenobia, a young man of a soft and effeminate temper, ^57 was
killed with his father. But Maeonius obtained only the pleasure
of revenge by this bloody deed. He had scarcely time to assume
the title of Augustus, before he was sacrificed by Zenobia to the
memory of her husband. ^58
[Footnote 56: Hist. August. p. 192, 193. Zosimus, l. i. p. 36.
Zonaras, l. xii p. 633. The last is clear and probable, the
others confused and inconsistent. The text of Syncellus, if not
corrupt, is absolute nonsense.]
[Footnote 57: Odenathus and Zenobia often sent him, from the
spoils of the enemy, presents of gems and toys, which he received
with infinite delight.]
[Footnote 58: Some very unjust suspicions have been cast on
Zenobia, as if she was accessory to her husband's death.]
With the assistance of his most faithful friends, she
immediately filled the vacant throne, and governed with manly
counsels Palmyra, Syria, and the East, above five years. By the
death of Odenathus, that authority was at an end which the senate
had granted him only as a personal distinction; but his martial
widow, disdaining both the senate and Gallienus, obliged one of
the Roman generals, who was sent against her, to retreat into
Europe, with the loss of his army and his reputation. ^59 Instead
of the little passions which so frequently perplex a female
reign, the steady administration of Zenobia was guided by the
most judicious maxims of policy. If it was expedient to pardon,
she could calm her resentment; if it was necessary to punish, she
could impose silence on the voice of pity. Her strict economy
was accused of avarice; yet on every proper occasion she appeared
magnificent and liberal. The neighboring states of Arabia,
Armenia, and Persia, dreaded her enmity, and solicited her
alliance. To the dominions of Odenathus, which extended from the
Euphrates to the frontiers of Bithynia, his widow added the
inheritance of her ancestors, the populous and fertile kingdom of
Egypt. ^60 ^* The emperor Claudius acknowledged her merit, and
was content, that, while he pursued the Gothic war, she should
assert the dignity of the empire in the East. ^61 The conduct,
however, of Zenobia, was attended with some ambiguity; not is it
unlikely that she had conceived the design of erecting an
independent and hostile monarchy. She blended with the popular
manners of Roman princes the stately pomp of the courts of Asia,
and exacted from her subjects the same adoration that was paid to
the successor of Cyrus. She bestowed on her three sons ^61 a
Latin education, and often showed them to the troops adorned with
the Imperial purple. For herself she reserved the diadem, with
the splendid but doubtful title of Queen of the East.
[Footnote 59: Hist. August. p. 180, 181.]
[Footnote 60: See, in Hist. August. p. 198, Aurelian's testimony
to her merit; and for the conquest of Egypt, Zosimus, l. i. p.
39, 40.]
[Footnote *: This seems very doubtful. Claudius, during all his
reign, is represented as emperor on the medals of Alexandria,
which are very numerous. If Zenobia possessed any power in Egypt,
it could only have been at the beginning of the reign of
Aurelian. The same circumstance throws great improbability on
her conquests in Galatia. Perhaps Zenobia administered Egypt in
the name of Claudius, and emboldened by the death of that prince,
subjected it to her own power. - G.]
[Footnote 61: Timolaus, Herennianus, and Vaballathus. It is
supposed that the two former were already dead before the war.
On the last, Aurelian bestowed a small province of Armenia, with
the title of King; several of his medals are still extant. See
Tillemont, tom. 3, p. 1190.]
When Aurelian passed over into Asia, against an adversary
whose sex alone could render her an object of contempt, his
presence restored obedience to the province of Bithynia, already
shaken by the arms and intrigues of Zenobia. ^62 Advancing at the
head of his legions, he accepted the submission of Ancyra, and
was admitted into Tyana, after an obstinate siege, by the help of
a perfidious citizen. The generous though fierce temper of
Aurelian abandoned the traitor to the rage of the soldiers; a
superstitious reverence induced him to treat with lenity the
countrymen of Apollonius the philosopher. ^63 Antioch was
deserted on his approach, till the emperor, by his salutary
edicts, recalled the fugitives, and granted a general pardon to
all, who, from necessity rather than choice, had been engaged in
the service of the Palmyrenian Queen. The unexpected mildness of
such a conduct reconciled the minds of the Syrians, and as far as
the gates of Emesa, the wishes of the people seconded the terror
of his arms. ^64
[Footnote 62: Zosimus, l. i. p. 44.]
[Footnote 63: Vopiscus (in Hist. August. p. 217) gives us an
authentic letter and a doubtful vision, of Aurelian. Apollonius
of Tyana was born about the same time as Jesus Christ. His life
(that of the former) is related in so fabulous a manner by his
disciples, that we are at a loss to discover whether he was a
sage, an impostor, or a fanatic.]
[Footnote 64: Zosimus, l. i. p. 46.]
Zenobia would have ill deserved her reputation, had she
indolently permitted the emperor of the West to approach within a
hundred miles of her capital. The fate of the East was decided
in two great battles; so similar in almost every circumstance,
that we can scarcely distinguish them from each other, except by
observing that the first was fought near Antioch, ^65 and the
second near Emesa. ^66 In both the queen of Palmyra animated the
armies by her presence, and devolved the execution of her orders
on Zabdas, who had already signalized his military talents by the
conquest of Egypt. The numerous forces of Zenobia consisted for
the most part of light archers, and of heavy cavalry clothed in
complete steel. The Moorish and Illyrian horse of Aurelian were
unable to sustain the ponderous charge of their antagonists. They
fled in real or affected disorder, engaged the Palmyrenians in a
laborious pursuit, harassed them by a desultory combat, and at
length discomfited this impenetrable but unwieldy body of
cavalry. The light infantry, in the mean time, when they had
exhausted their quivers, remaining without protection against a
closer onset, exposed their naked sides to the swords of the
legions. Aurelian had chosen these veteran troops, who were
usually stationed on the Upper Danube, and whose valor had been
severely tried in the Alemannic war. ^67 After the defeat of
Emesa, Zenobia found it impossible to collect a third army. As
far as the frontier of Egypt, the nations subject to her empire
had joined the standard of the conqueror, who detached Probus,
the bravest of his generals, to possess himself of the Egyptian
provinces. Palmyra was the last resource of the widow of
Odenathus. She retired within the walls of her capital, made
every preparation for a vigorous resistance, and declared, with
the intrepidity of a heroine, that the last moment of her reign
and of her life should be the same.
[Footnote 65: At a place called Immae. Eutropius, Sextus Rufus,
and Jerome, mention only this first battle.]
[Footnote 66: Vopiscus (in Hist. August. p. 217) mentions only
the second.]
[Footnote 67: Zosimus, l. i. p. 44 - 48. His account of the two
battles is clear and circumstantial.]
Amid the barren deserts of Arabia, a few cultivated spots
rise like islands out of the sandy ocean. Even the name of
Tadmor, or Palmyra, by its signification in the Syriac as well as
in the Latin language, denoted the multitude of palm-trees which
afforded shade and verdure to that temperate region. The air was
pure, and the soil, watered by some invaluable springs, was
capable of producing fruits as well as corn. A place possessed
of such singular advantages, and situated at a convenient
distance ^68 between the Gulf of Persia and the Mediterranean,
was soon frequented by the caravans which conveyed to the nations
of Europe a considerable part of the rich commodities of India.
Palmyra insensibly increased into an opulent and independent
city, and connecting the Roman and the Parthian monarchies by the
mutual benefits of commerce, was suffered to observe an humble
neutrality, till at length, after the victories of Trajan, the
little republic sunk into the bosom of Rome, and flourished more
than one hundred and fifty years in the subordinate though
honorable rank of a colony. It was during that peaceful period,
if we may judge from a few remaining inscriptions, that the
wealthy Palmyrenians constructed those temples, palaces, and
porticos of Grecian architecture, whose ruins, scattered over an
extent of several miles, have deserved the curiosity of our
travellers. The elevation of Odenathus and Zenobia appeared to
reflect new splendor on their country, and Palmyra, for a while,
stood forth the rival of Rome: but the competition was fatal, and
ages of prosperity were sacrificed to a moment of glory. ^69
[Footnote 68: It was five hundred and thirty-seven miles from
Seleucia, and two hundred and three from the nearest coast of
Syria, according to the reckoning of Pliny, who, in a few words,
(Hist. Natur. v. 21,) gives an excellent description of Palmyra.
Note: Talmor, or Palmyra, was probably at a very early
period the connecting link between the commerce of Tyre and
Babylon. Heeren, Ideen, v. i. p. ii. p. 125. Tadmor was
probably built by Solomon as a commercial station. Hist. of
Jews, v. p. 271 - M.]
[Footnote 69: Some English travellers from Aleppo discovered the
ruins of Palmyra about the end of the last century. Our
curiosity has since been gratified in a more splendid manner by
Messieurs Wood and Dawkins. For the history of Palmyra, we may
consult the masterly dissertation of Dr. Halley in the
Philosophical Transactions: Lowthorp's Abridgment, vol. iii. p.
518.]
In his march over the sandy desert between Emesa and
Palmyra, the emperor Aurelian was perpetually harassed by the
Arabs; nor could he always defend his army, and especially his
baggage, from those flying troops of active and daring robbers,
who watched the moment of surprise, and eluded the slow pursuit
of the legions. The siege of Palmyra was an object far more
difficult and important, and the emperor, who, with incessant
vigor, pressed the attacks in person, was himself wounded with a
dart. "The Roman people," says Aurelian, in an original letter,
"speak with contempt of the war which I am waging against a
woman. They are ignorant both of the character and of the power
of Zenobia. It is impossible to enumerate her warlike
preparations, of stones, of arrows, and of every species of
missile weapons. Every part of the walls is provided with two or
three balistoe and artificial fires are thrown from her military
engines. The fear of punishment has armed her with a desperate
courage. Yet still I trust in the protecting deities of Rome,
who have hitherto been favorable to all my undertakings." ^70
Doubtful, however, of the protection of the gods, and of the
event of the siege, Aurelian judged it more prudent to offer
terms of an advantageous capitulation; to the queen, a splendid
retreat; to the citizens, their ancient privileges. His
proposals were obstinately rejected, and the refusal was
accompanied with insult.
[Footnote 70: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 218.]
The firmness of Zenobia was supported by the hope, that in a
very short time famine would compel the Roman army to repass the
desert; and by the reasonable expectation that the kings of the
East, and particularly the Persian monarch, would arm in the
defence of their most natural ally. But fortune, and the
perseverance of Aurelian, overcame every obstacle. The death of
Sapor, which happened about this time, ^71 distracted the
councils of Persia, and the inconsiderable succors that attempted
to relieve Palmyra, were easily intercepted either by the arms or
the liberality of the emperor. From every part of Syria, a
regular succession of convoys safely arrived in the camp, which
was increased by the return of Probus with his victorious troops
from the conquest of Egypt. It was then that Zenobia resolved to
fly. She mounted the fleetest of her dromedaries, ^72 and had
already reached the banks of the Euphrates, about sixty miles
from Palmyra, when she was overtaken by the pursuit of Aurelian's
light horse, seized, and brought back a captive to the feet of
the emperor. Her capital soon afterwards surrendered, and was
treated with unexpected lenity. The arms, horses, and camels,
with an immense treasure of gold, silver, silk, and precious
stones, were all delivered to the conqueror, who, leaving only a
garrison of six hundred archers, returned to Emesa, and employed
some time in the distribution of rewards and punishments at the
end of so memorable a war, which restored to the obedience of
Rome those provinces that had renounced their allegiance since
the captivity of Valerian.
[Footnote 71: From a very doubtful chronology I have endeavored
to extract the most probable date.]
[Footnote 72: Hist. August. p. 218. Zosimus, l. i. p. 50.
Though the camel is a heavy beast of burden, the dromedary, which
is either of the same or of a kindred species, is used by the
natives of Asia and Africa on all occasions which require
celerity. The Arabs affirm, that he will run over as much ground
in one day as their fleetest horses can perform in eight or ten.
See Buffon, Hist. Naturelle, tom. xi. p. 222, and Shaw's Travels
p. 167]
When the Syrian queen was brought into the presence of
Aurelian, he sternly asked her, How she had presumed to rise in
arms against the emperors of Rome! The answer of Zenobia was a
prudent mixture of respect and firmness. "Because I disdained to
consider as Roman emperors an Aureolus or a Gallienus. You alone
I acknowledge as my conqueror and my sovereign." ^73 But as
female fortitude is commonly artificial, so it is seldom steady
or consistent. The courage of Zenobia deserted her in the hour
of trial; she trembled at the angry clamors of the soldiers, who
called aloud for her immediate execution, forgot the generous
despair of Cleopatra, which she had proposed as her model, and
ignominiously purchased life by the sacrifice of her fame and her
friends. It was to their counsels, which governed the weakness
of her sex, that she imputed the guilt of her obstinate
resistance; it was on their heads that she directed the vengeance
of the cruel Aurelian. The fame of Longinus, who was included
among the numerous and perhaps innocent victims of her fear, will
survive that of the queen who betrayed, or the tyrant who
condemned him. Genius and learning were incapable of moving a
fierce unlettered soldier, but they had served to elevate and
harmonize the soul of Longinus. Without uttering a complaint, he
calmly followed the executioner, pitying his unhappy mistress,
and bestowing comfort on his afflicted friends. ^74
[Footnote 73: Pollio in Hist. August. p. 199.]
[Footnote 74: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 219. Zosimus, l. i.
p. 51.]
Returning from the conquest of the East, Aurelian had
already crossed the Straits which divided Europe from Asia, when
he was provoked by the intelligence that the Palmyrenians had
massacred the governor and garrison which he had left among them,
and again erected the standard of revolt. Without a moment's
deliberation, he once more turned his face towards Syria. Antioch
was alarmed by his rapid approach, and the helpless city of
Palmyra felt the irresistible weight of his resentment. We have
a letter of Aurelian himself, in which he acknowledges, ^75 that
old men, women, children, and peasants, had been involved in that
dreadful execution, which should have been confined to armed
rebellion; and although his principal concern seems directed to
the reestablishment of a temple of the Sun, he discovers some
pity for the remnant of the Palmyrenians, to whom he grants the
permission of rebuilding and inhabiting their city. But it is
easier to destroy than to restore. The seat of commerce, of
arts, and of Zenobia, gradually sunk into an obscure town, a
trifling fortress, and at length a miserable village. The
present citizens of Palmyra, consisting of thirty or forty
families, have erected their mud cottages within the spacious
court of a magnificent temple.
[Footnote 75: Hist. August. p. 219.]
Another and a last labor still awaited the indefatigable
Aurelian; to suppress a dangerous though obscure rebel, who,
during the revolt of Palmyra, had arisen on the banks of the
Nile. Firmus, the friend and ally, as he proudly styled himself,
of Odenathus and Zenobia, was no more than a wealthy merchant of
Egypt. In the course of his trade to India, he had formed very
intimate connections with the Saracens and the Blemmyes, whose
situation on either coast of the Red Sea gave them an easy
introduction into the Upper Egypt. The Egyptians he inflamed
with the hope of freedom, and, at the head of their furious
multitude, broke into the city of Alexandria, where he assumed
the Imperial purple, coined money, published edicts, and raised
an army, which, as he vainly boasted, he was capable of
maintaining from the sole profits of his paper trade. Such
troops were a feeble defence against the approach of Aurelian;
and it seems almost unnecessary to relate, that Firmus was
routed, taken, tortured, and put to death. ^76 Aurelian might now
congratulate the senate, the people, and himself, that in little
more than three years, he had restored universal peace and order
to the Roman world.
[Footnote 76: See Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 220, 242. As an
instance of luxury, it is observed, that he had glass windows.
He was remarkable for his strength and appetite, his courage and
dexterity. From the letter of Aurelian, we may justly infer,
that Firmus was the last of the rebels, and consequently that
Tetricus was already suppressed.]
Since the foundation of Rome, no general had more nobly
deserved a triumph than Aurelian; nor was a triumph ever
celebrated with superior pride and magnificence. ^77 The pomp was
opened by twenty elephants, four royal tigers, and above two
hundred of the most curious animals from every climate of the
North, the East, and the South. They were followed by sixteen
hundred gladiators, devoted to the cruel amusement of the
amphitheatre. The wealth of Asia, the arms and ensigns of so
many conquered nations, and the magnificent plate and wardrobe of
the Syrian queen, were disposed in exact symmetry or artful
disorder. The ambassadors of the most remote parts of the earth,
of Aethiopia, Arabia, Persia, Bactriana, India, and China, all
remarkable by their rich or singular dresses, displayed the fame
and power of the Roman emperor, who exposed likewise to the
public view the presents that he had received, and particularly a
great number of crowns of gold, the offerings of grateful cities.
The victories of Aurelian were attested by the long train of
captives who reluctantly attended his triumph, Goths, Vandals,
Sarmatians, Alemanni, Franks, Gauls, Syrians, and Egyptians.
Each people was distinguished by its peculiar inscription, and
the title of Amazons was bestowed on ten martial heroines of the
Gothie nation who had been taken in arms. ^78 But every eye,
disregarding the crowd of captives, was fixed on the emperor
Tetricus and the queen of the East. The former, as well as his
son, whom he had created Augustus, was dressed in Gallic
trousers, ^79 a saffron tunic, and a robe of purple. The
beauteous figure of Zenobia was confined by fetters of gold; a
slave supported the gold chain which encircled her neck, and she
almost fainted under the intolerable weight of jewels. She
preceded on foot the magnificent chariot, in which she once hoped
to enter the gates of Rome. It was followed by two other
chariots, still more sumptuous, of Odenathus and of the Persian
monarch. The triumphal car of Aurelian (it had formerly been
used by a Gothic king) was drawn, on this memorable occasion,
either by four stags or by four elephants. ^80 The most
illustrious of the senate, the people, and the army closed the
solemn procession. Unfeigned joy, wonder, and gratitude, swelled
the acclamations of the multitude; but the satisfaction of the
senate was clouded by the appearance of Tetricus; nor could they
suppress a rising murmur, that the haughty emperor should thus
expose to public ignominy the person of a Roman and a magistrate.
^81
[Footnote 77: See the triumph of Aurelian, described by Vopiscus.
He relates the particulars with his usual minuteness; and, on
this occasion, they happen to be interesting. Hist. August. p.
220.]
[Footnote 78: Among barbarous nations, women have often combated
by the side of their husbands. But it is almost impossible that
a society of Amazons should ever have existed either in the old
or new world.
Note: Klaproth's theory on the origin of such traditions is
at least recommended by its ingenuity. The males of a tribe
having gone out on a marauding expedition, and having been cut
off to a man, the females may have endeavored, for a time, to
maintain their independence in their camp village, till their
children grew up. Travels, ch. xxx. Eng. Trans - M.]
[Footnote 79: The use of braccoe, breeches, or trousers, was
still considered in Italy as a Gallic and barbarian fashion. The
Romans, however, had made great advances towards it. To encircle
the legs and thighs with fascioe, or bands, was understood, in
the time of Pompey and Horace, to be a proof of ill health or
effeminacy. In the age of Trajan, the custom was confined to the
rich and luxurious. It gradually was adopted by the meanest of
the people. See a very curious note of Casaubon, ad Sueton. in
August. c. 82.]
[Footnote 80: Most probably the former; the latter seen on the
medals of Aurelian, only denote (according to the learned
Cardinal Norris) an oriental victory.]
[Footnote 81: The expression of Calphurnius, (Eclog. i. 50)
Nullos decet captiva triumphos, as applied to Rome, contains a
very manifest allusion and censure.]
But however, in the treatment of his unfortunate rivals,
Aurelian might indulge his pride, he behaved towards them with a
generous clemency, which was seldom exercised by the ancient
conquerors. Princes who, without success, had defended their
throne or freedom, were frequently strangled in prison, as soon
as the triumphal pomp ascended the Capitol. These usurpers, whom
their defeat had convicted of the crime of treason, were
permitted to spend their lives in affluence and honorable repose.
The emperor presented Zenobia with an elegant villa at Tibur, or
Tivoli, about twenty miles from the capital; the Syrian queen
insensibly sunk into a Roman matron, her daughters married into
noble families, and her race was not yet extinct in the fifth
century. ^82 Tetricus and his son were reinstated in their rank
and fortunes. They erected on the Caelian hill a magnificent
palace, and as soon as it was finished, invited Aurelian to
supper. On his entrance, he was agreeably surprised with a
picture which represented their singular history. They were
delineated offering to the emperor a civic crown and the sceptre
of Gaul, and again receiving at his hands the ornaments of the
senatorial dignity. The father was afterwards invested with the
government of Lucania, ^83 and Aurelian, who soon admitted the
abdicated monarch to his friendship and conversation, familiarly
asked him, Whether it were not more desirable to administer a
province of Italy, than to reign beyond the Alps. The son long
continued a respectable member of the senate; nor was there any
one of the Roman nobility more esteemed by Aurelian, as well as
by his successors. ^84
[Footnote 82: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 199. Hieronym. in
Chron. Prosper in Chron. Baronius supposes that Zenobius,
bishop of Florence in the time of St. Ambrose, was of her
family.]
[Footnote 83: Vopisc. in Hist. August. p. 222. Eutropius, ix.
13. Victor Junior. But Pollio, in Hist. August. p. 196, says,
that Tetricus was made corrector of all Italy.]
[Footnote 84: Hist. August. p. 197.]
So long and so various was the pomp of Aurelian's triumph,
that although it opened with the dawn of day, the slow majesty of
the procession ascended not the Capitol before the ninth hour;
and it was already dark when the emperor returned to the palace.
The festival was protracted by theatrical representations, the
games of the circus, the hunting of wild beasts, combats of
gladiators, and naval engagements. Liberal donatives were
distributed to the army and people, and several institutions,
agreeable or beneficial to the city, contributed to perpetuate
the glory of Aurelian. A considerable portion of his oriental
spoils was consecrated to the gods of Rome; the Capitol, and
every other temple, glittered with the offerings of his
ostentatious piety; and the temple of the Sun alone received
above fifteen thousand pounds of gold. ^85 This last was a
magnificent structure, erected by the emperor on the side of the
Quirinal hill, and dedicated, soon after the triumph, to that
deity whom Aurelian adored as the parent of his life and
fortunes. His mother had been an inferior priestess in a chapel
of the Sun; a peculiar devotion to the god of Light was a
sentiment which the fortunate peasant imbibed in his infancy; and
every step of his elevation, every victory of his reign,
fortified superstition by gratitude. ^86
[Footnote 85: Vopiscus in Hist. August. 222. Zosimus, l. i. p.
56. He placed in it the images of Belus and of the Sun, which he
had brought from Palmyra. It was dedicated in the fourth year of
his reign, (Euseb in Chron.,) but was most assuredly begun
immediately on his accession.]
[Footnote 86: See, in the Augustan History, p. 210, the omens of
his fortune. His devotion to the Sun appears in his letters, on
his medals, and is mentioned in the Caesars of Julian.
Commentaire de Spanheim, p. 109.]
The arms of Aurelian had vanquished the foreign and domestic
foes of the republic. We are assured, that, by his salutary
rigor, crimes and factions, mischievous arts and pernicious
connivance, the luxurious growth of a feeble and oppressive
government, were eradicated throughout the Roman world. ^87 But
if we attentively reflect how much swifter is the progress of
corruption than its cure, and if we remember that the years
abandoned to public disorders exceeded the months allotted to the
martial reign of Aurelian, we must confess that a few short
intervals of peace were insufficient for the arduous work of
reformation. Even his attempt to restore the integrity of the
coin was opposed by a formidable insurrection. The emperor's
vexation breaks out in one of his private letters. "Surely,"
says he, "the gods have decreed that my life should be a
perpetual warfare. A sedition within the walls has just now
given birth to a very serious civil war. The workmen of the
mint, at the instigation of Felicissimus, a slave to whom I had
intrusted an employment in the finances, have risen in rebellion.
They are at length suppressed; but seven thousand of my soldiers
have been slain in the contest, of those troops whose ordinary
station is in Dacia, and the camps along the Danube." ^88 Other
writers, who confirm the same fact, add likewise, that it
happened soon after Aurelian's triumph; that the decisive
engagement was fought on the Caelian hill; that the workmen of
the mint had adulterated the coin; and that the emperor restored
the public credit, by delivering out good money in exchange for
the bad, which the people was commanded to bring into the
treasury. ^89
[Footnote 87: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 221.]
[Footnote 88: Hist. August. p. 222. Aurelian calls these
soldiers Hiberi Riporiences Castriani, and Dacisci.]
[Footnote 89: Zosimus, l. i. p. 56. Eutropius, ix. 14. Aurel
Victor.]
We might content ourselves with relating this extraordinary
transaction, but we cannot dissemble how much in its present form
it appears to us inconsistent and incredible. The debasement of
the coin is indeed well suited to the administration of
Gallienus; nor is it unlikely that the instruments of the
corruption might dread the inflexible justice of Aurelian. But
the guilt, as well as the profit, must have been confined to a
very few; nor is it easy to conceive by what arts they could arm
a people whom they had injured, against a monarch whom they had
betrayed. We might naturally expect that such miscreants should
have shared the public detestation with the informers and the
other ministers of oppression; and that the reformation of the
coin should have been an action equally popular with the
destruction of those obsolete accounts, which by the emperor's
order were burnt in the forum of Trajan. ^90 In an age when the
principles of commerce were so imperfectly understood, the most
desirable end might perhaps be effected by harsh and injudicious
means; but a temporary grievance of such a nature can scarcely
excite and support a serious civil war. The repetition of
intolerable taxes, imposed either on the land or on the
necessaries of life, may at last provoke those who will not, or
who cannot, relinquish their country. But the case is far
otherwise in every operation which, by whatsoever expedients,
restores the just value of money. The transient evil is soon
obliterated by the permanent benefit, the loss is divided among
multitudes; and if a few wealthy individuals experience a
sensible diminution of treasure, with their riches, they at the
same time lose the degree of weight and importance which they
derived from the possession of them. However Aurelian might
choose to disguise the real cause of the insurrection, his
reformation of the coin could furnish only a faint pretence to a
party already powerful and discontented. Rome, though deprived
of freedom, was distracted by faction. The people, towards whom
the emperor, himself a plebeian, always expressed a peculiar
fondness, lived in perpetual dissension with the senate, the
equestrian order, and the Praetorian guards. ^91 Nothing less
than the firm though secret conspiracy of those orders, of the
authority of the first, the wealth of the second, and the arms of
the third, could have displayed a strength capable of contending
in battle with the veteran legions of the Danube, which, under
the conduct of a martial sovereign, had achieved the conquest of
the West and of the East.
[Footnote 90: Hist. August. p. 222. Aurel Victor.]
[Footnote 91: It already raged before Aurelian's return from
Egypt. See Vipiscus, who quotes an original letter. Hist.
August. p. 244.]
Whatever was the cause or the object of this rebellion,
imputed with so little probability to the workmen of the mint,
Aurelian used his victory with unrelenting rigor. ^92 He was
naturally of a severe disposition. A peasant and a soldier, his
nerves yielded not easily to the impressions of sympathy, and he
could sustain without emotion the sight of tortures and death.
Trained from his earliest youth in the exercise of arms, he set
too small a value on the life of a citizen, chastised by military
execution the slightest offences, and transferred the stern
discipline of the camp into the civil administration of the laws.
His love of justice often became a blind and furious passion and
whenever he deemed his own or the public safety endangered, he
disregarded the rules of evidence, and the proportion of
punishments. The unprovoked rebellion with which the Romans
rewarded his services, exasperated his haughty spirit. The
noblest families of the capital were involved in the guilt or
suspicion of this dark conspiracy. A nasty spirit of revenge
urged the bloody prosecution, and it proved fatal to one of the
nephews of the emperor. The the executioners (if we may use the
expression of a contemporary poet) were fatigued, the prisons
were crowded, and the unhappy senate lamented the death or
absence of its most illustrious members. ^93 Nor was the pride of
Aurelian less offensive to that assembly than his cruelty.
Ignorant or impatient of the restraints of civil institutions, he
disdained to hold his power by any other title than that of the
sword, and governed by right of conquest an empire which he had
saved and subdued. ^94
[Footnote 92: Vopiscus in Hist. August p. 222. The two Victors.
Eutropius ix. 14. Zosimus (l. i. p. 43) mentions only three
senators, and placed their death before the eastern war.]
[Footnote 93: Nulla catenati feralis pompa senatus
Carnificum lassabit opus; nec carcere pleno
Infelix raros numerabit curia Patres.
Calphurn. Eclog. i. 60.]
[Footnote 94: According to the younger Victor, he sometimes wore
the diadem, Deus and Dominus appear on his medals.]
It was observed by one of the most sagacious of the Roman
princes, that the talents of his predecessor Aurelian were better
suited to the command of an army, than to the government of an
empire. ^95 Conscious of the character in which nature and
experience had enabled him to excel, he again took the field a
few months after his triumph. It was expedient to exercise the
restless temper of the legions in some foreign war, and the
Persian monarch, exulting in the shame of Valerian, still braved
with impunity the offended majesty of Rome. At the head of an
army, less formidable by its numbers than by its discipline and
valor, the emperor advanced as far as the Straits which divide
Europe from Asia. He there experienced that the most absolute
power is a weak defence against the effects of despair. He had
threatened one of his secretaries who was accused of extortion;
and it was known that he seldom threatened in vain. The last
hope which remained for the criminal, was to involve some of the
principal officers of the army in his danger, or at least in his
fears. Artfully counterfeiting his master's hand, he showed
them, in a long and bloody list, their own names devoted to
death. Without suspecting or examining the fraud, they resolved
to secure their lives by the murder of the emperor. On his
march, between Byzanthium and Heraclea, Aurelian was suddenly
attacked by the conspirators, whose stations gave them a right to
surround his person, and after a short resistance, fell by the
hand of Mucapor, a general whom he had always loved and trusted.
He died regretted by the army, detested by the senate, but
universally acknowledged as a warlike and fortunate prince, the
useful, though severe reformer of a degenerate state. ^96
[Footnote 95: It was the observation of Dioclatian. See Vopiscus
in Hist. August. p. 224.]
[Footnote 96: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 221. Zosimus, l. i.
p. 57. Eutrop ix. 15. The two Victors.]
Chapter XII: Reigns Of Tacitus, Probus, Carus And His Sons.
Part I.
Conduct Of The Army And Senate After The Death Of Aurelian. -
Reigns Of Tacitus, Probus, Carus, And His Sons.
Such was the unhappy condition of the Roman emperors, that,
whatever might be their conduct, their fate was commonly the
same. A life of pleasure or virtue, of severity or mildness, of
indolence or glory, alike led to an untimely grave; and almost
every reign is closed by the same disgusting repetition of
treason and murder. The death of Aurelian, however, is
remarkable by its extraordinary consequences. The legions
admired, lamented, and revenged their victorious chief. The
artifice of his perfidious secretary was discovered and punished.
The deluded conspirators attended the funeral of their injured
sovereign, with sincere or well-feigned contrition, and submitted
to the unanimous resolution of the military order, which was
signified by the following epistle: "The brave and fortunate
armies to the senate and people of Rome. - The crime of one man,
and the error of many, have deprived us of the late emperor
Aurelian. May it please you, venerable lords and fathers! to
place him in the number of the gods, and to appoint a successor
whom your judgment shall declare worthy of the Imperial purple!
None of those whose guilt or misfortune have contributed to our
loss, shall ever reign over us." ^1 The Roman senators heard,
without surprise, that another emperor had been assassinated in
his camp; they secretly rejoiced in the fall of Aurelian; and,
besides the recent notoriety of the facts, constantly draws his
materials from the Journals of the Senate, and the but the modest
and dutiful address of the legions, when it was communicated in
full assembly by the consul, diffused the most pleasing
astonishment. Such honors as fear and perhaps esteem could
extort, they liberally poured forth on the memory of their
deceased sovereign. Such acknowledgments as gratitude could
inspire, they returned to the faithful armies of the republic,
who entertained so just a sense of the legal authority of the
senate in the choice of an emperor. Yet, notwithstanding this
flattering appeal, the most prudent of the assembly declined
exposing their safety and dignity to the caprice of an armed
multitude. The strength of the legions was, indeed, a pledge of
their sincerity, since those who may command are seldom reduced
to the necessity of dissembling; but could it naturally be
expected, that a hasty repentance would correct the inveterate
habits of fourscore years? Should the soldiers relapse into their
accustomed seditions, their insolence might disgrace the majesty
of the senate, and prove fatal to the object of its choice.
Motives like these dictated a decree, by which the election of a
new emperor was referred to the suffrage of the military order.
[Footnote 1: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 222. Aurelius Victor
mentions a formal deputation from the troops to the senate.]
The contention that ensued is one of the best attested, but
most improbable events in the history of mankind. ^2 The troops,
as if satiated with the exercise of power, again conjured the
senate to invest one of its own body with the Imperial purple.
The senate still persisted in its refusal; the army in its
request. The reciprocal offer was pressed and rejected at least
three times, and, whilst the obstinate modesty of either party
was resolved to receive a master from the hands of the other,
eight months insensibly elapsed; an amazing period of tranquil
anarchy, during which the Roman world remained without a
sovereign, without a usurper, and without a sedition. ^* The
generals and magistrates appointed by Aurelian continued to
execute their ordinary functions; and it is observed, that a
proconsul of Asia was the only considerable person removed from
his office in the whole course of the interregnum.
[Footnote 2: Vopiscus, our principal authority, wrote at Rome,
sixteen years only after the death of Aurelian; and, besides the
recent notoriety of the facts, constantly draws his materials
from the Journals of the Senate, and the original papers of the
Ulpian library. Zosimus and Zonaras appear as ignorant of this
transaction as they were in general of the Roman constitution.]
[Footnote *: The interregnum could not be more than seven months;
Aurelian was assassinated in the middle of March, the year of
Rome 1028. Tacitus was elected the 25th September in the same
year. - G.]
An event somewhat similar, but much less authentic, is
supposed to have happened after the death of Romulus, who, in his
life and character, bore some affinity with Aurelian. The throne
was vacant during twelve months, till the election of a Sabine
philosopher, and the public peace was guarded in the same manner,
by the union of the several orders of the state. But, in the
time of Numa and Romulus, the arms of the people were controlled
by the authority of the Patricians; and the balance of freedom
was easily preserved in a small and virtuous community. ^3 The
decline of the Roman state, far different from its infancy, was
attended with every circumstance that could banish from an
interregnum the prospect of obedience and harmony: an immense and
tumultuous capital, a wide extent of empire, the servile equality
of despotism, an army of four hundred thousand mercenaries, and
the experience of frequent revolutions. Yet, notwithstanding all
these temptations, the discipline and memory of Aurelian still
restrained the seditious temper of the troops, as well as the
fatal ambition of their leaders. The flower of the legions
maintained their stations on the banks of the Bosphorus, and the
Imperial standard awed the less powerful camps of Rome and of the
provinces. A generous though transient enthusiasm seemed to
animate the military order; and we may hope that a few real
patriots cultivated the returning friendship of the army and the
senate, as the only expedient capable of restoring the republic
to its ancient beauty and vigor.
[Footnote 3: Liv. i. 17 Dionys. Halicarn. l. ii. p. 115.
Plutarch in Numa, p. 60. The first of these writers relates the
story like an orator, the second like a lawyer, and the third
like a moralist, and none of them probably without some
intermixture of fable.]
On the twenty-fifth of September, near eight months after
the murder of Aurelian, the consul convoked an assembly of the
senate, and reported the doubtful and dangerous situation of the
empire. He slightly insinuated, that the precarious loyalty of
the soldiers depended on the chance of every hour, and of every
accident; but he represented, with the most convincing eloquence,
the various dangers that might attend any further delay in the
choice of an emperor. Intelligence, he said, was already
received, that the Germans had passed the Rhine, and occupied
some of the strongest and most opulent cities of Gaul. The
ambition of the Persian king kept the East in perpetual alarms;
Egypt, Africa, and Illyricum, were exposed to foreign and
domestic arms, and the levity of Syria would prefer even a female
sceptre to the sanctity of the Roman laws. The consul, then
addressing himself to Tacitus, the first of the senators, ^4
required his opinion on the important subject of a proper
candidate for the vacant throne.
[Footnote 4: Vopiscus (in Hist. August p. 227) calls him "primae
sententia consularis;" and soon afterwards Princeps senatus. It
is natural to suppose, that the monarchs of Rome, disdaining that
humble title, resigned it to the most ancient of the senators.]
If we can prefer personal merit to accidental greatness, we
shall esteem the birth of Tacitus more truly noble than that of
kings. He claimed his descent from the philosophic historian,
whose writings will instruct the last generations of mankind. ^5
The senator Tacitus was then seventy-five years of age. ^6 The
long period of his innocent life was adorned with wealth and
honors. He had twice been invested with the consular dignity, ^7
and enjoyed with elegance and sobriety his ample patrimony of
between two and three millions sterling. ^8 The experience of so
many princes, whom he had esteemed or endured, from the vain
follies of Elagabalus to the useful rigor of Aurelian, taught him
to form a just estimate of the duties, the dangers, and the
temptations of their sublime station. From the assiduous study
of his immortal ancestor, he derived the knowledge of the Roman
constitution, and of human nature. ^9 The voice of the people had
already named Tacitus as the citizen the most worthy of empire.
The ungrateful rumor reached his ears, and induced him to seek
the retirement of one of his villas in Campania. He had passed
two months in the delightful privacy of Baiae, when he
reluctantly obeyed the summons of the consul to resume his
honorable place in the senate, and to assist the republic with
his counsels on this important occasion.
[Footnote 5: The only objection to this genealogy is, that the
historian was named Cornelius, the emperor, Claudius. But under
the lower empire, surnames were extremely various and uncertain.]
[Footnote 6: Zonaras, l. xii. p. 637. The Alexandrian Chronicle,
by an obvious mistake, transfers that age to Aurelian.]
[Footnote 7: In the year 273, he was ordinary consul. But he
must have been Suffectus many years before, and most probably
under Valerian.]
[Footnote 8: Bis millies octingenties. Vopiscus in Hist. August
p. 229. This sum, according to the old standard, was equivalent
to eight hundred and forty thousand Roman pounds of silver, each
of the value of three pounds sterling. But in the age of
Tacitus, the coin had lost much of its weight and purity.]
[Footnote 9: After his accession, he gave orders that ten copies
of the historian should be annually transcribed and placed in the
public libraries. The Roman libraries have long since perished,
and the most valuable part of Tacitus was preserved in a single
Ms., and discovered in a monastery of Westphalia. See Bayle,
Dictionnaire, Art. Tacite, and Lipsius ad Annal. ii. 9.]
He arose to speak, when from every quarter of the house, he
was saluted with the names of Augustus and emperor. "Tacitus
Augustus, the gods preserve thee! we choose thee for our
sovereign; to thy care we intrust the republic and the world.
Accept the empire from the authority of the senate. It is due to
thy rank, to thy conduct, to thy manners." As soon as the tumult
of acclamations subsided, Tacitus attempted to decline the
dangerous honor, and to express his wonder, that they should
elect his age and infirmities to succeed the martial vigor of
Aurelian. "Are these limbs, conscript fathers! fitted to sustain
the weight of armor, or to practise the exercises of the camp?
The variety of climates, and the hardships of a military life,
would soon oppress a feeble constitution, which subsists only by
the most tender management. My exhausted strength scarcely
enables me to discharge the duty of a senator; how insufficient
would it prove to the arduous labors of war and government! Can
you hope, that the legions will respect a weak old man, whose
days have been spent in the shade of peace and retirement? Can
you desire that I should ever find reason to regret the favorable
opinion of the senate?" ^10
[Footnote 10: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 227.]
The reluctance of Tacitus (and it might possibly be sincere)
was encountered by the affectionate obstinacy of the senate.
Five hundred voices repeated at once, in eloquent confusion, that
the greatest of the Roman princes, Numa, Trajan, Hadrian, and the
Antonines, had ascended the throne in a very advanced season of
life; that the mind, not the body, a sovereign, not a soldier,
was the object of their choice; and that they expected from him
no more than to guide by his wisdom the valor of the legions.
These pressing though tumultuary instances were seconded by a
more regular oration of Metius Falconius, the next on the
consular bench to Tacitus himself. He reminded the assembly of
the evils which Rome had endured from the vices of headstrong and
capricious youths, congratulated them on the election of a
virtuous and experienced senator, and, with a manly, though
perhaps a selfish, freedom, exhorted Tacitus to remember the
reasons of his elevation, and to seek a successor, not in his own
family, but in the republic. The speech of Falconius was
enforced by a general acclamation. The emperor elect submitted
to the authority of his country, and received the voluntary
homage of his equals. The judgment of the senate was confirmed
by the consent of the Roman people, and of the Praetorian guards.
^11
[Footnote 11: Hist. August. p. 228. Tacitus addressed the
Praetorians by the appellation of sanctissimi milites, and the
people by that of sacratissim. Quirites.]
The administration of Tacitus was not unworthy of his life
and principles. A grateful servant of the senate, he considered
that national council as the author, and himself as the subject,
of the laws. ^12 He studied to heal the wounds which Imperial
pride, civil discord, and military violence, had inflicted on the
constitution, and to restore, at least, the image of the ancient
republic, as it had been preserved by the policy of Augustus, and
the virtues of Trajan and the Antonines. It may not be useless
to recapitulate some of the most important prerogatives which the
senate appeared to have regained by the election of Tacitus. ^13
1. To invest one of their body, under the title of emperor, with
the general command of the armies, and the government of the
frontier provinces. 2. To determine the list, or, as it was then
styled, the College of Consuls. They were twelve in number, who,
in successive pairs, each, during the space of two months, filled
the year, and represented the dignity of that ancient office.
The authority of the senate, in the nomination of the consuls,
was exercised with such independent freedom, that no regard was
paid to an irregular request of the emperor in favor of his
brother Florianus. "The senate," exclaimed Tacitus, with the
honest transport of a patriot, "understand the character of a
prince whom they have chosen." 3. To appoint the proconsuls and
presidents of the provinces, and to confer on all the magistrates
their civil jurisdiction. 4. To receive appeals through the
intermediate office of the praefect of the city from all the
tribunals of the empire. 5. To give force and validity, by their
decrees, to such as they should approve of the emperor's edicts.
6. To these several branches of authority we may add some
inspection over the finances, since, even in the stern reign of
Aurelian, it was in their power to divert a part of the revenue
from the public service. ^14
[Footnote 12: In his manumissions he never exceeded the number of
a hundred, as limited by the Caninian law, which was enacted
under Augustus, and at length repealed by Justinian. See
Casaubon ad locum Vopisci.]
[Footnote 13: See the lives of Tacitus, Florianus, and Probus, in
the Augustan History; we may be well assured, that whatever the
soldier gave the senator had already given.]
[Footnote 14: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 216. The passage is
perfectly clear, both Casaubon and Salmasius wish to correct it.]
Circular epistles were sent, without delay, to all the
principal cities of the empire, Treves, Milan, Aquileia, Thessalo
nica, Corinth, Athens, Antioch, Alexandria, and Carthage, to
claim their obedience, and to inform them of the happy
revolution, which had restored the Roman senate to its ancient
dignity. Two of these epistles are still extant. We likewise
possess two very singular fragments of the private correspondence
of the senators on this occasion. They discover the most
excessive joy, and the most unbounded hopes. "Cast away your
indolence," it is thus that one of the senators addresses his
friend, "emerge from your retirements of Baiae and Puteoli. Give
yourself to the city, to the senate. Rome flourishes, the whole
republic flourishes. Thanks to the Roman army, to an army truly
Roman; at length we have recovered our just authority, the end of
all our desires. We hear appeals, we appoint proconsuls, we
create emperors; perhaps too we may restrain them - to the wise a
word is sufficient." ^15 These lofty expectations were, however,
soon disappointed; nor, indeed, was it possible that the armies
and the provinces should long obey the luxurious and unwarlike
nobles of Rome. On the slightest touch, the unsupported fabric
of their pride and power fell to the ground. The expiring senate
displayed a sudden lustre, blazed for a moment and was
extinguished forever.
[Footnote 15: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 230, 232, 233. The
senators celebrated the happy restoration with hecatombs and
public rejoicings.]
All that had yet passed at Rome was no more than a
theatrical representation, unless it was ratified by the more
substantial power of the legions. Leaving the senators to enjoy
their dream of freedom and ambition, Tacitus proceeded to the
Thracian camp, and was there, by the Praetorian praefect,
presented to the assembled troops, as the prince whom they
themselves had demanded, and whom the senate had bestowed. As
soon as the praefect was silent, the emperor addressed himself to
the soldiers with eloquence and propriety. He gratified their
avarice by a liberal distribution of treasure, under the names of
pay and donative. He engaged their esteem by a spirited
declaration, that although his age might disable him from the
performance of military exploits, his counsels should never be
unworthy of a Roman general, the successor of the brave Aurelian.
^16
[Footnote 16: Hist. August. p. 228.]
Whilst the deceased emperor was making preparations for a
second expedition into the East, he had negotiated with the
Alani, ^* a Scythian people, who pitched their tents in the
neighborhood of the Lake Moeotis. Those barbarians, allured by
presents and subsidies, had promised to invade Persia with a
numerous body of light cavalry. They were faithful to their
engagements; but when they arrived on the Roman frontier,
Aurelian was already dead, the design of the Persian war was at
least suspended, and the generals, who, during the interregnum,
exercised a doubtful authority, were unprepared either to receive
or to oppose them. Provoked by such treatment, which they
considered as trifling and perfidious, the Alani had recourse to
their own valor for their payment and revenge; and as they moved
with the usual swiftness of Tartars, they had soon spread
themselves over the provinces of Pontus, Cappadocia, Cilicia, and
Galatia. The legions, who from the opposite shores of the
Bosphorus could almost distinguish the flames of the cities and
villages, impatiently urged their general to lead them against
the invaders. The conduct of Tacitus was suitable to his age and
station. He convinced the barbarians of the faith, as well as the
power, of the empire. Great numbers of the Alani, appeased by
the punctual discharge of the engagements which Aurelian had
contracted with them, relinquished their booty and captives, and
quietly retreated to their own deserts, beyond the Phasis.
Against the remainder, who refused peace, the Roman emperor
waged, in person, a successful war. Seconded by an army of brave
and experienced veterans, in a few weeks he delivered the
provinces of Asia from the terror of the Scythian invasion. ^17
[Footnote *: On the Alani, see ch. xxvi. note 55. - M.]
[Footnote 17: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 230. Zosimus, l. i.
p. 57. Zonaras, l. xii. p. 637. Two passages in the life of
Probus (p. 236, 238) convince me, that these Scythian invaders of
Pontus were Alani. If we may believe Zosimus, (l. i. p. 58,)
Florianus pursued them as far as the Cimmerian Bosphorus. But he
had scarcely time for so long and difficult an expedition.]
But the glory and life of Tacitus were of short duration.
Transported, in the depth of winter, from the soft retirement of
Campania to the foot of Mount Caucasus, he sunk under the
unaccustomed hardships of a military life. The fatigues of the
body were aggravated by the cares of the mind. For a while, the
angry and selfish passions of the soldiers had been suspended by
the enthusiasm of public virtue. They soon broke out with
redoubled violence, and raged in the camp, and even in the tent
of the aged emperor. His mild and amiable character served only
to inspire contempt, and he was incessantly tormented with
factions which he could not assuage, and by demands which it was
impossible to satisfy. Whatever flattering expectations he had
conceived of reconciling the public disorders, Tacitus soon was
convinced that the licentiousness of the army disdained the
feeble restraint of laws, and his last hour was hastened by
anguish and disappointment. It may be doubtful whether the
soldiers imbrued their hands in the blood of this innocent
prince. ^18 It is certain that their insolences was the cause of
his death. He expired at Tyana in Cappadocia, after a reign of
only six months and about twenty days. ^19
[Footnote 18: Eutropius and Aurelius Victor only say that he
died; Victor Junior adds, that it was of a fever. Zosimus and
Zonaras affirm, that he was killed by the soldiers. Vopiscus
mentions both accounts, and seems to hesitate. Yet surely these
jarring opinions are easily reconciled.]
[Footnote 19: According to the two Victors, he reigned exactly
two hundred days.]
The eyes of Tacitus were scarcely closed, before his brother
Florianus showed himself unworthy to reign, by the hasty
usurpation of the purple, without expecting the approbation of
the senate. The reverence for the Roman constitution, which yet
influenced the camp and the provinces, was sufficiently strong to
dispose them to censure, but not to provoke them to oppose, the
precipitate ambition of Florianus. The discontent would have
evaporated in idle murmurs, had not the general of the East, the
heroic Probus, boldly declared himself the avenger of the senate.
The contest, however, was still unequal; nor could the most able
leader, at the head of the effeminate troops of Egypt and Syria,
encounter, with any hopes of victory, the legions of Europe,
whose irresistible strength appeared to support the brother of
Tacitus. But the fortune and activity of Probus triumphed over
every obstacle. The hardy veterans of his rival, accustomed to
cold climates, sickened and consumed away in the sultry heats of
Cilicia, where the summer proved remarkably unwholesome. Their
numbers were diminished by frequent desertion; the passes of the
mountains were feebly defended; Tarsus opened its gates; and the
soldiers of Florianus, when they had permitted him to enjoy the
Imperial title about three months, delivered the empire from
civil war by the easy sacrifice of a prince whom they despised.
^20
[Footnote 20: Hist. August, p. 231. Zosimus, l. i. p. 58, 59.
Zonaras, l. xii. p. 637. Aurelius Victor says, that Probus
assumed the empire in Illyricum; an opinion which (though adopted
by a very learned man) would throw that period of history into
inextricable confusion.]
The perpetual revolutions of the throne had so perfectly
erased every notion of hereditary title, that the family of an
unfortunate emperor was incapable of exciting the jealousy of his
successors. The children of Tacitus and Florianus were permitted
to descend into a private station, and to mingle with the general
mass of the people. Their poverty indeed became an additional
safeguard to their innocence. When Tacitus was elected by the
senate, he resigned his ample patrimony to the public service;
^21 an act of generosity specious in appearance, but which
evidently disclosed his intention of transmitting the empire to
his descendants. The only consolation of their fallen state was
the remembrance of transient greatness, and a distant hope, the
child of a flattering prophecy, that at the end of a thousand
years, a monarch of the race of Tacitus should arise, the
protector of the senate, the restorer of Rome, and the conqueror
of the whole earth. ^22
[Footnote 21: Hist. August. p. 229]
[Footnote 22: He was to send judges to the Parthians, Persians,
and Sarmatians, a president to Taprobani, and a proconsul to the
Roman island, (supposed by Casaubon and Salmasius to mean
Britain.) Such a history as mine (says Vopiscus with proper
modesty) will not subsist a thousand years, to expose or justify
the prediction.]
The peasants of Illyricum, who had already given Claudius
and Aurelian to the sinking empire, had an equal right to glory
in the elevation of Probus. ^23 Above twenty years before, the
emperor Valerian, with his usual penetration, had discovered the
rising merit of the young soldier, on whom he conferred the rank
of tribune, long before the age prescribed by the military
regulations. The tribune soon justified his choice, by a victory
over a great body of Sarmatians, in which he saved the life of a
near relation of Valerian; and deserved to receive from the
emperor's hand the collars, bracelets, spears, and banners, the
mural and the civic crown, and all the honorable rewards reserved
by ancient Rome for successful valor. The third, and afterwards
the tenth, legion were intrusted to the command of Probus, who,
in every step of his promotion, showed himself superior to the
station which he filled. Africa and Pontus, the Rhine, the
Danube, the Euphrates, and the Nile, by turns afforded him the
most splendid occasions of displaying his personal prowess and
his conduct in war. Aurelian was indebted for the honest courage
with which he often checked the cruelty of his master. Tacitus,
who desired by the abilities of his generals to supply his own
deficiency of military talents, named him commander-in-chief of
all the eastern provinces, with five times the usual salary, the
promise of the consulship, and the hope of a triumph. When
Probus ascended the Imperial throne, he was about forty-four
years of age; ^24 in the full possession of his fame, of the love
of the army, and of a mature vigor of mind and body.
[Footnote 23: For the private life of Probus, see Vopiscus in
Hist. August p. 234 - 237]
[Footnote 24: According to the Alexandrian chronicle, he was
fifty at the time of his death.]
His acknowledge merit, and the success of his arms against
Florianus, left him without an enemy or a competitor. Yet, if we
may credit his own professions, very far from being desirous of
the empire, he had accepted it with the most sincere reluctance.
"But it is no longer in my power," says Probus, in a private
letter, "to lay down a title so full of envy and of danger. I
must continue to personate the character which the soldiers have
imposed upon me." ^25 His dutiful address to the senate displayed
the sentiments, or at least the language, of a Roman patriot:
"When you elected one of your order, conscript fathers! to
succeed the emperor Aurelian, you acted in a manner suitable to
your justice and wisdom. For you are the legal sovereigns of the
world, and the power which you derive from your ancestors will
descend to your posterity. Happy would it have been, if
Florianus, instead of usurping the purple of his brother, like a
private inheritance, had expected what your majesty might
determine, either in his favor, or in that of other person. The
prudent soldiers have punished his rashness. To me they have
offered the title of Augustus. But I submit to your clemency my
pretensions and my merits." ^26 When this respectful epistle was
read by the consul, the senators were unable to disguise their
satisfaction, that Probus should condescend thus numbly to
solicit a sceptre which he already possessed. They celebrated
with the warmest gratitude his virtues, his exploits, and above
all his moderation. A decree immediately passed, without a
dissenting voice, to ratify the election of the eastern armies,
and to confer on their chief all the several branches of the
Imperial dignity: the names of Caesar and Augustus, the title of
Father of his country, the right of making in the same day three
motions in the senate, ^27 the office of Pontifex, Maximus, the
tribunitian power, and the proconsular command; a mode of
investiture, which, though it seemed to multiply the authority of
the emperor, expressed the constitution of the ancient republic.
The reign of Probus corresponded with this fair beginning. The
senate was permitted to direct the civil administration of the
empire. Their faithful general asserted the honor of the Roman
arms, and often laid at their feet crowns of gold and barbaric
trophies, the fruits of his numerous victories. ^28 Yet, whilst
he gratified their vanity, he must secretly have despised their
indolence and weakness. Though it was every moment in their
power to repeal the disgraceful edict of Gallienus, the proud
successors of the Scipios patiently acquiesced in their exclusion
from all military employments. They soon experienced, that those
who refuse the sword must renounce the sceptre.
[Footnote 25: This letter was addressed to the Praetorian
praefect, whom (on condition of his good behavior) he promised to
continue in his great office. See Hist. August. p. 237.]
[Footnote 26: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 237. The date of the
letter is assuredly faulty. Instead of Nen. Februar. we may read
Non August.]
[Footnote 27: Hist. August. p. 238. It is odd that the senate
should treat Probus less favorably than Marcus Antoninus. That
prince had received, even before the death of Pius, Jus quintoe
relationis. See Capitolin. in Hist. August. p. 24.]
[Footnote 28: See the dutiful letter of Probus to the senate,
after his German victories. Hist. August. p. 239.]
Chapter XII: Reigns Of Tacitus, Probus, Carus And His Sons.
Part II.
The strength of Aurelian had crushed on every side the
enemies of Rome. After his death they seemed to revive with an
increase of fury and of numbers. They were again vanquished by
the active vigor of Probus, who, in a short reign of about six
years, ^29 equalled the fame of ancient heroes, and restored
peace and order to every province of the Roman world. The
dangerous frontier of Rhaetia he so firmly secured, that he left
it without the suspicion of an enemy. He broke the wandering
power of the Sarmatian tribes, and by the terror of his arms
compelled those barbarians to relinquish their spoil. The Gothic
nation courted the alliance of so warlike an emperor. ^30 He
attacked the Isaurians in their mountains, besieged and took
several of their strongest castles, ^31 and flattered himself
that he had forever suppressed a domestic foe, whose independence
so deeply wounded the majesty of the empire. The troubles
excited by the usurper Firmus in the Upper Egypt had never been
perfectly appeased, and the cities of Ptolemais and Coptos,
fortified by the alliance of the Blemmyes, still maintained an
obscure rebellion. The chastisement of those cities, and of
their auxiliaries the savages of the South, is said to have
alarmed the court of Persia, ^32 and the Great King sued in vain
for the friendship of Probus. Most of the exploits which
distinguished his reign were achieved by the personal valor and
conduct of the emperor, insomuch that the writer of his life
expresses some amazement how, in so short a time, a single man
could be present in so many distant wars. The remaining actions
he intrusted to the care of his lieutenants, the judicious choice
of whom forms no inconsiderable part of his glory. Carus,
Diocletian, Maximian, Constantius, Galerius, Asclepiodatus,
Annibalianus, and a crowd of other chiefs, who afterwards
ascended or supported the throne, were trained to arms in the
severe school of Aurelian and Probus. ^33
[Footnote 29: The date and duration of the reign of Probus are
very correctly ascertained by Cardinal Noris in his learned work,
De Epochis Syro-Macedonum, p. 96 - 105. A passage of Eusebius
connects the second year of Probus with the aeras of several of
the Syrian cities.]
[Footnote 30: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 239.]
[Footnote 31: Zosimus (l. i. p. 62 - 65) tells us a very long and
trifling story of Lycius, the Isaurian robber.]
[Footnote 32: Zosim. l. i. p. 65. Vopiscus in Hist. August. p.
239, 240. But it seems incredible that the defeat of the savages
of Aethiopia could affect the Persian monarch.]
[Footnote 33: Besides these well-known chiefs, several others are
named by Vopiscus, (Hist. August. p. 241,) whose actions have not
reached knowledge.]
But the most important service which Probus rendered to the
republic was the deliverance of Gaul, and the recovery of seventy
flourishing cities oppressed by the barbarians of Germany, who,
since the death of Aurelian, had ravaged that great province with
impunity. ^34 Among the various multitude of those fierce
invaders we may distinguish, with some degree of clearness, three
great armies, or rather nations, successively vanquished by the
valor of Probus. He drove back the Franks into their morasses; a
descriptive circumstance from whence we may infer, that the
confederacy known by the manly appellation of Free, already
occupied the flat maritime country, intersected and almost
overflown by the stagnating waters of the Rhine, and that several
tribes of the Frisians and Batavians had acceded to their
alliance. He vanquished the Burgundians, a considerable people
of the Vandalic race. ^* They had wandered in quest of booty from
the banks of the Oder to those of the Seine. They esteemed
themselves sufficiently fortunate to purchase, by the restitution
of all their booty, the permission of an undisturbed retreat.
They attempted to elude that article of the treaty. Their
punishment was immediate and terrible. ^35 But of all the
invaders of Gaul, the most formidable were the Lygians, a distant
people, who reigned over a wide domain on the frontiers of Poland
and Silesia. ^36 In the Lygian nation, the Arii held the first
rank by their numbers and fierceness. "The Arii" (it is thus
that they are described by the energy of Tacitus) "study to
improve by art and circumstances the innate terrors of their
barbarism. Their shields are black, their bodies are painted
black. They choose for the combat the darkest hour of the night.
Their host advances, covered as it were with a funeral shade; ^37
nor do they often find an enemy capable of sustaining so strange
and infernal an aspect. Of all our senses, the eyes are the
first vanquished in battle." ^38 Yet the arms and discipline of
the Romans easily discomfited these horrid phantoms. The Lygii
were defeated in a general engagement, and Semno, the most
renowned of their chiefs, fell alive into the hands of Probus.
That prudent emperor, unwilling to reduce a brave people to
despair, granted them an honorable capitulation, and permitted
them to return in safety to their native country. But the losses
which they suffered in the march, the battle, and the retreat,
broke the power of the nation: nor is the Lygian name ever
repeated in the history either of Germany or of the empire. The
deliverance of Gaul is reported to have cost the lives of four
hundred thousand of the invaders; a work of labor to the Romans,
and of expense to the emperor, who gave a piece of gold for the
head of every barbarian. ^39 But as the fame of warriors is built
on the destruction of human kind, we may naturally suspect, that
the sanguinary account was multiplied by the avarice of the
soldiers, and accepted without any very severe examination by the
liberal vanity of Probus.
[Footnote 34: See the Caesars of Julian, and Hist. August. p.
238, 240, 241.]
[Footnote *: It was only under the emperors Diocletian and
Maximian, that the Burgundians, in concert with the Alemanni,
invaded the interior of Gaul; under the reign of Probus, they did
no more than pass the river which separated them from the Roman
Empire: they were repelled. Gatterer presumes that this river
was the Danube; a passage in Zosimus appears to me rather to
indicate the Rhine. Zos. l. i. p. 37, edit H. Etienne, 1581. -
G.
On the origin of the Burgundians may be consulted Malte
Brun, Geogr vi. p. 396, (edit. 1831,) who observes that all the
remains of the Burgundian language indicate that they spoke a
Gothic dialect. - M.]
[Footnote 35: Zosimus, l. i. p. 62. Hist. August. p. 240. But
the latter supposes the punishment inflicted with the consent of
their kings: if so, it was partial, like the offence.]
[Footnote 36: See Cluver. Germania Antiqua, l. iii. Ptolemy
places in their country the city of Calisia, probably Calish in
Silesia.
Note: Luden (vol ii. 501) supposes that these have been
erroneously identified with the Lygii of Tacitus. Perhaps one
fertile source of mistakes has been, that the Romans have turned
appellations into national names. Malte Brun observes of the
Lygii, "that their name appears Sclavonian, and signifies
'inhabitants of plains;' they are probably the Lieches of the
middle ages, and the ancestors of the Poles. We find among the
Arii the worship of the two twin gods known in the Sclavian
mythology." Malte Brun, vol. i. p. 278, (edit. 1831.) - M.
But compare Schafarik, Slawische Alterthumer, 1, p. 406.
They were of German or Keltish descent, occupying the Wendish (or
Slavian) district, Luhy. - M. 1845.]
[Footnote 37: Feralis umbra, is the expression of Tacitus: it is
surely a very bold one.]
[Footnote 38: Tacit. Germania, (c. 43.)]
[Footnote 39: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 238]
Since the expedition of Maximin, the Roman generals had
confined their ambition to a defensive war against the nations of
Germany, who perpetually pressed on the frontiers of the empire.
The more daring Probus pursued his Gallic victories, passed the
Rhine, and displayed his invincible eagles on the banks of the
Elbe and the Necker. He was fully convinced that nothing could
reconcile the minds of the barbarians to peace, unless they
experienced, in their own country, the calamities of war.
Germany, exhausted by the ill success of the last emigration, was
astonished by his presence. Nine of the most considerable princes
repaired to his camp, and fell prostrate at his feet. Such a
treaty was humbly received by the Germans, as it pleased the
conqueror to dictate. He exacted a strict restitution of the
effects and captives which they had carried away from the
provinces; and obliged their own magistrates to punish the more
obstinate robbers who presumed to detain any part of the spoil.
A considerable tribute of corn, cattle, and horses, the only
wealth of barbarians, was reserved for the use of the garrisons
which Probus established on the limits of their territory. He
even entertained some thoughts of compelling the Germans to
relinquish the exercise of arms, and to trust their differences
to the justice, their safety to the power, of Rome. To
accomplish these salutary ends, the constant residence of an
Imperial governor, supported by a numerous army, was
indispensably requisite. Probus therefore judged it more
expedient to defer the execution of so great a design; which was
indeed rather of specious than solid utility. ^40 Had Germany
been reduced into the state of a province, the Romans, with
immense labor and expense, would have acquired only a more
extensive boundary to defend against the fiercer and more active
barbarians of Scythia.
[Footnote 40: Hist. August. 238, 239. Vopiscus quotes a letter
from the emperor to the senate, in which he mentions his design
of reducing Germany into a province.]
Instead of reducing the warlike natives of Germany to the
condition of subjects, Probus contented himself with the humble
expedient of raising a bulwark against their inroads. The
country which now forms the circle of Swabia had been left desert
in the age of Augustus by the emigration of its ancient
inhabitants. ^41 The fertility of the soil soon attracted a new
colony from the adjacent provinces of Gaul. Crowds of
adventurers, of a roving temper and of desperate fortunes,
occupied the doubtful possession, and acknowledged, by the
payment of tithes the majesty of the empire. ^42 To protect these
new subjects, a line of frontier garrisons was gradually extended
from the Rhine to the Danube. About the reign of Hadrian, when
that mode of defence began to be practised, these garrisons were
connected and covered by a strong intrenchment of trees and
palisades. In the place of so rude a bulwark, the emperor Probus
constructed a stone wall of a considerable height, and
strengthened it by towers at convenient distances. From the
neighborhood of Newstadt and Ratisbon on the Danube, it stretched
across hills, valleys, rivers, and morasses, as far as Wimpfen on
the Necker, and at length terminated on the banks of the Rhine,
after a winding course of near two hundred miles. ^43 This
important barrier, uniting the two mighty streams that protected
the provinces of Europe, seemed to fill up the vacant space
through which the barbarians, and particularly the Alemanni,
could penetrate with the greatest facility into the heart of the
empire. But the experience of the world, from China to Britain,
has exposed the vain attempt of fortifying any extensive tract of
country. ^44 An active enemy, who can select and vary his points
of attack, must, in the end, discover some feeble spot, on some
unguarded moment. The strength, as well as the attention, of the
defenders is divided; and such are the blind effects of terror on
the firmest troops, that a line broken in a single place is
almost instantly deserted. The fate of the wall which Probus
erected may confirm the general observation. Within a few years
after his death, it was overthrown by the Alemanni. Its
scattered ruins, universally ascribed to the power of the Daemon,
now serve only to excite the wonder of the Swabian peasant.
[Footnote 41: Strabo, l. vii. According to Valleius Paterculus,
(ii. 108,) Maroboduus led his Marcomanni into Bohemia; Cluverius
(German. Antiq. iii. 8) proves that it was from Swabia.]
[Footnote 42: These settlers, from the payment of tithes, were
denominated Decunates. Tacit. Germania, c. 29]
[Footnote 43: See notes de l'Abbe de la Bleterie a la Germanie de
Tacite, p. 183. His account of the wall is chiefly borrowed (as
he says himself) from the Alsatia Illustrata of Schoepflin.]
[Footnote 44: See Recherches sur les Chinois et les Egyptiens,
tom. ii. p. 81 - 102. The anonymous author is well acquainted
with the globe in general, and with Germany in particular: with
regard to the latter, he quotes a work of M. Hanselman; but he
seems to confound the wall of Probus, designed against the
Alemanni, with the fortification of the Mattiaci, constructed in
the neighborhood of Frankfort against the Catti.
Note: De Pauw is well known to have been the author of this
work, as of the Recherches sur les Americains before quoted. The
judgment of M. Remusat on this writer is in a very different, I
fear a juster tone. Quand au lieu de rechercher, d'examiner,
d'etudier, on se borne, comme cet ecrivain, a juger a prononcer,
a decider, sans connoitre ni l'histoire. ni les langues, sans
recourir aux sources, sans meme se douter de leur existence, on
peut en imposer pendant quelque temps a des lecteurs prevenus ou
peu instruits; mais le mepris qui ne manque guere de succeder a
cet engouement fait bientot justice de ces assertions hazardees,
et elles retombent dans l'oubli d'autant plus promptement,
qu'elles ont ete posees avec plus de confiance. Sur les l angues
Tartares, p. 231. - M.]
Among the useful conditions of peace imposed by Probus on
the vanquished nations of Germany, was the obligation of
supplying the Roman army with sixteen thousand recruits, the
bravest and most robust of their youth. The emperor dispersed
them through all the provinces, and distributed this dangerous
reenforcement, in small bands of fifty or sixty each, among the
national troops; judiciously observing, that the aid which the
republic derived from the barbarians should be felt but not seen.
^45 Their aid was now become necessary. The feeble elegance of
Italy and the internal provinces could no longer support the
weight of arms. The hardy frontiers of the Rhine and Danube
still produced minds and bodies equal to the labors of the camp;
but a perpetual series of wars had gradually diminished their
numbers. The infrequency of marriage, and the ruin of
agriculture, affected the principles of population, and not only
destroyed the strength of the present, but intercepted the hope
of future, generations. The wisdom of Probus embraced a great
and beneficial plan of replenishing the exhausted frontiers, by
new colonies of captive or fugitive barbarians, on whom he
bestowed lands, cattle, instruments of husbandry, and every
encouragement that might engage them to educate a race of
soldiers for the service of the republic. Into Britain, and most
probably into Cambridgeshire, ^46 he transported a considerable
body of Vandals. The impossibility of an escape reconciled them
to their situation, and in the subsequent troubles of that
island, they approved themselves the most faithful servants of
the state. ^47 Great numbers of Franks and Gepidae were settled
on the banks of the Danube and the Rhine. A hundred thousand
Bastarnae, expelled from their own country, cheerfully accepted
an establishment in Thrace, and soon imbibed the manners and
sentiments of Roman subjects. ^48 But the expectations of Probus
were too often disappointed. The impatience and idleness of the
barbarians could ill brook the slow labors of agriculture. Their
unconquerable love of freedom, rising against despotism, provoked
them into hasty rebellions, alike fatal to themselves and to the
provinces; ^49 nor could these artificial supplies, however
repeated by succeeding emperors, restore the important limit of
Gaul and Illyricum to its ancient and native vigor.
[Footnote 45: He distributed about fifty or sixty barbarians to a
Numerus, as it was then called, a corps with whose established
number we are not exactly acquainted.]
[Footnote 46: Camden's Britannia, Introduction, p. 136; but he
speaks from a very doubtful conjecture.]
[Footnote 47: Zosimus, l. i. p. 62. According to Vopiscus,
another body of Vandals was less faithful.]
[Footnote 48: Hist. August. p. 240. They were probably expelled
by the Goths. Zosim. l. i. p. 66.]
[Footnote 49: Hist. August. p. 240.]
Of all the barbarians who abandoned their new settlements,
and disturbed the public tranquillity, a very small number
returned to their own country. For a short season they might
wander in arms through the empire; but in the end they were
surely destroyed by the power of a warlike emperor. The
successful rashness of a party of Franks was attended, however,
with such memorable consequences, that it ought not to be passed
unnoticed. They had been established by Probus, on the sea-coast
of Pontus, with a view of strengthening the frontier against the
inroads of the Alani. A fleet stationed in one of the harbors of
the Euxine fell into the hands of the Franks; and they resolved,
through unknown seas, to explore their way from the mouth of the
Phasis to that of the Rhine. They easily escaped through the
Bosphorus and the Hellespont, and cruising along the
Mediterranean, indulged their appetite for revenge and plunder by
frequent descents on the unsuspecting shores of Asia, Greece, and
Africa. The opulent city of Syracuse, in whose port the natives
of Athens and Carthage had formerly been sunk, was sacked by a
handful of barbarians, who massacred the greatest part of the
trembling inhabitants. From the Island of Sicily, the Franks
proceeded to the columns of Hercules, trusted themselves to the
ocean, coasted round Spain and Gaul, and steering their
triumphant course through the British Channel, at length finished
their surprising voyage, by landing in safety on the Batavian or
Frisian shores. ^50 The example of their success, instructing
their countrymen to conceive the advantages and to despise the
dangers of the sea, pointed out to their enterprising spirit a
new road to wealth and glory.
[Footnote 50: Panegyr. Vet. v. 18. Zosimus, l. i. p. 66.]
Notwithstanding the vigilance and activity of Probus, it was
almost impossible that he could at once contain in obedience
every part of his wide- extended dominions. The barbarians, who
broke their chains, had seized the favorable opportunity of a
domestic war. When the emperor marched to the relief of Gaul, he
devolved the command of the East on Saturninus. That general, a
man of merit and experience, was driven into rebellion by the
absence of his sovereign, the levity of the Alexandrian people,
the pressing instances of his friends, and his own fears; but
from the moment of his elevation, he never entertained a hope of
empire, or even of life. "Alas!" he said, "the republic has lost
a useful servant, and the rashness of an hour has destroyed the
services of many years. You know not," continued he, "the misery
of sovereign power; a sword is perpetually suspended over our
head. We dread our very guards, we distrust our companions. The
choice of action or of repose is no longer in our disposition,
nor is there any age, or character, or conduct, that can protect
us from the censure of envy. In thus exalting me to the throne,
you have doomed me to a life of cares, and to an untimely fate.
The only consolation which remains is, the assurance that I shall
not fall alone." ^51 But as the former part of his prediction was
verified by the victory, so the latter was disappointed by the
clemency of Probus. That amiable prince attempted even to save
the unhappy Saturninus from the fury of the soldiers. He had
more than once solicited the usurper himself to place some
confidence in the mercy of a sovereign who so highly esteemed his
character, that he had punished, as a malicious informer, the
first who related the improbable news of his disaffection. ^52
Saturninus might, perhaps, have embraced the generous offer, had
he not been restrained by the obstinate distrust of his
adherents. Their guilt was deeper, and their hopes more
sanguine, than those of their experienced leader.
[Footnote 51: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 245, 246. The
unfortunate orator had studied rhetoric at Carthage; and was
therefore more probably a Moor (Zosim. l. i. p. 60) than a Gaul,
as Vopiscus calls him.]
[Footnote 52: Zonaras, l. xii. p. 638.]
The revolt of Saturninus was scarcely extinguished in the
East, before new troubles were excited in the West, by the
rebellion of Bonosus and Proculus, in Gaul. The most
distinguished merit of those two officers was their respective
prowess, of the one in the combats of Bacchus, of the other in
those of Venus, ^53 yet neither of them was destitute of courage
and capacity, and both sustained, with honor, the august
character which the fear of punishment had engaged them to
assume, till they sunk at length beneath the superior genius of
Probus. He used the victory with his accustomed moderation, and
spared the fortune, as well as the lives of their innocent
families. ^54
[Footnote 53: A very surprising instance is recorded of the
prowess of Procufus. He had taken one hundred Sarmatian virgins.
The rest of the story he must relate in his own language: "Ex his
una necte decem inivi; omnes tamen, quod in me erat, mulieres
intra dies quindecim reddidi. Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 246.]
[Footnote 54: Proculus, who was a native of Albengue, on the
Genoese coast armed two thousand of his own slaves. His riches
were great, but they were acquired by robbery. It was afterwards
a saying of his family, sibi non placere esse vel principes vel
latrones. Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 247.]
The arms of Probus had now suppressed all the foreign and
domestic enemies of the state. His mild but steady
administration confirmed the reestablishment of the public
tranquillity; nor was there left in the provinces a hostile
barbarian, a tyrant, or even a robber, to revive the memory of
past disorders. It was time that the emperor should revisit
Rome, and celebrate his own glory and the general happiness. The
triumph due to the valor of Probus was conducted with a
magnificence suitable to his fortune, and the people who had so
lately admired the trophies of Aurelian, gazed with equal
pleasure on those of his heroic successor. ^55 We cannot, on this
occasion, forget the desperate courage of about fourscore
gladiators, reserved, with near six hundred others, for the
inhuman sports of the amphitheatre. Disdaining to shed their
blood for the amusement of the populace, they killed their
keepers, broke from the place of their confinement, and filled
the streets of Rome with blood and confusion. After an obstinate
resistance, they were overpowered and cut in pieces by the
regular forces; but they obtained at least an honorable death,
and the satisfaction of a just revenge. ^56
[Footnote 55: Hist. August. p. 240.]
[Footnote 56: Zosim. l. i. p. 66.]
The military discipline which reigned in the camps of Probus
was less cruel than that of Aurelian, but it was equally rigid
and exact. The latter had punished the irregularities of the
soldiers with unrelenting severity, the former prevented them by
employing the legions in constant and useful labors. When Probus
commanded in Egypt, he executed many considerable works for the
splendor and benefit of that rich country. The navigation of the
Nile, so important to Rome itself, was improved; and temples,
buildings, porticos, and palaces were constructed by the hands of
the soldiers, who acted by turns as architects, as engineers, and
as husbandmen. ^57 It was reported of Hannibal, that in order to
preserve his troops from the dangerous temptations of idleness,
he had obliged them to form large plantations of olive-trees
along the coast of Africa. ^58 From a similar principle, Probus
exercised his legions in covering with rich vineyards the hills
of Gaul and Pannonia, and two considerable spots are described,
which were entirely dug and planted by military labor. ^59 One of
these, known under the name of Mount Almo, was situated near
Sirmium, the country where Probus was born, for which he ever
retained a partial affection, and whose gratitude he endeavored
to secure, by converting into tillage a large and unhealthy tract
of marshy ground. An army thus employed constituted perhaps the
most useful, as well as the bravest, portion of Roman subjects.
[Footnote 57: Hist. August. p. 236.]
[Footnote 58: Aurel. Victor. in Prob. But the policy of
Hannibal, unnoticed by any more ancient writer, is irreconcilable
with the history of his life. He left Africa when he was nine
years old, returned to it when he was forty- five, and
immediately lost his army in the decisive battle of Zama.
Livilus, xxx. 37.]
[Footnote 59: Hist. August. p. 240. Eutrop. ix. 17. Aurel.
Victor. in Prob. Victor Junior. He revoked the prohibition of
Domitian, and granted a general permission of planting vines to
the Gauls, the Britons, and the Pannonians.]
But in the prosecution of a favorite scheme, the best of
men, satisfied with the rectitude of their intentions, are
subject to forget the bounds of moderation; nor did Probus
himself sufficiently consult the patience and disposition of his
fierce legionaries. ^60 The dangers of the military profession
seem only to be compensated by a life of pleasure and idleness;
but if the duties of the soldier are incessantly aggravated by
the labors of the peasant, he will at last sink under the
intolerable burden, or shake it off with indignation. The
imprudence of Probus is said to have inflamed the discontent of
his troops. More attentive to the interests of mankind than to
those of the army, he expressed the vain hope, that, by the
establishment of universal peace, he should soon abolish the
necessity of a standing and mercenary force. ^61 The unguarded
expression proved fatal to him. In one of the hottest days of
summer, as he severely urged the unwholesome labor of draining
the marshes of Sirmium, the soldiers, impatient of fatigue, on a
sudden threw down their tools, grasped their arms, and broke out
into a furious mutiny. The emperor, conscious of his danger,
took refuge in a lofty tower, constructed for the purpose of
surveying the progress of the work. ^62 The tower was instantly
forced, and a thousand swords were plunged at once into the bosom
of the unfortunate Probus. The rage of the troops subsided as
soon as it had been gratified. They then lamented their fatal
rashness, forgot the severity of the emperor, whom they had
massacred, and hastened to perpetuate, by an honorable monument,
the memory of his virtues and victories. ^63
[Footnote 60: Julian bestows a severe, and indeed excessive,
censure on the rigor of Probus, who, as he thinks, almost
deserved his fate.]
[Footnote 61: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 241. He lavishes on
this idle hope a large stock of very foolish eloquence.]
[Footnote 62: Turris ferrata. It seems to have been a movable
tower, and cased with iron.]
[Footnote 63: Probus, et vere probus situs est; Victor omnium
gentium Barbararum; victor etiam tyrannorum.]
When the legions had indulged their grief and repentance for
the death of Probus, their unanimous consent declared Carus, his
Praetorian praefect, the most deserving of the Imperial throne.
Every circumstance that relates to this prince appears of a mixed
and doubtful nature. He gloried in the title of Roman Citizen;
and affected to compare the purity of his blood with the foreign
and even barbarous origin of the preceding emperors; yet the most
inquisitive of his contemporaries, very far from admitting his
claim, have variously deduced his own birth, or that of his
parents, from Illyricum, from Gaul, or from Africa. ^64 Though a
soldier, he had received a learned education; though a senator,
he was invested with the first dignity of the army; and in an age
when the civil and military professions began to be irrecoverably
separated from each other, they were united in the person of
Carus. Notwithstanding the severe justice which he exercised
against the assassins of Probus, to whose favor and esteem he was
highly indebted, he could not escape the suspicion of being
accessory to a deed from whence he derived the principal
advantage. He enjoyed, at least, before his elevation, an
acknowledged character of virtue and abilities; ^65 but his
austere temper insensibly degenerated into moroseness and
cruelty; and the imperfect writers of his life almost hesitate
whether they shall not rank him in the number of Roman tyrants.
^66 When Carus assumed the purple, he was about sixty years of
age, and his two sons, Carinus and Numerian had already attained
the season of manhood. ^67
[Footnote 64: Yet all this may be conciliated. He was born at
Narbonne in Illyricum, confounded by Eutropius with the more
famous city of that name in Gaul. His father might be an
African, and his mother a noble Roman. Carus himself was
educated in the capital. See Scaliger Animadversion. ad Euseb.
Chron. p. 241.]
[Footnote 65: Probus had requested of the senate an equestrian
statue and a marble palace, at the public expense, as a just
recompense of the singular merit of Carus. Vopiscus in Hist.
August. p. 249.]
[Footnote 66: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 242, 249. Julian
excludes the emperor Carus and both his sons from the banquet of
the Caesars.]
[Footnote 67: John Malala, tom. i. p. 401. But the authority of
that ignorant Greek is very slight. He ridiculously derives from
Carus the city of Carrhae, and the province of Caria, the latter
of which is mentioned by Homer.]
The authority of the senate expired with Probus; nor was the
repentance of the soldiers displayed by the same dutiful regard
for the civil power, which they had testified after the
unfortunate death of Aurelian. The election of Carus was decided
without expecting the approbation of the senate, and the new
emperor contented himself with announcing, in a cold and stately
epistle, that he had ascended the vacant throne. ^68 A behavior
so very opposite to that of his amiable predecessor afforded no
favorable presage of the new reign: and the Romans, deprived of
power and freedom, asserted their privilege of licentious
murmurs. ^69 The voice of congratulation and flattery was not,
however, silent; and we may still peruse, with pleasure and
contempt, an eclogue, which was composed on the accession of the
emperor Carus. Two shepherds, avoiding the noontide heat, retire
into the cave of Faunus. On a spreading beech they discover some
recent characters. The rural deity had described, in prophetic
verses, the felicity promised to the empire under the reign of so
great a prince. Faunus hails the approach of that hero, who,
receiving on his shoulders the sinking weight of the Roman world,
shall extinguish war and faction, and once again restore the
innocence and security of the golden age. ^70
[Footnote 68: Hist. August. p. 249. Carus congratulated the
senate, that one of their own order was made emperor.]
[Footnote 69: Hist. August. p. 242.]
[Footnote 70: See the first eclogue of Calphurnius. The design
of it is preferes by Fontenelle to that of Virgil's Pollio. See
tom. iii. p. 148.]
It is more than probable, that these elegant trifles never
reached the ears of a veteran general, who, with the consent of
the legions, was preparing to execute the long-suspended design
of the Persian war. Before his departure for this distant
expedition, Carus conferred on his two sons, Carinus and
Numerian, the title of Caesar, and investing the former with
almost an equal share of the Imperial power, directed the young
prince, first to suppress some troubles which had arisen in Gaul,
and afterwards to fix the seat of his residence at Rome, and to
assume the government of the Western provinces. ^71 The safety of
Illyricum was confirmed by a memorable defeat of the Sarmatians;
sixteen thousand of those barbarians remained on the field of
battle, and the number of captives amounted to twenty thousand.
The old emperor, animated with the fame and prospect of victory,
pursued his march, in the midst of winter, through the countries
of Thrace and Asia Minor, and at length, with his younger son,
Numerian, arrived on the confines of the Persian monarchy.
There, encamping on the summit of a lofty mountain, he pointed
out to his troops the opulence and luxury of the enemy whom they
were about to invade.
[Footnote 71: Hist. August. p. 353. Eutropius, ix. 18. Pagi.
Annal.]
The successor of Artaxerxes, ^* Varanes, or Bahram, though
he had subdued the Segestans, one of the most warlike nations of
Upper Asia, ^72 was alarmed at the approach of the Romans, and
endeavored to retard their progress by a negotiation of peace. ^!
His ambassadors entered the camp about sunset, at the time when
the troops were satisfying their hunger with a frugal repast. The
Persians expressed their desire of being introduced to the
presence of the Roman emperor. They were at length conducted to
a soldier, who was seated on the grass. A piece of stale bacon
and a few hard peas composed his supper. A coarse woollen
garment of purple was the only circumstance that announced his
dignity. The conference was conducted with the same disregard of
courtly elegance. Carus, taking off a cap which he wore to
conceal his baldness, assured the ambassadors, that, unless their
master acknowledged the superiority of Rome, he would speedily
render Persia as naked of trees as his own head was destitute of
hair. ^73 Notwithstanding some traces of art and preparation, we
may discover in this scene the manners of Carus, and the severe
simplicity which the martial princes, who succeeded Gallienus,
had already restored in the Roman camps. The ministers of the
Great King trembled and retired.
[Footnote *: Three monarchs had intervened, Sapor, (Shahpour,)
Hormisdas, (Hormooz,) Varanes; Baharam the First. - M.]
[Footnote 72: Agathias, l. iv. p. 135. We find one of his
sayings in the Bibliotheque Orientale of M. d'Herbelot. "The
definition of humanity includes all other virtues."]
[Footnote !: The manner in which his life was saved by the Chief
Pontiff from a conspiracy of his nobles, is as remarkable as his
saying. "By the advice (of the Pontiff) all the nobles absented
themselves from court. The king wandered through his palace
alone. He saw no one; all was silence around. He became alarmed
and distressed. At last the Chief Pontiff appeared, and bowed
his head in apparent misery, but spoke not a word. The king
entreated him to declare what had happened. The virtuous man
boldly related all that had passed, and conjured Bahram, in the
name of his glorious ancestors, to change his conduct and save
himself from destruction. The king was much moved, professed
himself most penitent, and said he was resolved his future life
should prove his sincerity. The overjoyed High Priest, delighted
at this success, made a signal, at which all the nobles and
attendants were in an instant, as if by magic, in their usual
places. The monarch now perceived that only one opinion
prevailed on his past conduct. He repeated therefore to his
nobles all he had said to the Chief Pontiff, and his future reign
was unstained by cruelty or oppression." Malcolm's Persia, - M.]
[Footnote 73: Synesius tells this story of Carinus; and it is
much more natural to understand it of Carus, than (as Petavius
and Tillemont choose to do) of Probus.]
The threats of Carus were not without effect. He ravaged
Mesopotamia, cut in pieces whatever opposed his passage, made
himself master of the great cities of Seleucia and Ctesiphon,
(which seemed to have surrendered without resistance,) and
carried his victorious arms beyond the Tigris. ^74 He had seized
the favorable moment for an invasion. The Persian councils were
distracted by domestic factions, and the greater part of their
forces were detained on the frontiers of India. Rome and the
East received with transports the news of such important
advantages. Flattery and hope painted, in the most lively
colors, the fall of Persia, the conquest of Arabia, the
submission of Egypt, and a lasting deliverance from the inroads
of the Scythian nations. ^75 But the reign of Carus was destined
to expose the vanity of predictions. They were scarcely uttered
before they were contradicted by his death; an event attended
with such ambiguous circumstances, that it may be related in a
letter from his own secretary to the praefect of the city.
"Carus," says he, "our dearest emperor, was confined by sickness
to his bed, when a furious tempest arose in the camp. The
darkness which overspread the sky was so thick, that we could no
longer distinguish each other; and the incessant flashes of
lightning took from us the knowledge of all that passed in the
general confusion. Immediately after the most violent clap of
thunder, we heard a sudden cry that the emperor was dead; and it
soon appeared, that his chamberlains, in a rage of grief, had set
fire to the royal pavilion; a circumstance which gave rise to the
report that Carus was killed by lightning. But, as far as we
have been able to investigate the truth, his death was the
natural effect of his disorder." ^76
[Footnote 74: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 250. Eutropius, ix.
18. The two Victors.]
[Footnote 75: To the Persian victory of Carus I refer the
dialogue of the Philopatris, which has so long been an object of
dispute among the learned. But to explain and justify my opinion,
would require a dissertation. ^
Note: Niebuhr, in the new edition of the Byzantine
Historians, (vol. x.) has boldly assigned the Philopatris to the
tenth century, and to the reign of Nicephorus Phocas. An opinion
so decisively pronounced by Niebuhr and favorably received by
Hase, the learned editor of Leo Diaconus, commands respectful
consideration. But the whole tone of the work appears to me
altogether inconsistent with any period in which philosophy did
not stand, as it were, on some ground of equality with
Christianity. The doctrine of the Trinity is sarcastically
introduced rather as the strange doctrine of a new religion, than
the established tenet of a faith universally prevalent. The
argument, adopted from Solanus, concerning the formula of the
procession of the Holy Ghost, is utterly worthless, as it is a
mere quotation in the words of the Gospel of St. John, xv. 26.
The only argument of any value is the historic one, from the
allusion to the recent violation of many virgins in the Island of
Crete. But neither is the language of Niebuhr quite accurate,
nor his reference to the Acroases of Theodosius satisfactory.
When, then, could this occurrence take place? Why not in the
devastation of the island by the Gothic pirates, during the reign
of Claudius. Hist. Aug. in Claud. p. 814. edit. Var. Lugd. Bat
1661. - M.]
[Footnote 76: Hist. August. p. 250. Yet Eutropius, Festus,
Rufus, the two Victors, Jerome, Sidonius Apollinaris, Syncellus,
and Zonaras, all ascribe the death of Carus to lightning.]
Chapter XII: Reigns Of Tacitus, Probus, Carus And His Sons.
Part III.
The vacancy of the throne was not productive of any
disturbance. The ambition of the aspiring generals was checked
by their natural fears, and young Numerian, with his absent
brother Carinus, were unanimously acknowledged as Roman emperors.
The public expected that the successor of Carus would pursue his
father's footsteps, and, without allowing the Persians to recover
from their consternation, would advance sword in hand to the
palaces of Susa and Ecbatana. ^77 But the legions, however strong
in numbers and discipline, were dismayed by the most abject
superstition. Notwithstanding all the arts that were practised to
disguise the manner of the late emperor's death, it was found
impossible to remove the opinion of the multitude, and the power
of opinion is irresistible. Places or persons struck with
lightning were considered by the ancients with pious horror, as
singularly devoted to the wrath of Heaven. ^78 An oracle was
remembered, which marked the River Tigris as the fatal boundary
of the Roman arms. The troops, terrified with the fate of Carus
and with their own danger, called aloud on young Numerian to obey
the will of the gods, and to lead them away from this
inauspicious scene of war. The feeble emperor was unable to
subdue their obstinate prejudice, and the Persians wondered at
the unexpected retreat of a victorious enemy. ^79
[Footnote 77: See Nemesian. Cynegeticon, v. 71, &c.]
[Footnote 78: See Festus and his commentators on the word
Scribonianum. Places struck by lightning were surrounded with a
wall; things were buried with mysterious ceremony.]
[Footnote 79: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 250. Aurelius Victor
seems to believe the prediction, and to approve the retreat.]
The intelligence of the mysterious fate of the late emperor
was soon carried from the frontiers of Persia to Rome; and the
senate, as well as the provinces, congratulated the accession of
the sons of Carus. These fortunate youths were strangers,
however, to that conscious superiority, either of birth or of
merit, which can alone render the possession of a throne easy,
and as it were natural. Born and educated in a private station,
the election of their father raised them at once to the rank of
princes; and his death, which happened about sixteen months
afterwards, left them the unexpected legacy of a vast empire. To
sustain with temper this rapid elevation, an uncommon share of
virtue and prudence was requisite; and Carinus, the elder of the
brothers, was more than commonly deficient in those qualities.
In the Gallic war he discovered some degree of personal courage;
^80 but from the moment of his arrival at Rome, he abandoned
himself to the luxury of the capital, and to the abuse of his
fortune. He was soft, yet cruel; devoted to pleasure, but
destitute of taste; and though exquisitely susceptible of vanity,
indifferent to the public esteem. In the course of a few months,
he successively married and divorced nine wives, most of whom he
left pregnant; and notwithstanding this legal inconstancy, found
time to indulge such a variety of irregular appetites, as brought
dishonor on himself and on the noblest houses of Rome. He beheld
with inveterate hatred all those who might remember his former
obscurity, or censure his present conduct. He banished, or put
to death, the friends and counsellors whom his father had placed
about him, to guide his inexperienced youth; and he persecuted
with the meanest revenge his school-fellows and companions who
had not sufficiently respected the latent majesty of the emperor.
With the senators, Carinus affected a lofty and regal demeanor,
frequently declaring, that he designed to distribute their
estates among the populace of Rome. From the dregs of that
populace he selected his favorites, and even his ministers. The
palace, and even the Imperial table, were filled with singers,
dancers, prostitutes, and all the various retinue of vice and
folly. One of his doorkeepers ^81 he intrusted with the
government of the city. In the room of the Praetorian praefect,
whom he put to death, Carinus substituted one of the ministers of
his looser pleasures. Another, who possessed the same, or even a
more infamous, title to favor, was invested with the consulship.
A confidential secretary, who had acquired uncommon skill in the
art of forgery, delivered the indolent emperor, with his own
consent from the irksome duty of signing his name.
[Footnote 80: Nemesian. Cynegeticon, v 69. He was a
contemporary, but a poet.]
[Footnote 81: Cancellarius. This word, so humble in its origin,
has, by a singular fortune, risen into the title of the first
great office of state in the monarchies of Europe. See Casaubon
and Salmasius, ad Hist. August, p. 253.]
When the emperor Carus undertook the Persian war, he was
induced, by motives of affection as well as policy, to secure the
fortunes of his family, by leaving in the hands of his eldest son
the armies and provinces of the West. The intelligence which he
soon received of the conduct of Carinus filled him with shame and
regret; nor had he concealed his resolution of satisfying the
republic by a severe act of justice, and of adopting, in the
place of an unworthy son, the brave and virtuous Constantius, who
at that time was governor of Dalmatia. But the elevation of
Constantius was for a while deferred; and as soon as the father's
death had released Carinus from the control of fear or decency,
he displayed to the Romans the extravagancies of Elagabalus,
aggravated by the cruelty of Domitian. ^82
[Footnote 82: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 253, 254. Eutropius,
x. 19. Vic to Junior. The reign of Diocletian indeed was so
long and prosperous, that it must have been very unfavorable to
the reputation of Carinus.]
The only merit of the administration of Carinus that history
could record, or poetry celebrate, was the uncommon splendor with
which, in his own and his brother's name, he exhibited the Roman
games of the theatre, the circus, and the amphitheatre. More
than twenty years afterwards, when the courtiers of Diocletian
represented to their frugal sovereign the fame and popularity of
his munificent predecessor, he acknowledged that the reign of
Carinus had indeed been a reign of pleasure. ^83 But this vain
prodigality, which the prudence of Diocletian might justly
despise, was enjoyed with surprise and transport by the Roman
people. The oldest of the citizens, recollecting the spectacles
of former days, the triumphal pomp of Probus or Aurelian, and the
secular games of the emperor Philip, acknowledged that they were
all surpassed by the superior magnificence of Carinus. ^84
[Footnote 83: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 254. He calls him
Carus, but the sense is sufficiently obvious, and the words were
often confounded.]
[Footnote 84: See Calphurnius, Eclog. vii. 43. We may observe,
that the spectacles of Probus were still recent, and that the
poet is seconded by the historian.]
The spectacles of Carinus may therefore be best illustrated
by the observation of some particulars, which history has
condescended to relate concerning those of his predecessors. If
we confine ourselves solely to the hunting of wild beasts,
however we may censure the vanity of the design or the cruelty of
the execution, we are obliged to confess that neither before nor
since the time of the Romans so much art and expense have ever
been lavished for the amusement of the people. ^85 By the order
of Probus, a great quantity of large trees, torn up by the roots,
were transplanted into the midst of the circus. The spacious and
shady forest was immediately filled with a thousand ostriches, a
thousand stags, a thousand fallow deer, and a thousand wild
boars; and all this variety of game was abandoned to the riotous
impetuosity of the multitude. The tragedy of the succeeding day
consisted in the massacre of a hundred lions, an equal number of
lionesses, two hundred leopards, and three hundred bears. ^86 The
collection prepared by the younger Gordian for his triumph, and
which his successor exhibited in the secular games, was less
remarkable by the number than by the singularity of the animals.
Twenty zebras displayed their elegant forms and variegated beauty
to the eyes of the Roman people. ^87 Ten elks, and as many
camelopards, the loftiest and most harmless creatures that wander
over the plains of Sarmatia and Aethiopia, were contrasted with
thirty African hyaenas and ten Indian tigers, the most implacable
savages of the torrid zone. The unoffending strength with which
Nature has endowed the greater quadrupeds was admired in the
rhinoceros, the hippopotamus of the Nile, ^88 and a majestic
troop of thirty-two elephants. ^89 While the populace gazed with
stupid wonder on the splendid show, the naturalist might indeed
observe the figure and properties of so many different species,
transported from every part of the ancient world into the
amphitheatre of Rome. But this accidental benefit, which science
might derive from folly, is surely insufficient to justify such a
wanton abuse of the public riches. There occurs, however, a
single instance in the first Punic war, in which the senate
wisely connected this amusement of the multitude with the
interest of the state. A considerable number of elephants, taken
in the defeat of the Carthaginian army, were driven through the
circus by a few slaves, armed only with blunt javelins. ^90 The
useful spectacle served to impress the Roman soldier with a just
contempt for those unwieldy animals; and he no longer dreaded to
encounter them in the ranks of war.
[Footnote 85: The philosopher Montaigne (Essais, l. iii. 6) gives
a very just and lively view of Roman magnificence in these
spectacles.]
[Footnote 86: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 240.]
[Footnote 87: They are called Onagri; but the number is too
inconsiderable for mere wild asses. Cuper (de Elephantis
Exercitat. ii. 7) has proved from Oppian, Dion, and an anonymous
Greek, that zebras had been seen at Rome. They were brought from
some island of the ocean, perhaps Madagascar.]
[Footnote 88: Carinus gave a hippopotamus, (see Calphurn. Eclog.
vi. 66.) In the latter spectacles, I do not recollect any
crocodiles, of which Augustus once exhibited thirty-six. Dion
Cassius, l. lv. p. 781.]
[Footnote 89: Capitolin. in Hist. August. p. 164, 165. We are
not acquainted with the animals which he calls archeleontes; some
read argoleontes others agrioleontes: both corrections are very
nugatory]
[Footnote 90: Plin. Hist. Natur. viii. 6, from the annals of
Piso.]
The hunting or exhibition of wild beasts was conducted with
a magnificence suitable to a people who styled themselves the
masters of the world; nor was the edifice appropriated to that
entertainment less expressive of Roman greatness. Posterity
admires, and will long admire, the awful remains of the
amphitheatre of Titus, which so well deserved the epithet of
Colossal. ^91 It was a building of an elliptic figure, five
hundred and sixty-four feet in length, and four hundred and
sixty-seven in breadth, founded on fourscore arches, and rising,
with four successive orders of architecture, to the height of one
hundred and forty feet. ^92 The outside of the edifice was
encrusted with marble, and decorated with statues. The slopes of
the vast concave, which formed the inside, were filled and
surrounded with sixty or eighty rows of seats of marble likewise,
covered with cushions, and capable of receiving with ease about
fourscore thousand spectators. ^93 Sixty-four vomitories (for by
that name the doors were very aptly distinguished) poured forth
the immense multitude; and the entrances, passages, and
staircases were contrived with such exquisite skill, that each
person, whether of the senatorial, the equestrian, or the
plebeian order, arrived at his destined place without trouble or
confusion. ^94 Nothing was omitted, which, in any respect, could
be subservient to the convenience and pleasure of the spectators.
They were protected from the sun and rain by an ample canopy,
occasionally drawn over their heads. The air was continally
refreshed by the playing of fountains, and profusely impregnated
by the grateful scent of aromatics. In the centre of the
edifice, the arena, or stage, was strewed with the finest sand,
and successively assumed the most different forms. At one moment
it seemed to rise out of the earth, like the garden of the
Hesperides, and was afterwards broken into the rocks and caverns
of Thrace. The subterraneous pipes conveyed an inexhaustible
supply of water; and what had just before appeared a level plain,
might be suddenly converted into a wide lake, covered with armed
vessels, and replenished with the monsters of the deep. ^95 In
the decoration of these scenes, the Roman emperors displayed
their wealth and liberality; and we read on various occasions
that the whole furniture of the amphitheatre consisted either of
silver, or of gold, or of amber. ^96 The poet who describes the
games of Carinus, in the character of a shepherd, attracted to
the capital by the fame of their magnificence, affirms that the
nets designed as a defence against the wild beasts, were of gold
wire; that the porticos were gilded; and that the belt or circle
which divided the several ranks of spectators from each other was
studded with a precious mosaic of beautiful stones. ^97
[Footnote 91: See Maffei, Verona Illustrata, p. iv. l. i. c. 2.]
[Footnote 92: Maffei, l. ii. c. 2. The height was very much
exaggerated by the ancients. It reached almost to the heavens,
according to Calphurnius, (Eclog. vii. 23,) and surpassed the ken
of human sight, according to Ammianus Marcellinus (xvi. 10.) Yet
how trifling to the great pyramid of Egypt, which rises 500 feet
perpendicular]
[Footnote 93: According to different copies of Victor, we read
77,000, or 87,000 spectators; but Maffei (l. ii. c. 12) finds
room on the open seats for no more than 34,000. The remainder
were contained in the upper covered galleries.]
[Footnote 94: See Maffei, l. ii. c. 5 - 12. He treats the very
difficult subject with all possible clearness, and like an
architect, as well as an antiquarian.]
[Footnote 95: Calphurn. Eclog vii. 64, 73. These lines are
curious, and the whole eclogue has been of infinite use to
Maffei. Calphurnius, as well as Martial, (see his first book,)
was a poet; but when they described the amphitheatre, they both
wrote from their own senses, and to those of the Romans.]
[Footnote 96: Consult Plin. Hist. Natur. xxxiii. 16, xxxvii. 11.]
[Footnote 97: Balteus en gemmis, en inlita porticus auro
Certatim radiant, &c. Calphurn. vii.]
In the midst of this glittering pageantry, the emperor
Carinus, secure of his fortune, enjoyed the acclamations of the
people, the flattery of his courtiers, and the songs of the
poets, who, for want of a more essential merit, were reduced to
celebrate the divine graces of his person. ^98 In the same hour,
but at the distance of nine hundred miles from Rome, his brother
expired; and a sudden revolution transferred into the hands of a
stranger the sceptre of the house of Carus. ^99
[Footnote 98: Et Martis vultus et Apollinis esse putavi, says
Calphurnius; but John Malala, who had perhaps seen pictures of
Carinus, describes him as thick, short, and white, tom. i. p.
403.]
[Footnote 99: With regard to the time when these Roman games were
celebrated, Scaliger, Salmasius, and Cuper have given themselves
a great deal of trouble to perplex a very clear subject.]
The sons of Carus never saw each other after their father's
death. The arrangements which their new situation required were
probably deferred till the return of the younger brother to Rome,
where a triumph was decreed to the young emperors for the
glorious success of the Persian war. ^100 It is uncertain whether
they intended to divide between them the administration, or the
provinces, of the empire; but it is very unlikely that their
union would have proved of any long duration. The jealousy of
power must have been inflamed by the opposition of characters.
In the most corrupt of times, Carinus was unworthy to live:
Numerian deserved to reign in a happier period. His affable
manners and gentle virtues secured him, as soon as they became
known, the regard and affections of the public. He possessed the
elegant accomplishments of a poet and orator, which dignify as
well as adorn the humblest and the most exalted station. His
eloquence, however it was applauded by the senate, was formed not
so much on the model of Cicero, as on that of the modern
declaimers; but in an age very far from being destitute of
poetical merit, he contended for the prize with the most
celebrated of his contemporaries, and still remained the friend
of his rivals; a circumstance which evinces either the goodness
of his heart, or the superiority of his genius. ^101 But the
talents of Numerian were rather of the contemplative than of the
active kind. When his father's elevation reluctantly forced him
from the shade of retirement, neither his temper nor his pursuits
had qualified him for the command of armies. His constitution
was destroyed by the hardships of the Persian war; and he had
contracted, from the heat of the climate, ^102 such a weakness in
his eyes, as obliged him, in the course of a long retreat, to
confine himself to the solitude and darkness of a tent or litter.
The administration of all affairs, civil as well as military, was
devolved on Arrius Aper, the Praetorian praefect, who to the
power of his important office added the honor of being
father-in-law to Numerian. The Imperial pavilion was strictly
guarded by his most trusty adherents; and during many days, Aper
delivered to the army the supposed mandates of their invisible
sovereign. ^103
[Footnote 100: Nemesianus (in the Cynegeticon) seems to
anticipate in his fancy that auspicious day.]
[Footnote 101: He won all the crowns from Nemesianus, with whom
he vied in didactic poetry. The senate erected a statue to the
son of Carus, with a very ambiguous inscription, "To the most
powerful of orators." See Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 251.]
[Footnote 102: A more natural cause, at least, than that assigned
by Vopiscus, (Hist. August. p. 251,) incessantly weeping for his
father's death.]
[Footnote 103: In the Persian war, Aper was suspected of a design
to betray Carus. Hist. August. p. 250.]
It was not till eight months after the death of Carus, that
the Roman army, returning by slow marches from the banks of the
Tigris, arrived on those of the Thracian Bosphorus. The legions
halted at Chalcedon in Asia, while the court passed over to
Heraclea, on the European side of the Propontis. ^104 But a
report soon circulated through the camp, at first in secret
whispers, and at length in loud clamors, of the emperor's death,
and of the presumption of his ambitious minister, who still
exercised the sovereign power in the name of a prince who was no
more. The impatience of the soldiers could not long support a
state of suspense. With rude curiosity they broke into the
Imperial tent, and discovered only the corpse of Numerian. ^105
The gradual decline of his health might have induced them to
believe that his death was natural; but the concealment was
interpreted as an evidence of guilt, and the measures which Aper
had taken to secure his election became the immediate occasion of
his ruin Yet, even in the transport of their rage and grief, the
troops observed a regular proceeding, which proves how firmly
discipline had been reestablished by the martial successors of
Gallienus. A general assembly of the army was appointed to be
held at Chalcedon, whither Aper was transported in chains, as a
prisoner and a criminal. A vacant tribunal was erected in the
midst of the camp, and the generals and tribunes formed a great
military council. They soon announced to the multitude that
their choice had fallen on Diocletian, commander of the domestics
or body-guards, as the person the most capable of revenging and
succeeding their beloved emperor. The future fortunes of the
candidate depended on the chance or conduct of the present hour.
Conscious that the station which he had filled exposed him to
some suspicions, Diocletian ascended the tribunal, and raising
his eyes towards the Sun, made a solemn profession of his own
innocence, in the presence of that all-seeing Deity. ^106 Then,
assuming the tone of a sovereign and a judge, he commanded that
Aper should be brought in chains to the foot of the tribunal.
"This man," said he, "is the murderer of Numerian;" and without
giving him time to enter on a dangerous justification, drew his
sword, and buried it in the breast of the unfortunate praefect.
A charge supported by such decisive proof was admitted without
contradiction, and the legions, with repeated acclamations,
acknowledged the justice and authority of the emperor Diocletian.
^107 [Footnote 104: We are obliged to the Alexandrian Chronicle,
p. 274, for the knowledge of the time and place where Diocletian
was elected emperor.]
[Footnote 105: Hist. August. p. 251. Eutrop. ix. 88. Hieronym.
in Chron. According to these judicious writers, the death of
Numerian was discovered by the stench of his dead body. Could no
aromatics be found in the Imperial household?]
[Footnote 106: Aurel. Victor. Eutropius, ix. 20. Hieronym. in
Chron.]
[Footnote 107: Vopiscus in Hist. August. p. 252. The reason why
Diocletian killed Aper, (a wild boar,) was founded on a prophecy
and a pun, as foolish as they are well known.]
Before we enter upon the memorable reign of that prince, it
will be proper to punish and dismiss the unworthy brother of
Numerian. Carinus possessed arms and treasures sufficient to
support his legal title to the empire. But his personal vices
overbalanced every advantage of birth and situation. The most
faithful servants of the father despised the incapacity, and
dreaded the cruel arrogance, of the son. The hearts of the
people were engaged in favor of his rival, and even the senate
was inclined to prefer a usurper to a tyrant. The arts of
Diocletian inflamed the general discontent; and the winter was
employed in secret intrigues, and open preparations for a civil
war. In the spring, the forces of the East and of the West
encountered each other in the plains of Margus, a small city of
Maesia, in the neighborhood of the Danube. ^108 The troops, so
lately returned from the Persian war, had acquired their glory at
the expense of health and numbers; nor were they in a condition
to contend with the unexhausted strength of the legions of
Europe. Their ranks were broken, and, for a moment, Diocletian
despaired of the purple and of life. But the advantage which
Carinus had obtained by the valor of his soldiers, he quickly
lost by the infidelity of his officers. A tribune, whose wife he
had seduced, seized the opportunity of revenge, and, by a single
blow, extinguished civil discord in the blood of the adulterer.
^109
[Footnote 108: Eutropius marks its situation very accurately; it
was between the Mons Aureus and Viminiacum. M. d'Anville
(Geographic Ancienne, tom. i. p. 304) places Margus at Kastolatz
in Servia, a little below Belgrade and Semendria.
Not: Kullieza - Eton Atlas - M.]
[Footnote 109: Hist. August. p. 254. Eutropius, ix. 20.
Aurelius Victor et Epitome]
Chapter XIII: Reign Of Diocletian And This Three Associates.
Part I.
The Reign Of Diocletian And His Three Associates, Maximian,
Galerius, And Constantius. - General Reestablishment Of Order And
Tranquillity. - The Persian War, Victory, And Triumph. - The New
Form Of Administration. - Abdication And Retirement Of Diocletian
And Maximian.
As the reign of Diocletian was more illustrious than that of
any of his predecessors, so was his birth more abject and
obscure. The strong claims of merit and of violence had
frequently superseded the ideal prerogatives of nobility; but a
distinct line of separation was hitherto preserved between the
free and the servile part of mankind. The parents of Diocletian
had been slaves in the house of Anulinus, a Roman senator; nor
was he himself distinguished by any other name than that which he
derived from a small town in Dalmatia, from whence his mother
deduced her origin. ^1 It is, however, probable that his father
obtained the freedom of the family, and that he soon acquired an
office of scribe, which was commonly exercised by persons of his
condition. ^2 Favorable oracles, or rather the consciousness of
superior merit, prompted his aspiring son to pursue the
profession of arms and the hopes of fortune; and it would be
extremely curious to observe the gradation of arts and accidents
which enabled him in the end to fulfil those oracles, and to
display that merit to the world. Diocletian was successively
promoted to the government of Maesia, the honors of the
consulship, and the important command of the guards of the
palace. He distinguished his abilities in the Persian war; and
after the death of Numerian, the slave, by the confession and
judgment of his rivals, was declared the most worthy of the
Imperial throne. The malice of religious zeal, whilst it
arraigns the savage fierceness of his colleague Maximian, has
affected to cast suspicions on the personal courage of the
emperor Diocletian. ^3 It would not be easy to persuade us of the
cowardice of a soldier of fortune, who acquired and preserved the
esteem of the legions as well as the favor of so many warlike
princes. Yet even calumny is sagacious enough to discover and to
attack the most vulnerable part. The valor of Diocletian was
never found inadequate to his duty, or to the occasion; but he
appears not to have possessed the daring and generous spirit of a
hero, who courts danger and fame, disdains artifice, and boldly
challenges the allegiance of his equals. His abilities were
useful rather than splendid; a vigorous mind, improved by the
experience and study of mankind; dexterity and application in
business; a judicious mixture of liberality and economy, of
mildness and rigor; profound dissimulation, under the disguise of
military frankness; steadiness to pursue his ends; flexibility to
vary his means; and, above all, the great art of submitting his
own passions, as well as those of others, to the interest of his
ambition, and of coloring his ambition with the most specious
pretences of justice and public utility. Like Augustus,
Diocletian may be considered as the founder of a new empire.
Like the adopted son of Caesar, he was distinguished as a
statesman rather than as a warrior; nor did either of those
princes employ force, whenever their purpose could be effected by
policy.
[Footnote 1: Eutrop. ix. 19. Victor in Epitome. The town seems
to have been properly called Doclia, from a small tribe of
Illyrians, (see Cellarius, Geograph. Antiqua, tom. i. p. 393;)
and the original name of the fortunate slave was probably Docles;
he first lengthened it to the Grecian harmony of Diocles, and at
length to the Roman majesty of Diocletianus. He likewise assumed
the Patrician name of Valerius and it is usually given him by
Aurelius Victor.]
[Footnote 2: See Dacier on the sixth satire of the second book of
Horace Cornel. Nepos, 'n Vit. Eumen. c. l.]
[Footnote 3: Lactantius (or whoever was the author of the little
treatise De Mortibus Persecutorum) accuses Diocletian of timidity
in two places, c. 7. 8. In chap. 9 he says of him, "erat in omni
tumultu meticulosu et animi disjectus."]
The victory of Diocletian was remarkable for its singular
mildness. A people accustomed to applaud the clemency of the
conqueror, if the usual punishments of death, exile, and
confiscation, were inflicted with any degree of temper and
equity, beheld, with the most pleasing astonishment, a civil war,
the flames of which were extinguished in the field of battle.
Diocletian received into his confidence Aristobulus, the
principal minister of the house of Carus, respected the lives,
the fortunes, and the dignity, of his adversaries, and even
continued in their respective stations the greater number of the
servants of Carinus. ^4 It is not improbable that motives of
prudence might assist the humanity of the artful Dalmatian; of
these servants, many had purchased his favor by secret treachery;
in others, he esteemed their grateful fidelity to an unfortunate
master. The discerning judgment of Aurelian, of Probus, and of
Carus, had filled the several departments of the state and army
with officers of approved merit, whose removal would have injured
the public service, without promoting the interest of his
successor. Such a conduct, however, displayed to the Roman world
the fairest prospect of the new reign, and the emperor affected
to confirm this favorable prepossession, by declaring, that,
among all the virtues of his predecessors, he was the most
ambitious of imitating the humane philosophy of Marcus Antoninus.
^5
[Footnote 4: In this encomium, Aurelius Victor seems to convey a
just, though indirect, censure of the cruelty of Constantius. It
appears from the Fasti, that Aristobulus remained praefect of the
city, and that he ended with Diocletian the consulship which he
had commenced with Carinus.]
[Footnote 5: Aurelius Victor styles Diocletian, "Parentum potius
quam Dominum." See Hist. August. p. 30.]
The first considerable action of his reign seemed to evince
his sincerity as well as his moderation. After the example of
Marcus, he gave himself a colleague in the person of Maximian, on
whom he bestowed at first the title of Caesar, and afterwards
that of Augustus. ^6 But the motives of his conduct, as well as
the object of his choice, were of a very different nature from
those of his admired predecessor. By investing a luxurious youth
with the honors of the purple, Marcus had discharged a debt of
private gratitude, at the expense, indeed, of the happiness of
the state. By associating a friend and a fellow-soldier to the
labors of government, Diocletian, in a time of public danger,
provided for the defence both of the East and of the West.
Maximian was born a peasant, and, like Aurelian, in the territory
of Sirmium. Ignorant of letters, ^7 careless of laws, the
rusticity of his appearance and manners still betrayed in the
most elevated fortune the meanness of his extraction. War was
the only art which he professed. In a long course of service, he
had distinguished himself on every frontier of the empire; and
though his military talents were formed to obey rather than to
command, though, perhaps, he never attained the skill of a
consummate general, he was capable, by his valor, constancy, and
experience, of executing the most arduous undertakings. Nor were
the vices of Maximian less useful to his benefactor. Insensible
to pity, and fearless of consequences, he was the ready
instrument of every act of cruelty which the policy of that
artful prince might at once suggest and disclaim. As soon as a
bloody sacrifice had been offered to prudence or to revenge,
Diocletian, by his seasonable intercession, saved the remaining
few whom he had never designed to punish, gently censured the
severity of his stern colleague, and enjoyed the comparison of a
golden and an iron age, which was universally applied to their
opposite maxims of government. Notwithstanding the difference of
their characters, the two emperors maintained, on the throne,
that friendship which they had contracted in a private station.
The haughty, turbulent spirit of Maximian, so fatal, afterwards,
to himself and to the public peace, was accustomed to respect the
genius of Diocletian, and confessed the ascendant of reason over
brutal violence. ^8 From a motive either of pride or
superstition, the two emperors assumed the titles, the one of
Jovius, the other of Herculius. Whilst the motion of the world
(such was the language of their venal orators) was maintained by
the all-seeing wisdom of Jupiter, the invincible arm of Hercules
purged the earth from monsters and tyrants. ^9
[Footnote 6: The question of the time when Maximian received the
honors of Caesar and Augustus has divided modern critics, and
given occasion to a great deal of learned wrangling. I have
followed M. de Tillemont, (Histoire des Empereurs, tom. iv. p.
500-505,) who has weighed the several reasons and difficulties
with his scrupulous accuracy.
Note: Eckbel concurs in this view, viii p. 15. - M.]
[Footnote 7: In an oration delivered before him, (Panegyr. Vet.
ii. 8,) Mamertinus expresses a doubt, whether his hero, in
imitating the conduct of Hannibal and Scipio, had ever heard of
their names. From thence we may fairly infer, that Maximian was
more desirous of being considered as a soldier than as a man of
letters; and it is in this manner that we can often translate the
language of flattery into that of truth.]
[Footnote 8: Lactantius de M. P. c. 8. Aurelius Victor. As
among the Panegyrics, we find orations pronounced in praise of
Maximian, and others which flatter his adversaries at his
expense, we derive some knowledge from the contrast.]
[Footnote 9: See the second and third Panegyrics, particularly
iii. 3, 10, 14 but it would be tedious to copy the diffuse and
affected expressions of their false eloquence. With regard to
the titles, consult Aurel. Victor Lactantius de M. P. c. 52.
Spanheim de Usu Numismatum, &c. xii 8.]
But even the omnipotence of Jovius and Herculius was
insufficient to sustain the weight of the public administration.
The prudence of Diocletian discovered that the empire, assailed
on every side by the barbarians, required on every side the
presence of a great army, and of an emperor. With this view, he
resolved once more to divide his unwieldy power, and with the
inferior title of Caesars, ^* to confer on two generals of
approved merit an unequal share of the sovereign authority. ^10
Galerius, surnamed Armentarius, from his original profession of a
herdsman, and Constantius, who from his pale complexion had
acquired the denomination of Chlorus, ^11 were the two persons
invested with the second honors of the Imperial purple. In
describing the country, extraction, and manners of Herculius, we
have already delineated those of Galerius, who was often, and not
improperly, styled the younger Maximian, though, in many
instances both of virtue and ability, he appears to have
possessed a manifest superiority over the elder. The birth of
Constantius was less obscure than that of his colleagues.
Eutropius, his father, was one of the most considerable nobles of
Dardania, and his mother was the niece of the emperor Claudius.
^12 Although the youth of Constantius had been spent in arms, he
was endowed with a mild and amiable disposition, and the popular
voice had long since acknowledged him worthy of the rank which he
at last attained. To strengthen the bonds of political, by those
of domestic, union, each of the emperors assumed the character of
a father to one of the Caesars, Diocletian to Galerius, and
Maximian to Constantius; and each, obliging them to repudiate
their former wives, bestowed his daughter in marriage or his
adopted son. ^13 These four princes distributed among themselves
the wide extent of the Roman empire. The defence of Gaul, Spain,
^14 and Britain, was intrusted to Constantius: Galerius was
stationed on the banks of the Danube, as the safeguard of the
Illyrian provinces. Italy and Africa were considered as the
department of Maximian; and for his peculiar portion, Diocletian
reserved Thrace, Egypt, and the rich countries of Asia. Every one
was sovereign with his own jurisdiction; but their united
authority extended over the whole monarchy, and each of them was
prepared to assist his colleagues with his counsels or presence.
The Caesars, in their exalted rank, revered the majesty of the
emperors, and the three younger princes invariably acknowledged,
by their gratitude and obedience, the common parent of their
fortunes. The suspicious jealousy of power found not any place
among them; and the singular happiness of their union has been
compared to a chorus of music, whose harmony was regulated and
maintained by the skilful hand of the first artist. ^15
[Footnote *: On the relative power of the Augusti and the
Caesars, consult a dissertation at the end of Manso's Leben
Constantius des Grossen - M.]
[Footnote 10: Aurelius Victor. Victor in Epitome. Eutrop. ix.
22. Lactant de M. P. c. 8. Hieronym. in Chron.]
[Footnote 11: It is only among the modern Greeks that Tillemont
can discover his appellation of Chlorus. Any remarkable degree
of paleness seems inconsistent with the rubor mentioned in
Panegyric, v. 19.]
[Footnote 12: Julian, the grandson of Constantius, boasts that
his family was derived from the warlike Maesians. Misopogon, p.
348. The Dardanians dwelt on the edge of Maesia.]
[Footnote 13: Galerius married Valeria, the daughter of
Diocletian; if we speak with strictness, Theodora, the wife of
Constantius, was daughter only to the wife of Maximian.
Spanheim, Dissertat, xi. 2.]
[Footnote 14: This division agrees with that of the four
praefectures; yet there is some reason to doubt whether Spain was
not a province of Maximian. See Tillemont, tom. iv. p. 517.
Note: According to Aurelius Victor and other authorities,
Thrace belonged to the division of Galerius. See Tillemont, iv.
36. But the laws of Diocletian are in general dated in Illyria
or Thrace. - M.]
[Footnote 15: Julian in Caesarib. p. 315. Spanheim's notes to
the French translation, p. 122.]
This important measure was not carried into execution till
about six years after the association of Maximian, and that
interval of time had not been destitute of memorable incidents.
But we have preferred, for the sake of perspicuity, first to
describe the more perfect form of Diocletian's government, and
afterwards to relate the actions of his reign, following rather
the natural order of the events, than the dates of a very
doubtful chronology.
The first exploit of Maximian, though it is mentioned in a
few words by our imperfect writers, deserves, from its
singularity, to be recorded in a history of human manners. He
suppressed the peasants of Gaul, who, under the appellation of
Bagaudae, ^16 had risen in a general insurrection; very similar
to those which in the fourteenth century successively afflicted
both France and England. ^17 It should seem that very many of
those institutions, referred by an easy solution to the feudal
system, are derived from the Celtic barbarians. When Caesar
subdued the Gauls, that great nation was already divided into
three orders of men; the clergy, the nobility, and the common
people. The first governed by superstition, the second by arms,
but the third and last was not of any weight or account in their
public councils. It was very natural for the plebeians, oppressed
by debt, or apprehensive of injuries, to implore the protection
of some powerful chief, who acquired over their persons and
property the same absolute right as, among the Greeks and Romans,
a master exercised over his slaves. ^18 The greatest part of the
nation was gradually reduced into a state of servitude; compelled
to perpetual labor on the estates of the Gallic nobles, and
confined to the soil, either by the real weight of fetters, or by
the no less cruel and forcible restraints of the laws. During
the long series of troubles which agitated Gaul, from the reign
of Gallienus to that of Diocletian, the condition of these
servile peasants was peculiarly miserable; and they experienced
at once the complicated tyranny of their masters, of the
barbarians, of the soldiers, and of the officers of the revenue.
^19
[Footnote 16: The general name of Bagaudoe (in the signification
of rebels) continued till the fifth century in Gaul. Some
critics derive it from a Celtic word Bagad, a tumultuous
assembly. Scaliger ad Euseb. Du Cange Glossar. (Compare S.
Turner, Anglo-Sax. History, i. 214. - M.)]
[Footnote 17: Chronique de Froissart, vol. i. c. 182, ii. 73, 79.
The naivete of his story is lost in our best modern writers.]
[Footnote 18: Caesar de Bell. Gallic. vi. 13. Orgetorix, the
Helvetian, could arm for his defence a body of ten thousand
slaves.]
[Footnote 19: Their oppression and misery are acknowledged by
Eumenius (Panegyr. vi. 8,) Gallias efferatas injuriis.]
Their patience was at last provoked into despair. On every
side they rose in multitudes, armed with rustic weapons, and with
irresistible fury. The ploughman became a foot soldier, the
shepherd mounted on horseback, the deserted villages and open
towns were abandoned to the flames, and the ravages of the
peasants equalled those of the fiercest barbarians. ^20 They
asserted the natural rights of men, but they asserted those
rights with the most savage cruelty. The Gallic nobles, justly
dreading their revenge, either took refuge in the fortified
cities, or fled from the wild scene of anarchy. The peasants
reigned without control; and two of their most daring leaders had
the folly and rashness to assume the Imperial ornaments. ^21
Their power soon expired at the approach of the legions. The
strength of union and discipline obtained an easy victory over a
licentious and divided multitude. ^22 A severe retaliation was
inflicted on the peasants who were found in arms; the affrighted
remnant returned to their respective habitations, and their
unsuccessful effort for freedom served only to confirm their
slavery. So strong and uniform is the current of popular
passions, that we might almost venture, from very scanty
materials, to relate the particulars of this war; but we are not
disposed to believe that the principal leaders, Aelianus and
Amandus, were Christians, ^23 or to insinuate, that the
rebellion, as it happened in the time of Luther, was occasioned
by the abuse of those benevolent principles of Christianity,
which inculcate the natural freedom of mankind.
[Footnote 20: Panegyr. Vet. ii. 4. Aurelius Victor.]
[Footnote 21: Aelianus and Amandus. We have medals coined by
them Goltzius in Thes. R. A. p. 117, 121.]
[Footnote 22: Levibus proeliis domuit. Eutrop. ix. 20.]
[Footnote 23: The fact rests indeed on very slight authority, a
life of St. Babolinus, which is probably of the seventh century.
See Duchesne Scriptores Rer. Francicar. tom. i. p. 662.]
Maximian had no sooner recovered Gaul from the hands of the
peasants, than he lost Britain by the usurpation of Carausius.
Ever since the rash but successful enterprise of the Franks under
the reign of Probus, their daring countrymen had constructed
squadrons of light brigantines, in which they incessantly ravaged
the provinces adjacent to the ocean. ^24 To repel their desultory
incursions, it was found necessary to create a naval power; and
the judicious measure was prosecuted with prudence and vigor.
Gessoriacum, or Boulogne, in the straits of the British Channel,
was chosen by the emperor for the station of the Roman fleet; and
the command of it was intrusted to Carausius, a Menapian of the
meanest origin, ^25 but who had long signalized his skill as a
pilot, and his valor as a soldier. The integrity of the new
admiral corresponded not with his abilities. When the German
pirates sailed from their own harbors, he connived at their
passage, but he diligently intercepted their return, and
appropriated to his own use an ample share of the spoil which
they had acquired. The wealth of Carausius was, on this
occasion, very justly considered as an evidence of his guilt; and
Maximian had already given orders for his death. But the crafty
Menapian foresaw and prevented the severity of the emperor. By
his liberality he had attached to his fortunes the fleet which he
commanded, and secured the barbarians in his interest. From the
port of Boulogne he sailed over to Britain, persuaded the legion,
and the auxiliaries which guarded that island, to embrace his
party, and boldly assuming, with the Imperial purple, the title
of Augustus defied the justice and the arms of his injured
sovereign. ^26
[Footnote 24: Aurelius Victor calls them Germans. Eutropius (ix.
21) gives them the name of Saxons. But Eutropius lived in the
ensuing century, and seems to use the language of his own times.]
[Footnote 25: The three expressions of Eutropius, Aurelius
Victor, and Eumenius, "vilissime natus," "Bataviae alumnus," and
"Menapiae civis," give us a very doubtful account of the birth of
Carausius. Dr. Stukely, however, (Hist. of Carausius, p. 62,)
chooses to make him a native of St. David's and a prince of the
blood royal of Britain. The former idea he had found in Richard
of Cirencester, p. 44.
Note: The Menapians were settled between the Scheldt and the
Meuse, is the northern part of Brabant. D'Anville, Geogr. Anc.
i. 93. - G.]
[Footnote 26: Panegyr. v. 12. Britain at this time was secure,
and slightly guarded.]
When Britain was thus dismembered from the empire, its
importance was sensibly felt, and its loss sincerely lamented.
The Romans celebrated, and perhaps magnified, the extent of that
noble island, provided on every side with convenient harbors; the
temperature of the climate, and the fertility of the soil, alike
adapted for the production of corn or of vines; the valuable
minerals with which it abounded; its rich pastures covered with
innumerable flocks, and its woods free from wild beasts or
venomous serpents. Above all, they regretted the large amount of
the revenue of Britain, whilst they confessed, that such a
province well deserved to become the seat of an independent
monarchy. ^27 During the space of seven years it was possessed by
Carausius; and fortune continued propitious to a rebellion
supported with courage and ability. The British emperor defended
the frontiers of his dominions against the Caledonians of the
North, invited, from the continent, a great number of skilful
artists, and displayed, on a variety of coins that are still
extant, his taste and opulence. Born on the confines of the
Franks, he courted the friendship of that formidable people, by
the flattering imitation of their dress and manners. The bravest
of their youth he enlisted among his land or sea forces; and, in
return for their useful alliance, he communicated to the
barbarians the dangerous knowledge of military and naval arts.
Carausius still preserved the possession of Boulogne and the
adjacent country. His fleets rode triumphant in the channel,
commanded the mouths of the Seine and of the Rhine, ravaged the
coasts of the ocean, and diffused beyond the columns of Hercules
the terror of his name. Under his command, Britain, destined in
a future age to obtain the empire of the sea, already assumed its
natural and respectable station of a maritime power. ^28
[Footnote 27: Panegyr. Vet v 11, vii. 9. The orator Eumenius
wished to exalt the glory of the hero (Constantius) with the
importance of the conquest. Notwithstanding our laudable
partiality for our native country, it is difficult to conceive,
that, in the beginning of the fourth century England deserved all
these commendations. A century and a half before, it hardly paid
its own establishment.]
[Footnote 28: As a great number of medals of Carausius are still
preserved, he is become a very favorite object of antiquarian
curiosity, and every circumstance of his life and actions has
been investigated with sagacious accuracy. Dr. Stukely, in
particular, has devoted a large volume to the British emperor. I
have used his materials, and rejected most of his fanciful
conjectures.]
By seizing the fleet of Boulogne, Carausius had deprived his
master of the means of pursuit and revenge. And when, after a
vast expense of time and labor, a new armament was launched into
the water, ^29 the Imperial troops, unaccustomed to that element,
were easily baffled and defeated by the veteran sailors of the
usurper. This disappointed effort was soon productive of a
treaty of peace. Diocletian and his colleague, who justly
dreaded the enterprising spirit of Carausius, resigned to him the
sovereignty of Britain, and reluctantly admitted their perfidious
servant to a participation of the Imperial honors. ^30 But the
adoption of the two Caesars restored new vigor to the Romans
arms; and while the Rhine was guarded by the presence of
Maximian, his brave associate Constantius assumed the conduct of
the British war. His first enterprise was against the important
place of Boulogne. A stupendous mole, raised across the entrance
of the harbor, intercepted all hopes of relief. The town
surrendered after an obstinate defence; and a considerable part
of the naval strength of Carausius fell into the hands of the
besiegers. During the three years which Constantius employed in
preparing a fleet adequate to the conquest of Britain, he secured
the coast of Gaul, invaded the country of the Franks, and
deprived the usurper of the assistance of those powerful allies.
[Footnote 29: When Mamertinus pronounced his first panegyric, the
naval preparations of Maximian were completed; and the orator
presaged an assured victory. His silence in the second panegyric
might alone inform us that the expedition had not succeeded.]
[Footnote 30: Aurelius Victor, Eutropius, and the medals, (Pax
Augg.) inform us of this temporary reconciliation; though I will
not presume (as Dr. Stukely has done, Medallic History of
Carausius, p. 86, &c) to insert the identical articles of the
treaty.]
Before the preparations were finished, Constantius received
the intelligence of the tyrant's death, and it was considered as
a sure presage of the approaching victory. The servants of
Carausius imitated the example of treason which he had given. He
was murdered by his first minister, Allectus, and the assassin
succeeded to his power and to his danger. But he possessed not
equal abilities either to exercise the one or to repel the other.
He beheld, with anxious terror, the opposite shores of the
continent already filled with arms, with troops, and with
vessels; for Constantius had very prudently divided his forces,
that he might likewise divide the attention and resistance of the
enemy. The attack was at length made by the principal squadron,
which, under the command of the praefect Asclepiodatus, an
officer of distinguished merit, had been assembled in the north
of the Seine. So imperfect in those times was the art of
navigation, that orators have celebrated the daring courage of
the Romans, who ventured to set sail with a side-wind, and on a
stormy day. The weather proved favorable to their enterprise.
Under the cover of a thick fog, they escaped the fleet of
Allectus, which had been stationed off the Isle of Wight to
receive them, landed in safety on some part of the western coast,
and convinced the Britons, that a superiority of naval strength
will not always protect their country from a foreign invasion.
Asclepiodatus had no sooner disembarked the imperial troops, then
he set fire to his ships; and, as the expedition proved
fortunate, his heroic conduct was universally admired. The
usurper had posted himself near London, to expect the formidable
attack of Constantius, who commanded in person the fleet of
Boulogne; but the descent of a new enemy required his immediate
presence in the West. He performed this long march in so
precipitate a manner, that he encountered the whole force of the
praefect with a small body of harassed and disheartened troops.
The engagement was soon terminated by the total defeat and death
of Allectus; a single battle, as it has often happened, decided
the fate of this great island; and when Constantius landed on the
shores of Kent, he found them covered with obedient subjects.
Their acclamations were loud and unanimous; and the virtues of
the conqueror may induce us to believe, that they sincerely
rejoiced in a revolution, which, after a separation of ten years,
restored Britain to the body of the Roman empire. ^31
[Footnote 31: With regard to the recovery of Britain, we obtain a
few hints from Aurelius Victor and Eutropius.]
Chapter XIII: Reign Of Diocletian And This Three Associates.
Part II.
Britain had none but domestic enemies to dread; and as long
as the governors preserved their fidelity, and the troops their
discipline, the incursions of the naked savages of Scotland or
Ireland could never materially affect the safety of the province.
The peace of the continent, and the defence of the principal
rivers which bounded the empire, were objects of far greater
difficulty and importance. The policy of Diocletian, which
inspired the councils of his associates, provided for the public
tranquility, by encouraging a spirit of dissension among the
barbarians, and by strengthening the fortifications of the Roman
limit. In the East he fixed a line of camps from Egypt to the
Persian dominions, and for every camp, he instituted an adequate
number of stationary troops, commanded by their respective
officers, and supplied with every kind of arms, from the new
arsenals which he had formed at Antioch, Emesa, and Damascus. ^32
Nor was the precaution of the emperor less watchful against the
well-known valor of the barbarians of Europe. From the mouth of
the Rhine to that of the Danube, the ancient camps, towns, and
citidels, were diligently reestablished, and, in the most exposed
places, new ones were skilfully constructed: the strictest
vigilance was introduced among the garrisons of the frontier, and
every expedient was practised that could render the long chain of
fortifications firm and impenetrable. ^33 A barrier so
respectable was seldom violated, and the barbarians often turned
against each other their disappointed rage. The Goths, the
Vandals, the Gepidae, the Burgundians, the Alemanni, wasted each
other's strength by destructive hostilities: and whosoever
vanquished, they vanquished the enemies of Rome. The subjects of
Diocletian enjoyed the bloody spectacle, and congratulated each
other, that the mischiefs of civil war were now experienced only
by the barbarians. ^34
[Footnote 32: John Malala, in Chron, Antiochen. tom. i. p. 408,
409.]
[Footnote 33: Zosim. l. i. p. 3. That partial historian seems to
celebrate the vigilance of Diocletian with a design of exposing
the negligence of Constantine; we may, however, listen to an
orator: "Nam quid ego alarum et cohortium castra percenseam, toto
Rheni et Istri et Euphraus limite restituta." Panegyr. Vet. iv.
18.]
[Footnote 34: Ruunt omnes in sanguinem suum populi, quibus ron
contigilesse Romanis, obstinataeque feritatis poenas nunc sponte
persolvunt. Panegyr. Vet. iii. 16. Mamertinus illustrates the
fact by the example of almost all the nations in the world.]
Notwithstanding the policy of Diocletian, it was impossible
to maintain an equal and undisturbed tranquillity during a reign
of twenty years, and along a frontier of many hundred miles.
Sometimes the barbarians suspended their domestic animosities,
and the relaxed vigilance of the garrisons sometimes gave a
passage to their strength or dexterity. Whenever the provinces
were invaded, Diocletian conducted himself with that calm dignity
which he always affected or possessed; reserved his presence for
such occasions as were worthy of his interposition, never exposed
his person or reputation to any unnecessary danger, insured his
success by every means that prudence could suggest, and
displayed, with ostentation, the consequences of his victory. In
wars of a more difficult nature, and more doubtful event, he
employed the rough valor of Maximian; and that faithful soldier
was content to ascribe his own victories to the wise counsels and
auspicious influence of his benefactor. But after the adoption
of the two Caesars, the emperors themselves, retiring to a less
laborious scene of action, devolved on their adopted sons the
defence of the Danube and of the Rhine. The vigilant Galerius
was never reduced to the necessity of vanquishing an army of
barbarians on the Roman territory. ^35 The brave and active
Contsantius delivered Gaul from a very furious inroad of the
Alemanni; and his victories of Langres and Vindonissa appear to
have been actions of considerable danger and merit. As he
traversed the open country with a feeble guard, he was
encompassed on a sudden by the superior multitude of the enemy.
He retreated with difficulty towards Langres; but, in the general
consternation, the citizens refused to open their gates, and the
wounded prince was drawn up the wall by the means of a rope.
But, on the news of his distress, the Roman troops hastened from
all sides to his relief, and before the evening he had satisfied
his honor and revenge by the slaughter of six thousand Alemanni.
^36 From the monuments of those times, the obscure traces of
several other victories over the barbarians of Sarmatia and
Germany might possibly be collected; but the tedious search would
not be rewarded either with amusement or with instruction.
[Footnote 35: He complained, though not with the strictest truth,
"Jam fluxisse annos quindecim in quibus, in Illyrico, ad ripam
Danubii relegatus cum gentibus barbaris luctaret." Lactant. de M.
P. c. 18.]
[Footnote 36: In the Greek text of Eusebius, we read six
thousand, a number which I have preferred to the sixty thousand
of Jerome, Orosius Eutropius, and his Greek translator Paeanius.]
The conduct which the emperor Probus had adopted in the
disposal of the vanquished, was imitated by Diocletian and his
associates. The captive barbarians, exchanging death for
slavery, were distributed among the provincials, and assigned to
those districts (in Gaul, the territories of Amiens, Beauvais,
Cambray, Treves, Langres, and Troyes, are particularly specified
^37) which had been depopulated by the calamities of war. They
were usefully employed as shepherds and husbandmen, but were
denied the exercise of arms, except when it was found expedient
to enroll them in the military service. Nor did the emperors
refuse the property of lands, with a less servile tenure, to such
of the barbarians as solicited the protection of Rome. They
granted a settlement to several colonies of the Carpi, the
Bastarnae, and the Sarmatians; and, by a dangerous indulgence,
permitted them in some measure to retain their national manners
and independence. ^38 Among the provincials, it was a subject of
flattering exultation, that the barbarian, so lately an object of
terror, now cultivated their lands, drove their cattle to the
neighboring fair, and contributed by his labor to the public
plenty. They congratulated their masters on the powerful
accession of subjects and soldiers; but they forgot to observe,
that multitudes of secret enemies, insolent from favor, or
desperate from oppression, were introduced into the heart of the
empire. ^39
[Footnote 37: Panegyr. Vet. vii. 21.]
[Footnote 38: There was a settlement of the Sarmatians in the
neighborhood of Treves, which seems to have been deserted by
those lazy barbarians. Ausonius speaks of them in his Mosella: -
"Unde iter ingrediens nemorosa per avia solum,
Et nulla humani spectans vestigia cultus;
. . . . . . . .
Arvaque Sauromatum nuper metata colonis.]
[Footnote 39: There was a town of the Carpi in the Lower Maesia.
See the rhetorical exultation of Eumenius.]
While the Caesars exercised their valor on the banks of the
Rhine and Danube, the presence of the emperors was required on
the southern confines of the Roman world. From the Nile to Mount
Atlas Africa was in arms. A confederacy of five Moorish nations
issued from their deserts to invade the peaceful provinces. ^40
Julian had assumed the purple at Carthage. ^41 Achilleus at
Alexandria, and even the Blemmyes, renewed, or rather continued,
their incursions into the Upper Egypt. Scarcely any
circumstances have been preserved of the exploits of Maximian in
the western parts of Africa; but it appears, by the event, that
the progress of his arms was rapid and decisive, that he
vanquished the fiercest barbarians of Mauritania, and that he
removed them from the mountains, whose inaccessible strength had
inspired their inhabitants with a lawless confidence, and
habituated them to a life of rapine and violence. ^42 Diocletian,
on his side, opened the campaign in Egypt by the siege of
Alexandria, cut off the aqueducts which conveyed the waters of
the Nile into every quarter of that immense city, ^43 and
rendering his camp impregnable to the sallies of the besieged
multitude, he pushed his reiterated attacks with caution and
vigor. After a siege of eight months, Alexandria, wasted by the
sword and by fire, implored the clemency of the conqueror, but it
experienced the full extent of his severity. Many thousands of
the citizens perished in a promiscuous slaughter, and there were
few obnoxious persons in Egypt who escaped a sentence either of
death or at least of exile. ^44 The fate of Busiris and of Coptos
was still more melancholy than that of Alexandria: those proud
cities, the former distinguished by its antiquity, the latter
enriched by the passage of the Indian trade, were utterly
destroyed by the arms and by the severe order of Diocletian. ^45
The character of the Egyptian nation, insensible to kindness, but
extremely susceptible of fear, could alone justify this excessive
rigor. The seditions of Alexandria had often affected the
tranquillity and subsistence of Rome itself. Since the
usurpation of Firmus, the province of Upper Egypt, incessantly
relapsing into rebellion, had embraced the alliance of the
savages of Aethiopia. The number of the Blemmyes, scattered
between the Island of Meroe and the Red Sea, was very
inconsiderable, their disposition was unwarlike, their weapons
rude and inoffensive. ^46 Yet in the public disorders, these
barbarians, whom antiquity, shocked with the deformity of their
figure, had almost excluded from the human species, presumed to
rank themselves among the enemies of Rome. ^47 Such had been the
unworthy allies of the Egyptians; and while the attention of the
state was engaged in more serious wars, their vexations inroads
might again harass the repose of the province. With a view of
opposing to the Blemmyes a suitable adversary, Diocletian
persuaded the Nobatae, or people of Nubia, to remove from their
ancient habitations in the deserts of Libya, and resigned to them
an extensive but unprofitable territory above Syene and the
cataracts of the Nile, with the stipulation, that they should
ever respect and guard the frontier of the empire. The treaty
long subsisted; and till the establishment of Christianity
introduced stricter notions of religious worship, it was annually
ratified by a solemn sacrifice in the Isle of Elephantine, in
which the Romans, as well as the barbarians, adored the same
visible or invisible powers of the universe. ^48
[Footnote 40: Scaliger (Animadvers. ad Euseb. p. 243) decides, in
his usual manner, that the Quinque gentiani, or five African
nations, were the five great cities, the Pentapolis of the
inoffensive province of Cyrene.]
[Foot]note 41: After his defeat, Julian stabbed himself with a
dagger, and immediately leaped into the flames. Victor in
Epitome.]
[Footnote 42: Tu ferocissimos Mauritaniae populos inaccessis
montium jugis et naturali munitione fidentes, expugnasti,
recepisti, transtulisti. Panegyr Vet. vi. 8.]
[Footnote 43: See the description of Alexandria, in Hirtius de
Bel. Alexandrin c. 5.]
[Footnote 44: Eutrop. ix. 24. Orosius, vii. 25. John Malala in
Chron. Antioch. p. 409, 410. Yet Eumenius assures us, that Egypt
was pacified by the clemency of Diocletian.]
[Footnote 45: Eusebius (in Chron.) places their destruction
several years sooner and at a time when Egypt itself was in a
state of rebellion against the Romans.]
[Footnote 46: Strabo, l. xvii. p. 172. Pomponius Mela, l. i. c.
4. His words are curious: "Intra, si credere libet vix, homines
magisque semiferi Aegipanes, et Blemmyes, et Satyri."]
[Footnote 47: Ausus sese inserere fortunae et provocare arma
Romana.]
[Footnote 48: See Procopius de Bell. Persic. l. i. c. 19.
Note: Compare, on the epoch of the final extirpation of the
rites of Paganism from the Isle of Philae, (Elephantine,) which
subsisted till the edict of Theodosius, in the sixth century, a
dissertation of M. Letronne, on certain Greek inscriptions. The
dissertation contains some very interesting observations on the
conduct and policy of Diocletian in Egypt. Mater pour l'Hist. du
Christianisme en Egypte, Nubie et Abyssinie, Paris 1817 - M.]
At the same time that Diocletian chastised the past crimes
of the Egyptians, he provided for their future safety and
happiness by many wise regulations, which were confirmed and
enforced under the succeeding reigns. ^49 One very remarkable
edict which he published, instead of being condemned as the
effect of jealous tyranny, deserves to be applauded as an act of
prudence and humanity. He caused a diligent inquiry to be made
"for all the ancient books which treated of the admirable art of
making gold and silver, and without pity, committed them to the
flames; apprehensive, as we are assumed, lest the opulence of the
Egyptians should inspire them with confidence to rebel against
the empire." ^50 But if Diocletian had been convinced of the
reality of that valuable art, far from extinguishing the memory,
he would have converted the operation of it to the benefit of the
public revenue. It is much more likely, that his good sense
discovered to him the folly of such magnificent pretensions, and
that he was desirous of preserving the reason and fortunes of his
subjects from the mischievous pursuit. It may be remarked, that
these ancient books, so liberally ascribed to Pythagoras, to
Solomon, or to Hermes, were the pious frauds of more recent
adepts. The Greeks were inattentive either to the use or to the
abuse of chemistry. In that immense register, where Pliny has
deposited the discoveries, the arts, and the errors of mankind,
there is not the least mention of the transmutation of metals;
and the persecution of Diocletian is the first authentic event in
the history of alchemy. The conquest of Egypt by the Arabs
diffused that vain science over the globe. Congenial to the
avarice of the human heart, it was studied in China as in Europe,
with equal eagerness, and with equal success. The darkness of
the middle ages insured a favorable reception to every tale of
wonder, and the revival of learning gave new vigor to hope, and
suggested more specious arts of deception. Philosophy, with the
aid of experience, has at length banished the study of alchemy;
and the present age, however desirous of riches, is content to
seek them by the humbler means of commerce and industry. ^51
[Footnote 49: He fixed the public allowance of corn, for the
people of Alexandria, at two millions of medimni; about four
hundred thousand quarters. Chron. Paschal. p. 276 Procop. Hist.
Arcan. c. 26.]
[Footnote 50: John Antioch, in Excerp. Valesian. p. 834. Suidas
in Diocletian.]
[Footnote 51: See a short history and confutation of Alchemy, in
the works of that philosophical compiler, La Mothe le Vayer, tom.
i. p. 32 - 353.]
The reduction of Egypt was immediately followed by the
Persian war. It was reserved for the reign of Diocletian to
vanquish that powerful nation, and to extort a confession from
the successors of Artaxerxes, of the superior majesty of the
Roman empire.
We have observed, under the reign of Valerian, that Armenia
was subdued by the perfidy and the arms of the Persians, and
that, after the assassination of Chosroes, his son Tiridates, the
infant heir of the monarchy, was saved by the fidelity of his
friends, and educated under the protection of the emperors.
Tiridates derived from his exile such advantages as he could
never have obtained on the throne of Armenia; the early knowledge
of adversity, of mankind, and of the Roman discipline. He
signalized his youth by deeds of valor, and displayed a matchless
dexterity, as well as strength, in every martial exercise, and
even in the less honorable contests of the Olympian games. ^52
Those qualities were more nobly exerted in the defence of his
benefactor Licinius. ^53 That officer, in the sedition which
occasioned the death of Probus, was exposed to the most imminent
danger, and the enraged soldiers were forcing their way into his
tent, when they were checked by the single arm of the Armenian
prince. The gratitude of Tiridates contributed soon afterwards
to his restoration. Licinius was in every station the friend and
companion of Galerius, and the merit of Galerius, long before he
was raised to the dignity of Caesar, had been known and esteemed
by Diocletian. In the third year of that emperor's reign
Tiridates was invested with the kingdom of Armenia. The justice
of the measure was not less evident than its expediency. It was
time to rescue from the usurpation of the Persian monarch an
important territory, which, since the reign of Nero, had been
always granted under the protection of the empire to a younger
branch of the house of Arsaces. ^54
[Footnote 52: See the education and strength of Tiridates in the
Armenian history of Moses of Chorene, l. ii. c. 76. He could
seize two wild bulls by the horns, and break them off with his
hands.]
[Footnote 53: If we give credit to the younger Victor, who
supposes that in the year 323 Licinius was only sixty years of
age, he could scarcely be the same person as the patron of
Tiridates; but we know from much better authority, (Euseb. Hist.
Ecclesiast. l. x. c. 8,) that Licinius was at that time in the
last period of old age: sixteen years before, he is represented
with gray hairs, and as the contemporary of Galerius. See
Lactant. c. 32. Licinius was probably born about the year 250.]
[Footnote 54: See the sixty-second and sixty-third books of Dion
Cassius.]
When Tiridates appeared on the frontiers of Armenia, he was
received with an unfeigned transport of joy and loyalty. During
twenty-six years, the country had experienced the real and
imaginary hardships of a foreign yoke. The Persian monarchs
adorned their new conquest with magnificent buildings; but those
monuments had been erected at the expense of the people, and were
abhorred as badges of slavery. The apprehension of a revolt had
inspired the most rigorous precautions: oppression had been
aggravated by insult, and the consciousness of the public hatred
had been productive of every measure that could render it still
more implacable. We have already remarked the intolerant spirit
of the Magian religion. The statues of the deified kings of
Armenia, and the sacred images of the sun and moon, were broke in
pieces by the zeal of the conqueror; and the perpetual fire of
Ormuzd was kindled and preserved upon an altar erected on the
summit of Mount Bagavan. ^55 It was natural, that a people
exasperated by so many injuries, should arm with zeal in the
cause of their independence, their religion, and their hereditary
sovereign. The torrent bore down every obstacle, and the Persian
garrisons retreated before its fury. The nobles of Armenia flew
to the standard of Tiridates, all alleging their past merit,
offering their future service, and soliciting from the new king
those honors and rewards from which they had been excluded with
disdain under the foreign government. ^56 The command of the army
was bestowed on Artavasdes, whose father had saved the infancy of
Tiridates, and whose family had been massacred for that generous
action. The brother of Artavasdes obtained the government of a
province. One of the first military dignities was conferred on
the satrap Otas, a man of singular temperance and fortitude, who
presented to the king his sister ^57 and a considerable treasure,
both of which, in a sequestered fortress, Otas had preserved from
violation. Among the Armenian nobles appeared an ally, whose
fortunes are too remarkable to pass unnoticed. His name was
Mamgo, ^! his origin was Scythian, and the horde which
acknowledge his authority had encamped a very few years before on
the skirts of the Chinese empire, ^58 which at that time extended
as far as the neighborhood of Sogdiana. ^59 Having incurred the
displeasure of his master, Mamgo, with his followers, retired to
the banks of the Oxus, and implored the protection of Sapor. The
emperor of China claimed the fugitive, and alleged the rights of
sovereignty. The Persian monarch pleaded the laws of hospitality,
and with some difficulty avoided a war, by the promise that he
would banish Mamgo to the uttermost parts of the West, a
punishment, as he described it, not less dreadful than death
itself. Armenia was chosen for the place of exile, and a large
district was assigned to the Scythian horde, on which they might
feed their flocks and herds, and remove their encampment from one
place to another, according to the different seasons of the year.
They were employed to repel the invasion of Tiridates; but their
leader, after weighing the obligations and injuries which he had
received from the Persian monarch, resolved to abandon his party.
The Armenian prince, who was well acquainted with this merit as
well as power of Mamgo, treated him with distinguished respect;
and, by admitting him into his confidence, acquired a brave and
faithful servant, who contributed very effectually to his
restoration. ^60
[Footnote 55: Moses of Chorene. Hist. Armen. l. ii. c. 74. The
statues had been erected by Valarsaces, who reigned in Armenia
about 130 years before Christ, and was the first king of the
family of Arsaces, (see Moses, Hist. Armen. l. ii. 2, 3.) The
deification of the Arsacides is mentioned by Justin, (xli. 5,)
and by Ammianus Marcellinus, (xxiii. 6.)]
[Footnote 56: The Armenian nobility was numerous and powerful.
Moses mentions many families which were distinguished under the
reign of Valarsaces, (l. ii. 7,) and which still subsisted in his
own time, about the middle of the fifth century. See the preface
of his Editors.]
[Footnote 57: She was named Chosroiduchta, and had not the os
patulum like other women. (Hist. Armen. l. ii. c. 79.) I do not
understand the expression.
Note: Os patulum signifies merely a large and widely opening
mouth. Ovid (Metam. xv. 513) says, speaking of the monster who
attacked Hippolytus, patulo partem maris evomit ore. Probably a
wide mouth was a common defect among the Armenian women. - G.]
[Footnote !: Mamgo (according to M. St. Martin, note to Le Beau.
ii. 213) belonged to the imperial race of Hon, who had filled the
throne of China for four hundred years. Dethroned by the
usurping race of Wei, Mamgo found a hospitable reception in
Persia in the reign of Ardeschir. The emperor of china having
demanded the surrender of the fugitive and his partisans, Sapor,
then king, threatened with war both by Rome and China, counselled
Mamgo to retire into Armenia. "I have expelled him from my
dominions, (he answered the Chinese ambassador;) I have banished
him to the extremity of the earth, where the sun sets; I have
dismissed him to certain death." Compare Mem. sur l'Armenie, ii.
25. - M.]
[Footnote 58: In the Armenian history, (l. ii. 78,) as well as in
the Geography, (p. 367,) China is called Zenia, or Zenastan. It
is characterized by the production of silk, by the opulence of
the natives, and by their love of peace, above all the other
nations of the earth.
Note: See St. Martin, Mem. sur l'Armenie, i. 304.]
[Footnote 59: Vou-ti, the first emperor of the seventh dynasty,
who then reigned in China, had political transactions with
Fergana, a province of Sogdiana, and is said to have received a
Roman embassy, (Histoire des Huns, tom. i. p. 38.) In those ages
the Chinese kept a garrison at Kashgar, and one of their
generals, about the time of Trajan, marched as far as the Caspian
Sea. With regard to the intercourse between China and the
Western countries, a curious memoir of M. de Guignes may be
consulted, in the Academie des Inscriptions, tom. xxii. p. 355.
Note: The Chinese Annals mention, under the ninth year of
Yan-hi, which corresponds with the year 166 J. C., an embassy
which arrived from Tathsin, and was sent by a prince called
An-thun, who can be no other than Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, who
then ruled over the Romans. St. Martin, Mem. sur l'Armaenic. ii.
30. See also Klaproth, Tableaux Historiques de l'Asie, p. 69.
The embassy came by Jy-nan, Tonquin. - M.]
[Footnote 60: See Hist. Armen. l. ii. c. 81.]
For a while, fortune appeared to favor the enterprising
valor of Tiridates. He not only expelled the enemies of his
family and country from the whole extent of Armenia, but in the
prosecution of his revenge he carried his arms, or at least his
incursions, into the heart of Assyria. The historian, who has
preserved the name of Tiridates from oblivion, celebrates, with a
degree of national enthusiasm, his personal prowess: and, in the
true spirit of eastern romance, describes the giants and the
elephants that fell beneath his invincible arm. It is from other
information that we discover the distracted state of the Persian
monarchy, to which the king of Armenia was indebted for some part
of his advantages. The throne was disputed by the ambition of
contending brothers; and Hormuz, after exerting without success
the strength of his own party, had recourse to the dangerous
assistance of the barbarians who inhabited the banks of the
Caspian Sea. ^61 The civil war was, however, soon terminated,
either by a victor or by a reconciliation; and Narses, who was
universally acknowledged as king of Persia, directed his whole
force against the foreign enemy. The contest then became too
unequal; nor was the valor of the hero able to withstand the
power of the monarch, Tiridates, a second time expelled from the
throne of Armenia, once more took refuge in the court of the
emperors. ^* Narses soon reestablished his authority over the
revolted province; and loudly complaining of the protection
afforded by the Romans to rebels and fugitives, aspired to the
conquest of the East. ^62
[Footnote 61: Ipsos Persas ipsumque Regem ascitis Saccis, et
Russis, et Gellis, petit frater Ormies. Panegyric. Vet. iii. 1.
The Saccae were a nation of wandering Scythians, who encamped
towards the sources of the Oxus and the Jaxartes. The Gelli
where the inhabitants of Ghilan, along the Caspian Sea, and who
so long, under the name of Dilemines, infested the Persian
monarchy. See d'Herbelot, Bibliotheque]
[Footnote *: M St. Martin represents this differently. Le roi de
Perse * * * profits d'un voyage que Tiridate avoit fait a Rome
pour attaquer ce royaume. This reads like the evasion of the
national historians to disguise the fact discreditable to their
hero. See Mem. sur l'Armenie, i. 304. - M.]
[Footnote 62: Moses of Chorene takes no notice of this second
revolution, which I have been obliged to collect from a passage
of Ammianus Marcellinus, (l. xxiii. c. 5.) Lactantius speaks of
the ambition of Narses: "Concitatus domesticis exemplis avi sui
Saporis ad occupandum orientem magnis copiis inhiabat." De Mort.
Persecut. c. 9.]
Neither prudence nor honor could permit the emperors to
forsake the cause of the Armenian king, and it was resolved to
exert the force of the empire in the Persian war. Diocletian,
with the calm dignity which he constantly assumed, fixed his own
station in the city of Antioch, from whence he prepared and
directed the military operations. ^63 The conduct of the legions
was intrusted to the intrepid valor of Galerius, who, for that
important purpose, was removed from the banks of the Danube to
those of the Euphrates. The armies soon encountered each other
in the plains of Mesopotamia, and two battles were fought with
various and doubtful success; but the third engagement was of a
more decisive nature; and the Roman army received a total
overthrow, which is attributed to the rashness of Galerius, who,
with an inconsiderable body of troops, attacked the innumerable
host of the Persians. ^64 But the consideration of the country
that was the scene of action, may suggest another reason for his
defeat. The same ground on which Galerius was vanquished, had
been rendered memorable by the death of Crassus, and the
slaughter of ten legions. It was a plain of more than sixty
miles, which extended from the hills of Carrhae to the Euphrates;
a smooth and barren surface of sandy desert, without a hillock,
without a tree, and without a spring of fresh water. ^65 The
steady infantry of the Romans, fainting with heat and thirst,
could neither hope for victory if they preserved their ranks, nor
break their ranks without exposing themselves to the most
imminent danger. In this situation they were gradually
encompassed by the superior numbers, harassed by the rapid
evolutions, and destroyed by the arrows of the barbarian cavalry.
The king of Armenia had signalized his valor in the battle, and
acquired personal glory by the public misfortune. He was pursued
as far as the Euphrates; his horse was wounded, and it appeared
impossible for him to escape the victorious enemy. In this
extremity Tiridates embraced the only refuge which appeared
before him: he dismounted and plunged into the stream. His armor
was heavy, the river very deep, and at those parts at least half
a mile in breadth; ^66 yet such was his strength and dexterity,
that he reached in safety the opposite bank. ^67 With regard to
the Roman general, we are ignorant of the circumstances of his
escape; but when he returned to Antioch, Diocletian received him,
not with the tenderness of a friend and colleague, but with the
indignation of an offended sovereign. The haughtiest of men,
clothed in his purple, but humbled by the sense of his fault and
misfortune, was obliged to follow the emperor's chariot above a
mile on foot, and to exhibit, before the whole court, the
spectacle of his disgrace. ^68
[Footnote 63: We may readily believe, that Lactantius ascribes to
cowardice the conduct of Diocletian. Julian, in his oration,
says, that he remained with all the forces of the empire; a very
hyperbolical expression.]
[Footnote 64: Our five abbreviators, Eutropius, Festus, the two
Victors, and Orosius, all relate the last and great battle; but
Orosius is the only one who speaks of the two former.]
[Footnote 65: The nature of the country is finely described by
Plutarch, in the life of Crassus; and by Xenophon, in the first
book of the Anabasis]
[Footnote 66: See Foster's Dissertation in the second volume of
the translation of the Anabasis by Spelman; which I will venture
to recommend as one of the best versions extant.]
[Footnote 67: Hist. Armen. l. ii. c. 76. I have transferred this
exploit of Tiridates from an imaginary defeat to the real one of
Galerius.]
[Footnote 68: Ammian. Marcellin. l. xiv. The mile, in the hands
of Eutropoius, (ix. 24,) of Festus (c. 25,) and of Orosius, (vii
25), easily increased to several miles]
As soon as Diocletian had indulged his private resentment,
and asserted the majesty of supreme power, he yielded to the
submissive entreaties of the Caesar, and permitted him to
retrieve his own honor, as well as that of the Roman arms. In
the room of the unwarlike troops of Asia, which had most probably
served in the first expedition, a second army was drawn from the
veterans and new levies of the Illyrian frontier, and a
considerable body of Gothic auxiliaries were taken into the
Imperial pay. ^69 At the head of a chosen army of twenty-five
thousand men, Galerius again passed the Euphrates; but, instead
of exposing his legions in the open plains of Mesopotamia he
advanced through the mountains of Armenia, where he found the
inhabitants devoted to his cause, and the country as favorable to
the operations of infantry as it was inconvenient for the motions
of cavalry. ^70 Adversity had confirmed the Roman discipline,
while the barbarians, elated by success, were become so negligent
and remiss, that in the moment when they least expected it, they
were surprised by the active conduct of Galerius, who, attended
only by two horsemen, had with his own eyes secretly examined the
state and position of their camp. A surprise, especially in the
night time, was for the most part fatal to a Persian army.
"Their horses were tied, and generally shackled, to prevent their
running away; and if an alarm happened, a Persian had his housing
to fix, his horse to bridle, and his corselet to put on, before
he could mount." ^71 On this occasion, the impetuous attack of
Galerius spread disorder and dismay over the camp of the
barbarians. A slight resistance was followed by a dreadful
carnage, and, in the general confusion, the wounded monarch (for
Narses commanded his armies in person) fled towards the deserts
of Media. His sumptuous tents, and those of his satraps,
afforded an immense booty to the conqueror; and an incident is
mentioned, which proves the rustic but martial ignorance of the
legions in the elegant superfluities of life. A bag of shining
leather, filled with pearls, fell into the hands of a private
soldier; he carefully preserved the bag, but he threw away its
contents, judging that whatever was of no use could not possibly
be of any value. ^72 The principal loss of Narses was of a much
more affecting nature. Several of his wives, his sisters, and
children, who had attended the army, were made captives in the
defeat. But though the character of Galerius had in general very
little affinity with that of Alexander, he imitated, after his
victory, the amiable behavior of the Macedonian towards the
family of Darius. The wives and children of Narses were
protected from violence and rapine, conveyed to a place of
safety, and treated with every mark of respect and tenderness,
that was due from a generous enemy to their age, their sex, and
their royal dignity. ^73
[Footnote 69: Aurelius Victor. Jornandes de Rebus Geticis, c.
21.]
[Footnote 70: Aurelius Victor says, "Per Armeniam in hostes
contendit, quae fermo sola, seu facilior vincendi via est." He
followed the conduct of Trajan, and the idea of Julius Caesar.]
[Footnote 71: Xenophon's Anabasis, l. iii. For that reason the
Persian cavalry encamped sixty stadia from the enemy.]
[Footnote 72: The story is told by Ammianus, l. xxii. Instead of
saccum, some read scutum.]
[Footnote 73: The Persians confessed the Roman superiority in
morals as well as in arms. Eutrop. ix. 24. But this respect and
gratitude of enemies is very seldom to be found in their own
accounts.]
Chapter XIII: Reign Of Diocletian And This Three Associates.
Part III.
While the East anxiously expected the decision of this great
contest, the emperor Diocletian, having assembled in Syria a
strong army of observation, displayed from a distance the
resources of the Roman power, and reserved himself for any future
emergency of the war. On the intelligence of the victory he
condescended to advance towards the frontier, with a view of
moderating, by his presence and counsels, the pride of Galerius.
The interview of the Roman princes at Nisibis was accompanied
with every expression of respect on one side, and of esteem on
the other. It was in that city that they soon afterwards gave
audience to the ambassador of the Great King. ^74 The power, or
at least the spirit, of Narses, had been broken by his last
defeat; and he considered an immediate peace as the only means
that could stop the progress of the Roman arms. He despatched
Apharban, a servant who possessed his favor and confidence, with
a commission to negotiate a treaty, or rather to receive whatever
conditions the conqueror should impose. Apharban opened the
conference by expressing his master's gratitude for the generous
treatment of his family, and by soliciting the liberty of those
illustrious captives. He celebrated the valor of Galerius,
without degrading the reputation of Narses, and thought it no
dishonor to confess the superiority of the victorious Caesar,
over a monarch who had surpassed in glory all the princes of his
race. Notwithstanding the justice of the Persian cause, he was
empowered to submit the present differences to the decision of
the emperors themselves; convinced as he was, that, in the midst
of prosperity, they would not be unmindful of the vicissitudes of
fortune. Apharban concluded his discourse in the style of
eastern allegory, by observing that the Roman and Persian
monarchies were the two eyes of the world, which would remain
imperfect and mutilated if either of them should be put out.
[Footnote 74: The account of the negotiation is taken from the
fragments of Peter the Patrician, in the Excerpta Legationum,
published in the Byzantine Collection. Peter lived under
Justinian; but it is very evident, by the nature of his
materials, that they are drawn from the most authentic and
respectable writers.]
"It well becomes the Persians," replied Galerius, with a
transport of fury, which seemed to convulse his whole frame, "it
well becomes the Persians to expatiate on the vicissitudes of
fortune, and calmly to read us lectures on the virtues of
moderation. Let them remember their own moderation, towards the
unhappy Valerian. They vanquished him by fraud, they treated him
with indignity. They detained him till the last moment of his
life in shameful captivity, and after his death they exposed his
body to perpetual ignominy." Softening, however, his tone,
Galerius insinuated to the ambassador, that it had never been the
practice of the Romans to trample on a prostrate enemy; and that,
on this occasion, they should consult their own dignity rather
than the Persian merit. He dismissed Apharban with a hope that
Narses would soon be informed on what conditions he might obtain,
from the clemency of the emperors, a lasting peace, and the
restoration of his wives and children. In this conference we may
discover the fierce passions of Galerius, as well as his
deference to the superior wisdom and authority of Diocletian.
The ambition of the former grasped at the conquest of the East,
and had proposed to reduce Persia into the state of a province.
The prudence of the latter, who adhered to the moderate policy of
Augustus and the Antonines, embraced the favorable opportunity of
terminating a successful war by an honorable and advantageous
peace. ^75
[Footnote 75: Adeo victor (says Aurelius) ut ni Valerius, cujus
nutu omnis gerebantur, abnuisset, Romani fasces in provinciam
novam ferrentur Verum pars terrarum tamen nobis utilior
quaesita.]
In pursuance of their promise, the emperors soon afterwards
appointed Sicorius Probus, one of their secretaries, to acquaint
the Persian court with their final resolution. As the minister
of peace, he was received with every mark of politeness and
friendship; but, under the pretence of allowing him the necessary
repose after so long a journey, the audience of Probus was
deferred from day to day; and he attended the slow motions of the
king, till at length he was admitted to his presence, near the
River Asprudus in Media. The secret motive of Narses, in this
delay, had been to collect such a military force as might enable
him, though sincerely desirous of peace, to negotiate with the
greater weight and dignity. Three persons only assisted at this
important conference, the minister Apharban, the praefect of the
guards, and an officer who had commanded on the Armenian
frontier. ^76 The first condition proposed by the ambassador is
not at present of a very intelligible nature; that the city of
Nisibis might be established for the place of mutual exchange,
or, as we should formerly have termed it, for the staple of
trade, between the two empires. There is no difficulty in
conceiving the intention of the Roman princes to improve their
revenue by some restraints upon commerce; but as Nisibis was
situated within their own dominions, and as they were masters
both of the imports and exports, it should seem that such
restraints were the objects of an internal law, rather than of a
foreign treaty. To render them more effectual, some stipulations
were probably required on the side of the king of Persia, which
appeared so very repugnant either to his interest or to his
dignity, that Narses could not be persuaded to subscribe them.
As this was the only article to which he refused his consent, it
was no longer insisted on; and the emperors either suffered the
trade to flow in its natural channels, or contented themselves
with such restrictions, as it depended on their own authority to
establish.
[Footnote 76: He had been governor of Sumium, (Pot. Patricius in
Excerpt. Legat. p. 30.) This province seems to be mentioned by
Moses of Chorene, (Geograph. p. 360,) and lay to the east of
Mount Ararat.
Note: The Siounikh of the Armenian writers St. Martin i.
142. - M.]
As soon as this difficulty was removed, a solemn peace was
concluded and ratified between the two nations. The conditions
of a treaty so glorious to the empire, and so necessary to Persia
Persian, may deserve a more peculiar attention, as the history of
Rome presents very few transactions of a similar nature; most of
her wars having either been terminated by absolute conquest, or
waged against barbarians ignorant of the use of letters. I. The
Aboras, or, as it is called by Xenophon, the Araxes, was fixed as
the boundary between the two monarchies. ^77 That river, which
rose near the Tigris, was increased, a few miles below Nisibis,
by the little stream of the Mygdonius, passed under the walls of
Singara, and fell into the Euphrates at Circesium, a frontier
town, which, by the care of Diocletian, was very strongly
fortified. ^78 Mesopotomia, the object of so many wars, was ceded
to the empire; and the Persians, by this treaty, renounced all
pretensions to that great province. II. They relinquished to the
Romans five provinces beyond the Tigris. ^79 Their situation
formed a very useful barrier, and their natural strength was soon
improved by art and military skill. Four of these, to the north
of the river, were districts of obscure fame and inconsiderable
extent; Intiline, Zabdicene, Arzanene, and Moxoene; ^! but on the
east of the Tigris, the empire acquired the large and mountainous
territory of Carduene, the ancient seat of the Carduchians, who
preserved for many ages their manly freedom in the heart of the
despotic monarchies of Asia. The ten thousand Greeks traversed
their country, after a painful march, or rather engagement, of
seven days; and it is confessed by their leader, in his
incomparable relation of the retreat, that they suffered more
from the arrows of the Carduchians, than from the power of the
Great King. ^80 Their posterity, the Curds, with very little
alteration either of name or manners, ^* acknowledged the nominal
sovereignty of the Turkish sultan. III. It is almost needless
to observe, that Tiridates, the faithful ally of Rome, was
restored to the throne of his fathers, and that the rights of the
Imperial supremacy were fully asserted and secured. The limits
of Armenia were extended as far as the fortress of Sintha in
Media, and this increase of dominion was not so much an act of
liberality as of justice. Of the provinces already mentioned
beyond the Tigris, the four first had been dismembered by the
Parthians from the crown of Armenia; ^81 and when the Romans
acquired the possession of them, they stipulated, at the expense
of the usurpers, an ample compensation, which invested their ally
with the extensive and fertile country of Atropatene. Its
principal city, in the same situation perhaps as the modern
Tauris, was frequently honored by the residence of Tiridates; and
as it sometimes bore the name of Ecbatana, he imitated, in the
buildings and fortifications, the splendid capital of the Medes.
^82 IV. The country of Iberia was barren, its inhabitants rude
and savage. But they were accustomed to the use of arms, and
they separated from the empire barbarians much fiercer and more
formidable than themselves. The narrow defiles of Mount Caucasus
were in their hands, and it was in their choice, either to admit
or to exclude the wandering tribes of Sarmatia, whenever a
rapacious spirit urged them to penetrate into the richer climes
of the South. ^83 The nomination of the kings of Iberia, which
was resigned by the Persian monarch to the emperors, contributed
to the strength and security of the Roman power in Asia. ^84 The
East enjoyed a profound tranquillity during forty years; and the
treaty between the rival monarchies was strictly observed till
the death of Tiridates; when a new generation, animated with
different views and different passions, succeeded to the
government of the world; and the grandson of Narses undertook a
long and memorable war against the princes of the house of
Constantine.
[Footnote 77: By an error of the geographer Ptolemy, the position
of Singara is removed from the Aboras to the Tigris, which may
have produced the mistake of Peter, in assigning the latter river
for the boundary, instead of the former. The line of the Roman
frontier traversed, but never followed, the course of the Tigris.
Note: There are here several errors. Gibbon has confounded
the streams, and the towns which they pass. The Aboras, or
rather the Chaboras, the Araxes of Xenophon, has its source above
Ras-Ain or Re-Saina, (Theodosiopolis,) about twenty-seven leagues
from the Tigris; it receives the waters of the Mygdonius, or
Saocoras, about thirty-three leagues below Nisibis. at a town now
called Al Nahraim; it does not pass under the walls of Singara;
it is the Saocoras that washes the walls of that town: the latter
river has its source near Nisibis. at five leagues from the
Tigris. See D'Anv. l'Euphrate et le Tigre, 46, 49, 50, and the
map.
To the east of the Tigris is another less considerable
river, named also the Chaboras, which D'Anville calls the
Centrites, Khabour, Nicephorius, without quoting the authorities
on which he gives those names. Gibbon did not mean to speak of
this river, which does not pass by Singara, and does not fall
into the Euphrates. See Michaelis, Supp. ad Lex. Hebraica. 3d
part, p. 664, 665. - G.]
[Footnote 78: Procopius de Edificiis, l. ii. c. 6.]
[Footnote 79: Three of the provinces, Zabdicene, Arzanene, and
Carduene, are allowed on all sides. But instead of the other
two, Peter (in Excerpt. Leg. p. 30) inserts Rehimene and Sophene.
I have preferred Ammianus, (l. xxv. 7,) because it might be
proved that Sophene was never in the hands of the Persians,
either before the reign of Diocletian, or after that of Jovian.
For want of correct maps, like those of M. d'Anville, almost all
the moderns, with Tillemont and Valesius at their head, have
imagined, that it was in respect to Persia, and not to Rome, that
the five provinces were situate beyond the Tigris.]
[Footnote !: See St. Martin, note on Le Beau, i. 380. He would
read, for Intiline, Ingeleme, the name of a small province of
Armenia, near the sources of the Tigris, mentioned by St.
Epiphanius, (Haeres, 60;) for the unknown name Arzacene, with
Gibbon, Arzanene. These provinces do not appear to have made an
integral part of the Roman empire; Roman garrisons replaced those
of Persia, but the sovereignty remained in the hands of the
feudatory princes of Armenia. A prince of Carduene, ally or
dependent on the empire, with the Roman name of Jovianus, occurs
in the reign of Julian. - M.]
[Footnote 80: Xenophon's Anabasis, l. iv. Their bows were three
cubits in length, their arrows two; they rolled down stones that
were each a wagon load. The Greeks found a great many villages
in that rude country.] [Footnote *: I travelled through this
country in 1810, and should judge, from what I have read and seen
of its inhabitants, that they have remained unchanged in their
appearance and character for more than twenty centuries Malcolm,
note to Hist. of Persia, vol. i. p. 82. - M.]
[Footnote 81: According to Eutropius, (vi. 9, as the text is
represented by the best Mss.,) the city of Tigranocerta was in
Arzanene. The names and situation of the other three may be
faintly traced.]
[Footnote 82: Compare Herodotus, l. i. c. 97, with Moses
Choronens. Hist Armen. l. ii. c. 84, and the map of Armenia
given by his editors.]
[Footnote 83: Hiberi, locorum potentes, Caspia via Sarmatam in
Armenios raptim effundunt. Tacit. Annal. vi. 34. See Strabon.
Geograph. l. xi. p. 764, [edit. Casaub.]
[Footnote 84: Peter Patricius (in Excerpt. Leg. p. 30) is the
only writer who mentions the Iberian article of the treaty.]
The arduous work of rescuing the distressed empire from
tyrants and barbarians had now been completely achieved by a
succession of Illyrian peasants. As soon as Diocletian entered
into the twentieth year of his reign, he celebrated that
memorable aera, as well as the success of his arms, by the pomp
of a Roman triumph. ^85 Maximian, the equal partner of his power,
was his only companion in the glory of that day. The two Caesars
had fought and conquered, but the merit of their exploits was
ascribed, according to the rigor of ancient maxims, to the
auspicious influence of their fathers and emperors. ^86 The
triumph of Diocletian and Maximian was less magnificent, perhaps,
than those of Aurelian and Probus, but it was dignified by
several circumstances of superior fame and good fortune. Africa
and Britain, the Rhine, the Danube, and the Nile, furnished their
respective trophies; but the most distinguished ornament was of a
more singular nature, a Persian victory followed by an important
conquest. The representations of rivers, mountains, and
provinces, were carried before the Imperial car. The images of
the captive wives, the sisters, and the children of the Great
King, afforded a new and grateful spectacle to the vanity of the
people. ^87 In the eyes of posterity, this triumph is remarkable,
by a distinction of a less honorable kind. It was the last that
Rome ever beheld. Soon after this period, the emperors ceased to
vanquish, and Rome ceased to be the capital of the empire.
[Footnote 85: Euseb. in Chron. Pagi ad annum. Till the discovery
of the treatise De Mortibus Persecutorum, it was not certain that
the triumph and the Vicennalia was celebrated at the same time.]
[Footnote 86: At the time of the Vicennalia, Galerius seems to
have kept station on the Danube. See Lactant. de M. P. c. 38.]
[Footnote 87: Eutropius (ix. 27) mentions them as a part of the
triumph. As the persons had been restored to Narses, nothing
more than their images could be exhibited.]
The spot on which Rome was founded had been consecrated by
ancient ceremonies and imaginary miracles. The presence of some
god, or the memory of some hero, seemed to animate every part of
the city, and the empire of the world had been promised to the
Capitol. ^88 The native Romans felt and confessed the power of
this agreeable illusion. It was derived from their ancestors,
had grown up with their earliest habits of life, and was
protected, in some measure, by the opinion of political utility.
The form and the seat of government were intimately blended
together, nor was it esteemed possible to transport the one
without destroying the other. ^89 But the sovereignty of the
capital was gradually annihilated in the extent of conquest; the
provinces rose to the same level, and the vanquished nations
acquired the name and privileges, without imbibing the partial
affections, of Romans. During a long period, however, the
remains of the ancient constitution, and the influence of custom,
preserved the dignity of Rome. The emperors, though perhaps of
African or Illyrian extraction, respected their adopted country,
as the seat of their power, and the centre of their extensive
dominions. The emergencies of war very frequently required their
presence on the frontiers; but Diocletian and Maximian were the
first Roman princes who fixed, in time of peace, their ordinary
residence in the provinces; and their conduct, however it might
be suggested by private motives, was justified by very specious
considerations of policy. The court of the emperor of the West
was, for the most part, established at Milan, whose situation, at
the foot of the Alps, appeared far more convenient than that of
Rome, for the important purpose of watching the motions of the
barbarians of Germany. Milan soon assumed the splendor of an
Imperial city. The houses are described as numerous and well
built; the manners of the people as polished and liberal. A
circus, a theatre, a mint, a palace, baths, which bore the name
of their founder Maximian; porticos adorned with statues, and a
double circumference of walls, contributed to the beauty of the
new capital; nor did it seem oppressed even by the proximity of
Rome. ^90 To rival the majesty of Rome was the ambition likewise
of Diocletian, who employed his leisure, and the wealth of the
East, in the embellishment of Nicomedia, a city placed on the
verge of Europe and Asia, almost at an equal distance between the
Danube and the Euphrates. By the taste of the monarch, and at
the expense of the people, Nicomedia acquired, in the space of a
few years, a degree of magnificence which might appear to have
required the labor of ages, and became inferior only to Rome,
Alexandria, and Antioch, in extent of populousness. ^91 The life
of Diocletian and Maximian was a life of action, and a
considerable portion of it was spent in camps, or in the long and
frequent marches; but whenever the public business allowed them
any relaxation, they seemed to have retired with pleasure to
their favorite residences of Nicomedia and Milan. Till
Diocletian, in the twentieth year of his reign, celebrated his
Roman triumph, it is extremely doubtful whether he ever visited
the ancient capital of the empire. Even on that memorable
occasion his stay did not exceed two months. Disgusted with the
licentious familiarity of the people, he quitted Rome with
precipitation thirteen days before it was expected that he should
have appeared in the senate, invested with the ensigns of the
consular dignity. ^92
[Footnote 88: Livy gives us a speech of Camillus on that subject,
(v. 51 - 55,) full of eloquence and sensibility, in opposition to
a design of removing the seat of government from Rome to the
neighboring city of Veii.]
[Footnote 89: Julius Caesar was reproached with the intention of
removing the empire to Ilium or Alexandria. See Sueton. in
Caesar. c. 79. According to the ingenious conjecture of Le Fevre
and Dacier, the ode of the third book of Horace was intended to
divert from the execution of a similar design.]
[Footnote 90: See Aurelius Victor, who likewise mentions the
buildings erected by Maximian at Carthage, probably during the
Moorish war. We shall insert some verses of Ausonius de Clar.
Urb. v.
Et Mediolani miraeomnia: copia rerum;
Innumerae cultaeque domus; facunda virorum
Ingenia, et mores laeti: tum duplice muro
Amplificata loci species; populique voluptas
Circus; et inclusi moles cuneata Theatri;
Templa, Palatinaeque arces, opulensque Moneta,
Et regio Herculei celebris sub honore lavacri.
Cunctaque marmoreis ornata Peristyla signis;
Moeniaque in valli formam circumdata labro,
Omnia quae magnis operum velut aemula formis
Excellunt: nec juncta premit vicinia Romae.]
[Footnote 91: Lactant. de M. P. c. 17. Libanius, Orat. viii. p.
203.]
[Footnote 92: Lactant. de M. P. c. 17. On a similar occasion,
Ammianus mentions the dicacitas plebis, as not very agreeable to
an Imperial ear. (See l. xvi. c. 10.)]
The dislike expressed by Diocletian towards Rome and Roman
freedom, was not the effect of momentary caprice, but the result
of the most artful policy. That crafty prince had framed a new
system of Imperial government, which was afterwards completed by
the family of Constantine; and as the image of the old
constitution was religiously preserved in the senate, he resolved
to deprive that order of its small remains of power and
consideration. We may recollect, about eight years before the
elevation, of Diocletian the transient greatness, and the
ambitious hopes, of the Roman senate. As long as that enthusiasm
prevailed, many of the nobles imprudently displayed their zeal in
the cause of freedom; and after the successes of Probus had
withdrawn their countenance from the republican party, the
senators were unable to disguise their impotent resentment. As
the sovereign of Italy, Maximian was intrusted with the care of
extinguishing this troublesome, rather than dangerous spirit, and
the task was perfectly suited to his cruel temper. The most
illustrious members of the senate, whom Diocletian always
affected to esteem, were involved, by his colleague, in the
accusation of imaginary plots; and the possession of an elegant
villa, or a well-cultivated estate, was interpreted as a
convincing evidence of guilt. ^93 The camp of the Praetorians,
which had so long oppressed, began to protect, the majesty of
Rome; and as those haughty troops were conscious of the decline
of their power, they were naturally disposed to unite their
strength with the authority of the senate. By the prudent
measures of Diocletian, the numbers of the Praetorians were
insensibly reduced, their privileges abolished, ^94 and their
place supplied by two faithful legions of Illyricum, who, under
the new titles of Jovians and Herculians, were appointed to
perform the service of the Imperial guards. ^95 But the most
fatal though secret wound, which the senate received from the
hands of Diocletian and Maximian, was inflicted by the inevitable
operation of their absence. As long as the emperors resided at
Rome, that assembly might be oppressed, but it could scarcely be
neglected. The successors of Augustus exercised the power of
dictating whatever laws their wisdom or caprice might suggest;
but those laws were ratified by the sanction of the senate. The
model of ancient freedom was preserved in its deliberations and
decrees; and wise princes, who respected the prejudices of the
Roman people, were in some measure obliged to assume the language
and behavior suitable to the general and first magistrate of the
republic. In the armies and in the provinces, they displayed the
dignity of monarchs; and when they fixed their residence at a
distance from the capital, they forever laid aside the
dissimulation which Augustus had recommended to his successors.
In the exercise of the legislative as well as the executive
power, the sovereign advised with his ministers, instead of
consulting the great council of the nation. The name of the
senate was mentioned with honor till the last period of the
empire; the vanity of its members was still flattered with
honorary distinctions; ^96 but the assembly which had so long
been the source, and so long the instrument of power, was
respectfully suffered to sink into oblivion. The senate of Rome,
losing all connection with the Imperial court and the actual
constitution, was left a venerable but useless monument of
antiquity on the Capitoline hill.
[Footnote 93: Lactantius accuses Maximian of destroying fictis
criminationibus lumina senatus, (De M. P. c. 8.) Aurelius Victor
speaks very doubtfully of the faith of Diocletian towards his
friends.]
[Footnote 94: Truncatae vires urbis, imminuto praetoriarum
cohortium atque in armis vulgi numero. Aurelius Victor.
Lactantius attributes to Galerius the prosecution of the same
plan, (c. 26.)]
[Footnote 95: They were old corps stationed in Illyricum; and
according to the ancient establishment, they each consisted of
six thousand men. They had acquired much reputation by the use
of the plumbatoe, or darts loaded with lead. Each soldier
carried five of these, which he darted from a considerable
distance, with great strength and dexterity. See Vegetius, i.
17.]
[Footnote 96: See the Theodosian Code, l. vi. tit. ii. with
Godefroy's commentary.]
Chapter XIII: Reign Of Diocletian And This Three Associates.
Part IV.
When the Roman princes had lost sight of the senate and of
their ancient capital, they easily forgot the origin and nature
of their legal power. The civil offices of consul, of proconsul,
of censor, and of tribune, by the union of which it had been
formed, betrayed to the people its republican extraction. Those
modest titles were laid aside; ^97 and if they still
distinguished their high station by the appellation of Emperor,
or Imperator, that word was understood in a new and more
dignified sense, and no longer denoted the general of the Roman
armies, but the sovereign of the Roman world. The name of
Emperor, which was at first of a military nature, was associated
with another of a more servile kind. The epithet of Dominus, or
Lord, in its primitive signification, was expressive, not of the
authority of a prince over his subjects, or of a commander over
his soldiers, but of the despotic power of a master over his
domestic slaves. ^98 Viewing it in that odious light, it had been
rejected with abhorrence by the first Caesars. Their resistance
insensibly became more feeble, and the name less odious; till at
length the style of our Lord and Emperor was not only bestowed by
flattery, but was regularly admitted into the laws and public
monuments. Such lofty epithets were sufficient to elate and
satisfy the most excessive vanity; and if the successors of
Diocletian still declined the title of King, it seems to have
been the effect not so much of their moderation as of their
delicacy. Wherever the Latin tongue was in use, (and it was the
language of government throughout the empire,) the Imperial
title, as it was peculiar to themselves, conveyed a more
respectable idea than the name of king, which they must have
shared with a hundred barbarian chieftains; or which, at the
best, they could derive only from Romulus, or from Tarquin. But
the sentiments of the East were very different from those of the
West. From the earliest period of history, the sovereigns of
Asia had been celebrated in the Greek language by the title of
Basileus, or King; and since it was considered as the first
distinction among men, it was soon employed by the servile
provincials of the East, in their humble addresses to the Roman
throne. ^99 Even the attributes, or at least the titles, of the
Divinity, were usurped by Diocletian and Maximian, who
transmitted them to a succession of Christian emperors. ^100 Such
extravagant compliments, however, soon lose their impiety by
losing their meaning; and when the ear is once accustomed to the
sound, they are heard with indifference, as vague though
excessive professions of respect.
[Footnote 97: See the 12th dissertation in Spanheim's excellent
work de Usu Numismatum. From medals, inscriptions, and
historians, he examines every title separately, and traces it
from Augustus to the moment of its disappearing.]
[Footnote 98: Pliny (in Panegyr. c. 3, 55, &c.) speaks of Dominus
with execration, as synonymous to Tyrant, and opposite to Prince.
And the same Pliny regularly gives that title (in the tenth book
of the epistles) to his friend rather than master, the virtuous
Trajan. This strange contradiction puzzles the commentators, who
think, and the translators, who can write.]
[Footnote 99: Synesius de Regno, edit. Petav. p. 15. I am
indebted for this quotation to the Abbe de la Bleterie.]
[Footnote 100: Soe Vandale de Consecratione, p. 354, &c. It was
customary for the emperors to mention (in the preamble of laws)
their numen, sacreo majesty, divine oracles, &c. According to
Tillemont, Gregory Nazianzen complains most bitterly of the
profanation, especially when it was practised by an Arian
emperor.
Note: In the time of the republic, says Hegewisch, when the
consuls, the praetors, and the other magistrates appeared in
public, to perform the functions of their office, their dignity
was announced both by the symbols which use had consecrated, and
the brilliant cortege by which they were accompanied. But this
dignity belonged to the office, not to the individual; this pomp
belonged to the magistrate, not to the man. * * The consul,
followed, in the comitia, by all the senate, the praetors, the
quaestors, the aediles, the lictors, the apparitors, and the
heralds, on reentering his house, was served only by freedmen and
by his slaves. The first emperors went no further. Tiberius
had, for his personal attendance, only a moderate number of
slaves, and a few freedmen. (Tacit. Ann. iv. 7.) But in
proportion as the republican forms disappeared, one after
another, the inclination of the emperors to environ themselves
with personal pomp, displayed itself more and more. * * The
magnificence and the ceremonial of the East were entirely
introduced by Diocletian, and were consecrated by Constantine to
the Imperial use. Thenceforth the palace, the court, the table,
all the personal attendance, distinguished the emperor from his
subjects, still more than his superior dignity. The organization
which Diocletian gave to his new court, attached less honor and
distinction to rank than to services performed towards the
members of the Imperial family. Hegewisch, Essai, Hist. sur les
Finances Romains.
Few historians have characterized, in a more philosophic
manner, the influence of a new institution. - G.
It is singular that the son of a slave reduced the haughty
aristocracy of Home to the offices of servitude. - M.]
From the time of Augustus to that of Diocletian, the Roman
princes, conversing in a familiar manner among their
fellow-citizens, were saluted only with the same respect that was
usually paid to senators and magistrates. Their principal
distinction was the Imperial or military robe of purple; whilst
the senatorial garment was marked by a broad, and the equestrian
by a narrow, band or stripe of the same honorable color. The
pride, or rather the policy, of Diocletian, engaged that artful
prince to introduce the stately magnificence of the court of
Persia. ^101 He ventured to assume the diadem, an ornament
detested by the Romans as the odious ensign of royalty, and the
use of which had been considered as the most desperate act of the
madness of Caligula. It was no more than a broad white fillet
set with pearls, which encircled the emperor's head. The
sumptuous robes of Diocletian and his successors were of silk and
gold; and it is remarked with indignation, that even their shoes
were studded with the most precious gems. The access to their
sacred person was every day rendered more difficult by the
institution of new forms and ceremonies. The avenues of the
palace were strictly guarded by the various schools, as they
began to be called, of domestic officers. The interior apartments
were intrusted to the jealous vigilance of the eunuchs, the
increase of whose numbers and influence was the most infallible
symptom of the progress of despotism. When a subject was at
length admitted to the Imperial presence, he was obliged,
whatever might be his rank, to fall prostrate on the ground, and
to adore, according to the eastern fashion, the divinity of his
lord and master. ^102 Diocletian was a man of sense, who, in the
course of private as well as public life, had formed a just
estimate both of himself and of mankind: nor is it easy to
conceive, that in substituting the manners of Persia to those of
Rome, he was seriously actuated by so mean a principle as that of
vanity. He flattered himself, that an ostentation of splendor
and luxury would subdue the imagination of the multitude; that
the monarch would be less exposed to the rude license of the
people and the soldiers, as his person was secluded from the
public view; and that habits of submission would insensibly be
productive of sentiments of veneration. Like the modesty
affected by Augustus, the state maintained by Diocletian was a
theatrical representation; but it must be confessed, that of the
two comedies, the former was of a much more liberal and manly
character than the latter. It was the aim of the one to
disguise, and the object of the other to display, the unbounded
power which the emperors possessed over the Roman world.
[Footnote 101: See Spanheim de Usu Numismat. Dissert. xii.]
[Footnote 102: Aurelius Victor. Eutropius, ix. 26. It appears
by the Panegyrists, that the Romans were soon reconciled to the
name and ceremony of adoration.]
Ostentation was the first principle of the new system
instituted by Diocletian. The second was division. He divided
the empire, the provinces, and every branch of the civil as well
as military administration. He multiplied the wheels of the
machine of government, and rendered its operations less rapid,
but more secure. Whatever advantages and whatever defects might
attend these innovations, they must be ascribed in a very great
degree to the first inventor; but as the new frame of policy was
gradually improved and completed by succeeding princes, it will
be more satisfactory to delay the consideration of it till the
season of its full maturity and perfection. ^103 Reserving,
therefore, for the reign of Constantine a more exact picture of
the new empire, we shall content ourselves with describing the
principal and decisive outline, as it was traced by the hand of
Diocletian. He had associated three colleagues in the exercise
of the supreme power; and as he was convinced that the abilities
of a single man were inadequate to the public defence, he
considered the joint administration of four princes not as a
temporary expedient, but as a fundamental law of the
constitution. It was his intention, that the two elder princes
should be distinguished by the use of the diadem, and the title
of Augusti; that, as affection or esteem might direct their
choice, they should regularly call to their assistance two
subordinate colleagues; and that the Coesars, rising in their
turn to the first rank, should supply an uninterrupted succession
of emperors. The empire was divided into four parts. The East
and Italy were the most honorable, the Danube and the Rhine the
most laborious stations. The former claimed the presence of the
Augusti, the latter were intrusted to the administration of the
Coesars. The strength of the legions was in the hands of the
four partners of sovereignty, and the despair of successively
vanquishing four formidable rivals might intimidate the ambition
of an aspiring general. In their civil government, the emperors
were supposed to exercise the undivided power of the monarch, and
their edicts, inscribed with their joint names, were received in
all the provinces, as promulgated by their mutual councils and
authority. Notwithstanding these precautions, the political
union of the Roman world was gradually dissolved, and a principle
of division was introduced, which, in the course of a few years,
occasioned the perpetual separation of the Eastern and Western
Empires.
[Footnote 103: The innovations introduced by Diocletian are
chiefly deduced, 1st, from some very strong passages in
Lactantius; and, 2dly, from the new and various offices which, in
the Theodosian code, appear already established in the beginning
of the reign of Constantine.]
The system of Diocletian was accompanied with another very
material disadvantage, which cannot even at present be totally
overlooked; a more expensive establishment, and consequently an
increase of taxes, and the oppression of the people. Instead of
a modest family of slaves and freedmen, such as had contented the
simple greatness of Augustus and Trajan, three or four
magnificent courts were established in the various parts of the
empire, and as many Roman kings contended with each other and
with the Persian monarch for the vain superiority of pomp and
luxury. The number of ministers, of magistrates, of officers,
and of servants, who filled the different departments of the
state, was multiplied beyond the example of former times; and (if
we may borrow the warm expression of a contemporary) "when the
proportion of those who received, exceeded the proportion of
those who contributed, the provinces were oppressed by the weight
of tributes." ^104 From this period to the extinction of the
empire, it would be easy to deduce an uninterrupted series of
clamors and complaints. According to his religion and situation,
each writer chooses either Diocletian, or Constantine, or Valens,
or Theodosius, for the object of his invectives; but they
unanimously agree in representing the burden of the public
impositions, and particularly the land tax and capitation, as the
intolerable and increasing grievance of their own times. From
such a concurrence, an impartial historian, who is obliged to
extract truth from satire, as well as from panegyric, will be
inclined to divide the blame among the princes whom they accuse,
and to ascribe their exactions much less to their personal vices,
than to the uniform system of their administration. ^* The
emperor Diocletian was indeed the author of that system; but
during his reign, the growing evil was confined within the bounds
of modesty and discretion, and he deserves the reproach of
establishing pernicious precedents, rather than of exercising
actual oppression. ^105 It may be added, that his revenues were
managed with prudent economy; and that after all the current
expenses were discharged, there still remained in the Imperial
treasury an ample provision either for judicious liberality or
for any emergency of the state.
[Footnote 104: Lactant. de M. P. c. 7.]
[Footnote *: The most curious document which has come to light
since the publication of Gibbon's History, is the edict of
Diocletian, published from an inscription found at Eskihissar,
(Stratoniccia,) by Col. Leake. This inscription was first copied
by Sherard, afterwards much more completely by Mr. Bankes. It is
confirmed and illustrated by a more imperfect copy of the same
edict, found in the Levant by a gentleman of Aix, and brought to
this country by M. Vescovali. This edict was issued in the name
of the four Caesars, Diocletian, Maximian, Constantius, and
Galerius. It fixed a maximum of prices throughout the empire,
for all the necessaries and commodities of life. The preamble
insists, with great vehemence on the extortion and inhumanity of
the venders and merchants. Quis enim adeo obtunisi (obtusi)
pectores (is) et a sensu inhumanitatis extorris est qui ignorare
potest immo non senserit in venalibus rebus quaevel in
mercimoniis aguntur vel diurna urbium conversatione tractantur,
in tantum se licen liam defusisse, ut effraenata libido rapien -
rum copia nec annorum ubertatibus mitigaretur. The edict, as Col.
Leake clearly shows, was issued A. C. 303. Among the articles of
which the maximum value is assessed, are oil, salt, honey,
butchers' meat, poultry, game, fish, vegetables, fruit the wages
of laborers and artisans, schoolmasters and skins, boots and
shoes, harness, timber, corn, wine, and beer, (zythus.) The
depreciation in the value of money, or the rise in the price of
commodities, had been so great during the past century, that
butchers' meat, which, in the second century of the empire, was
in Rome about two denaril the pound, was now fixed at a maximum
of eight. Col. Leake supposes the average price could not be
less than four: at the same time the maximum of the wages of the
agricultural laborers was twenty-five. The whole edict is,
perhaps, the most gigantic effort of a blind though
well-intentioned despotism, to control that which is, and ought
to be, beyond the regulation of the government. See an Edict of
Diocletian, by Col. Leake, London, 1826.
Col. Leake has not observed that this Edict is expressly
named in the treatise de Mort. Persecut. ch. vii. Idem cum
variis iniquitatibus immensam faceret caritatem, legem pretiis
rerum venalium statuere conatus. - M]
[Footnote 105: Indicta lex nova quae sane illorum temporum
modestia tolerabilis, in perniciem processit. Aurel. Victor.,
who has treated the character of Diocletian with good sense,
though in bad Latin.]
It was in the twenty first year of his reign that Diocletian
executed his memorable resolution of abdicating the empire; an
action more naturally to have been expected from the elder or the
younger Antoninus, than from a prince who had never practised the
lessons of philosophy either in the attainment or in the use of
supreme power. Diocletian acquired the glory of giving to the
world the first example of a resignation, ^106 which has not been
very frequently imitated by succeeding monarchs. The parallel of
Charles the Fifth, however, will naturally offer itself to our
mind, not only since the eloquence of a modern historian has
rendered that name so familiar to an English reader, but from the
very striking resemblance between the characters of the two
emperors, whose political abilities were superior to their
military genius, and whose specious virtues were much less the
effect of nature than of art. The abdication of Charles appears
to have been hastened by the vicissitude of fortune; and the
disappointment of his favorite schemes urged him to relinquish a
power which he found inadequate to his ambition. But the reign
of Diocletian had flowed with a tide of uninterrupted success;
nor was it till after he had vanquished all his enemies, and
accomplished all his designs, that he seems to have entertained
any serious thoughts of resigning the empire. Neither Charles
nor Diocletian were arrived at a very advanced period of life;
since the one was only fifty- five, and the other was no more
than fifty-nine years of age; but the active life of those
princes, their wars and journeys, the cares of royalty, and their
application to business, had already impaired their constitution,
and brought on the infirmities of a premature old age. ^107
[Footnote 106: Solus omnium post conditum Romanum Imperium, qui
extanto fastigio sponte ad privatae vitae statum civilitatemque
remearet, Eutrop. ix. 28.]
[Footnote 107: The particulars of the journey and illness are
taken from Laclantius, c. 17,) who may sometimes be admitted as
an evidence of public facts, though very seldom of private
anecdotes.]
Notwithstanding the severity of a very cold and rainy
winter, Diocletian left Italy soon after the ceremony of his
triumph, and began his progress towards the East round the
circuit of the Illyrian provinces. From the inclemency of the
weather, and the fatigue of the journey, he soon contracted a
slow illness; and though he made easy marches, and was generally
carried in a close litter, his disorder, before he arrived at
Nicomedia, about the end of the summer, was become very serious
and alarming. During the whole winter he was confined to his
palace: his danger inspired a general and unaffected concern; but
the people could only judge of the various alterations of his
health, from the joy or consternation which they discovered in
the countenances and behavior of his attendants. The rumor of
his death was for some time universally believed, and it was
supposed to be concealed with a view to prevent the troubles that
might have happened during the absence of the Caesar Galerius.
At length, however, on the first of March, Diocletian once more
appeared in public, but so pale and emaciated, that he could
scarcely have been recognized by those to whom his person was the
most familiar. It was time to put an end to the painful
struggle, which he had sustained during more than a year, between
the care of his health and that of his dignity. The former
required indulgence and relaxation, the latter compelled him to
direct, from the bed of sickness, the administration of a great
empire. He resolved to pass the remainder of his days in
honorable repose, to place his glory beyond the reach of fortune,
and to relinquish the theatre of the world to his younger and
more active associates. ^108
[Footnote 108: Aurelius Victor ascribes the abdication, which had
been so variously accounted for, to two causes: 1st, Diocletian's
contempt of ambition; and 2dly, His apprehension of impending
troubles. One of the panegyrists (vi. 9) mentions the age and
infirmities of Diocletian as a very natural reason for his
retirement.
Note: Constantine (Orat. ad Sanct. c. 401) more than
insinuated that derangement of mind, connected with the
conflagration of the palace at Nicomedia by lightning, was the
cause of his abdication. But Heinichen. in a very sensible note
on this passage in Eusebius, while he admits that his long
illness might produce a temporary depression of spirits,
triumphantly appeals to the philosophical conduct of Diocletian
in his retreat, and the influence which he still retained on
public affairs. - M.]
The ceremony of his abdication was performed in a spacious
plain, about three miles from Nicomedia. The emperor ascended a
lofty throne, and in a speech, full of reason and dignity,
declared his intention, both to the people and to the soldiers
who were assembled on this extraordinary occasion. As soon as he
had divested himself of his purple, he withdrew from the gazing
multitude; and traversing the city in a covered chariot,
proceeded, without delay, to the favorite retirement which he had
chosen in his native country of Dalmatia. On the same day, which
was the first of May, ^109 Maximian, as it had been previously
concerted, made his resignation of the Imperial dignity at Milan.
Even in the splendor of the Roman triumph, Diocletian had
meditated his design of abdicating the government. As he wished
to secure the obedience of Maximian, he exacted from him either a
general assurance that he would submit his actions to the
authority of his benefactor, or a particular promise that he
would descend from the throne, whenever he should receive the
advice and the example. This engagement, though it was confirmed
by the solemnity of an oath before the altar of the Capitoline
Jupiter, ^110 would have proved a feeble restraint on the fierce
temper of Maximian, whose passion was the love of power, and who
neither desired present tranquility nor future reputation. But
he yielded, however reluctantly, to the ascendant which his wiser
colleague had acquired over him, and retired, immediately after
his abdication, to a villa in Lucania, where it was almost
impossible that such an impatient spirit could find any lasting
tranquility.
[Footnote 109: The difficulties as well as mistakes attending the
dates both of the year and of the day of Diocletian's abdication
are perfectly cleared up by Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, tom.
iv. p 525, note 19, and by Pagi ad annum.]
[Footnote 110: See Panegyr. Veter. vi. 9. The oration was
pronounced after Maximian had resumed the purple.]
Diocletian, who, from a servile origin, had raised himself
to the throne, passed the nine last years of his life in a
private condition. Reason had dictated, and content seems to have
accompanied, his retreat, in which he enjoyed, for a long time,
the respect of those princes to whom he had resigned the
possession of the world. ^111 It is seldom that minds long
exercised in business have formed the habits of conversing with
themselves, and in the loss of power they principally regret the
want of occupation. The amusements of letters and of devotion,
which afford so many resources in solitude, were incapable of
fixing the attention of Diocletian; but he had preserved, or at
least he soon recovered, a taste for the most innocent as well as
natural pleasures, and his leisure hours were sufficiently
employed in building, planting, and gardening. His answer to
Maximian is deservedly celebrated. He was solicited by that
restless old man to reassume the reins of government, and the
Imperial purple. He rejected the temptation with a smile of
pity, calmly observing, that if he could show Maximian the
cabbages which he had planted with his own hands at Salona, he
should no longer be urged to relinquish the enjoyment of
happiness for the pursuit of power. ^112 In his conversations
with his friends, he frequently acknowledged, that of all arts,
the most difficult was the art of reigning; and he expressed
himself on that favorite topic with a degree of warmth which
could be the result only of experience. "How often," was he
accustomed to say, "is it the interest of four or five ministers
to combine together to deceive their sovereign! Secluded from
mankind by his exalted dignity, the truth is concealed from his
knowledge; he can see only with their eyes, he hears nothing but
their misrepresentations. He confers the most important offices
upon vice and weakness, and disgraces the most virtuous and
deserving among his subjects. By such infamous arts," added
Diocletian, "the best and wisest princes are sold to the venal
corruption of their courtiers." ^113 A just estimate of
greatness, and the assurance of immortal fame, improve our relish
for the pleasures of retirement; but the Roman emperor had filled
too important a character in the world, to enjoy without alloy
the comforts and security of a private condition. It was
impossible that he could remain ignorant of the troubles which
afflicted the empire after his abdication. It was impossible
that he could be indifferent to their consequences. Fear,
sorrow, and discontent, sometimes pursued him into the solitude
of Salona. His tenderness, or at least his pride, was deeply
wounded by the misfortunes of his wife and daughter; and the last
moments of Diocletian were imbittered by some affronts, which
Licinius and Constantine might have spared the father of so many
emperors, and the first author of their own fortune. A report,
though of a very doubtful nature, has reached our times, that he
prudently withdrew himself from their power by a voluntary death.
^114
[Footnote 111: Eumenius pays him a very fine compliment: "At enim
divinum illum virum, qui primus imperium et participavit et
posuit, consilii et fact isui non poenitet; nec amisisse se putat
quod sponte transcripsit. Felix beatusque vere quem vestra,
tantorum principum, colunt privatum." Panegyr. Vet. vii. 15.]
[Footnote 112: We are obliged to the younger Victor for this
celebrated item. Eutropius mentions the thing in a more general
manner.]
[Footnote 113: Hist. August. p. 223, 224. Vopiscus had learned
this conversation from his father.]
[Footnote 114: The younger Victor slightly mentions the report.
But as Diocletian had disobliged a powerful and successful party,
his memory has been loaded with every crime and misfortune. It
has been affirmed that he died raving mad, that he was condemned
as a criminal by the Roman senate, &c.]
Before we dismiss the consideration of the life and
character of Diocletian, we may, for a moment, direct our view to
the place of his retirement. Salona, a principal city of his
native province of Dalmatia, was near two hundred Roman miles
(according to the measurement of the public highways) from
Aquileia and the confines of Italy, and about two hundred and
seventy from Sirmium, the usual residence of the emperors
whenever they visited the Illyrian frontier. ^115 A miserable
village still preserves the name of Salona; but so late as the
sixteenth century, the remains of a theatre, and a confused
prospect of broken arches and marble columns, continued to attest
its ancient splendor. ^116 About six or seven miles from the
city, Diocletian constructed a magnificent palace, and we may
infer, from the greatness of the work, how long he had meditated
his design of abdicating the empire. The choice of a spot which
united all that could contribute either to health or to luxury,
did not require the partiality of a native. "The soil was dry and
fertile, the air is pure and wholesome, and though extremely hot
during the summer months, this country seldom feels those sultry
and noxious winds, to which the coasts of Istria and some parts
of Italy are exposed. The views from the palace are no less
beautiful than the soil and climate were inviting. Towards the
west lies the fertile shore that stretches along the Adriatic, in
which a number of small islands are scattered in such a manner,
as to give this part of the sea the appearance of a great lake.
On the north side lies the bay, which led to the ancient city of
Salona; and the country beyond it, appearing in sight, forms a
proper contrast to that more extensive prospect of water, which
the Adriatic presents both to the south and to the east. Towards
the north, the view is terminated by high and irregular
mountains, situated at a proper distance, and in many places
covered with villages, woods, and vineyards." ^117
[Footnote 115: See the Itiner. p. 269, 272, edit. Wessel.]
[Footnote 116: The Abate Fortis, in his Viaggio in Dalmazia, p.
43, (printed at Venice in the year 1774, in two small volumes in
quarto,) quotes a Ms account of the antiquities of Salona,
composed by Giambattista Giustiniani about the middle of the
xvith century.]
[Footnote 117: Adam's Antiquities of Diocletian's Palace at
Spalatro, p. 6. We may add a circumstance or two from the Abate
Fortis: the little stream of the Hyader, mentioned by Lucan,
produces most exquisite trout, which a sagacious writer, perhaps
a monk, supposes to have been one of the principal reasons that
determined Diocletian in the choice of his retirement. Fortis,
p. 45. The same author (p. 38) observes, that a taste for
agriculture is reviving at Spalatro; and that an experimental
farm has lately been established near the city, by a society of
gentlemen.]
Though Constantine, from a very obvious prejudice, affects
to mention the palace of Diocletian with contempt, ^118 yet one
of their successors, who could only see it in a neglected and
mutilated state, celebrates its magnificence in terms of the
highest admiration. ^119 It covered an extent of ground
consisting of between nine and ten English acres. The form was
quadrangular, flanked with sixteen towers. Two of the sides were
near six hundred, and the other two near seven hundred feet in
length. The whole was constructed of a beautiful freestone,
extracted from the neighboring quarries of Trau, or Tragutium,
and very little inferior to marble itself. Four streets,
intersecting each other at right angles, divided the several
parts of this great edifice, and the approach to the principal
apartment was from a very stately entrance, which is still
denominated the Golden Gate. The approach was terminated by a
peristylium of granite columns, on one side of which we discover
the square temple of Aesculapius, on the other the octagon temple
of Jupiter. The latter of those deities Diocletian revered as
the patron of his fortunes, the former as the protector of his
health. By comparing the present remains with the precepts of
Vitruvius, the several parts of the building, the baths,
bed-chamber, the atrium, the basilica, and the Cyzicene,
Corinthian, and Egyptian halls have been described with some
degree of precision, or at least of probability. Their forms
were various, their proportions just; but they all were attended
with two imperfections, very repugnant to our modern notions of
taste and conveniency. These stately rooms had neither windows
nor chimneys. They were lighted from the top, (for the building
seems to have consisted of no more than one story,) and they
received their heat by the help of pipes that were conveyed along
the walls. The range of principal apartments was protected
towards the south-west by a portico five hundred and seventeen
feet long, which must have formed a very noble and delightful
walk, when the beauties of painting and sculpture were added to
those of the prospect.
[Footnote 118: Constantin. Orat. ad Coetum Sanct. c. 25. In this
sermon, the emperor, or the bishop who composed it for him,
affects to relate the miserable end of all the persecutors of the
church.]
[Footnote 119: Constantin. Porphyr. de Statu Imper. p. 86.]
Had this magnificent edifice remained in a solitary country,
it would have been exposed to the ravages of time; but it might,
perhaps, have escaped the rapacious industry of man. The village
of Aspalathus, ^120 and, long afterwards, the provincial town of
Spalatro, have grown out of its ruins. The Golden Gate now opens
into the market-place. St. John the Baptist has usurped the
honors of Aesculapius; and the temple of Jupiter, under the
protection of the Virgin, is converted into the cathedral church.
For this account of Diocletian's palace we are principally
indebted to an ingenious artist of our own time and country, whom
a very liberal curiosity carried into the heart of Dalmatia. ^121
But there is room to suspect that the elegance of his designs and
engraving has somewhat flattered the objects which it was their
purpose to represent. We are informed by a more recent and very
judicious traveller, that the awful ruins of Spalatro are not
less expressive of the decline of the art than of the greatness
of the Roman empire in the time of Diocletian. ^122 If such was
indeed the state of architecture, we must naturally believe that
painting and sculpture had experienced a still more sensible
decay. The practice of architecture is directed by a few general
and even mechanical rules. But sculpture, and above all,
painting, propose to themselves the imitation not only of the
forms of nature, but of the characters and passions of the human
soul. In those sublime arts, the dexterity of the hand is of
little avail, unless it is animated by fancy, and guided by the
most correct taste and observation.
[Footnote 120: D'Anville, Geographie Ancienne, tom. i. p. 162.]
[Footnote 121: Messieurs Adam and Clerisseau, attended by two
draughtsmen visited Spalatro in the month of July, 1757. The
magnificent work which their journey produced was published in
London seven years afterwards.]
[Footnote 122: I shall quote the words of the Abate Fortis.
"E'bastevolmente agli amatori dell' Architettura, e dell'
Antichita, l'opera del Signor Adams, che a donato molto a que'
superbi vestigi coll'abituale eleganza del suo toccalapis e del
bulino. In generale la rozzezza del scalpello, e'l cattivo gusto
del secolo vi gareggiano colla magnificenz del fabricato." See
Viaggio in Dalmazia, p. 40.]
It is almost unnecessary to remark, that the civil
distractions of the empire, the license of the soldiers, the
inroads of the barbarians, and the progress of despotism, had
proved very unfavorable to genius, and even to learning. The
succession of Illyrian princes restored the empire without
restoring the sciences. Their military education was not
calculated to inspire them with the love of letters; and even the
mind of Diocletian, however active and capacious in business, was
totally uninformed by study or speculation. The professions of
law and physic are of such common use and certain profit, that
they will always secure a sufficient number of practitioners,
endowed with a reasonable degree of abilities and knowledge; but
it does not appear that the students in those two faculties
appeal to any celebrated masters who have flourished within that
period. The voice of poetry was silent. History was reduced to
dry and confused abridgments, alike destitute of amusement and
instruction. A languid and affected eloquence was still retained
in the pay and service of the emperors, who encouraged not any
arts except those which contributed to the gratification of their
pride, or the defence of their power. ^123
[Footnote 123: The orator Eumenius was secretary to the emperors
Maximian and Constantius, and Professor of Rhetoric in the
college of Autun. His salary was six hundred thousand sesterces,
which, according to the lowest computation of that age, must have
exceeded three thousand pounds a year. He generously requested
the permission of employing it in rebuilding the college. See
his Oration De Restaurandis Scholis; which, though not exempt
from vanity, may atone for his panegyrics.]
The declining age of learning and of mankind is marked,
however, by the rise and rapid progress of the new Platonists.
The school of Alexandria silenced those of Athens; and the
ancient sects enrolled themselves under the banners of the more
fashionable teachers, who recommended their system by the novelty
of their method, and the austerity of their manners. Several of
these masters, Ammonius, Plotinus, Amelius, and Porphyry, ^124
were men of profound thought and intense application; but by
mistaking the true object of philosophy, their labors contributed
much less to improve than to corrupt the human understanding.
The knowledge that is suited to our situation and powers, the
whole compass of moral, natural, and mathematical science, was
neglected by the new Platonists; whilst they exhausted their
strength in the verbal disputes of metaphysics, attempted to
explore the secrets of the invisible world, and studied to
reconcile Aristotle with Plato, on subjects of which both these
philosophers were as ignorant as the rest of mankind. Consuming
their reason in these deep but unsubstantial meditations, their
minds were exposed to illusions of fancy. They flattered
themselves that they possessed the secret of disengaging the soul
from its corporal prison; claimed a familiar intercourse with
demons and spirits; and, by a very singular revolution, converted
the study of philosophy into that of magic. The ancient sages had
derided the popular superstition; after disguising its
extravagance by the thin pretence of allegory, the disciples of
Plotinus and Porphyry became its most zealous defenders. As they
agreed with the Christians in a few mysterious points of faith,
they attacked the remainder of their theological system with all
the fury of civil war. The new Platonists would scarcely deserve
a place in the history of science, but in that of the church the
mention of them will very frequently occur.
[Footnote 124: Porphyry died about the time of Diocletian's
abdication. The life of his master Plotinus, which he composed,
will give us the most complete idea of the genius of the sect,
and the manners of its professors. This very curious piece is
inserted in Fabricius Bibliotheca Graeca tom. iv. p. 88 - 148.]
Chapter XIV: Six Emperors At The Same Time, Reunion Of The
Empire.
Part I.
Troubles After The Abdication Of Diocletian. - Death Of
Constantius. - Elevation Of Constantine And Maxen Tius. - Six
Emperors At The Same Time. - Death Of Maximian And Galerius. -
Victories Of Constantine Over Maxentius And Licinus. - Reunion Of
The Empire Under The Authority Of Constantine.
The balance of power established by Diocletian subsisted no
longer than while it was sustained by the firm and dexterous hand
of the founder. It required such a fortunate mixture of
different tempers and abilities, as could scarcely be found or
even expected a second time; two emperors without jealousy, two
Caesars without ambition, and the same general interest
invariably pursued by four independent princes. The abdication
of Diocletian and Maximian was succeeded by eighteen years of
discord and confusion. The empire was afflicted by five civil
wars; and the remainder of the time was not so much a state of
tranquillity as a suspension of arms between several hostile
monarchs, who, viewing each other with an eye of fear and hatred,
strove to increase their respective forces at the expense of
their subjects.
As soon as Diocletian and Maximian had resigned the purple,
their station, according to the rules of the new constitution,
was filled by the two Caesars, Constantius and Galerius, who
immediately assumed the title of Augustus. ^1
[Footnote 1: M. de Montesquieu (Considerations sur la Grandeur et
La Decadence des Romains, c. 17) supposes, on the authority of
Orosius and Eusebius, that, on this occasion, the empire, for the
first time, was really divided into two parts. It is difficult,
however, to discover in what respect the plan of Galerius
differed from that of Diocletian.]
The honors of seniority and precedence were allowed to the
former of those princes, and he continued under a new appellation
to administer his ancient department of Gaul, Spain, and Britain.
The government of those ample provinces was sufficient to
exercise his talents and to satisfy his ambition. Clemency,
temperance, and moderation, distinguished the amiable character
of Constantius, and his fortunate subjects had frequently
occasion to compare the virtues of their sovereign with the
passions of Maximian, and even with the arts of Diocletian. ^2
Instead of imitating their eastern pride and magnificence,
Constantius preserved the modesty of a Roman prince. He
declared, with unaffected sincerity, that his most valued
treasure was in the hearts of his people, and that, whenever the
dignity of the throne, or the danger of the state, required any
extraordinary supply, he could depend with confidence on their
gratitude and liberality. ^3 The provincials of Gaul, Spain, and
Britain, sensible of his worth, and of their own happiness,
reflected with anxiety on the declining health of the emperor
Constantius, and the tender age of his numerous family, the issue
of his second marriage with the daughter of Maximian.
[Footnote 2: Hic non modo amabilis, sed etiam venerabilis Gallis
fuit; praecipuc quod Diocletiani suspectam prudentiam, et
Maximiani sanguinariam violentiam imperio ejus evaserant.
Eutrop. Breviar. x. i.]
[Footnote 3: Divitiis Provincialium (mel. provinciarum) ac
privatorum studens, fisci commoda non admodum affectans;
ducensque melius publicas opes a privatis haberi, quam intra unum
claustrum reservari. Id. ibid. He carried this maxim so far,
that whenever he gave an entertainment, he was obliged to borrow
a service of plate.]
The stern temper of Galerius was cast in a very different
mould; and while he commanded the esteem of his subjects, he
seldom condescended to solicit their affections. His fame in
arms, and, above all, the success of the Persian war, had elated
his haughty mind, which was naturally impatient of a superior, or
even of an equal. If it were possible to rely on the partial
testimony of an injudicious writer, we might ascribe the
abdication of Diocletian to the menaces of Galerius, and relate
the particulars of a private conversation between the two
princes, in which the former discovered as much pusillanimity as
the latter displayed ingratitude and arrogance. ^4 But these
obscure anecdotes are sufficiently refuted by an impartia view of
the character and conduct of Diocletian. Whatever might
otherwise have been his intentions, if he had apprehended any
danger from the violence of Galerius, his good sense would have
instructed him to prevent the ignominious contest; and as he had
held the sceptre with glory, he would have resigned it without
disgrace.
[Footnote 4: Lactantius de Mort. Persecutor. c. 18. Were the
particulars of this conference more consistent with truth and
decency, we might still ask how they came to the knowledge of an
obscure rhetorician. But there are many historians who put us in
mind of the admirable saying of the great Conde to Cardinal de
Retz: "Ces coquins nous font parlor et agir, comme ils auroient
fait eux-memes a notre place."
Note: This attack upon Lactantius is unfounded. Lactantius
was so far from having been an obscure rhetorician, that he had
taught rhetoric publicly, and with the greatest success, first in
Africa, and afterwards in Nicomedia. His reputation obtained him
the esteem of Constantine, who invited him to his court, and
intrusted to him the education of his son Crispus. The facts
which he relates took place during his own time; he cannot be
accused of dishonesty or imposture. Satis me vixisse arbitrabor
et officium hominis implesse si labor meus aliquos homines, ab
erroribus iberatos, ad iter coeleste direxerit. De Opif. Dei,
cap. 20. The eloquence of Lactantius has caused him to be called
the Christian Cicero. Annon Gent. - G.
Yet no unprejudiced person can read this coarse and
particular private conversation of the two emperors, without
assenting to the justice of Gibbon's severe sentence. But the
authorship of the treatise is by no means certain. The fame of
Lactantius for eloquence as well as for truth, would suffer no
loss if it should be adjudged to some more "obscure rhetorician."
Manso, in his Leben Constantins des Grossen, concurs on this
point with Gibbon Beylage, iv. - M.]
After the elevation of Constantius and Galerius to the rank
of Augusti, two new Coesars were required to supply their place,
and to complete the system of the Imperial government.
Diocletian, was sincerely desirous of withdrawing himself from
the world; he considered Galerius, who had married his daughter,
as the firmest support of his family and of the empire; and he
consented, without reluctance, that his successor should assume
the merit as well as the envy of the important nomination. It
was fixed without consulting the interest or inclination of the
princes of the West. Each of them had a son who was arrived at
the age of manhood, and who might have been deemed the most
natural candidates for the vacant honor. But the impotent
resentment of Maximian was no longer to be dreaded; and the
moderate Constantius, though he might despise the dangers, was
humanely apprehensive of the calamities, of civil war. The two
persons whom Galerius promoted to the rank of Caesar, were much
better suited to serve the views of his ambition; and their
principal recommendation seems to have consisted in the want of
merit or personal consequence. The first of these was Daza, or,
as he was afterwards called, Maximin, whose mother was the sister
of Galerius. The unexperienced youth still betrayed, by his
manners and language, his rustic education, when, to his own
astonishment, as well as that of the world, he was invested by
Diocletian with the purple, exalted to the dignity of Caesar, and
intrusted with the sovereign command of Egypt and Syria. ^5 At
the same time, Severus, a faithful servant, addicted to pleasure,
but not incapable of business, was sent to Milan, to receive,
from the reluctant hands of Maximian, the Caesarian ornaments,
and the possession of Italy and Africa. According to the forms
of the constitution, Severus acknowledged the supremacy of the
western emperor; but he was absolutely devoted to the commands of
his benefactor Galerius, who, reserving to himself the
intermediate countries from the confines of Italy to those of
Syria, firmly established his power over three fourths of the
monarchy. In the full confidence that the approaching death of
Constantius would leave him sole master of the Roman world, we
are assured that he had arranged in his mind a long succession of
future princes, and that he meditated his own retreat from public
life, after he should have accomplished a glorious reign of about
twenty years. ^7
[Footnote 5: Sublatus nuper a pecoribus et silvis (says
Lactantius de M. P. c. 19) statim Scutarius, continuo Protector,
mox Tribunus, postridie Caesar, accepit Orientem. Aurelius
Victor is too liberal in giving him the whole portion of
Diocletian.]
[Footnote 6: His diligence and fidelity are acknowledged even by
Lactantius, de M. P. c. 18.]
[Footnote 7: These schemes, however, rest only on the very
doubtful authority of Lactantius de M. P. c. 20.]
But within less than eighteen months, two unexpected
revolutions overturned the ambitious schemes of Galerius. The
hopes of uniting the western provinces to his empire were
disappointed by the elevation of Constantine, whilst Italy and
Africa were lost by the successful revolt of Maxentius.
I. The fame of Constantine has rendered posterity attentive
to the most minute circumstances of his life and actions. The
place of his birth, as well as the condition of his mother
Helena, have been the subject, not only of literary, but of
national disputes. Notwithstanding the recent tradition, which
assigns for her father a British king, ^8 we are obliged to
confess, that Helena was the daughter of an innkeeper; but at the
same time, we may defend the legality of her marriage, against
those who have represented her as the concubine of Constantius.
^9 The great Constantine was most probably born at Naissus, in
Dacia; ^10 and it is not surprising that, in a family and
province distinguished only by the profession of arms, the youth
should discover very little inclination to improve his mind by
the acquisition of knowledge. ^11 He was about eighteen years of
age when his father was promoted to the rank of Caesar; but that
fortunate event was attended with his mother's divorce; and the
splendor of an Imperial alliance reduced the son of Helena to a
state of disgrace and humiliation. Instead of following
Constantius in the West, he remained in the service of
Diocletian, signalized his valor in the wars of Egypt and Persia,
and gradually rose to the honorable station of a tribune of the
first order. The figure of Constantine was tall and majestic; he
was dexterous in all his exercises, intrepid in war, affable in
peace; in his whole conduct, the active spirit of youth was
tempered by habitual prudence; and while his mind was engrossed
by ambition, he appeared cold and insensible to the allurements
of pleasure. The favor of the people and soldiers, who had named
him as a worthy candidate for the rank of Caesar, served only to
exasperate the jealousy of Galerius; and though prudence might
restrain him from exercising any open violence, an absolute
monarch is seldom at a loss now to execute a sure and secret
evenge. ^12 Every hour increased the danger of Constantine, and
the anxiety of his father, who, by repeated letters, expressed
the warmest desire of embracing his son. For some time the
policy of Galerius supplied him with delays and excuses; but it
was impossible long to refuse so natural a request of his
associate, without maintaining his refusal by arms. The
permission of the journey was reluctantly granted, and whatever
precautions the emperor might have taken to intercept a return,
the consequences of which he, with so much reason, apprehended,
they were effectually disappointed by the incredible diligence of
Constantine. ^13 Leaving the palace of Nicomedia in the night, he
travelled post through Bithynia, Thrace, Dacia, Pannonia, Italy,
and Gaul, and, amidst the joyful acclamations of the people,
reached the port of Boulogne in the very moment when his father
was preparing to embark for Britain. ^14
[Footnote 8: This tradition, unknown to the contemporaries of
Constantine was invented in the darkness of monestaries, was
embellished by Jeffrey of Monmouth, and the writers of the xiith
century, has been defended by our antiquarians of the last age,
and is seriously related in the ponderous History of England,
compiled by Mr. Carte, (vol. i. p. 147.) He transports, however,
the kingdom of Coil, the imaginary father of Helena, from Essex
to the wall of Antoninus.]
[Footnote 9: Eutropius (x. 2) expresses, in a few words, the real
truth, and the occasion of the error "ex obscuriori matrimonio
ejus filius." Zosimus (l. ii. p. 78) eagerly seized the most
unfavorable report, and is followed by Orosius, (vii. 25,) whose
authority is oddly enough overlooked by the indefatigable, but
partial Tillemont. By insisting on the divorce of Helena,
Diocletian acknowledged her marriage.]
[Footnote 10: There are three opinions with regard to the place
of Constantine's birth. 1. Our English antiquarians were used to
dwell with rapture on the words of his panegyrist, "Britannias
illic oriendo nobiles fecisti." But this celebrated passage may
be referred with as much propriety to the accession, as to the
nativity of Constantine. 2. Some of the modern Greeks have
ascribed the honor of his birth to Drepanum, a town on the Gulf
of Nicomedia, (Cellarius, tom. ii. p. 174,) which Constantine
dignified with the name of Helenopolis, and Justinian adorned
with many splendid buildings, (Procop. de Edificiis, v. 2.) It is
indeed probable enough, that Helena's father kept an inn at
Drepanum, and that Constantius might lodge there when he returned
from a Persian embassy, in the reign of Aurelian. But in the
wandering life of a soldier, the place of his marriage, and the
places where his children are born, have very little connection
with each other. 3. The claim of Naissus is supported by the
anonymous writer, published at the end of Ammianus, p. 710, and
who in general copied very good materials; and it is confirmed by
Julius Firmicus, (de Astrologia, l. i. c. 4,) who flourished
under the reign of Constantine himself. Some objections have
been raised against the integrity of the text, and the
application of the passage of Firmicus but the former is
established by the best Mss., and the latter is very ably
defended by Lipsius de Magnitudine Romana, l. iv. c. 11, et
Supplement.]
[Footnote 11: Literis minus instructus. Anonym. ad Ammian. p.
710.]
[Footnote 12: Galerius, or perhaps his own courage, exposed him
to single combat with a Sarmatian, (Anonym. p. 710,) and with a
monstrous lion. See Praxagoras apud Photium, p. 63. Praxagoras,
an Athenian philosopher, had written a life of Constantine in two
books, which are now lost. He was a contemporary.]
[Footnote 13: Zosimus, l. ii. p. 78, 79. Lactantius de M. P. c.
24. The former tells a very foolish story, that Constantine
caused all the post- horses which he had used to be hamstrung.
Such a bloody execution, without preventing a pursuit, would have
scattered suspicions, and might have stopped his journey.
Note: Zosimus is not the only writer who tells this story.
The younger Victor confirms it. Ad frustrandos insequentes,
publica jumenta, quaqua iter ageret, interficiens. Aurelius
Victor de Caesar says the same thing, G. as also the Anonymus
Valesii. - M.
Manso, (Leben Constantins,) p. 18, observes that the story
has been exaggerated; he took this precaution during the first
stage of his journey. - M.]
[Footnote 14: Anonym. p. 710. Panegyr. Veter. vii. 4. But
Zosimus, l. ii. p. 79, Eusebius de Vit. Constant. l. i. c. 21,
and Lactantius de M. P. c. 24. suppose, with less accuracy, that
he found his father on his death-bed.]
The British expedition, and an easy victory over the
barbarians of Caledonia, were the last exploits of the reign of
Constantius. He ended his life in the Imperial palace of York,
fifteen months after he had received the title of Augustus, and
almost fourteen years and a half after he had been promoted to
the rank of Caesar. His death was immediately succeeded by the
elevation of Constantine. The ideas of inheritance and
succession are so very familiar, that the generality of mankind
consider them as founded, not only in reason, but in nature
itself. Our imagination readily transfers the same principles
from private property to public dominion: and whenever a virtuous
father leaves behind him a son whose merit seems to justify the
esteem, or even the hopes, of the people, the joint influence of
prejudice and of affection operates with irresistible weight.
The flower of the western armies had followed Constantius into
Britain, and the national troops were reenforced by a numerous
body of Alemanni, who obeyed the orders of Crocus, one of their
hereditary chieftains. ^15 The opinion of their own importance,
and the assurance that Britain, Gaul, and Spain would acquiesce
in their nomination, were diligently inculcated to the legions by
the adherents of Constantine. The soldiers were asked, whether
they could hesitate a moment between the honor of placing at
their head the worthy son of their beloved emperor, and the
ignominy of tamely expecting the arrival of some obscure
stranger, on whom it might please the sovereign of Asia to bestow
the armies and provinces of the West. It was insinuated to them,
that gratitude and liberality held a distinguished place among
the virtues of Constantine; nor did that artful prince show
himself to the troops, till they were prepared to salute him with
the names of Augustus and Emperor. The throne was the object of
his desires; and had he been less actuated by ambition, it was
his only means of safety. He was well acquainted with the
character and sentiments of Galerius, and sufficiently apprised,
that if he wished to live he must determine to reign. The decent
and even obstinate resistance which he chose to affect, ^16 was
contrived to justify his usurpation; nor did he yield to the
acclamations of the army, till he had provided the proper
materials for a letter, which he immediately despatched to the
emperor of the East. Constantine informed him of the melancholy
event of his father's death, modestly asserted his natural claim
to the succession, and respectfully lamented, that the
affectionate violence of his troops had not permitted him to
solicit the Imperial purple in the regular and constitutional
manner. The first emotions of Galerius were those of surprise,
disappointment, and rage; and as he could seldom restrain his
passions, he loudly threatened, that he would commit to the
flames both the letter and the messenger. But his resentment
insensibly subsided; and when he recollected the doubtful chance
of war, when he had weighed the character and strength of his
adversary, he consented to embrace the honorable accommodation
which the prudence of Constantine had left open to him. Without
either condemning or ratifying the choice of the British army,
Galerius accepted the son of his deceased colleague as the
sovereign of the provinces beyond the Alps; but he gave him only
the title of Caesar, and the fourth rank among the Roman princes,
whilst he conferred the vacant place of Augustus on his favorite
Severus. The apparent harmony of the empire was still preserved,
and Constantine, who already possessed the substance, expected,
without impatience, an opportunity of obtaining the honors, of
supreme power. ^17
[Footnote 15: Cunctis qui aderant, annitentibus, sed praecipue
Croco (alii Eroco) [Erich?] Alamannorum Rege, auxilii gratia
Constantium comitato, imperium capit. Victor Junior, c. 41.
This is perhaps the first instance of a barbarian king, who
assisted the Roman arms with an independent body of his own
subjects. The practice grew familiar and at last became fatal.]
[Footnote 16: His panegyrist Eumenius (vii. 8) ventures to affirm
in the presence of Constantine, that he put spurs to his horse,
and tried, but in vain, to escape from the hands of his
soldiers.]
[Footnote 17: Lactantius de M. P. c. 25. Eumenius (vii. 8.)
gives a rhetorical turn to the whole transaction.]
The children of Constantius by his second marriage were six
in number, three of either sex, and whose Imperial descent might
have solicited a preference over the meaner extraction of the son
of Helena. But Constantine was in the thirty-second year of his
age, in the full vigor both of mind and body, at the time when
the eldest of his brothers could not possibly be more than
thirteen years old. His claim of superior merit had been allowed
and ratified by the dying emperor. ^18 In his last moments
Constantius bequeathed to his eldest son the care of the safety
as well as greatness of the family; conjuring him to assume both
the authority and the sentiments of a father with regard to the
children of Theodora. Their liberal education, advantageous
marriages, the secure dignity of their lives, and the first
honors of the state with which they were invested, attest the
fraternal affection of Constantine; and as those princes
possessed a mild and grateful disposition, they submitted without
reluctance to the superiority of his genius and fortune. ^19
[Footnote 18: The choice of Constantine, by his dying father,
which is warranted by reason, and insinuated by Eumenius, seems
to be confirmed by the most unexceptionable authority, the
concurring evidence of Lactantius (de M. P. c. 24) and of
Libanius, (Oratio i.,) of Eusebius (in Vit. Constantin. l. i. c.
18, 21) and of Julian, (Oratio i)]
[Footnote 19: Of the three sisters of Constantine, Constantia
married the emperor Licinius, Anastasia the Caesar Bassianus, and
Eutropia the consul Nepotianus. The three brothers were,
Dalmatius, Julius Constantius, and Annibalianus, of whom we shall
have occasion to speak hereafter.]
II. The ambitious spirit of Galerius was scarcely
reconciled to the disappointment of his views upon the Gallic
provinces, before the unexpected loss of Italy wounded his pride
as well as power in a still more sensible part. The long absence
of the emperors had filled Rome with discontent and indignation;
and the people gradually discovered, that the preference given to
Nicomedia and Milan was not to be ascribed to the particular
inclination of Diocletian, but to the permanent form of
government which he had instituted. It was in vain that, a few
months after his abdication, his successors dedicated, under his
name, those magnificent baths, whose ruins still supply the
ground as well as the materials for so many churches and
convents. ^20 The tranquility of those elegant recesses of ease
and luxury was disturbed by the impatient murmurs of the Romans,
and a report was insensibly circulated, that the sums expended in
erecting those buildings would soon be required at their hands.
About that time the avarice of Galerius, or perhaps the
exigencies of the state, had induced him to make a very strict
and rigorous inquisition into the property of his subjects, for
the purpose of a general taxation, both on their lands and on
their persons. A very minute survey appears to have been taken of
their real estates; and wherever there was the slightest
suspicion of concealment, torture was very freely employed to
obtain a sincere declaration of their personal wealth. ^21 The
privileges which had exalted Italy above the rank of the
provinces were no longer regarded: ^* and the officers of the
revenue already began to number the Roman people, and to settle
the proportion of the new taxes. Even when the spirit of freedom
had been utterly extinguished, the tamest subjects have sometimes
ventured to resist an unprecedented invasion of their property;
but on this occasion the injury was aggravated by the insult, and
the sense of private interest was quickened by that of national
honor. The conquest of Macedonia, as we have already observed,
had delivered the Roman people from the weight of personal taxes.
Though they had experienced every form of despotism, they had now
enjoyed that exemption near five hundred years; nor could they
patiently brook the insolence of an Illyrian peasant, who, from
his distant residence in Asia, presumed to number Rome among the
tributary cities of his empire. The rising fury of the people
was encouraged by the authority, or at least the connivance, of
the senate; and the feeble remains of the Praetorian guards, who
had reason to apprehend their own dissolution, embraced so
honorable a pretence, and declared their readiness to draw their
swords in the service of their oppressed country. It was the
wish, and it soon became the hope, of every citizen, that after
expelling from Italy their foreign tyrants, they should elect a
prince who, by the place of his residence, and by his maxims of
government, might once more deserve the title of Roman emperor.
The name, as well as the situation, of Maxentius determined in
his favor the popular enthusiasm.
[Footnote 20: See Gruter. Inscrip. p. 178. The six princes are
all mentioned, Diocletian and Maximian as the senior Augusti, and
fathers of the emperors. They jointly dedicate, for the use of
their own Romans, this magnificent edifice. The architects have
delineated the ruins of these Thermoe, and the antiquarians,
particularly Donatus and Nardini, have ascertained the ground
which they covered. One of the great rooms is now the Carthusian
church; and even one of the porter's lodges is sufficient to form
another church, which belongs to the Feuillans.]
[Footnote 21: See Lactantius de M. P. c. 26, 31. ]
[Footnote *: Saviguy, in his memoir on Roman taxation, (Mem.
Berl. Academ. 1822, 1823, p. 5,) dates from this period the
abolition of the Jus Italicum. He quotes a remarkable passage of
Aurelius Victor. Hinc denique parti Italiae invec tum tributorum
ingens malum. Aur. Vict. c. 39. It was a necessary consequence
of the division of the empire: it became impossible to maintain a
second court and executive, and leave so large and fruitful a
part of the territory exempt from contribution. - M.]
Maxentius was the son of the emperor Maximian, and he had
married the daughter of Galerius. His birth and alliance seemed
to offer him the fairest promise of succeeding to the empire; but
his vices and incapacity procured him the same exclusion from the
dignity of Caesar, which Constantine had deserved by a dangerous
superiority of merit. The policy of Galerius preferred such
associates as would never disgrace the choice, nor dispute the
commands, of their benefactor. An obscure stranger was therefore
raised to the throne of Italy, and the son of the late emperor of
the West was left to enjoy the luxury of a private fortune in a
villa a few miles distant from the capital. The gloomy passions
of his soul, shame, vexation, and rage, were inflamed by envy on
the news of Constantine's success; but the hopes of Maxentius
revived with the public discontent, and he was easily persuaded
to unite his personal injury and pretensions with the cause of
the Roman people. Two Praetorian tribunes and a commissary of
provisions undertook the management of the conspiracy; and as
every order of men was actuated by the same spirit, the immediate
event was neither doubtful nor difficult. The praefect of the
city, and a few magistrates, who maintained their fidelity to
Severus, were massacred by the guards; and Maxentius, invested
with the Imperial ornaments, was acknowledged by the applauding
senate and people as the protector of the Roman freedom and
dignity. It is uncertain whether Maximian was previously
acquainted with the conspiracy; but as soon as the standard of
rebellion was erected at Rome, the old emperor broke from the
retirement where the authority of Diocletian had condemned him to
pass a life of melancholy and solitude, and concealed his
returning ambition under the disguise of paternal tenderness. At
the request of his son and of the senate, he condescended to
reassume the purple. His ancient dignity, his experience, and
his fame in arms, added strength as well as reputation to the
party of Maxentius. ^22
[Footnote 22: The sixth Panegyric represents the conduct of
Maximian in the most favorable light, and the ambiguous
expression of Aurelius Victor, "retractante diu," may signify
either that he contrived, or that he opposed, the conspiracy.
See Zosimus, l. ii. p. 79, and Lactantius de M. P. c. 26.]
According to the advice, or rather the orders, of his
colleague, the emperor Severus immediately hastened to Rome, in
the full confidence, that, by his unexpected celerity, he should
easily suppress the tumult of an unwarlike populace, commanded by
a licentious youth. But he found on his arrival the gates of the
city shut against him, the walls filled with men and arms, an
experienced general at the head of the rebels, and his own troops
without spirit or affection. A large body of Moors deserted to
the enemy, allured by the promise of a large donative; and, if it
be true that they had been levied by Maximian in his African war,
preferring the natural feelings of gratitude to the artificial
ties of allegiance. Anulinus, the Praetorian praefect, declared
himself in favor of Maxentius, and drew after him the most
considerable part of the troops, accustomed to obey his commands.
Rome, according to the expression of an orator, recalled her
armies; and the unfortunate Severus, destitute of force and of
counsel, retired, or rather fled, with precipitation, to Ravenna.
Here he might for some time have been safe. The fortifications
of Ravenna were able to resist the attempts, and the morasses
that surrounded the town, were sufficient to prevent the
approach, of the Italian army. The sea, which Severus commanded
with a powerful fleet, secured him an inexhaustible supply of
provisions, and gave a free entrance to the legions, which, on
the return of spring, would advance to his assistance from
Illyricum and the East. Maximian, who conducted the siege in
person, was soon convinced that he might waste his time and his
army in the fruitless enterprise, and that he had nothing to hope
either from force or famine. With an art more suitable to the
character of Diocletian than to his own, he directed his attack,
not so much against the walls of Ravenna, as against the mind of
Severus. The treachery which he had experienced disposed that
unhappy prince to distrust the most sincere of his friends and
adherents. The emissaries of Maximian easily persuaded his
credulity, that a conspiracy was formed to betray the town, and
prevailed upon his fears not to expose himself to the discretion
of an irritated conqueror, but to accept the faith of an
honorable capitulation. He was at first received with humanity
and treated with respect. Maximian conducted the captive emperor
to Rome, and gave him the most solemn assurances that he had
secured his life by the resignation of the purple. But Severus,
could obtain only an easy death and an Imperial funeral. When
the sentence was signified to him, the manner of executing it was
left to his own choice; he preferred the favorite mode of the
ancients, that of opening his veins; and as soon as he expired,
his body was carried to the sepulchre which had been constructed
for the family of Gallienus. ^23
[Footnote 23: The circumstances of this war, and the death of
Severus, are very doubtfully and variously told in our ancient
fragments, (see Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, tom. iv. part i.
p. 555.) I have endeavored to extract from them a consistent and
probable narration.
Note: Manso justly observes that two totally different
narratives might be formed, almost upon equal authority.
Beylage, iv. - M.]
Chapter XIV: Six Emperors At The Same Time, Reunion Of The
Empire.
Part II.
Though the characters of Constantine and Maxentius had very
little affinity with each other, their situation and interest
were the same; and prudence seemed to require that they should
unite their forces against the common enemy. Notwithstanding the
superiority of his age and dignity, the indefatigable Maximian
passed the Alps, and, courting a personal interview with the
sovereign of Gaul, carried with him his daughter Fausta as the
pledge of the new alliance. The marriage was celebrated at Arles
with every circumstance of magnificence; and the ancient
colleague of Diocletian, who again asserted his claim to the
Western empire, conferred on his son-in-law and ally the title of
Augustus. By consenting to receive that honor from Maximian,
Constantine seemed to embrace the cause of Rome and of the
senate; but his professions were ambiguous, and his assistance
slow and ineffectual. He considered with attention the
approaching contest between the masters of Italy and the emperor
of the East, and was prepared to consult his own safety or
ambition in the event of the war. ^24
[Footnote 24: The sixth Panegyric was pronounced to celebrate the
elevation of Constantine; but the prudent orator avoids the
mention either of Galerius or of Maxentius. He introduces only
one slight allusion to the actual troubles, and to the majesty of
Rome.
Note: Compare Manso, Beylage, iv. p. 302. Gibbon's account
is at least as probable as that of his critic. - M.]
The importance of the occasion called for the presence and
abilities of Galerius. At the head of a powerful army, collected
from Illyricum and the East, he entered Italy, resolved to
revenge the death of Severus, and to chastise the rebellions
Romans; or, as he expressed his intentions, in the furious
language of a barbarian, to extirpate the senate, and to destroy
the people by the sword. But the skill of Maximian had concerted
a prudent system of defence. The invader found every place
hostile, fortified, and inaccessible; and though he forced his
way as far as Narni, within sixty miles of Rome, his dominion in
Italy was confined to the narrow limits of his camp. Sensible of
the increasing difficulties of his enterprise, the haughty
Galerius made the first advances towards a reconciliation, and
despatched two of his most considerable officers to tempt the
Roman princes by the offer of a conference, and the declaration
of his paternal regard for Maxentius, who might obtain much more
from his liberality than he could hope from the doubtful chance
of war. ^25 The offers of Galerius were rejected with firmness,
his perfidious friendship refused with contempt, and it was not
long before he discovered, that, unless he provided for his
safety by a timely retreat, he had some reason to apprehend the
fate of Severus. The wealth which the Romans defended against
his rapacious tyranny, they freely contributed for his
destruction. The name of Maximian, the popular arts of his son,
the secret distribution of large sums, and the promise of still
more liberal rewards, checked the ardor and corrupted the
fidelity of the Illyrian legions; and when Galerius at length
gave the signal of the retreat, it was with some difficulty that
he could prevail on his veterans not to desert a banner which had
so often conducted them to victory and honor. A contemporary
writer assigns two other causes for the failure of the
expedition; but they are both of such a nature, that a cautious
historian will scarcely venture to adopt them. We are told that
Galerius, who had formed a very imperfect notion of the greatness
of Rome by the cities of the East with which he was acquainted,
found his forces inadequate to the siege of that immense capital.
But the extent of a city serves only to render it more accessible
to the enemy: Rome had long since been accustomed to submit on
the approach of a conqueror; nor could the temporary enthusiasm
of the people have long contended against the discipline and
valor of the legions. We are likewise informed that the legions
themselves were struck with horror and remorse, and that those
pious sons of the republic refused to violate the sanctity of
their venerable parent. ^26 But when we recollect with how much
ease, in the more ancient civil wars, the zeal of party and the
habits of military obedience had converted the native citizens of
Rome into her most implacable enemies, we shall be inclined to
distrust this extreme delicacy of strangers and barbarians, who
had never beheld Italy till they entered it in a hostile manner.
Had they not been restrained by motives of a more interested
nature, they would probably have answered Galerius in the words
of Caesar's veterans: "If our general wishes to lead us to the
banks of the Tyber, we are prepared to trace out his camp.
Whatsoever walls he has determined to level with the ground, our
hands are ready to work the engines: nor shall we hesitate,
should the name of the devoted city be Rome itself." These are
indeed the expressions of a poet; but of a poet who has been
distinguished, and even censured, for his strict adherence to the
truth of history. ^27
[Footnote 25: With regard to this negotiation, see the fragments
of an anonymous historian, published by Valesius at the end of
his edition of Ammianus Marcellinus, p. 711. These fragments
have furnished with several curious, and, as it should seem,
authentic anecdotes.]
[Footnote 26: Lactantius de M. P. c. 28. The former of these
reasons is probably taken from Virgil's Shepherd: "Illam * * *
ego huic notra similem, Meliboee, putavi," &c. Lactantius
delights in these poetical illusions.]
[Footnote 27: Castra super Tusci si ponere Tybridis undas;
(jubeus) Hesperios audax veniam metator in agros.
Tu quoscunque voles in planum effundere muros,
His aries actus disperget saxa lacertis;
Illa licet penitus tolli quam jusseris urbem
Roma sit. Lucan. Pharsal. i. 381.]
The legions of Galerius exhibited a very melancholy proof of
their disposition, by the ravages which they committed in their
retreat. They murdered, they ravished, they plundered, they
drove away the flocks and herds of the Italians; they burnt the
villages through which they passed, and they endeavored to
destroy the country which it had not been in their power to
subdue. During the whole march, Maxentius hung on their rear,
but he very prudently declined a general engagement with those
brave and desperate veterans. His father had undertaken a second
journey into Gaul, with the hope of persuading Constantine, who
had assembled an army on the frontier, to join in the pursuit,
and to complete the victory. But the actions of Constantine were
guided by reason, and not by resentment. He persisted in the
wise resolution of maintaining a balance of power in the divided
empire, and he no longer hated Galerius, when that aspiring
prince had ceased to be an object of terror. ^28
[Footnote 28: Lactantius de M. P. c. 27. Zosim. l. ii. p. 82.
The latter, that Constantine, in his interview with Maximian, had
promised to declare war against Galerius.]
The mind of Galerius was the most susceptible of the sterner
passions, but it was not, however, incapable of a sincere and
lasting friendship. Licinius, whose manners as well as character,
were not unlike his own, seems to have engaged both his affection
and esteem. Their intimacy had commenced in the happier period
perhaps of their youth and obscurity. It had been cemented by
the freedom and dangers of a military life; they had advanced
almost by equal steps through the successive honors of the
service; and as soon as Galerius was invested with the Imperial
dignity, he seems to have conceived the design of raising his
companion to the same rank with himself. During the short period
of his prosperity, he considered the rank of Caesar as unworthy
of the age and merit of Licinius, and rather chose to reserve for
him the place of Constantius, and the empire of the West. While
the emperor was employed in the Italian war, he intrusted his
friend with the defence of the Danube; and immediately after his
return from that unfortunate expedition, he invested Licinius
with the vacant purple of Severus, resigning to his immediate
command the provinces of Illyricum. ^29 The news of his promotion
was no sooner carried into the East, than Maximin, who governed,
or rather oppressed, the countries of Egypt and Syria, betrayed
his envy and discontent, disdained the inferior name of Caesar,
and, notwithstanding the prayers as well as arguments of
Galerius, exacted, almost by violence, the equal title of
Augustus. ^30 For the first, and indeed for the last time, the
Roman world was administered by six emperors. In the West,
Constantine and Maxentius affected to reverence their father
Maximian. In the East, Licinius and Maximin honored with more
real consideration their benefactor Galerius. The opposition of
interest, and the memory of a recent war, divided the empire into
two great hostile powers; but their mutual fears produced an
apparent tranquillity, and even a feigned reconciliation, till
the death of the elder princes, of Maximian, and more
particularly of Galerius, gave a new direction to the views and
passions of their surviving associates.
[Footnote 29: M. de Tillemont (Hist. des Empereurs, tom. iv. part
i. p. 559) has proved that Licinius, without passing through the
intermediate rank of Caesar, was declared Augustus, the 11th of
November, A. D. 307, after the return of Galerius from Italy.]
[Footnote 30: Lactantius de M. P. c. 32. When Galerius declared
Licinius Augustus with himself, he tried to satisfy his younger
associates, by inventing for Constantine and Maximin (not
Maxentius; see Baluze, p. 81) the new title of sons of the
Augusti. But when Maximin acquainted him that he had been
saluted Augustus by the army, Galerius was obliged to acknowledge
him as well as Constantine, as equal associates in the Imperial
dignity.]
When Maximian had reluctantly abdicated the empire, the
venal orators of the times applauded his philosophic moderation.
When his ambition excited, or at least encouraged, a civil war,
they returned thanks to his generous patriotism, and gently
censured that love of ease and retirement which had withdrawn him
from the public service. ^31 But it was impossible that minds
like those of Maximian and his son could long possess in harmony
an undivided power. Maxentius considered himself as the legal
sovereign of Italy, elected by the Roman senate and people; nor
would he endure the control of his father, who arrogantly
declared that by his name and abilities the rash youth had been
established on the throne. The cause was solemnly pleaded before
the Praetorian guards; and those troops, who dreaded the severity
of the old emperor, espoused the party of Maxentius. ^32 The life
and freedom of Maximian were, however, respected, and he retired
from Italy into Illyricum, affecting to lament his past conduct,
and secretly contriving new mischiefs. But Galerius, who was well
acquainted with his character, soon obliged him to leave his
dominions, and the last refuge of the disappointed Maximian was
the court of his son-in-law Constantine. ^33 He was received with
respect by that artful prince, and with the appearance of filial
tenderness by the empress Fausta. That he might remove every
suspicion, he resigned the Imperial purple a second time, ^34
professing himself at length convinced of the vanity of greatness
and ambition. Had he persevered in this resolution, he might
have ended his life with less dignity, indeed, than in his first
retirement, yet, however, with comfort and reputation. But the
near prospect of a throne brought back to his remembrance the
state from whence he was fallen, and he resolved, by a desperate
effort either to reign or to perish. An incursion of the Franks
had summoned Constantine, with a part of his army, to the banks
of the Rhine; the remainder of the troops were stationed in the
southern provinces of Gaul, which lay exposed to the enterprises
of the Italian emperor, and a considerable treasure was deposited
in the city of Arles. Maximian either craftily invented, or
easily credited, a vain report of the death of Constantine.
Without hesitation he ascended the throne, seized the treasure,
and scattering it with his accustomed profusion among the
soldiers, endeavored to awake in their minds the memory of his
ancient dignity and exploits. Before he could establish his
authority, or finish the negotiation which he appears to have
entered into with his son Maxentius, the celerity of Constantine
defeated all his hopes. On the first news of his perfidy and
ingratitude, that prince returned by rapid marches from the Rhine
to the Saone, embarked on the last mentioned river at Chalons,
and at Lyons trusting himself to the rapidity of the Rhone,
arrived at the gates of Arles, with a military force which it was
impossible for Maximian to resist, and which scarcely permitted
him to take refuge in the neighboring city of Marseilles. The
narrow neck of land which joined that place to the continent was
fortified against the besiegers, whilst the sea was open, either
for the escape of Maximian, or for the succor of Maxentius, if
the latter should choose to disguise his invasion of Gaul under
the honorable pretence of defending a distressed, or, as he might
allege, an injured father. Apprehensive of the fatal consequences
of delay, Constantine gave orders for an immediate assault; but
the scaling-ladders were found too short for the height of the
walls, and Marseilles might have sustained as long a siege as it
formerly did against the arms of Caesar, if the garrison,
conscious either of their fault or of their danger, had not
purchased their pardon by delivering up the city and the person
of Maximian. A secret but irrevocable sentence of death was
pronounced against the usurper; he obtained only the same favor
which he had indulged to Severus, and it was published to the
world, that, oppressed by the remorse of his repeated crimes, he
strangled himself with his own hands. After he had lost the
assistance, and disdained the moderate counsels of Diocletian,
the second period of his active life was a series of public
calamities and personal mortifications, which were terminated, in
about three years, by an ignominious death. He deserved his
fate; but we should find more reason to applaud the humanity of
Constantine, if he had spared an old man, the benefactor of his
father, and the father of his wife. During the whole of this
melancholy transaction, it appears that Fausta sacrificed the
sentiments of nature to her conjugal duties. ^35
[Footnote 31: See Panegyr. Vet. vi. 9. Audi doloris nostri
liberam vocem, &c. The whole passage is imagined with artful
flattery, and expressed with an easy flow of eloquence.]
[Footnote 32: Lactantius de M. P. c. 28. Zosim. l. ii. p. 82. A
report was spread, that Maxentius was the son of some obscure
Syrian, and had been substituted by the wife of Maximian as her
own child. See Aurelius Victor, Anonym. Valesian, and Panegyr.
Vet. ix. 3, 4.]
[Footnote 33: Ab urbe pulsum, ab Italia fugatum, ab Illyrico
repudiatum, provinciis, tuis copiis, tuo palatio recepisti.
Eumen. in Panegyr Vet. vii. 14.]
[Footnote 34: Lactantius de M. P. c. 29. Yet, after the
resignation of the purple, Constantine still continued to
Maximian the pomp and honors of the Imperial dignity; and on all
public occasions gave the right hand place to his father-in-law.
Panegyr. Vet. viii. 15.]
[Footnote 35: Zosim. l. ii. p. 82. Eumenius in Panegyr. Vet.
vii. 16 - 21. The latter of these has undoubtedly represented the
whole affair in the most favorable light for his sovereign. Yet
even from this partial narrative we may conclude, that the
repeated clemency of Constantine, and the reiterated treasons of
Maximian, as they are described by Lactantius, (de M. P. c. 29,
30,) and copied by the moderns, are destitute of any historical
foundation.
Note: Yet some pagan authors relate and confirm them.
Aurelius Victor speaking of Maximin, says, cumque specie officii,
dolis compositis, Constantinum generum tentaret acerbe, jure
tamen interierat. Aur. Vict. de Caesar l. p. 623. Eutropius
also says, inde ad Gallias profectus est (Maximianus) composito
tamquam a filio esset expulsus, ut Constantino genero jun
geretur: moliens tamen Constantinum, reperta occasione,
interficere, dedit justissimo exitu. Eutrop. x. p. 661. (Anon.
Gent.) - G.
These writers hardly confirm more than Gibbon admits; he
denies the repeated clemency of Constantine, and the reiterated
treasons of Maximian Compare Manso, p. 302. - M.]
The last years of Galerius were less shameful and
unfortunate; and though he had filled with more glory the
subordinate station of Caesar than the superior rank of Augustus,
he preserved, till the moment of his death, the first place among
the princes of the Roman world. He survived his retreat from
Italy about four years; and wisely relinquishing his views of
universal empire, he devoted the remainder of his life to the
enjoyment of pleasure, and to the execution of some works of
public utility, among which we may distinguish the discharging
into the Danube the superfluous waters of the Lake Pelso, and the
cutting down the immense forests that encompassed it; an
operation worthy of a monarch, since it gave an extensive country
to the agriculture of his Pannonian subjects. ^36 His death was
occasioned by a very painful and lingering disorder. His body,
swelled by an intemperate course of life to an unwieldy
corpulence, was covered with ulcers, and devoured by innumerable
swarms of those insects which have given their name to a most
loathsome disease; ^37 but as Galerius had offended a very
zealous and powerful party among his subjects, his sufferings,
instead of exciting their compassion, have been celebrated as the
visible effects of divine justice. ^38 He had no sooner expired
in his palace of Nicomedia, than the two emperors who were
indebted for their purple to his favors, began to collect their
forces, with the intention either of disputing, or of dividing,
the dominions which he had left without a master. They were
persuaded, however, to desist from the former design, and to
agree in the latter. The provinces of Asia fell to the share of
Maximin, and those of Europe augmented the portion of Licinius.
The Hellespont and the Thracian Bosphorus formed their mutual
boundary, and the banks of those narrow seas, which flowed in the
midst of the Roman world, were covered with soldiers, with arms,
and with fortifications. The deaths of Maximian and of Galerius
reduced the number of emperors to four. The sense of their true
interest soon connected Licinius and Constantine; a secret
alliance was concluded between Maximin and Maxentius, and their
unhappy subjects expected with terror the bloody consequences of
their inevitable dissensions, which were no longer restrained by
the fear or the respect which they had entertained for Galerius.
^39
[Footnote 36: Aurelius Victor, c. 40. But that lake was situated
on the upper Pannonia, near the borders of Noricum; and the
province of Valeria (a name which the wife of Galerius gave to
the drained country) undoubtedly lay between the Drave and the
Danube, (Sextus Rufus, c. 9.) I should therefore suspect that
Victor has confounded the Lake Pelso with the Volocean marshes,
or, as they are now called, the Lake Sabaton. It is placed in
the heart of Valeria, and its present extent is not less than
twelve Hungarian miles (about seventy English) in length, and two
in breadth. See Severini Pannonia, l. i. c. 9.]
[Footnote 37: Lactantius (de M. P. c. 33) and Eusebius (l. viii.
c. 16) describe the symptoms and progress of his disorder with
singular accuracy and apparent pleasure.]
[Footnote 38: If any (like the late Dr. Jortin, Remarks on
Ecclesiastical History, vol. ii. p. 307 - 356) still delight in
recording the wonderful deaths of the persecutors, I would
recommend to their perusal an admirable passage of Grotius (Hist.
l. vii. p. 332) concerning the last illness of Philip II. of
Spain.]
[Footnote 39: See Eusebius, l. ix. 6, 10. Lactantius de M. P. c.
36. Zosimus is less exact, and evidently confounds Maximian with
Maximin.]
Among so many crimes and misfortunes, occasioned by the
passions of the Roman princes, there is some pleasure in
discovering a single action which may be ascribed to their
virtue. In the sixth year of his reign, Constantine visited the
city of Autun, and generously remitted the arrears of tribute,
reducing at the same time the proportion of their assessment from
twenty-five to eighteen thousand heads, subject to the real and
personal capitation. ^40 Yet even this indulgence affords the
most unquestionable proof of the public misery. This tax was so
extremely oppressive, either in itself or in the mode of
collecting it, that whilst the revenue was increased by
extortion, it was diminished by despair: a considerable part of
the territory of Autun was left uncultivated; and great numbers
of the provincials rather chose to live as exiles and outlaws,
than to support the weight of civil society. It is but too
probable, that the bountiful emperor relieved, by a partial act
of liberality, one among the many evils which he had caused by
his general maxims of administration. But even those maxims were
less the effect of choice than of necessity. And if we except
the death of Maximian, the reign of Constantine in Gaul seems to
have been the most innocent and even virtuous period of his life.
The provinces were protected by his presence from the inroads of
the barbarians, who either dreaded or experienced his active
valor. After a signal victory over the Franks and Alemanni,
several of their princes were exposed by his order to the wild
beasts in the amphitheatre of Treves, and the people seem to have
enjoyed the spectacle, without discovering, in such a treatment
of royal captives, any thing that was repugnant to the laws of
nations or of humanity. ^41 ^*
[Footnote 40: See the viiith Panegyr., in which Eumenius
displays, in the presence of Constantine, the misery and the
gratitude of the city of Autun.]
[Footnote 41: Eutropius, x. 3. Panegyr. Veter. vii. 10, 11, 12.
A great number of the French youth were likewise exposed to the
same cruel and ignominious death.]
[Footnote *: Yet the panegyric assumes something of an apologetic
tone. Te vero Constantine, quantumlibet oderint hoses, dum
perhorrescant. Haec est enim vera virtus, ut non ament et
quiescant. The orator appeals to the ancient ideal of the
republic. - M.]
The virtues of Constantine were rendered more illustrious by
the vices of Maxentius. Whilst the Gallic provinces enjoyed as
much happiness as the condition of the times was capable of
receiving, Italy and Africa groaned under the dominion of a
tyrant, as contemptible as he was odious. The zeal of flattery
and faction has indeed too frequently sacrificed the reputation
of the vanquished to the glory of their successful rivals; but
even those writers who have revealed, with the most freedom and
pleasure, the faults of Constantine, unanimously confess that
Maxentius was cruel, rapacious, and profligate. ^42 He had the
good fortune to suppress a slight rebellion in Africa. The
governor and a few adherents had been guilty; the province
suffered for their crime. The flourishing cities of Cirtha and
Carthage, and the whole extent of that fertile country, were
wasted by fire and sword. The abuse of victory was followed by
the abuse of law and justice. A formidable army of sycophants
and delators invaded Africa; the rich and the noble were easily
convicted of a connection with the rebels; and those among them
who experienced the emperor's clemency, were only punished by the
confiscation of their estates. ^43 So signal a victory was
celebrated by a magnificent triumph, and Maxentius exposed to the
eyes of the people the spoils and captives of a Roman province.
The state of the capital was no less deserving of compassion than
that of Africa. The wealth of Rome supplied an inexhaustible
fund for his vain and prodigal expenses, and the ministers of his
revenue were skilled in the arts of rapine. It was under his
reign that the method of exacting a free gift from the senators
was first invented; and as the sum was insensibly increased, the
pretences of levying it, a victory, a birth, a marriage, or an
imperial consulship, were proportionably multiplied. ^44
Maxentius had imbibed the same implacable aversion to the senate,
which had characterized most of the former tyrants of Rome; nor
was it possible for his ungrateful temper to forgive the generous
fidelity which had raised him to the throne, and supported him
against all his enemies. The lives of the senators were exposed
to his jealous suspicions, the dishonor of their wives and
daughters heightened the gratification of his sensual passions.
^45 It may be presumed, that an Imperial lover was seldom reduced
to sigh in vain; but whenever persuasion proved ineffectual, he
had recourse to violence; and there remains one memorable example
of a noble matron, who preserved her chastity by a voluntary
death. The soldiers were the only order of men whom he appeared
to respect, or studied to please. He filled Rome and Italy with
armed troops, connived at their tumults, suffered them with
impunity to plunder, and even to massacre, the defenceless
people; ^46 and indulging them in the same licentiousness which
their emperor enjoyed, Maxentius often bestowed on his military
favorites the splendid villa, or the beautiful wife, of a
senator. A prince of such a character, alike incapable of
governing, either in peace or in war, might purchase the support,
but he could never obtain the esteem, of the army. Yet his pride
was equal to his other vices. Whilst he passed his indolent life
either within the walls of his palace, or in the neighboring
gardens of Sallust, he was repeatedly heard to declare, that he
alone was emperor, and that the other princes were no more than
his lieutenants, on whom he had devolved the defence of the
frontier provinces, that he might enjoy without interruption the
elegant luxury of the capital. Rome, which had so long regretted
the absence, lamented, during the six years of his reign, the
presence of her sovereign. ^47
[Footnote 42: Julian excludes Maxentius from the banquet of the
Caesars with abhorrence and contempt; and Zosimus (l. ii. p. 85)
accuses him of every kind of cruelty and profligacy.]
[Footnote 43: Zosimus, l. ii. p. 83 - 85. Aurelius Victor.]
[Footnote 44: The passage of Aurelius Victor should be read in
the following manner: Primus instituto pessimo, munerum specie,
Patres Oratores que pecuniam conferre prodigenti sibi cogeret.]
[Footnote 45: Panegyr. Vet. ix. 3. Euseb. Hist Eccles. viii. 14,
et in Vit. Constant i. 33, 34. Rufinus, c. 17. The virtuous
matron who stabbed herself to escape the violence of Maxentius,
was a Christian, wife to the praefect of the city, and her name
was Sophronia. It still remains a question among the casuists,
whether, on such occasions, suicide is justifiable.]
[Footnote 46: Praetorianis caedem vulgi quondam annueret, is the
vague expression of Aurelius Victor. See more particular, though
somewhat different, accounts of a tumult and massacre which
happened at Rome, in Eusebius, (l. viii. c. 14,) and in Zosimus,
(l. ii. p. 84.)]
[Footnote 47: See, in the Panegyrics, (ix. 14,) a lively
description of the indolence and vain pride of Maxentius. In
another place the orator observes that the riches which Rome had
accumulated in a period of 1060 years, were lavished by the
tyrant on his mercenary bands; redemptis ad civile latrocinium
manibus in gesserat.]
Though Constantine might view the conduct of Maxentius with
abhorrence, and the situation of the Romans with compassion, we
have no reason to presume that he would have taken up arms to
punish the one or to relieve the other. But the tyrant of Italy
rashly ventured to provoke a formidable enemy, whose ambition had
been hitherto restrained by considerations of prudence, rather
than by principles of justice. ^48 After the death of Maximian,
his titles, according to the established custom, had been erased,
and his statues thrown down with ignominy. His son, who had
persecuted and deserted him when alive, effected to display the
most pious regard for his memory, and gave orders that a similar
treatment should be immediately inflicted on all the statues that
had been erected in Italy and Africa to the honor of Constantine.
That wise prince, who sincerely wished to decline a war, with the
difficulty and importance of which he was sufficiently
acquainted, at first dissembled the insult, and sought for
redress by the milder expedient of negotiation, till he was
convinced that the hostile and ambitious designs of the Italian
emperor made it necessary for him to arm in his own defence.
Maxentius, who openly avowed his pretensions to the whole
monarchy of the West, had already prepared a very considerable
force to invade the Gallic provinces on the side of Rhaetia; and
though he could not expect any assistance from Licinius, he was
flattered with the hope that the legions of Illyricum, allured by
his presents and promises, would desert the standard of that
prince, and unanimously declare themselves his soldiers and
subjects. ^49 Constantine no longer hesitated. He had
deliberated with caution, he acted with vigor. He gave a private
audience to the ambassadors, who, in the name of the senate and
people, conjured him to deliver Rome from a detested tyrant; and
without regarding the timid remonstrances of his council, he
resolved to prevent the enemy, and to carry the war into the
heart of Italy. ^50
[Footnote 48: After the victory of Constantine, it was
universally allowed, that the motive of delivering the republic
from a detested tyrant, would, at any time, have justified his
expedition into Italy. Euseb in Vi'. Constantin. l. i. c. 26.
Panegyr. Vet. ix. 2.]
[Footnote 49: Zosimus, l. ii. p. 84, 85. Nazarius in Panegyr. x.
7 - 13.]
[Footnote 50: See Panegyr. Vet. ix. 2. Omnibus fere tuis
Comitibus et Ducibus non solum tacite mussantibus, sed etiam
aperte timentibus; contra consilia hominum, contra Haruspicum
monita, ipse per temet liberandae arbis tempus venisse sentires.
The embassy of the Romans is mentioned only by Zonaras, (l.
xiii.,) and by Cedrenus, (in Compend. Hist. p. 370;) but those
modern Greeks had the opportunity of consulting many writers
which have since been lost, among which we may reckon the life of
Constantine by Praxagoras. Photius (p. 63) has made a short
extract from that historical work.]
The enterprise was as full of danger as of glory; and the
unsuccessful event of two former invasions was sufficient to
inspire the most serious apprehensions. The veteran troops, who
revered the name of Maximian, had embraced in both those wars the
party of his son, and were now restrained by a sense of honor, as
well as of interest, from entertaining an idea of a second
desertion. Maxentius, who considered the Praetorian guards as
the firmest defence of his throne, had increased them to their
ancient establishment; and they composed, including the rest of
the Italians who were enlisted into his service, a formidable
body of fourscore thousand men. Forty thousand Moors and
Carthaginians had been raised since the reduction of Africa.
Even Sicily furnished its proportion of troops; and the armies of
Maxentius amounted to one hundred and seventy thousand foot and
eighteen thousand horse. The wealth of Italy supplied the
expenses of the war; and the adjacent provinces were exhausted,
to form immense magazines of corn and every other kind of
provisions.
The whole force of Constantine consisted of ninety thousand
foot and eight thousand horse; ^51 and as the defence of the
Rhine required an extraordinary attention during the absence of
the emperor, it was not in his power to employ above half his
troops in the Italian expedition, unless he sacrificed the public
safety to his private quarrel. ^52 At the head of about forty
thousand soldiers he marched to encounter an enemy whose numbers
were at least four times superior to his own. But the armies of
Rome, placed at a secure distance from danger, were enervated by
indulgence and luxury. Habituated to the baths and theatres of
Rome, they took the field with reluctance, and were chiefly
composed of veterans who had almost forgotten, or of new levies
who had never acquired, the use of arms and the practice of war.
The hardy legions of Gaul had long defended the frontiers of the
empire against the barbarians of the North; and in the
performance of that laborious service, their valor was exercised
and their discipline confirmed. There appeared the same
difference between the leaders as between the armies. Caprice or
flattery had tempted Maxentius with the hopes of conquest; but
these aspiring hopes soon gave way to the habits of pleasure and
the consciousness of his inexperience. The intrepid mind of
Constantine had been trained from his earliest youth to war, to
action, and to military command.
[Footnote 51: Zosimus (l. ii. p. 86) has given us this curious
account of the forces on both sides. He makes no mention of any
naval armaments, though we are assured (Panegyr. Vet. ix. 25)
that the war was carried on by sea as well as by land; and that
the fleet of Constantine took possession of Sardinia, Corsica,
and the ports of Italy.]
[Footnote 52: Panegyr. Vet. ix. 3. It is not surprising that the
orator should diminish the numbers with which his sovereign
achieved the conquest of Italy; but it appears somewhat singular
that he should esteem the tyrant's army at no more than 100,000
men.]
Chapter XIV: Six Emperors At The Same Time, Reunion Of The
Empire.
Part III.
When Hannibal marched from Gaul into Italy, he was obliged,
first to discover, and then to open, a way over mountains, and
through savage nations, that had never yielded a passage to a
regular army. ^53 The Alps were then guarded by nature, they are
now fortified by art. Citadels, constructed with no less skill
than labor and expense, command every avenue into the plain, and
on that side render Italy almost inaccessible to the enemies of
the king of Sardinia. ^54 But in the course of the intermediate
period, the generals, who have attempted the passage, have seldom
experienced any difficulty or resistance. In the age of
Constantine, the peasants of the mountains were civilized and
obedient subjects; the country was plentifully stocked with
provisions, and the stupendous highways, which the Romans had
carried over the Alps, opened several communications between Gaul
and Italy. ^55 Constantine preferred the road of the Cottian
Alps, or, as it is now called, of Mount Cenis, and led his troops
with such active diligence, that he descended into the plain of
Piedmont before the court of Maxentius had received any certain
intelligence of his departure from the banks of the Rhine. The
city of Susa, however, which is situated at the foot of Mount
Cenis, was surrounded with walls, and provided with a garrison
sufficiently numerous to check the progress of an invader; but
the impatience of Constantine's troops disdained the tedious
forms of a siege. The same day that they appeared before Susa,
they applied fire to the gates, and ladders to the walls; and
mounting to the assault amidst a shower of stones and arrows,
they entered the place sword in hand, and cut in pieces the
greatest part of the garrison. The flames were extinguished by
the care of Constantine, and the remains of Susa preserved from
total destruction. About forty miles from thence, a more severe
contest awaited him. A numerous army of Italians was assembled
under the lieutenants of Maxentius, in the plains of Turin. Its
principal strength consisted in a species of heavy cavalry, which
the Romans, since the decline of their discipline, had borrowed
from the nations of the East. The horses, as well as the men,
were clothed in complete armor, the joints of which were artfully
adapted to the motions of their bodies. The aspect of this
cavalry was formidable, their weight almost irresistible; and as,
on this occasion, their generals had drawn them up in a compact
column or wedge, with a sharp point, and with spreading flanks,
they flattered themselves that they could easily break and
trample down the army of Constantine. They might, perhaps, have
succeeded in their design, had not their experienced adversary
embraced the same method of defence, which in similar
circumstances had been practised by Aurelian. The skilful
evolutions of Constantine divided and baffled this massy column
of cavalry. The troops of Maxentius fled in confusion towards
Turin; and as the gates of the city were shut against them, very
few escaped the sword of the victorious pursuers. By this
important service, Turin deserved to experience the clemency and
even favor of the conqueror. He made his entry into the Imperial
palace of Milan, and almost all the cities of Italy between the
Alps and the Po not only acknowledged the power, but embraced
with zeal the party, of Constantine. ^56
[Footnote 53: The three principal passages of the Alps between
Gaul and Italy, are those of Mount St. Bernard, Mount Cenis, and
Mount Genevre. Tradition, and a resemblance of names, (Alpes
Penninoe,) had assigned the first of these for the march of
Hannibal, (see Simler de Alpibus.) The Chevalier de Folard
(Polyp. tom. iv.) and M. d'Anville have led him over Mount
Genevre. But notwithstanding the authority of an experienced
officer and a learned geographer, the pretensions of Mount Cenis
are supported in a specious, not to say a convincing, manner, by
M. Grosley. Observations sur l'Italie, tom. i. p. 40, &c. ^*
[Footnote *: The dissertation of Messrs. Cramer and Wickham
has clearly shown that the Little St. Bernard must claim the
honor of Hannibal's passage. Mr. Long (London, 1831) has added
some sensible corrections re Hannibal's march to the Alps. - M]
[Footnote 54: La Brunette near Suse, Demont, Exiles,
Fenestrelles, Coni, &c.]
[Footnote 55: See Ammian. Marcellin. xv. 10. His description of
the roads over the Alps is clear, lively, and accurate.]
[Footnote 56: Zosimus as well as Eusebius hasten from the passage
of the Alps to the decisive action near Rome. We must apply to
the two Panegyrics for the intermediate actions of Constantine.]
From Milan to Rome, the Aemilian and Flaminian highways
offered an easy march of about four hundred miles; but though
Constantine was impatient to encounter the tyrant, he prudently
directed his operations against another army of Italians, who, by
their strength and position, might either oppose his progress,
or, in case of a misfortune, might intercept his retreat.
Ruricius Pompeianus, a general distinguished by his valor and
ability, had under his command the city of Verona, and all the
troops that were stationed in the province of Venetia. As soon
as he was informed that Constantine was advancing towards him, he
detached a large body of cavalry which was defeated in an
engagement near Brescia, and pursued by the Gallic legions as far
as the gates of Verona. The necessity, the importance, and the
difficulties of the siege of Verona, immediately presented
themselves to the sagacious mind of Constantine. ^57 The city was
accessible only by a narrow peninsula towards the west, as the
other three sides were surrounded by the Adige, a rapid river,
which covered the province of Venetia, from whence the besieged
derived an inexhaustible supply of men and provisions. It was
not without great difficulty, and after several fruitless
attempts, that Constantine found means to pass the river at some
distance above the city, and in a place where the torrent was
less violent. He then encompassed Verona with strong lines,
pushed his attacks with prudent vigor, and repelled a desperate
sally of Pompeianus. That intrepid general, when he had used
every means of defence that the strength of the place or that of
the garrison could afford, secretly escaped from Verona, anxious
not for his own, but for the public safety. With indefatigable
diligence he soon collected an army sufficient either to meet
Constantine in the field, or to attack him if he obstinately
remained within his lines. The emperor, attentive to the
motions, and informed of the approach of so formidable an enemy,
left a part of his legions to continue the operations of the
siege, whilst, at the head of those troops on whose valor and
fidelity he more particularly depended, he advanced in person to
engage the general of Maxentius. The army of Gaul was drawn up
in two lines, according to the usual practice of war; but their
experienced leader, perceiving that the numbers of the Italians
far exceeded his own, suddenly changed his disposition, and,
reducing the second, extended the front of his first line to a
just proportion with that of the enemy. Such evolutions, which
only veteran troops can execute without confusion in a moment of
danger, commonly prove decisive; but as this engagement began
towards the close of the day, and was contested with great
obstinacy during the whole night, there was less room for the
conduct of the generals than for the courage of the soldiers.
The return of light displayed the victory of Constantine, and a
field of carnage covered with many thousands of the vanquished
Italians. Their general, Pompeianus, was found among the slain;
Verona immediately surrendered at discretion, and the garrison
was made prisoners of war. ^58 When the officers of the
victorious army congratulated their master on this important
success, they ventured to add some respectful complaints, of such
a nature, however, as the most jealous monarchs will listen to
without displeasure. They represented to Constantine, that, not
contented with all the duties of a commander, he had exposed his
own person with an excess of valor which almost degenerated into
rashness; and they conjured him for the future to pay more regard
to the preservation of a life in which the safety of Rome and of
the empire was involved. ^59
[Footnote 57: The Marquis Maffei has examined the siege and
battle of Verona with that degree of attention and accuracy which
was due to a memorable action that happened in his native
country. The fortifications of that city, constructed by
Gallienus, were less extensive than the modern walls, and the
amphitheatre was not included within their circumference. See
Verona Illustrata, part i. p. 142 150.]
[Footnote 58: They wanted chains for so great a multitude of
captives; and the whole council was at a loss; but the sagacious
conqueror imagined the happy expedient of converting into fetters
the swords of the vanquished. Panegyr. Vet. ix. 11.]
[Footnote 59: Panegyr. Vet. ix. 11.]
While Constantine signalized his conduct and valor in the
field, the sovereign of Italy appeared insensible of the
calamities and danger of a civil war which reigned in the heart
of his dominions. Pleasure was still the only business of
Maxentius. Concealing, or at least attempting to conceal, from
the public knowledge the misfortunes of his arms, ^60 he indulged
himself in a vain confidence which deferred the remedies of the
approaching evil, without deferring the evil itself. ^61 The
rapid progress of Constantine ^62 was scarcely sufficient to
awaken him from his fatal security; he flattered himself, that
his well-known liberality, and the majesty of the Roman name,
which had already delivered him from two invasions, would
dissipate with the same facility the rebellious army of Gaul.
The officers of experience and ability, who had served under the
banners of Maximian, were at length compelled to inform his
effeminate son of the imminent danger to which he was reduced;
and, with a freedom that at once surprised and convinced him, to
urge the necessity of preventing his ruin, by a vigorous exertion
of his remaining power. The resources of Maxentius, both of men
and money, were still considerable. The Praetorian guards felt
how strongly their own interest and safety were connected with
his cause; and a third army was soon collected, more numerous
than those which had been lost in the battles of Turin and
Verona. It was far from the intention of the emperor to lead his
troops in person. A stranger to the exercises of war, he
trembled at the apprehension of so dangerous a contest; and as
fear is commonly superstitious, he listened with melancholy
attention to the rumors of omens and presages which seemed to
menace his life and empire. Shame at length supplied the place
of courage, and forced him to take the field. He was unable to
sustain the contempt of the Roman people. The circus resounded
with their indignant clamors, and they tumultuously besieged the
gates of the palace, reproaching the pusillanimity of their
indolent sovereign, and celebrating the heroic spirit of
Constantine. ^63 Before Maxentius left Rome, he consulted the
Sibylline books. The guardians of these ancient oracles were as
well versed in the arts of this world as they were ignorant of
the secrets of fate; and they returned him a very prudent answer,
which might adapt itself to the event, and secure their
reputation, whatever should be the chance of arms. ^64
[Footnote 60: Literas calamitatum suarum indices supprimebat.
Panegyr Vet. ix. 15.]
[Footnote 61: Remedia malorum potius quam mala differebat, is the
fine censure which Tacitus passes on the supine indolence of
Vitellius.]
[Footnote 62: The Marquis Maffei has made it extremely probable
that Constantine was still at Verona, the 1st of September, A.D.
312, and that the memorable aera of the indications was dated
from his conquest of the Cisalpine Gaul.]
[Footnote 63: See Panegyr. Vet. xi. 16. Lactantius de M. P. c.
44.]
[Footnote 64: Illo die hostem Romanorum esse periturum. The
vanquished became of course the enemy of Rome.]
The celerity of Constantine's march has been compared to the
rapid conquest of Italy by the first of the Caesars; nor is the
flattering parallel repugnant to the truth of history, since no
more than fifty-eight days elapsed between the surrender of
Verona and the final decision of the war. Constantine had always
apprehended that the tyrant would consult the dictates of fear,
and perhaps of prudence; and that, instead of risking his last
hopes in a general engagement, he would shut himself up within
the walls of Rome. His ample magazines secured him against the
danger of famine; and as the situation of Constantine admitted
not of delay, he might have been reduced to the sad necessity of
destroying with fire and sword the Imperial city, the noblest
reward of his victory, and the deliverance of which had been the
motive, or rather indeed the pretence, of the civil war. ^65 It
was with equal surprise and pleasure, that on his arrival at a
place called Saxa Rubra, about nine miles from Rome, ^66 he
discovered the army of Maxentius prepared to give him battle. ^67
Their long front filled a very spacious plain, and their deep
array reached to the banks of the Tyber, which covered their
rear, and forbade their retreat. We are informed, and we may
believe, that Constantine disposed his troops with consummate
skill, and that he chose for himself the post of honor and
danger. Distinguished by the splendor of his arms, he charged in
person the cavalry of his rival; and his irresistible attack
determined the fortune of the day. The cavalry of Maxentius was
principally composed either of unwieldy cuirassiers, or of light
Moors and Numidians. They yielded to the vigor of the Gallic
horse, which possessed more activity than the one, more firmness
than the other. The defeat of the two wings left the infantry
without any protection on its flanks, and the undisciplined
Italians fled without reluctance from the standard of a tyrant
whom they had always hated, and whom they no longer feared. The
Praetorians, conscious that their offences were beyond the reach
of mercy, were animated by revenge and despair. Notwithstanding
their repeated efforts, those brave veterans were unable to
recover the victory: they obtained, however, an honorable death;
and it was observed that their bodies covered the same ground
which had been occupied by their ranks. ^68 The confusion then
became general, and the dismayed troops of Maxentius, pursued by
an implacable enemy, rushed by thousands into the deep and rapid
stream of the Tyber. The emperor himself attempted to escape
back into the city over the Milvian bridge; but the crowds which
pressed together through that narrow passage forced him into the
river, where he was immediately drowned by the weight of his
armor. ^69 His body, which had sunk very deep into the mud, was
found with some difficulty the next day. The sight of his head,
when it was exposed to the eyes of the people, convinced them of
their deliverance, and admonished them to receive with
acclamations of loyalty and gratitude the fortunate Constantine,
who thus achieved by his valor and ability the most splendid
enterprise of his life. ^70
[Footnote 65: See Panegyr. Vet. ix. 16, x. 27. The former of
these orators magnifies the hoards of corn, which Maxentius had
collected from Africa and the Islands. And yet, if there is any
truth in the scarcity mentioned by Eusebius, (in Vit. Constantin.
l. i. c. 36,) the Imperial granaries must have been open only to
the soldiers.]
[Footnote 66: Maxentius . . . tandem urbe in Saxa Rubra, millia
ferme novem aegerrime progressus. Aurelius Victor. See
Cellarius Geograph. Antiq. tom. i. p. 463. Saxa Rubra was in the
neighborhood of the Cremera, a trifling rivulet, illustrated by
the valor and glorious death of the three hundred Fabii.]
[Footnote 67: The post which Maxentius had taken, with the Tyber
in his rear is very clearly described by the two Panegyrists, ix.
16, x. 28.]
[Footnote 68: Exceptis latrocinii illius primis auctoribus, qui
desperata venia ocum quem pugnae sumpserant texere corporibus.
Panegyr. Vet 17.]
[Footnote 69: A very idle rumor soon prevailed, that Maxentius,
who had not taken any precaution for his own retreat, had
contrived a very artful snare to destroy the army of the
pursuers; but that the wooden bridge, which was to have been
loosened on the approach of Constantine, unluckily broke down
under the weight of the flying Italians. M. de Tillemont (Hist.
des Empereurs, tom. iv. part i. p. 576) very seriously examines
whether, in contradiction to common sense, the testimony of
Eusebius and Zosimus ought to prevail over the silence of
Lactantius, Nazarius, and the anonymous, but contemporary orator,
who composed the ninth Panegyric.
Note: Manso (Beylage, vi.) examines the question, and
adduces two manifest allusions to the bridge, from the Life of
Constantine by Praxagoras, and from Libanius. Is it not very
probable that such a bridge was thrown over the river to
facilitate the advance, and to secure the retreat, of the army of
Maxentius? In case of defeat, orders were given for destroying
it, in order to check the pursuit: it broke down accidentally, or
in the confusion was destroyed, as has not unfrequently been the
case, before the proper time. - M.]
[Footnote 70: Zosimus, l. ii. p. 86-88, and the two Panegyrics,
the former of which was pronounced a few months afterwards,
afford the clearest notion of this great battle. Lactantius,
Eusebius, and even the Epitomes, supply several useful hints.]
In the use of victory, Constantine neither deserved the
praise of clemency, nor incurred the censure of immoderate rigor.
^71 He inflicted the same treatment to which a defeat would have
exposed his own person and family, put to death the two sons of
the tyrant, and carefully extirpated his whole race. The most
distinguished adherents of Maxentius must have expected to share
his fate, as they had shared his prosperity and his crimes; but
when the Roman people loudly demanded a greater number of
victims, the conqueror resisted with firmness and humanity, those
servile clamors, which were dictated by flattery as well as by
resentment. Informers were punished and discouraged; the
innocent, who had suffered under the late tyranny, were recalled
from exile, and restored to their estates. A general act of
oblivion quieted the minds and settled the property of the
people, both in Italy and in Africa. ^72 The first time that
Constantine honored the senate with his presence, he
recapitulated his own services and exploits in a modest oration,
assured that illustrious order of his sincere regard, and
promised to reestablish its ancient dignity and privileges. The
grateful senate repaid these unmeaning professions by the empty
titles of honor, which it was yet in their power to bestow; and
without presuming to ratify the authority of Constantine, they
passed a decree to assign him the first rank among the three
Augusti who governed the Roman world. ^73 Games and festivals
were instituted to preserve the fame of his victory, and several
edifices, raised at the expense of Maxentius, were dedicated to
the honor of his successful rival. The triumphal arch of
Constantine still remains a melancholy proof of the decline of
the arts, and a singular testimony of the meanest vanity. As it
was not possible to find in the capital of the empire a sculptor
who was capable of adorning that public monument, the arch of
Trajan, without any respect either for his memory or for the
rules of propriety, was stripped of its most elegant figures.
The difference of times and persons, of actions and characters,
was totally disregarded. The Parthian captives appear prostrate
at the feet of a prince who never carried his arms beyond the
Euphrates; and curious antiquarians can still discover the head
of Trajan on the trophies of Constantine. The new ornaments
which it was necessary to introduce between the vacancies of
ancient sculpture are executed in the rudest and most unskillful
manner. ^74
[Footnote 71: Zosimus, the enemy of Constantine, allows (l. ii.
p. 88) that only a few of the friends of Maxentius were put to
death; but we may remark the expressive passage of Nazarius,
(Panegyr. Vet. x. 6.) Omnibus qui labefactari statum ejus
poterant cum stirpe deletis. The other orator (Panegyr. Vet. ix.
20, 21) contents himself with observing, that Constantine, when
he entered Rome, did not imitate the cruel massacres of Cinna, of
Marius, or of Sylla.
Note: This may refer to the son or sons of Maxentius. - M.]
[Footnote 72: See the two Panegyrics, and the laws of this and
the ensuing year, in the Theodosian Code.]
[Footnote 73: Panegyr. Vet. ix. 20. Lactantius de M. P. c. 44.
Maximin, who was confessedly the eldest Caesar, claimed, with
some show of reason, the first rank among the Augusti.]
[Footnote 74: Adhuc cuncta opera quae magnifice construxerat,
urbis fanum atque basilicam, Flavii meritis patres sacravere.
Aurelius Victor. With regard to the theft of Trajan's trophies,
consult Flaminius Vacca, apud Montfaucon, Diarium Italicum, p.
250, and l'Antiquite Expliquee of the latter, tom. iv. p. 171.]
The final abolition of the Praetorian guards was a measure
of prudence as well as of revenge. Those haughty troops, whose
numbers and privileges had been restored, and even augmented, by
Maxentius, were forever suppressed by Constantine. Their
fortified camp was destroyed, and the few Praetorians who had
escaped the fury of the sword were dispersed among the legions,
and banished to the frontiers of the empire, where they might be
serviceable without again becoming dangerous. ^75 By suppressing
the troops which were usually stationed in Rome, Constantine gave
the fatal blow to the dignity of the senate and people, and the
disarmed capital was exposed without protection to the insults or
neglect of its distant master. We may observe, that in this last
effort to preserve their expiring freedom, the Romans, from the
apprehension of a tribute, had raised Maxentius to the throne.
He exacted that tribute from the senate under the name of a free
gift. They implored the assistance of Constantine. He
vanquished the tyrant, and converted the free gift into a
perpetual tax. The senators, according to the declaration which
was required of their property, were divided into several
classes. The most opulent paid annually eight pounds of gold,
the next class paid four, the last two, and those whose poverty
might have claimed an exemption, were assessed, however, at seven
pieces of gold. Besides the regular members of the senate, their
sons, their descendants, and even their relations, enjoyed the
vain privileges, and supported the heavy burdens, of the
senatorial order; nor will it any longer excite our surprise,
that Constantine should be attentive to increase the number of
persons who were included under so useful a description. ^76
After the defeat of Maxentius, the victorious emperor passed no
more than two or three months in Rome, which he visited twice
during the remainder of his life, to celebrate the solemn
festivals of the tenth and of the twentieth years of his reign.
Constantine was almost perpetually in motion, to exercise the
legions, or to inspect the state of the provinces. Treves,
Milan, Aquileia, Sirmium, Naissus, and Thessalonica, were the
occasional places of his residence, till he founded a new Rome on
the confines of Europe and Asia. ^77
[Footnote 75: Praetoriae legiones ac subsidia factionibus aptiora
quam urbi Romae, sublata penitus; simul arma atque usus indumenti
militaris Aurelius Victor. Zosimus (l. ii. p. 89) mentions this
fact as an historian, and it is very pompously celebrated in the
ninth Panegyric.]
[Footnote 76: Ex omnibus provinciis optimates viros Curiae tuae
pigneraveris ut Senatus dignitas . . . . ex totius Orbis flore
consisteret. Nazarius in Panegyr. Vet x. 35. The word
pigneraveris might almost seem maliciously chosen. Concerning
the senatorial tax, see Zosimus, l. ii. p. 115, the second title
of the sixth book of the Theodosian Code, with Godefroy's
Commentary, and Memoires de l'Academic des Inscriptions, tom.
xxviii. p. 726.]
[Footnote 77: From the Theodosian Code, we may now begin to trace
the motions of the emperors; but the dates both of time and place
have frequently been altered by the carelessness of
transcribers.]
Before Constantine marched into Italy, he had secured the
friendship, or at least the neutrality, of Licinius, the Illyrian
emperor. He had promised his sister Constantia in marriage to
that prince; but the celebration of the nuptials was deferred
till after the conclusion of the war, and the interview of the
two emperors at Milan, which was appointed for that purpose,
appeared to cement the union of their families and interests. ^78
In the midst of the public festivity they were suddenly obliged
to take leave of each other. An inroad of the Franks summoned
Constantine to the Rhime, and the hostile approach of the
sovereign of Asia demanded the immediate presence of Licinius.
Maximin had been the secret ally of Maxentius, and without being
discouraged by his fate, he resolved to try the fortune of a
civil war. He moved out of Syria, towards the frontiers of
Bithynia, in the depth of winter. The season was severe and
tempestuous; great numbers of men as well as horses perished in
the snow; and as the roads were broken up by incessant rains, he
was obliged to leave behind him a considerable part of the heavy
baggage, which was unable to follow the rapidity of his forced
marches. By this extraordinary effort of diligence, he arrived
with a harassed but formidable army, on the banks of the Thracian
Bosphorus before the lieutenants of Licinius were apprised of his
hostile intentions. Byzantium surrendered to the power of
Maximin, after a siege of eleven days. He was detained some days
under the walls of Heraclea; and he had no sooner taken
possession of that city, than he was alarmed by the intelligence,
that Licinius had pitched his camp at the distance of only
eighteen miles. After a fruitless negotiation, in which the two
princes attempted to seduce the fidelity of each other's
adherents, they had recourse to arms. The emperor of the East
commanded a disciplined and veteran army of above seventy
thousand men; and Licinius, who had collected about thirty
thousand Illyrians, was at first oppressed by the superiority of
numbers. His military skill, and the firmness of his troops,
restored the day, and obtained a decisive victory. The
incredible speed which Maximin exerted in his flight is much more
celebrated than his prowess in the battle. Twenty- four hours
afterwards he was seen, pale, trembling, and without his Imperial
ornaments, at Nicomedia, one hundred and sixty miles from the
place of his defeat. The wealth of Asia was yet unexhausted; and
though the flower of his veterans had fallen in the late action,
he had still power, if he could obtain time, to draw very
numerous levies from Syria and Egypt. But he survived his
misfortune only three or four months. His death, which happened
at Tarsus, was variously ascribed to despair, to poison, and to
the divine justice. As Maximin was alike destitute of abilities
and of virtue, he was lamented neither by the people nor by the
soldiers. The provinces of the East, delivered from the terrors
of civil war, cheerfully acknowledged the authority of Licinius.
^79
[Footnote 78: Zosimus (l. ii. p. 89) observes, that before the
war the sister of Constantine had been betrothed to Licinius.
According to the younger Victor, Diocletian was invited to the
nuptials; but having ventured to plead his age and infirmities,
he received a second letter, filled with reproaches for his
supposed partiality to the cause of Maxentius and Maximin.]
[Footnote 79: Zosimus mentions the defeat and death of Maximin as
ordinary events; but Lactantius expatiates on them, (de M. P. c.
45-50,) ascribing them to the miraculous interposition of Heaven.
Licinius at that time was one of the protectors of the church.]
The vanquished emperor left behind him two children, a boy
of about eight, and a girl of about seven, years old. Their
inoffensive age might have excited compassion; but the compassion
of Licinius was a very feeble resource, nor did it restrain him
from extinguishing the name and memory of his adversary. The
death of Severianus will admit of less excuse, as it was dictated
neither by revenge nor by policy. The conqueror had never
received any injury from the father of that unhappy youth, and
the short and obscure reign of Severus, in a distant part of the
empire, was already forgotten. But the execution of Candidianus
was an act of the blackest cruelty and ingratitude. He was the
natural son of Galerius, the friend and benefactor of Licinius.
The prudent father had judged him too young to sustain the weight
of a diadem; but he hoped that, under the protection of princes
who were indebted to his favor for the Imperial purple,
Candidianus might pass a secure and honorable life. He was now
advancing towards the twentieth year of his age, and the royalty
of his birth, though unsupported either by merit or ambition, was
sufficient to exasperate the jealous mind of Licinius. ^80 To
these innocent and illustrious victims of his tyranny, we must
add the wife and daughter of the emperor Diocletian. When that
prince conferred on Galerius the title of Caesar, he had given
him in marriage his daughter Valeria, whose melancholy adventures
might furnish a very singular subject for tragedy. She had
fulfilled and even surpassed the duties of a wife. As she had
not any children herself, she condescended to adopt the
illegitimate son of her husband, and invariably displayed towards
the unhappy Candidianus the tenderness and anxiety of a real
mother. After the death of Galerius, her ample possessions
provoked the avarice, and her personal attractions excited the
desires, of his successor, Maximin. ^81 He had a wife still
alive; but divorce was permitted by the Roman law, and the fierce
passions of the tyrant demanded an immediate gratification. The
answer of Valeria was such as became the daughter and widow of
emperors; but it was tempered by the prudence which her
defenceless condition compelled her to observe. She represented
to the persons whom Maximin had employed on this occasion, "that
even if honor could permit a woman of her character and dignity
to entertain a thought of second nuptials, decency at least must
forbid her to listen to his addresses at a time when the ashes of
her husband, and his benefactor were still warm, and while the
sorrows of her mind were still expressed by her mourning
garments. She ventured to declare, that she could place very
little confidence in the professions of a man whose cruel
inconstancy was capable of repudiating a faithful and
affectionate wife." ^82 On this repulse, the love of Maximin was
converted into fury; and as witnesses and judges were always at
his disposal, it was easy for him to cover his fury with an
appearance of legal proceedings, and to assault the reputation as
well as the happiness of Valeria. Her estates were confiscated,
her eunuchs and domestics devoted to the most inhuman tortures;
and several innocent and respectable matrons, who were honored
with her friendship, suffered death, on a false accusation of
adultery. The empress herself, together with her mother Prisca,
was condemned to exile; and as they were ignominiously hurried
from place to place before they were confined to a sequestered
village in the deserts of Syria, they exposed their shame and
distress to the provinces of the East, which, during thirty
years, had respected their august dignity. Diocletian made
several ineffectual efforts to alleviate the misfortunes of his
daughter; and, as the last return that he expected for the
Imperial purple, which he had conferred upon Maximin, he
entreated that Valeria might be permitted to share his retirement
of Salona, and to close the eyes of her afflicted father. ^83 He
entreated; but as he could no longer threaten, his prayers were
received with coldness and disdain; and the pride of Maximin was
gratified, in treating Diocletian as a suppliant, and his
daughter as a criminal. The death of Maximin seemed to assure
the empresses of a favorable alteration in their fortune. The
public disorders relaxed the vigilance of their guard, and they
easily found means to escape from the place of their exile, and
to repair, though with some precaution, and in disguise, to the
court of Licinius. His behavior, in the first days of his reign,
and the honorable reception which he gave to young Candidianus,
inspired Valeria with a secret satisfaction, both on her own
account and on that of her adopted son. But these grateful
prospects were soon succeeded by horror and astonishment; and the
bloody executions which stained the palace of Nicomedia
sufficiently convinced her that the throne of Maximin was filled
by a tyrant more inhuman than himself. Valeria consulted her
safety by a hasty flight, and, still accompanied by her mother
Prisca, they wandered above fifteen months ^84 through the
provinces, concealed in the disguise of plebeian habits. They
were at length discovered at Thessalonica; and as the sentence of
their death was already pronounced, they were immediately
beheaded, and their bodies thrown into the sea. The people gazed
on the melancholy spectacle; but their grief and indignation were
suppressed by the terrors of a military guard. Such was the
unworthy fate of the wife and daughter of Diocletian. We lament
their misfortunes, we cannot discover their crimes; and whatever
idea we may justly entertain of the cruelty of Licinius, it
remains a matter of surprise that he was not contented with some
more secret and decent method of revenge. ^85
[Footnote 80: Lactantius de M. P. c. 50. Aurelius Victor touches
on the different conduct of Licinius, and of Constantine, in the
use of victory.]
[Footnote 81: The sensual appetites of Maximin were gratified at
the expense of his subjects. His eunuchs, who forced away wives
and virgins, examined their naked charms with anxious curiosity,
lest any part of their body should be found unworthy of the royal
embraces. Coyness and disdain were considered as treason, and
the obstinate fair one was condemned to be drowned. A custom was
gradually introduced, that no person should marry a wife without
the permission of the emperor, "ut ipse in omnibus nuptiis
praegustator esset." Lactantius de M. P. c. 38.]
[Footnote 82: Lactantius de M. P. c. 39.]
[Footnote 83: Diocletian at last sent cognatum suum, quendam
militarem ae potentem virum, to intercede in favor of his
daughter, (Lactantius de M. P. c. 41.) We are not sufficiently
acquainted with the history of these times to point out the
person who was employed.]
[Footnote 84: Valeria quoque per varias provincias quindecim
mensibus plebeio cultu pervagata. Lactantius de M. P. c. 51.
There is some doubt whether we should compute the fifteen months
from the moment of her exile, or from that of her escape. The
expression of parvagata seems to denote the latter; but in that
case we must suppose that the treatise of Lactantius was written
after the first civil war between Licinius and Constantine. See
Cuper, p. 254.]
[Footnote 85: Ita illis pudicitia et conditio exitio fuit.
Lactantius de M. P. c. 51. He relates the misfortunes of the
innocent wife and daughter of Discletian with a very natural
mixture of pity and exultation.]
The Roman world was now divided between Constantine and
Licinius, the former of whom was master of the West, and the
latter of the East. It might perhaps have been expected that the
conquerors, fatigued with civil war, and connected by a private
as well as public alliance, would have renounced, or at least
would have suspended, any further designs of ambition. And yet a
year had scarcely elapsed after the death of Maximin, before the
victorious emperors turned their arms against each other. The
genius, the success, and the aspiring temper of Constantine, may
seem to mark him out as the aggressor; but the perfidious
character of Licinius justifies the most unfavorable suspicions,
and by the faint light which history reflects on this
transaction, ^86 we may discover a conspiracy fomented by his
arts against the authority of his colleague. Constantine had
lately given his sister Anastasia in marriage to Bassianus, a man
of a considerable family and fortune, and had elevated his new
kinsman to the rank of Caesar. According to the system of
government instituted by Diocletian, Italy, and perhaps Africa,
were designed for his department in the empire. But the
performance of the promised favor was either attended with so
much delay, or accompanied with so many unequal conditions, that
the fidelity of Bassianus was alienated rather than secured by
the honorable distinction which he had obtained. His nomination
had been ratified by the consent of Licinius; and that artful
prince, by the means of his emissaries, soon contrived to enter
into a secret and dangerous correspondence with the new Caesar,
to irritate his discontents, and to urge him to the rash
enterprise of extorting by violence what he might in vain solicit
from the justice of Constantine. But the vigilant emperor
discovered the conspiracy before it was ripe for execution; and
after solemnly renouncing the alliance of Bassianus, despoiled
him of the purple, and inflicted the deserved punishment on his
treason and ingratitude. The haughty refusal of Licinius, when he
was required to deliver up the criminals who had taken refuge in
his dominions, confirmed the suspicions already entertained of
his perfidy; and the indignities offered at Aemona, on the
frontiers of Italy, to the statues of Constantine, became the
signal of discord between the two princes. ^87
[Footnote 86: The curious reader, who consults the Valesian
fragment, p. 713, will probably accuse me of giving a bold and
licentious paraphrase; but if he considers it with attention, he
will acknowledge that my interpretation is probable and
consistent.]
[Footnote 87: The situation of Aemona, or, as it is now called,
Laybach, in Carniola, (D'Anville, Geographie Ancienne, tom. i. p.
187,) may suggest a conjecture. As it lay to the north-east of
the Julian Alps, that important territory became a natural object
of dispute between the sovereigns of Italy and of Illyricum.]
The first battle was fought near Cibalis, a city of
Pannonia, situated on the River Save, about fifty miles above
Sirmium. ^88 From the inconsiderable forces which in this
important contest two such powerful monarchs brought into the
field, it may be inferred that the one was suddenly provoked, and
that the other was unexpectedly surprised. The emperor of the
West had only twenty thousand, and the sovereign of the East no
more than five and thirty thousand, men. The inferiority of
number was, however, compensated by the advantage of the ground.
Constantine had taken post in a defile about half a mile in
breadth, between a steep hill and a deep morass, and in that
situation he steadily expected and repulsed the first attack of
the enemy. He pursued his success, and advanced into the plain.
But the veteran legions of Illyricum rallied under the standard
of a leader who had been trained to arms in the school of Probus
and Diocletian. The missile weapons on both sides were soon
exhausted; the two armies, with equal valor, rushed to a closer
engagement of swords and spears, and the doubtful contest had
already lasted from the dawn of the day to a late hour of the
evening, when the right wing, which Constantine led in person,
made a vigorous and decisive charge. The judicious retreat of
Licinius saved the remainder of his troops from a total defeat;
but when he computed his loss, which amounted to more than twenty
thousand men, he thought it unsafe to pass the night in the
presence of an active and victorious enemy. Abandoning his camp
and magazines, he marched away with secrecy and diligence at the
head of the greatest part of his cavalry, and was soon removed
beyond the danger of a pursuit. His diligence preserved his
wife, his son, and his treasures, which he had deposited at
Sirmium. Licinius passed through that city, and breaking down
the bridge on the Save, hastened to collect a new army in Dacia
and Thrace. In his flight he bestowed the precarious title of
Caesar on Valens, his general of the Illyrian frontier. ^89
[Footnote 88: Cibalis or Cibalae (whose name is still preserved
in the obscure ruins of Swilei) was situated about fifty miles
from Sirmium, the capital of Illyricum, and about one hundred
from Taurunum, or Belgrade, and the conflux of the Danube and the
Save. The Roman garrisons and cities on those rivers are finely
illustrated by M. d'Anville in a memoir inserted in l'Academie
des Inscriptions, tom. xxviii.]
[Footnote 89: Zosimus (l. ii. p. 90, 91) gives a very particular
account of this battle; but the descriptions of Zosimus are
rhetorical rather than military]
Chapter XIV: Six Emperors At The Same Time, Reunion Of The
Empire.
Part IV.
The plain of Mardia in Thrace was the theatre of a second
battle no less obstinate and bloody than the former. The troops
on both sides displayed the same valor and discipline; and the
victory was once more decided by the superior abilities of
Constantine, who directed a body of five thousand men to gain an
advantageous height, from whence, during the heat of the action,
they attacked the rear of the enemy, and made a very considerable
slaughter. The troops of Licinius, however, presenting a double
front, still maintained their ground, till the approach of night
put an end to the combat, and secured their retreat towards the
mountains of Macedonia. ^90 The loss of two battles, and of his
bravest veterans, reduced the fierce spirit of Licinius to sue
for peace. His ambassador Mistrianus was admitted to the
audience of Constantine: he expatiated on the common topics of
moderation and humanity, which are so familiar to the eloquence
of the vanquished; represented in the most insinuating language,
that the event of the war was still doubtful, whilst its
inevitable calamities were alike pernicious to both the
contending parties; and declared that he was authorized to
propose a lasting and honorable peace in the name of the two
emperors his masters. Constantine received the mention of Valens
with indignation and contempt. "It was not for such a purpose,"
he sternly replied, "that we have advanced from the shores of the
western ocean in an uninterrupted course of combats and
victories, that, after rejecting an ungrateful kinsman, we should
accept for our colleague a contemptible slave. The abdication of
Valens is the first article of the treaty." ^91 It was necessary
to accept this humiliating condition; and the unhappy Valens,
after a reign of a few days, was deprived of the purple and of
his life. As soon as this obstacle was removed, the tranquillity
of the Roman world was easily restored. The successive defeats
of Licinius had ruined his forces, but they had displayed his
courage and abilities. His situation was almost desperate, but
the efforts of despair are sometimes formidable, and the good
sense of Constantine preferred a great and certain advantage to a
third trial of the chance of arms. He consented to leave his
rival, or, as he again styled Licinius, his friend and brother,
in the possession of Thrace, Asia Minor, Syria, and Egypt; but
the provinces of Pannonia, Dalmatia, Dacia, Macedonia, and
Greece, were yielded to the Western empire, and the dominions of
Constantine now extended from the confines of Caledonia to the
extremity of Peloponnesus. It was stipulated by the same treaty,
that three royal youths, the sons of emperors, should be called
to the hopes of the succession. Crispus and the young
Constantine were soon afterwards declared Caesars in the West,
while the younger Licinius was invested with the same dignity in
the East. In this double proportion of honors, the conqueror
asserted the superiority of his arms and power. ^92
[Footnote 90: Zosimus, l. ii. p. 92, 93. Anonym. Valesian. p.
713. The Epitomes furnish some circumstances; but they
frequently confound the two wars between Licinius and
Constantine.]
[Footnote 91: Petrus Patricius in Excerpt. Legat. p. 27. If it
should be thought that signifies more properly a son-in-law, we
might conjecture that Constantine, assuming the name as well as
the duties of a father, had adopted his younger brothers and
sisters, the children of Theodora. But in the best authors
sometimes signifies a husband, sometimes a father-in-law, and
sometimes a kinsman in general. See Spanheim, Observat. ad
Julian. Orat. i. p. 72.]
[Footnote 92: Zosimus, l. ii. p. 93. Anonym. Valesian. p. 713.
Eutropius, x. v. Aurelius Victor, Euseb. in Chron. Sozomen, l.
i. c. 2. Four of these writers affirm that the promotion of the
Caesars was an article of the treaty. It is, however, certain,
that the younger Constantine and Licinius were not yet born; and
it is highly probable that the promotion was made the 1st of
March, A. D. 317. The treaty had probably stipulated that the
two Caesars might be created by the western, and one only by the
eastern emperor; but each of them reserved to himself the choice
of the persons.]
The reconciliation of Constantine and Licinius, though it
was imbittered by resentment and jealousy, by the remembrance of
recent injuries, and by the apprehension of future dangers,
maintained, however, above eight years, the tranquility of the
Roman world. As a very regular series of the Imperial laws
commences about this period, it would not be difficult to
transcribe the civil regulations which employed the leisure of
Constantine. But the most important of his institutions are
intimately connected with the new system of policy and religion,
which was not perfectly established till the last and peaceful
years of his reign. There are many of his laws, which, as far as
they concern the rights and property of individuals, and the
practice of the bar, are more properly referred to the private
than to the public jurisprudence of the empire; and he published
many edicts of so local and temporary a nature, that they would
ill deserve the notice of a general history. Two laws, however,
may be selected from the crowd; the one for its importance, the
other for its singularity; the former for its remarkable
benevolence, the latter for its excessive severity. 1. The
horrid practice, so familiar to the ancients, of exposing or
murdering their new-born infants, was become every day more
frequent in the provinces, and especially in Italy. It was the
effect of distress; and the distress was principally occasioned
by the intolerant burden of taxes, and by the vexatious as well
as cruel prosecutions of the officers of the revenue against
their insolvent debtors. The less opulent or less industrious
part of mankind, instead of rejoicing in an increase of family,
deemed it an act of paternal tenderness to release their children
from the impending miseries of a life which they themselves were
unable to support. The humanity of Constantine; moved, perhaps,
by some recent and extraordinary instances of despair, ^* engaged
him to address an edict to all the cities of Italy, and
afterwards of Africa, directing immediate and sufficient relief
to be given to those parents who should produce before the
magistrates the children whom their own poverty would not allow
them to educate. But the promise was too liberal, and the
provision too vague, to effect any general or permanent benefit.
^93 The law, though it may merit some praise, served rather to
display than to alleviate the public distress. It still remains
an authentic monument to contradict and confound those venal
orators, who were too well satisfied with their own situation to
discover either vice or misery under the government of a generous
sovereign. ^94 2. The laws of Constantine against rapes were
dictated with very little indulgence for the most amiable
weaknesses of human nature; since the description of that crime
was applied not only to the brutal violence which compelled, but
even to the gentle seduction which might persuade, an unmarried
woman, under the age of twenty-five, to leave the house of her
parents. "The successful ravisher was punished with death; and
as if simple death was inadequate to the enormity of his guilt,
he was either burnt alive, or torn in pieces by wild beasts in
the amphitheatre. The virgin's declaration, that she had been
carried away with her own consent, instead of saving her lover,
exposed her to share his fate. The duty of a public prosecution
was intrusted to the parents of the guilty or unfortunate maid;
and if the sentiments of nature prevailed on them to dissemble
the injury, and to repair by a subsequent marriage the honor of
their family, they were themselves punished by exile and
confiscation. The slaves, whether male or female, who were
convicted of having been accessory to rape or seduction, were
burnt alive, or put to death by the ingenious torture of pouring
down their throats a quantity of melted lead. As the crime was
of a public kind, the accusation was permitted even to strangers.
The commencement of the action was not limited to any term of
years, and the consequences of the sentence were extended to the
innocent offspring of such an irregular union." ^95 But whenever
the offence inspires less horror than the punishment, the rigor
of penal law is obliged to give way to the common feelings of
mankind. The most odious parts of this edict were softened or
repealed in the subsequent reigns; ^96 and even Constantine
himself very frequently alleviated, by partial acts of mercy, the
stern temper of his general institutions. Such, indeed, was the
singular humor of that emperor, who showed himself as indulgent,
and even remiss, in the execution of his laws, as he was severe,
and even cruel, in the enacting of them. It is scarcely possible
to observe a more decisive symptom of weakness, either in the
character of the prince, or in the constitution of the
government. ^97
[Footnote *: This explanation appears to me little probable.
Godefroy has made a much more happy conjecture, supported by all
the historical circumstances which relate to this edict. It was
published the 12th of May, A. D. 315. at Naissus in Pannonia, the
birthplace of Constantine. The 8th of October, in that year,
Constantine gained the victory of Cibalis over Licinius. He was
yet uncertain as to the fate of the war: the Christians, no
doubt, whom he favored, had prophesied his victory. Lactantius,
then preceptor of Crispus, had just written his work upon
Christianity, (his Divine Institutes;) he had dedicated it to
Constantine. In this book he had inveighed with great force
against infanticide, and the exposure of infants, (l. vi. c. 20.)
Is it not probable that Constantine had read this work, that he
had conversed on the subject with Lactantius, that he was moved,
among other things, by the passage to which I have referred, and
in the first transport of his enthusiasm, he published the edict
in question? The whole of the edict bears the character of
precipitation, of excitement, (entrainement,) rather than of
deliberate reflection - the extent of the promises, the
indefiniteness of the means, of the conditions, and of the time
during which the parents might have a right to the succor of the
state. Is there not reason to believe that the humanity of
Constantine was excited by the influence of Lactantius, by that
of the principles of Christianity, and of the Christians
themselves, already in high esteem with the emperor, rather than
by some "extraordinary instances of despair"? * * * See
Hegewisch, Essai Hist. sur les Finances Romaines
The edict for Africa was not published till 322: of that we
may say in truth that its origin was in the misery of the times.
Africa had suffered much from the cruelty of Maxentius.
Constantine says expressly, that he had learned that parents,
under the pressure of distress, were there selling their
children. This decree is more distinct, more maturely
deliberated than the former; the succor which was to be given to
the parents, and the source from which it was to be derived, are
determined. (Code Theod. l. xi. tit. 27, c 2.) If the direct
utility of these laws may not have been very extensive, they had
at least the great and happy effect of establishing a decisive
opposition between the principles of the government and those
which, at this time, had prevailed among the subjects of the
empire. - G.]
[Footnote 93: Codex Theodosian. l. xi. tit. 27, tom. iv. p. 188,
with Godefroy's observations. See likewise l. v. tit. 7, 8.]
[Footnote 94: Omnia foris placita, domi prospera, annonae
ubertate, fructuum copia, &c. Panegyr. Vet. x. 38. This oration
of Nazarius was pronounced on the day of the Quinquennalia of the
Caesars, the 1st of March, A. D. 321.]
[Footnote 95: See the edict of Constantine, addressed to the
Roman people, in the Theodosian Code, l. ix. tit. 24, tom. iii.
p. 189.]
[Footnote 96: His son very fairly assigns the true reason of the
repeal: "Na sub specie atrocioris judicii aliqua in ulciscendo
crimine dilatio nae ceretur." Cod. Theod. tom. iii. p. 193]
[Footnote 97: Eusebius (in Vita Constant. l. iii. c. 1) chooses
to affirm, that in the reign of this hero, the sword of justice
hung idle in the hands of the magistrates. Eusebius himself, (l.
iv. c. 29, 54,) and the Theodosian Code, will inform us that this
excessive lenity was not owing to the want either of atrocious
criminals or of penal laws.]
The civil administration was sometimes interrupted by the
military defence of the empire. Crispus, a youth of the most
amiable character, who had received with the title of Caesar the
command of the Rhine, distinguished his conduct, as well as
valor, in several victories over the Franks and Alemanni, and
taught the barbarians of that frontier to dread the eldest son of
Constantine, and the grandson of Constantius. ^98 The emperor
himself had assumed the more difficult and important province of
the Danube. The Goths, who in the time of Claudius and Aurelian
had felt the weight of the Roman arms, respected the power of the
empire, even in the midst of its intestine divisions. But the
strength of that warlike nation was now restored by a peace of
near fifty years; a new generation had arisen, who no longer
remembered the misfortunes of ancient days; the Sarmatians of the
Lake Maeotis followed the Gothic standard either as subjects or
as allies, and their united force was poured upon the countries
of Illyricum. Campona, Margus, and Benonia, ^! appear to have
been the scenes of several memorable sieges and battles; ^99 and
though Constantine encountered a very obstinate resistance, he
prevailed at length in the contest, and the Goths were compelled
to purchased an ignominious retreat, by restoring the booty and
prisoners which they had taken. Nor was this advantage
sufficient to satisfy the indignation of the emperor. He
resolved to chastise as well as to repulse the insolent
barbarians who had dared to invade the territories of Rome. At
the head of his legions he passed the Danube after repairing the
bridge which had been constructed by Trajan, penetrated into the
strongest recesses of Dacia, ^100 and when he had inflicted a
severe revenge, condescended to give peace to the suppliant
Goths, on condition that, as often as they were required, they
should supply his armies with a body of forty thousand soldiers.
^101 Exploits like these were no doubt honorable to Constantine,
and beneficial to the state; but it may surely be questioned,
whether they can justify the exaggerated assertion of Eusebius,
that All Scythia, as far as the extremity of the North, divided
as it was into so many names and nations of the most various and
savage manners, had been added by his victorious arms to the
Roman empire. ^102
[Footnote 98: Nazarius in Panegyr. Vet. x. The victory of
Crispus over the Alemanni is expressed on some medals.
Note: Other medals are extant, the legends of which
commemorate the success of Constantine over the Sarmatians and
other barbarous nations, Sarmatia Devicta. Victoria Gothica.
Debellatori Gentium Barbarorum. Exuperator Omnium Gentium. St.
Martin, note on Le Beau, i. 148. - M.]
[Footnote !: Campona, Old Buda in Hungary; Margus, Benonia,
Widdin, in Maesia - G and M.]
[Footnote 99: See Zosimus, l. ii. p. 93, 94; though the narrative
of that historian is neither clear nor consistent. The Panegyric
of Optatianus (c. 23) mentions the alliance of the Sarmatians
with the Carpi and Getae, and points out the several fields of
battle. It is supposed that the Sarmatian games, celebrated in
the month of November, derived their origin from the success of
this war.]
[Footnote 100: In the Caesars of Julian, (p. 329. Commentaire de
Spanheim, p. 252.) Constantine boasts, that he had recovered the
province (Dacia) which Trajan had subdued. But it is insinuated
by Silenus, that the conquests of Constantine were like the
gardens of Adonis, which fade and wither almost the moment they
appear.]
[Footnote 101: Jornandes de Rebus Geticis, c. 21. I know not
whether we may entirely depend on his authority. Such an
alliance has a very recent air, and scarcely is suited to the
maxims of the beginning of the fourth century.]
[Footnote 102: Eusebius in Vit. Constantin. l. i. c. 8. This
passage, however, is taken from a general declamation on the
greatness of Constantine, and not from any particular account of
the Gothic war.]
In this exalted state of glory, it was impossible that
Constantine should any longer endure a partner in the empire.
Confiding in the superiority of his genius and military power, he
determined, without any previous injury, to exert them for the
destruction of Licinius, whose advanced age and unpopular vices
seemed to offer a very easy conquest. ^103 But the old emperor,
awakened by the approaching danger, deceived the expectations of
his friends, as well as of his enemies. Calling forth that
spirit and those abilities by which he had deserved the
friendship of Galerius and the Imperial purple, he prepared
himself for the contest, collected the forces of the East, and
soon filled the plains of Hadrianople with his troops, and the
Straits of the Hellespont with his fleet. The army consisted of
one hundred and fifty thousand foot, and fifteen thousand horse;
and as the cavalry was drawn, for the most part, from Phrygia and
Cappadocia, we may conceive a more favorable opinion of the
beauty of the horses, than of the courage and dexterity of their
riders. The fleet was composed of three hundred and fifty
galleys of three ranks of oars. A hundred and thirty of these
were furnished by Egypt and the adjacent coast of Africa. A
hundred and ten sailed from the ports of Phoenicia and the Isle
of Cyprus; and the maritime countries of Bithynia, Ionia, and
Caria, were likewise obliged to provide a hundred and ten
galleys. The troops of Constantine were ordered to a rendezvous
at Thessalonica; they amounted to above a hundred and twenty
thousand horse and foot. ^104 Their emperor was satisfied with
their martial appearance, and his army contained more soldiers,
though fewer men, than that of his eastern competitor. The
legions of Constantine were levied in the warlike provinces of
Europe; action had confirmed their discipline, victory had
elevated their hopes, and there were among them a great number of
veterans, who, after seventeen glorious campaigns under the same
leader, prepared themselves to deserve an honorable dismission by
a last effort of their valor. ^105 But the naval preparations of
Constantine were in every respect much inferior to those of
Licinius. The maritime cities of Greece sent their respective
quotas of men and ships to the celebrated harbor of Piraeus, and
their united forces consisted of no more than two hundred small
vessels - a very feeble armament, if it is compared with those
formidable fleets which were equipped and maintained by the
republic of Athens during the Peloponnesian war. ^106 Since Italy
was no longer the seat of government, the naval establishments of
Misenum and Ravenna had been gradually neglected; and as the
shipping and mariners of the empire were supported by commerce
rather than by war, it was natural that they should the most
abound in the industrious provinces of Egypt and Asia. It is
only surprising that the eastern emperor, who possessed so great
a superiority at sea, should have neglected the opportunity of
carrying an offensive war into the centre of his rival's
dominions.
[Footnote 103: Constantinus tamen, vir ingens, et omnia efficere
nitens quae animo praeparasset, simul principatum totius urbis
affectans, Licinio bellum intulit. Eutropius, x. 5. Zosimus, l.
ii. p 89. The reasons which they have assigned for the first
civil war, may, with more propriety, be applied to the second.]
[Footnote 104: Zosimus, l. ii. p. 94, 95.]
[Footnote 105: Constantine was very attentive to the privileges
and comforts of his fellow-veterans, (Conveterani,) as he now
began to style them. See the Theodosian Code, l. vii. tit. 10,
tom. ii. p. 419, 429.]
[Footnote 106: Whilst the Athenians maintained the empire of the
sea, their fleet consisted of three, and afterwards of four,
hundred galleys of three ranks of oars, all completely equipped
and ready for immediate service. The arsenal in the port of
Piraeus had cost the republic a thousand talents, about two
hundred and sixteen thousand pounds. See Thucydides de Bel.
Pelopon. l. ii. c. 13, and Meursius de Fortuna Attica, c. 19.]
Instead of embracing such an active resolution, which might
have changed the whole face of the war, the prudent Licinius
expected the approach of his rival in a camp near Hadrianople,
which he had fortified with an anxious care, that betrayed his
apprehension of the event. Constantine directed his march from
Thessalonica towards that part of Thrace, till he found himself
stopped by the broad and rapid stream of the Hebrus, and
discovered the numerous army of Licinius, which filled the steep
ascent of the hill, from the river to the city of Hadrianople.
Many days were spent in doubtful and distant skirmishes; but at
length the obstacles of the passage and of the attack were
removed by the intrepid conduct of Constantine. In this place we
might relate a wonderful exploit of Constantine, which, though it
can scarcely be paralleled either in poetry or romance, is
celebrated, not by a venal orator devoted to his fortune, but by
an historian, the partial enemy of his fame. We are assured that
the valiant emperor threw himself into the River Hebrus,
accompanied only by twelve horsemen, and that by the effort or
terror of his invincible arm, he broke, slaughtered, and put to
flight a host of a hundred and fifty thousand men. The credulity
of Zosimus prevailed so strongly over his passion, that among the
events of the memorable battle of Hadrianople, he seems to have
selected and embellished, not the most important, but the most
marvellous. The valor and danger of Constantine are attested by
a slight wound which he received in the thigh; but it may be
discovered even from an imperfect narration, and perhaps a
corrupted text, that the victory was obtained no less by the
conduct of the general than by the courage of the hero; that a
body of five thousand archers marched round to occupy a thick
wood in the rear of the enemy, whose attention was diverted by
the construction of a bridge, and that Licinius, perplexed by so
many artful evolutions, was reluctantly drawn from his
advantageous post to combat on equal ground on the plain. The
contest was no longer equal. His confused multitude of new
levies was easily vanquished by the experienced veterans of the
West. Thirty-four thousand men are reported to have been slain.
The fortified camp of Licinius was taken by assault the evening
of the battle; the greater part of the fugitives, who had retired
to the mountains, surrendered themselves the next day to the
discretion of the conqueror; and his rival, who could no longer
keep the field, confined himself within the walls of Byzantium.
^107
[Footnote 107: Zosimus, l. ii. p. 95, 96. This great battle is
described in the Valesian fragment, (p. 714,) in a clear though
concise manner. "Licinius vero circum Hadrianopolin maximo
exercitu latera ardui montis impleverat; illuc toto agmine
Constantinus inflexit. Cum bellum terra marique traheretur,
quamvis per arduum suis nitentibus, attamen disciplina militari
et felicitate, Constantinus Licinu confusum et sine ordine
agentem vicit exercitum; leviter femore sau ciatus."]
The siege of Byzantium, which was immediately undertaken by
Constantine, was attended with great labor and uncertainty. In
the late civil wars, the fortifications of that place, so justly
considered as the key of Europe and Asia, had been repaired and
strengthened; and as long as Licinius remained master of the sea,
the garrison was much less exposed to the danger of famine than
the army of the besiegers. The naval commanders of Constantine
were summoned to his camp, and received his positive orders to
force the passage of the Hellespont, as the fleet of Licinius,
instead of seeking and destroying their feeble enemy, continued
inactive in those narrow straits, where its superiority of
numbers was of little use or advantage. Crispus, the emperor's
eldest son, was intrusted with the execution of this daring
enterprise, which he performed with so much courage and success,
that he deserved the esteem, and most probably excited the
jealousy, of his father. The engagement lasted two days; and in
the evening of the first, the contending fleets, after a
considerable and mutual loss, retired into their respective
harbors of Europe and Asia. The second day, about noon, a strong
south wind ^108 sprang up, which carried the vessels of Crispus
against the enemy; and as the casual advantage was improved by
his skilful intrepidity, he soon obtained a complete victory. A
hundred and thirty vessels were destroyed, five thousand men were
slain, and Amandus, the admiral of the Asiatic fleet, escaped
with the utmost difficulty to the shores of Chalcedon. As soon as
the Hellespont was open, a plentiful convoy of provisions flowed
into the camp of Constantine, who had already advanced the
operations of the siege. He constructed artificial mounds of
earth of an equal height with the ramparts of Byzantium. The
lofty towers which were erected on that foundation galled the
besieged with large stones and darts from the military engines,
and the battering rams had shaken the walls in several places.
If Licinius persisted much longer in the defence, he exposed
himself to be involved in the ruin of the place. Before he was
surrounded, he prudently removed his person and treasures to
Chalcedon in Asia; and as he was always desirous of associating
companions to the hopes and dangers of his fortune, he now
bestowed the title of Caesar on Martinianus, who exercised one of
the most important offices of the empire. ^109
[Footnote 108: Zosimus, l. ii. p. 97, 98. The current always
sets out of the Hellespont; and when it is assisted by a north
wind, no vessel can[Footnote Continuation: attempt the passage.
A south wind renders the force of the current almost
imperceptible. See Tournefort's Voyage au Levant, Let. xi.]
[Footnote 109: Aurelius Victor. Zosimus, l. ii. p. 93.
According to the latter, Martinianus was Magister Officiorum, (he
uses the Latin appellation in Greek.) Some medals seem to
intimate, that during his short reign he received the title of
Augustus.]
Such were still the resources, and such the abilities, of
Licinius, that, after so many successive defeats, he collected in
Bithynia a new army of fifty or sixty thousand men, while the
activity of Constantine was employed in the siege of Byzantium.
The vigilant emperor did not, however, neglect the last struggles
of his antagonist. A considerable part of his victorious army
was transported over the Bosphorus in small vessels, and the
decisive engagement was fought soon after their landing on the
heights of Chrysopolis, or, as it is now called, of Scutari. The
troops of Licinius, though they were lately raised, ill armed,
and worse disciplined, made head against their conquerors with
fruitless but desperate valor, till a total defeat, and a
slaughter of five and twenty thousand men, irretrievably
determined the fate of their leader. ^110 He retired to
Nicomedia, rather with the view of gaining some time for
negotiation, than with the hope of any effectual defence.
Constantia, his wife, and the sister of Constantine, interceded
with her brother in favor of her husband, and obtained from his
policy, rather than from his compassion, a solemn promise,
confirmed by an oath, that after the sacrifice of Martinianus,
and the resignation of the purple, Licinius himself should be
permitted to pass the remainder of this life in peace and
affluence. The behavior of Constantia, and her relation to the
contending parties, naturally recalls the remembrance of that
virtuous matron who was the sister of Augustus, and the wife of
Antony. But the temper of mankind was altered, and it was no
longer esteemed infamous for a Roman to survive his honor and
independence. Licinius solicited and accepted the pardon of his
offences, laid himself and his purple at the feet of his lord and
master, was raised from the ground with insulting pity, was
admitted the same day to the Imperial banquet, and soon
afterwards was sent away to Thessalonica, which had been chosen
for the place of his confinement. ^111 His confinement was soon
terminated by death, and it is doubtful whether a tumult of the
soldiers, or a decree of the senate, was suggested as the motive
for his execution. According to the rules of tyranny, he was
accused of forming a conspiracy, and of holding a treasonable
correspondence with the barbarians; but as he was never
convicted, either by his own conduct or by any legal evidence, we
may perhaps be allowed, from his weakness, to presume his
innocence. ^112 The memory of Licinius was branded with infamy,
his statues were thrown down, and by a hasty edict, of such
mischievous tendency that it was almost immediately corrected,
all his laws, and all the judicial proceedings of his reign, were
at once abolished. ^113 By this victory of Constantine, the Roman
world was again united under the authority of one emperor,
thirty-seven years after Diocletian had divided his power and
provinces with his associate Maximian.
[Footnote 110: Eusebius (in Vita Constantin. I. ii. c. 16, 17)
ascribes this decisive victory to the pious prayers of the
emperor. The Valesian fragment (p. 714) mentions a body of
Gothic auxiliaries, under their chief Aliquaca, who adhered to
the party of Licinius.]
[Footnote 111: Zosimus, l. ii. p. 102. Victor Junior in Epitome.
Anonym. Valesian. p. 714.]
[Footnote 112: Contra religionem sacramenti Thessalonicae
privatus occisus est. Eutropius, x. 6; and his evidence is
confirmed by Jerome (in Chronic.) as well as by Zosimus, l. ii.
p. 102. The Valesian writer is the only one who mentions the
soldiers, and it is Zonaras alone who calls in the assistance of
the senate. Eusebius prudently slides over this delicate
transaction. But Sozomen, a century afterwards, ventures to
assert the treasonable practices of Licinius.]
[Footnote 113: See the Theodosian Code, l. xv. tit. 15, tom. v. p
404, 405. These edicts of Constantine betray a degree of passion
and precipitation very unbecoming the character of a lawgiver.]
The successive steps of the elevation of Constantine, from
his first assuming the purple at York, to the resignation of
Licinius, at Nicomedia, have been related with some minuteness
and precision, not only as the events are in themselves both
interesting and important, but still more, as they contributed to
the decline of the empire by the expense of blood and treasure,
and by the perpetual increase, as well of the taxes, as of the
military establishment. The foundation of Constantinople, and
the establishment of the Christian religion, were the immediate
and memorable consequences of this revolution.
Chapter XV: Progress Of The Christian Religion.
Part I.
The Progress Of The Christian Religion, And The Sentiments,
Manners, Numbers, And Condition Of The Primitive Christians. ^*
[Footnote *: In spite of my resolution, Lardner led me to look
through the famous fifteenth and sixteenth chapters of Gibbon. I
could not lay them down without finishing them. The causes
assigned, in the fifteenth chapter, for the diffusion of
Christianity, must, no doubt, have contributed to it materially;
but I doubt whether he saw them all. Perhaps those which he
enumerates are among the most obvious. They might all be safely
adopted by a Christian writer, with some change in the language
and manner. Mackintosh see Life, i. p. 244. - M.]
A candid but rational inquiry into the progress and
establishment of Christianity may be considered as a very
essential part of the history of the Roman empire. While that
great body was invaded by open violence, or undermined by slow
decay, a pure and humble religion gently insinuated itself into
the minds of men, grew up in silence and obscurity, derived new
vigor from opposition, and finally erected the triumphant banner
of the Cross on the ruins of the Capitol. Nor was the influence
of Christianity confined to the period or to the limits of the
Roman empire. After a revolution of thirteen or fourteen
centuries, that religion is still professed by the nations of
Europe, the most distinguished portion of human kind in arts and
learning as well as in arms. By the industry and zeal of the
Europeans, it has been widely diffused to the most distant shores
of Asia and Africa; and by the means of their colonies has been
firmly established from Canada to Chili, in a world unknown to
the ancients.
But this inquiry, however useful or entertaining, is
attended with two peculiar difficulties. The scanty and
suspicious materials of ecclesiastical history seldom enable us
to dispel the dark cloud that hangs over the first age of the
church. The great law of impartiality too often obliges us to
reveal the imperfections of the uninspired teachers and believers
of the gospel; and, to a careless observer, their faults may seem
to cast a shade on the faith which they professed. But the
scandal of the pious Christian, and the fallacious triumph of the
Infidel, should cease as soon as they recollect not only by whom,
but likewise to whom, the Divine Revelation was given. The
theologian may indulge the pleasing task of describing Religion
as she descended from Heaven, arrayed in her native purity. A
more melancholy duty is imposed on the historian. He must
discover the inevitable mixture of error and corruption, which
she contracted in a long residence upon earth, among a weak and
degenerate race of beings. ^*
[Footnote *: The art of Gibbon, or at least the unfair impression
produced by these two memorable chapters, consists in confounding
together, in one undistinguishable mass, the origin and apostolic
propagation of the Christian religion with its later progress.
The main question, the divine origin of the religion, is
dexterously eluded or speciously conceded; his plan enables him
to commence his account, in most parts, below the apostolic
times; and it is only by the strength of the dark coloring with
which he has brought out the failings and the follies of
succeeding ages, that a shadow of doubt and suspicion is thrown
back on the primitive period of Christianity. Divest this whole
passage of the latent sarcasm betrayed by the subsequent one of
the whole disquisition, and it might commence a Christian
history, written in the most Christian spirit of candor. - M.]
Our curiosity is naturally prompted to inquire by what means
the Christian faith obtained so remarkable a victory over the
established religions of the earth. To this inquiry, an obvious
but satisfactory answer may be returned; that it was owing to the
convincing evidence of the doctrine itself, and to the ruling
providence of its great Author. But as truth and reason seldom
find so favorable a reception in the world, and as the wisdom of
Providence frequently condescends to use the passions of the
human heart, and the general circumstances of mankind, as
instruments to execute its purpose, we may still be permitted,
though with becoming submission, to ask, not indeed what were the
first, but what were the secondary causes of the rapid growth of
the Christian church. It will, perhaps, appear, that it was most
effectually favored and assisted by the five following causes:
I. The inflexible, and if we may use the expression, the
intolerant zeal of the Christians, derived, it is true, from the
Jewish religion, but purified from the narrow and unsocial
spirit, which, instead of inviting, had deterred the Gentiles
from embracing the law of Moses. ^!
II. The doctrine of a future life, improved by every
additional circumstance which could give weight and efficacy to
that important truth.
III. The miraculous powers ascribed to the primitive
church.
IV. The pure and austere morals of the Christians.
V. The union and discipline of the Christian republic,
which gradually formed an independent and increasing state in the
heart of the Roman empire.
[Footnote !: Though we are thus far agreed with respect to the
inflexibility and intolerance of Christian zeal, yet as to the
principle from which it was derived, we are, toto coelo, divided
in opinion. You deduce it from the Jewish religion; I would
refer it to a more adequate and a more obvious source, a full
persuasion of the truth of Christianity. Watson. Letters Gibbon,
i. 9. - M.]
I. We have already described the religious harmony of the
ancient world, and the facility ^* with which the most different
and even hostile nations embraced, or at least respected, each
other's superstitions. A single people refused to join in the
common intercourse of mankind. The Jews, who, under the Assyrian
and Persian monarchies, had languished for many ages the most
despised portion of their slaves, ^1 emerged from obscurity under
the successors of Alexander; and as they multiplied to a
surprising degree in the East, and afterwards in the West, they
soon excited the curiosity and wonder of other nations. ^2 The
sullen obstinacy with which they maintained their peculiar rites
and unsocial manners, seemed to mark them out as a distinct
species of men, who boldly professed, or who faintly disguised,
their implacable habits to the rest of human kind. ^3 Neither the
violence of Antiochus, nor the arts of Herod, nor the example of
the circumjacent nations, could ever persuade the Jews to
associate with the institutions of Moses the elegant mythology of
the Greeks. ^4 According to the maxims of universal toleration,
the Romans protected a superstition which they despised. ^5 The
polite Augustus condescended to give orders, that sacrifices
should be offered for his prosperity in the temple of Jerusalem;
^6 whilst the meanest of the posterity of Abraham, who should
have paid the same homage to the Jupiter of the Capitol, would
have been an object of abhorrence to himself and to his brethren.
But the moderation of the conquerors was insufficient to appease
the jealous prejudices of their subjects, who were alarmed and
scandalized at the ensigns of paganism, which necessarily
introduced themselves into a Roman province. ^7 The mad attempt
of Caligula to place his own statue in the temple of Jerusalem
was defeated by the unanimous resolution of a people who dreaded
death much less than such an idolatrous profanation. ^8 Their
attachment to the law of Moses was equal to their detestation of
foreign religions. The current of zeal and devotion, as it was
contracted into a narrow channel, ran with the strength, and
sometimes with the fury, of a torrent.
[Footnote *: This facility has not always prevented intolerance,
which seems inherent in the religious spirit, when armed with
authority. The separation of the ecclesiastical and civil power,
appears to be the only means of at once maintaining religion and
tolerance: but this is a very modern notion. The passions, which
mingle themselves with opinions, made the Pagans very often
intolerant and persecutors; witness the Persians, the Egyptians
even the Greeks and Romans.
1st. The Persians. - Cambyses, conqueror of the Egyptians,
condemned to death the magistrates of Memphis, because they had
offered divine honors to their god. Apis: he caused the god to
be brought before him, struck him with his dagger, commanded the
priests to be scourged, and ordered a general massacre of all the
Egyptians who should be found celebrating the festival of the
statues of the gods to be burnt. Not content with this
intolerance, he sent an army to reduce the Ammonians to slavery,
and to set on fire the temple in which Jupiter delivered his
oracles. See Herod. iii. 25 - 29, 37.
Xerxes, during his invasion of Greece, acted on the same
principles: l c destroyed all the temples of Greece and Ionia,
except that of Ephesus. See Paus. l. vii. p. 533, and x. p. 887.
Strabo, l. xiv. b. 941.
2d. The Egyptians. - They thought themselves defiled when
they had drunk from the same cup or eaten at the same table with
a man of a different belief from their own. "He who has
voluntarily killed any sacred animal is punished with death; but
if any one, even involuntarily, has killed a cat or an ibis, he
cannot escape the extreme penalty: the people drag him away,
treat him in the most cruel manner, sometimes without waiting for
a judicial sentence. * * * Even at the time when King Ptolemy
was not yet the acknowledged friend of the Roman people, while
the multitude were paying court with all possible attention to
the strangers who came from Italy * * a Roman having killed a
cat, the people rushed to his house, and neither the entreaties
of the nobles, whom the king sent to them, nor the terror of the
Roman name, were sufficiently powerful to rescue the man from
punishment, though he had committed the crime involuntarily."
Diod. Sic. i 83. Juvenal, in his 13th Satire, describes the
sanguinary conflict between the inhabitants of Ombos and of
Tentyra, from religious animosity. The fury was carried so far,
that the conquerors tore and devoured the quivering limbs of the
conquered.
Ardet adhuc Ombos et Tentyra, summus utrinque
Inde furor vulgo, quod numina vicinorum
Odit uterque locus; quum solos credat habendos
Esse Deos quos ipse colit. Sat. xv. v. 85.
3d. The Greeks. - "Let us not here," says the Abbe Guenee,
"refer to the cities of Peloponnesus and their severity against
atheism; the Ephesians prosecuting Heraclitus for impiety; the
Greeks armed one against the other by religious zeal, in the
Amphictyonic war. Let us say nothing either of the frightful
cruelties inflicted by three successors of Alexander upon the
Jews, to force them to abandon their religion, nor of Antiochus
expelling the philosophers from his states. Let us not seek our
proofs of intolerance so far off. Athens, the polite and learned
Athens, will supply us with sufficient examples. Every citizen
made a public and solemn vow to conform to the religion of his
country, to defend it, and to cause it to be respected. An
express law severely punished all discourses against the gods,
and a rigid decree ordered the denunciation of all who should
deny their existence. * * * The practice was in unison with the
severity of the law. The proceedings commenced against
Protagoras; a price set upon the head of Diagoras; the danger of
Alcibiades; Aristotle obliged to fly; Stilpo banished; Anaxagoras
hardly escaping death; Pericles himself, after all his services
to his country, and all the glory he had acquired, compelled to
appear before the tribunals and make his defence; * * a priestess
executed for having introduced strange gods; Socrates condemned
and drinking the hemlock, because he was accused of not
recognizing those of his country, &c.; these facts attest too
loudly, to be called in question, the religious intolerance of
the most humane and enlightened people in Greece." Lettres de
quelques Juifs a Mons. Voltaire, i. p. 221. (Compare Bentley on
Freethinking, from which much of this is derived.) - M.
4th. The Romans. - The laws of Rome were not less express
and severe. The intolerance of foreign religions reaches, with
the Romans, as high as the laws of the twelve tables; the
prohibitions were afterwards renewed at different times.
Intolerance did not discontinue under the emperors; witness the
counsel of Maecenas to Augustus. This counsel is so remarkable,
that I think it right to insert it entire. "Honor the gods
yourself," says Maecenas to Augustus, "in every way according to
the usage of your ancestors, and compel others to worship them.
Hate and punish those who introduce strange gods, not only for
the sake of the gods, (he who despises them will respect no one,)
but because those who introduce new gods engage a multitude of
persons in foreign laws and customs. From hence arise unions
bound by oaths and confederacies, and associations, things
dangerous to a monarchy." Dion Cass. l. ii. c. 36. (But, though
some may differ from it, see Gibbon's just observation on this
passage in Dion Cassius, ch. xvi. note 117; impugned, indeed, by
M. Guizot, note in loc.) - M.
Even the laws which the philosophers of Athens and of Rome
wrote for their imaginary republics are intolerant. Plato does
not leave to his citizens freedom of religious worship; and
Cicero expressly prohibits them from having other gods than those
of the state. Lettres de quelques Juifs a Mons. Voltaire, i. p.
226. - G.
According to M. Guizot's just remarks, religious intolerance
will always ally itself with the passions of man, however
different those passions may be. In the instances quoted above,
with the Persians it was the pride of despotism; to conquer the
gods of a country was the last mark of subjugation. With the
Egyptians, it was the gross Fetichism of the superstitious
populace, and the local jealousy of neighboring towns. In
Greece, persecution was in general connected with political
party; in Rome, with the stern supremacy of the law and the
interests of the state. Gibbon has been mistaken in attributing
to the tolerant spirit of Paganism that which arose out of the
peculiar circumstances of the times. 1st. The decay of the old
Polytheism, through the progress of reason and intelligence, and
the prevalence of philosophical opinions among the higher orders.
2d. The Roman character, in which the political always
predominated over the religious party. The Romans were contented
with having bowed the world to a uniformity of subjection to
their power, and cared not for establishing the (to them) less
important uniformity of religion. - M.]
[Footnote 1: Dum Assyrios penes, Medosque, et Persas Oriens fuit,
despectissima pars servientium. Tacit. Hist. v. 8. Herodotus,
who visited Asia whilst it obeyed the last of those empires,
slightly mentions the Syrians of Palestine, who, according to
their own confession, had received from Egypt the rite of
circumcision. See l. ii. c. 104.]
[Footnote 2: Diodorus Siculus, l. xl. Dion Cassius, l. xxxvii.
p. 121. Tacit Hist. v. 1 - 9. Justin xxxvi. 2, 3.]
Tradidit arcano quaecunque volumine Moses,
Non monstrare vias cadem nisi sacra colenti,
Quaesitum ad fontem solos deducere verpas.
The letter of this law is not to be found in the present volume
of Moses. But the wise, the humane Maimonides openly teaches that
if an idolater fall into the water, a Jew ought not to save him
from instant death. See Basnage, Histoire des Juifs, l. vi. c.
28.
Note: It is diametrically opposed to its spirit and to its
letter, see, among other passages, Deut. v. 18. 19, (God) "loveth
the stranger in giving him food and raiment. Love ye, therefore,
the stranger: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt." Comp.
Lev. xxiii. 25. Juvenal is a satirist, whose strong expressions
can hardly be received as historic evidence; and he wrote after
the horrible cruelties of the Romans, which, during and after the
war, might give some cause for the complete isolation of the Jew
from the rest of the world. The Jew was a bigot, but his
religion was not the only source of his bigotry. After how many
centuries of mutual wrong and hatred, which had still further
estranged the Jew from mankind, did Maimonides write? - M.]
[Footnote 4: A Jewish sect, which indulged themselves in a sort
of occasional conformity, derived from Herod, by whose example
and authority they had been seduced, the name of Herodians. But
their numbers were so inconsiderable, and their duration so
short, that Josephus has not thought them worthy of his notice.
See Prideaux's Connection, vol. ii. p. 285.
Note: The Herodians were probably more of a political party
than a religious sect, though Gibbon is most likely right as to
their occasional conformity. See Hist. of the Jews, ii. 108. -
M.]
[Footnote 5: Cicero pro Flacco, c. 28.
Note: The edicts of Julius Caesar, and of some of the cities
in Asia Minor (Krebs. Decret. pro Judaeis,) in favor of the
nation in general, or of the Asiatic Jews, speak a different
language. - M.]
[Footnote 6: Philo de Legatione. Augustus left a foundation for
a perpetual sacrifice. Yet he approved of the neglect which his
grandson Caius expressed towards the temple of Jerusalem. See
Sueton. in August. c. 93, and Casaubon's notes on that passage.]
[Footnote 7: See, in particular, Joseph. Antiquitat. xvii. 6,
xviii. 3; and de Bell. Judiac. i. 33, and ii. 9, edit.
Havercamp.
Note: This was during the government of Pontius Pilate.
(Hist. of Jews, ii. 156.) Probably in part to avoid this
collision, the Roman governor, in general, resided at Caesarea. -
M.]
[Footnote 8: Jussi a Caio Caesare, effigiem ejus in templo
locare, arma potius sumpsere. Tacit. Hist. v. 9. Philo and
Josephus gave a very circumstantial, but a very rhetorical,
account of this transaction, which exceedingly perplexed the
governor of Syria. At the first mention of this idolatrous
proposal, King Agrippa fainted away; and did not recover his
senses until the third day. (Hist. of Jews, ii. 181, &c.)]
This inflexible perseverance, which appeared so odious or so
ridiculous to the ancient world, assumes a more awful character,
since Providence has deigned to reveal to us the mysterious
history of the chosen people. But the devout and even scrupulous
attachment to the Mosaic religion, so conspicuous among the Jews
who lived under the second temple, becomes still more surprising,
if it is compared with the stubborn incredulity of their
forefathers. When the law was given in thunder from Mount Sinai,
when the tides of the ocean and the course of the planets were
suspended for the convenience of the Israelites, and when
temporal rewards and punishments were the immediate consequences
of their piety or disobedience, they perpetually relapsed into
rebellion against the visible majesty of their Divine King,
placed the idols of the nations in the sanctuary of Jehovah, and
imitated every fantastic ceremony that was practised in the tents
of the Arabs, or in the cities of Phoenicia. ^9 As the protection
of Heaven was deservedly withdrawn from the ungrateful race,
their faith acquired a proportionable degree of vigor and purity.
The contemporaries of Moses and Joshua had beheld with careless
indifference the most amazing miracles. Under the pressure of
every calamity, the belief of those miracles has preserved the
Jews of a later period from the universal contagion of idolatry;
and in contradiction to every known principle of the human mind,
that singular people seems to have yielded a stronger and more
ready assent to the traditions of their remote ancestors, than to
the evidence of their own senses. ^10
[Footnote 9: For the enumeration of the Syrian and Arabian
deities, it may be observed, that Milton has comprised in one
hundred and thirty very beautiful lines the two large and learned
syntagmas which Selden had composed on that abstruse subject.]
[Footnote 10: "How long will this people provoke me? and how
long will it be ere they believe me, for all the signs which I
have shown among them?" (Numbers xiv. 11.) It would be easy, but
it would be unbecoming, to justify the complaint of the Deity
from the whole tenor of the Mosaic history.
Note: Among a rude and barbarous people, religious
impressions are easily made, and are as soon effaced. The
ignorance which multiplies imaginary wonders, would weaken and
destroy the effect of real miracle. At the period of the Jewish
history, referred to in the passage from Numbers, their fears
predominated over their faith, - the fears of an unwarlike
people, just rescued from debasing slavery, and commanded to
attack a fierce, a well-armed, a gigantic, and a far more
numerous race, the inhabitants of Canaan. As to the frequent
apostasy of the Jews, their religion was beyond their state of
civilization. Nor is it uncommon for a people to cling with
passionate attachment to that of which, at first, they could not
appreciate the value. Patriotism and national pride will contend,
even to death, for political rights which have been forced upon a
reluctant people. The Christian may at least retort, with
justice, that the great sign of his religion, the resurrection of
Jesus, was most ardently believed, and most resolutely asserted,
by the eye witnesses of the fact. - M.]
The Jewish religion was admirably fitted for defence, but it
was never designed for conquest; and it seems probable that the
number of proselytes was never much superior to that of
apostates. The divine promises were originally made, and the
distinguishing rite of circumcision was enjoined, to a single
family. When the posterity of Abraham had multiplied like the
sands of the sea, the Deity, from whose mouth they received a
system of laws and ceremonies, declared himself the proper and as
it were the national God of Israel and with the most jealous care
separated his favorite people from the rest of mankind. The
conquest of the land of Canaan was accompanied with so many
wonderful and with so many bloody circumstances, that the
victorious Jews were left in a state of irreconcilable hostility
with all their neighbors. They had been commanded to extirpate
some of the most idolatrous tribes, and the execution of the
divine will had seldom been retarded by the weakness of humanity.
With the other nations they were forbidden to contract any
marriages or alliances; and the prohibition of receiving them
into the congregation, which in some cases was perpetual, almost
always extended to the third, to the seventh, or even to the
tenth generation. The obligation of preaching to the Gentiles
the faith of Moses had never been inculcated as a precept of the
law, nor were the Jews inclined to impose it on themselves as a
voluntary duty.
In the admission of new citizens, that unsocial people was
actuated by the selfish vanity of the Greeks, rather than by the
generous policy of Rome. The descendants of Abraham were
flattered by the opinion that they alone were the heirs of the
covenant, and they were apprehensive of diminishing the value of
their inheritance by sharing it too easily with the strangers of
the earth. A larger acquaintance with mankind extended their
knowledge without correcting their prejudices; and whenever the
God of Israel acquired any new votaries, he was much more
indebted to the inconstant humor of polytheism than to the active
zeal of his own missionaries. ^11 The religion of Moses seems to
be instituted for a particular country as well as for a single
nation; and if a strict obedience had been paid to the order,
that every male, three times in the year, should present himself
before the Lord Jehovah, it would have been impossible that the
Jews could ever have spread themselves beyond the narrow limits
of the promised land. ^12 That obstacle was indeed removed by the
destruction of the temple of Jerusalem; but the most considerable
part of the Jewish religion was involved in its destruction; and
the Pagans, who had long wondered at the strange report of an
empty sanctuary, ^13 were at a loss to discover what could be the
object, or what could be the instruments, of a worship which was
destitute of temples and of altars, of priests and of sacrifices.
Yet even in their fallen state, the Jews, still asserting their
lofty and exclusive privileges, shunned, instead of courting, the
society of strangers. They still insisted with inflexible rigor
on those parts of the law which it was in their power to
practise. Their peculiar distinctions of days, of meats, and a
variety of trivial though burdensome observances, were so many
objects of disgust and aversion for the other nations, to whose
habits and prejudices they were diametrically opposite. The
painful and even dangerous rite of circumcision was alone capable
of repelling a willing proselyte from the door of the synagogue.
^14
[Footnote 11: All that relates to the Jewish proselytes has been
very ably by Basnage, Hist. des Juifs, l. vi. c. 6, 7.]
[Footnote 12: See Exod. xxiv. 23, Deut. xvi. 16, the
commentators, and a very sensible note in the Universal History,
vol. i. p. 603, edit. fol.]
[Footnote 13: When Pompey, using or abusing the right of
conquest, entered into the Holy of Holies, it was observed with
amazement, "Nulli intus Deum effigie, vacuam sedem et inania
arcana." Tacit. Hist. v. 9. It was a popular saying, with regard
to the Jews, "Nil praeter nubes et coeli numen adorant."]
[Footnote 14: A second kind of circumcision was inflicted on a
Samaritan or Egyptian proselyte. The sullen indifference of the
Talmudists, with respect to the conversion of strangers, may be
seen in Basnage Histoire des Juifs, l. xi. c. 6.]
Under these circumstances, Christianity offered itself to
the world, armed with the strength of the Mosaic law, and
delivered from the weight of its fetters. An exclusive zeal for
the truth of religion, and the unity of God, was as carefully
inculcated in the new as in the ancient system: and whatever was
now revealed to mankind concerning the nature and designs of the
Supreme Being, was fitted to increase their reverence for that
mysterious doctrine. The divine authority of Moses and the
prophets was admitted, and even established, as the firmest basis
of Christianity. From the beginning of the world, an
uninterrupted series of predictions had announced and prepared
the long-expected coming of the Messiah, who, in compliance with
the gross apprehensions of the Jews, had been more frequently
represented under the character of a King and Conqueror, than
under that of a Prophet, a Martyr, and the Son of God. By his
expiatory sacrifice, the imperfect sacrifices of the temple were
at once consummated and abolished. The ceremonial law, which
consisted only of types and figures, was succeeded by a pure and
spiritual worship, equally adapted to all climates, as well as to
every condition of mankind; and to the initiation of blood was
substituted a more harmless initiation of water. The promise of
divine favor, instead of being partially confined to the
posterity of Abraham, was universally proposed to the freeman and
the slave, to the Greek and to the barbarian, to the Jew and to
the Gentile. Every privilege that could raise the proselyte from
earth to heaven, that could exalt his devotion, secure his
happiness, or even gratify that secret pride which, under the
semblance of devotion, insinuates itself into the human heart,
was still reserved for the members of the Christian church; but
at the same time all mankind was permitted, and even solicited,
to accept the glorious distinction, which was not only proffered
as a favor, but imposed as an obligation. It became the most
sacred duty of a new convert to diffuse among his friends and
relations the inestimable blessing which he had received, and to
warn them against a refusal that would be severely punished as a
criminal disobedience to the will of a benevolent but
all-powerful Deity.
Chapter XV: Progress Of The Christian Religion.
Part II.
The enfranchisement of the church from the bonds of the
synagogue was a work, however, of some time and of some
difficulty. The Jewish converts, who acknowledged Jesus in the
character of the Messiah foretold by their ancient oracles,
respected him as a prophetic teacher of virtue and religion; but
they obstinately adhered to the ceremonies of their ancestors,
and were desirous of imposing them on the Gentiles, who
continually augmented the number of believers. These Judaizing
Christians seem to have argued with some degree of plausibility
from the divine origin of the Mosaic law, and from the immutable
perfections of its great Author. They affirmed, that if the
Being, who is the same through all eternity, had designed to
abolish those sacred rites which had served to distinguish his
chosen people, the repeal of them would have been no less clear
and solemn than their first promulgation: that, instead of those
frequent declarations, which either suppose or assert the
perpetuity of the Mosaic religion, it would have been represented
as a provisionary scheme intended to last only to the coming of
the Messiah, who should instruct mankind in a more perfect mode
of faith and of worship: ^15 that the Messiah himself, and his
disciples who conversed with him on earth, instead of authorizing
by their example the most minute observances of the Mosaic law,
^16 would have published to the world the abolition of those
useless and obsolete ceremonies, without suffering Christianity
to remain during so many years obscurely confounded among the
sects of the Jewish church. Arguments like these appear to have
been used in the defence of the expiring cause of the Mosaic law;
but the industry of our learned divines has abundantly explained
the ambiguous language of the Old Testament, and the ambiguous
conduct of the apostolic teachers. It was proper gradually to
unfold the system of the gospel, and to pronounce, with the
utmost caution and tenderness, a sentence of condemnation so
repugnant to the inclination and prejudices of the believing
Jews.
[Footnote 15: These arguments were urged with great ingenuity by
the Jew Orobio, and refuted with equal ingenuity and candor by
the Christian Limborch. See the Amica Collatio, (it well
deserves that name,) or account of the dispute between them.]
[Footnote 16: Jesus . . . circumcisus erat; cibis utebatur
Judaicis; vestitu simili; purgatos scabie mittebat ad sacerdotes;
Paschata et alios dies festos religiose observabat: Si quos
sanavit sabbatho, ostendit non tantum ex lege, sed et exceptis
sententiis, talia opera sabbatho non interdicta. Grotius de
Veritate Religionis Christianae, l. v. c. 7. A little
afterwards, (c. 12,) he expatiates on the condescension of the
apostles.]
The history of the church of Jerusalem affords a lively
proof of the necessity of those precautions, and of the deep
impression which the Jewish religion had made on the minds of its
sectaries. The first fifteen bishops of Jerusalem were all
circumcised Jews; and the congregation over which they presided
united the law of Moses with the doctrine of Christ. ^17 It was
natural that the primitive tradition of a church which was
founded only forty days after the death of Christ, and was
governed almost as many years under the immediate inspection of
his apostle, should be received as the standard of orthodoxy. ^18
The distant churches very frequently appealed to the authority of
their venerable Parent, and relieved her distresses by a liberal
contribution of alms. But when numerous and opulent societies
were established in the great cities of the empire, in Antioch,
Alexandria, Ephesus, Corinth, and Rome, the reverence which
Jerusalem had inspired to all the Christian colonies insensibly
diminished. The Jewish converts, or, as they were afterwards
called, the Nazarenes, who had laid the foundations of the
church, soon found themselves overwhelmed by the increasing
multitudes, that from all the various religions of polytheism
enlisted under the banner of Christ: and the Gentiles, who, with
the approbation of their peculiar apostle, had rejected the
intolerable weight of the Mosaic ceremonies, at length refused to
their more scrupulous brethren the same toleration which at first
they had humbly solicited for their own practice. The ruin of
the temple of the city, and of the public religion of the Jews,
was severely felt by the Nazarenes; as in their manners, though
not in their faith, they maintained so intimate a connection with
their impious countrymen, whose misfortunes were attributed by
the Pagans to the contempt, and more justly ascribed by the
Christians to the wrath, of the Supreme Deity. The Nazarenes
retired from the ruins of Jerusalem ^* to the little town of
Pella beyond the Jordan, where that ancient church languished
above sixty years in solitude and obscurity. ^19 They still
enjoyed the comfort of making frequent and devout visits to the
Holy City, and the hope of being one day restored to those seats
which both nature and religion taught them to love as well as to
revere. But at length, under the reign of Hadrian, the desperate
fanaticism of the Jews filled up the measure of their calamities;
and the Romans, exasperated by their repeated rebellions,
exercised the rights of victory with unusual rigor. The emperor
founded, under the name of Aelia Capitolina, a new city on Mount
Sion, ^20 to which he gave the privileges of a colony; and
denouncing the severest penalties against any of the Jewish
people who should dare to approach its precincts, he fixed a
vigilant garrison of a Roman cohort to enforce the execution of
his orders. The Nazarenes had only one way left to escape the
common proscription, and the force of truth was on this occasion
assisted by the influence of temporal advantages. They elected
Marcus for their bishop, a prelate of the race of the Gentiles,
and most probably a native either of Italy or of some of the
Latin provinces. At his persuasion, the most considerable part
of the congregation renounced the Mosaic law, in the practice of
which they had persevered above a century. By this sacrifice of
their habits and prejudices, they purchased a free admission into
the colony of Hadrian, and more firmly cemented their union with
the Catholic church. ^21
[Footnote 17: Paene omnes Christum Deum sub legis observatione
credebant Sulpicius Severus, ii. 31. See Eusebius, Hist.
Ecclesiast. l. iv. c. 5.]
[Footnote 18: Mosheim de Rebus Christianis ante Constantinum
Magnum, page 153. In this masterly performance, which I shall
often have occasion to quote he enters much more fully into the
state of the primitive church than he has an opportunity of doing
in his General History.]
[Footnote *: This is incorrect: all the traditions concur in
placing the abandonment of the city by the Christians, not only
before it was in ruins, but before the seige had commenced.
Euseb. loc. cit., and Le Clerc. - M.]
[Footnote 19: Eusebius, l. iii. c. 5. Le Clerc, Hist.
Ecclesiast. p. 605. During this occasional absence, the bishop
and church of Pella still retained the title of Jerusalem. In
the same manner, the Roman pontiffs resided seventy years at
Avignon; and the patriarchs of Alexandria have long since
transferred their episcopal seat to Cairo.]
[Footnote 20: Dion Cassius, l. lxix. The exile of the Jewish
nation from Jerusalem is attested by Aristo of Pella, (apud
Euseb. l. iv. c. 6,) and is mentioned by several ecclesiastical
writers; though some of them too hastily extend this interdiction
to the whole country of Palestine.]
[Footnote 21: Eusebius, l. iv. c. 6. Sulpicius Severus, ii. 31.
By comparing their unsatisfactory accounts, Mosheim (p. 327, &c.)
has drawn out a very distinct representation of the circumstances
and motives of this revolution.]
When the name and honors of the church of Jerusalem had been
restored to Mount Sion, the crimes of heresy and schism were
imputed to the obscure remnant of the Nazarenes, which refused to
accompany their Latin bishop. They still preserved their former
habitation of Pella, spread themselves into the villages adjacent
to Damascus, and formed an inconsiderable church in the city of
Beroea, or, as it is now called, of Aleppo, in Syria. ^22 The
name of Nazarenes was deemed too honorable for those Christian
Jews, and they soon received, from the supposed poverty of their
understanding, as well as of their condition, the contemptuous
epithet of Ebionites. ^23 In a few years after the return of the
church of Jerusalem, it became a matter of doubt and controversy,
whether a man who sincerely acknowledged Jesus as the Messiah,
but who still continued to observe the law of Moses, could
possibly hope for salvation. The humane temper of Justin Martyr
inclined him to answer this question in the affirmative; and
though he expressed himself with the most guarded diffidence, he
ventured to determine in favor of such an imperfect Christian, if
he were content to practise the Mosaic ceremonies, without
pretending to assert their general use or necessity. But when
Justin was pressed to declare the sentiment of the church, he
confessed that there were very many among the orthodox
Christians, who not only excluded their Judaizing brethren from
the hope of salvation, but who declined any intercourse with them
in the common offices of friendship, hospitality, and social
life. ^24 The more rigorous opinion prevailed, as it was natural
to expect, over the milder; and an eternal bar of separation was
fixed between the disciples of Moses and those of Christ. The
unfortunate Ebionites, rejected from one religion as apostates,
and from the other as heretics, found themselves compelled to
assume a more decided character; and although some traces of that
obsolete sect may be discovered as late as the fourth century,
they insensibly melted away, either into the church or the
synagogue. ^25
[Footnote 22: Le Clerc (Hist. Ecclesiast. p. 477, 535) seems to
have collected from Eusebius, Jerome, Epiphanius, and other
writers, all the principal circumstances that relate to the
Nazarenes or Ebionites. The nature of their opinions soon
divided them into a stricter and a milder sect; and there is some
reason to conjecture, that the family of Jesus Christ remained
members, at least, of the latter and more moderate party.]
[Footnote 23: Some writers have been pleased to create an Ebion,
the imaginary author of their sect and name. But we can more
safely rely on the learned Eusebius than on the vehement
Tertullian, or the credulous Epiphanius. According to Le Clerc,
the Hebrew word Ebjonim may be translated into Latin by that of
Pauperes. See Hist. Ecclesiast. p. 477.
Note: The opinion of Le Clerc is generally admitted; but
Neander has suggested some good reasons for supposing that this
term only applied to poverty of condition. The obscure history
of their tenets and divisions, is clearly and rationally traced
in his History of the Church, vol. i. part ii. p. 612, &c., Germ.
edit. - M.]
[Footnote 24: See the very curious Dialogue of Justin Martyr with
the Jew Tryphon. The conference between them was held at Ephesus,
in the reign of Antoninus Pius, and about twenty years after the
return of the church of Pella to Jerusalem. For this date
consult the accurate note of Tillemont, Memoires Ecclesiastiques,
tom. ii. p. 511.
Note: Justin Martyr makes an important distinction, which
Gibbon has neglected to notice. * * * There were some who were
not content with observing the Mosaic law themselves, but
enforced the same observance, as necessary to salvation, upon the
heathen converts, and refused all social intercourse with them if
they did not conform to the law. Justin Martyr himself freely
admits those who kept the law themselves to Christian communion,
though he acknowledges that some, not the Church, thought
otherwise; of the other party, he himself thought less favorably.
The former by some are considered the Nazarenes the atter the
Ebionites - G and M.]
[Footnote 25: Of all the systems of Christianity, that of
Abyssinia is the only one which still adheres to the Mosaic
rites. (Geddes's Church History of Aethiopia, and Dissertations
de La Grand sur la Relation du P. Lobo.) The eunuch of the queen
Candace might suggest some suspicious; but as we are assured
(Socrates, i. 19. Sozomen, ii. 24. Ludolphus, p. 281) that the
Aethiopians were not converted till the fourth century, it is
more reasonable to believe that they respected the sabbath, and
distinguished the forbidden meats, in imitation of the Jews, who,
in a very early period, were seated on both sides of the Red Sea.
Circumcision had been practised by the most ancient Aethiopians,
from motives of health and cleanliness, which seem to be
explained in the Recherches Philosophiques sur les Americains,
tom. ii. p. 117.]
While the orthodox church preserved a just medium between
excessive veneration and improper contempt for the law of Moses,
the various heretics deviated into equal but opposite extremes of
error and extravagance. From the acknowledged truth of the
Jewish religion, the Ebionites had concluded that it could never
be abolished. From its supposed imperfections, the Gnostics as
hastily inferred that it never was instituted by the wisdom of
the Deity. There are some objections against the authority of
Moses and the prophets, which too readily present themselves to
the sceptical mind; though they can only be derived from our
ignorance of remote antiquity, and from our incapacity to form an
adequate judgment of the divine economy. These objections were
eagerly embraced and as petulantly urged by the vain science of
the Gnostics. ^26 As those heretics were, for the most part,
averse to the pleasures of sense, they morosely arraigned the
polygamy of the patriarchs, the gallantries of David, and the
seraglio of Solomon. The conquest of the land of Canaan, and the
extirpation of the unsuspecting natives, they were at a loss how
to reconcile with the common notions of humanity and justice. ^*
But when they recollected the sanguinary list of murders, of
executions, and of massacres, which stain almost every page of
the Jewish annals, they acknowledged that the barbarians of
Palestine had exercised as much compassion towards their
idolatrous enemies, as they had ever shown to their friends or
countrymen. ^27 Passing from the sectaries of the law to the law
itself, they asserted that it was impossible that a religion
which consisted only of bloody sacrifices and trifling
ceremonies, and whose rewards as well as punishments were all of
a carnal and temporal nature, could inspire the love of virtue,
or restrain the impetuosity of passion. The Mosaic account of
the creation and fall of man was treated with profane derision by
the Gnostics, who would not listen with patience to the repose of
the Deity after six days' labor, to the rib of Adam, the garden
of Eden, the trees of life and of knowledge, the speaking
serpent, the forbidden fruit, and the condemnation pronounced
against human kind for the venial offence of their first
progenitors. ^28 The God of Israel was impiously represented by
the Gnostics as a being liable to passion and to error,
capricious in his favor, implacable in his resentment, meanly
jealous of his superstitious worship, and confining his partial
providence to a single people, and to this transitory life. In
such a character they could discover none of the features of the
wise and omnipotent Father of the universe. ^29 They allowed that
the religion of the Jews was somewhat less criminal than the
idolatry of the Gentiles; but it was their fundamental doctrine,
that the Christ whom they adored as the first and brightest
emanation of the Deity appeared upon earth to rescue mankind from
their various errors, and to reveal a new system of truth and
perfection. The most learned of the fathers, by a very singular
condescension, have imprudently admitted the sophistry of the
Gnostics. ^* Acknowledging that the literal sense is repugnant to
every principle of faith as well as reason, they deem themselves
secure and invulnerable behind the ample veil of allegory, which
they carefully spread over every tender part of the Mosaic
dispensation. ^30
[Footnote 26: Beausobre, Histoire du Manicheisme, l. i. c. 3, has
stated their objections, particularly those of Faustus, the
adversary of Augustin, with the most learned impartiality.]
[Footnote *: On the "war law" of the Jews, see Hist. of Jews, i.
137. - M.]
[Footnote 27: Apud ipsos fides obstinata, misericordia in
promptu: adversus amnes alios hostile odium. Tacit. Hist. v. 4.
Surely Tacitus had seen the Jews with too favorable an eye. The
perusal of Josephus must have destroyed the antithesis.
Note: Few writers have suspected Tacitus of partiality
towards the Jews. The whole later history of the Jews illustrates
as well their strong feelings of humanity to their brethren, as
their hostility to the rest of mankind. The character and the
position of Josephus with the Roman authorities, must be kept in
mind during the perusal of his History. Perhaps he has not
exaggerated the ferocity and fanaticism of the Jews at that time;
but insurrectionary warfare is not the best school for the
humaner virtues, and much must be allowed for the grinding
tyranny of the later Roman governors. See Hist. of Jews, ii. 254.
- M.]
[Footnote 28: Dr. Burnet (Archaeologia, l. ii. c. 7) has
discussed the first chapters of Genesis with too much wit and
freedom. ^!
Note: Dr. Burnet apologized for the levity with which he had
conducted some of his arguments, by the excuse that he wrote in a
learned language for scholars alone, not for the vulgar.
Whatever may be thought of his success in tracing an Eastern
allegory in the first chapters of Genesis, his other works prove
him to have been a man of great genius, and of sincere piety. -
M]
[Footnote 29: The milder Gnostics considered Jehovah, the
Creator, as a Being of a mixed nature between God and the Daemon.
Others confounded him with an evil principle. Consult the second
century of the general history of Mosheim, which gives a very
distinct, though concise, account of their strange opinions on
this subject.]
[Footnote *: The Gnostics, and the historian who has stated these
plausible objections with so much force as almost to make them
his own, would have shown a more considerate and not less
reasonable philosophy, if they had considered the religion of
Moses with reference to the age in which it was promulgated; if
they had done justice to its sublime as well as its more
imperfect views of the divine nature; the humane and civilizing
provisions of the Hebrew law, as well as those adapted for an
infant and barbarous people. See Hist of Jews, i. 36, 37, &c. -
M.]
[Footnote 30: See Beausobre, Hist. du Manicheisme, l. i. c. 4.
Origen and St. Augustin were among the allegorists.]
It has been remarked with more ingenuity than truth, that
the virgin purity of the church was never violated by schism or
heresy before the reign of Trajan or Hadrian, about one hundred
years after the death of Christ. ^31 We may observe with much
more propriety, that, during that period, the disciples of the
Messiah were indulged in a freer latitude, both of faith and
practice, than has ever been allowed in succeeding ages. As the
terms of communion were insensibly narrowed, and the spiritual
authority of the prevailing party was exercised with increasing
severity, many of its most respectable adherents, who were called
upon to renounce, were provoked to assert their private opinions,
to pursue the consequences of their mistaken principles, and
openly to erect the standard of rebellion against the unity of
the church. The Gnostics were distinguished as the most polite,
the most learned, and the most wealthy of the Christian name; and
that general appellation, which expressed a superiority of
knowledge, was either assumed by their own pride, or ironically
bestowed by the envy of their adversaries. They were almost
without exception of the race of the Gentiles, and their
principal founders seem to have been natives of Syria or Egypt,
where the warmth of the climate disposes both the mind and the
body to indolent and contemplative devotion. The Gnostics
blended with the faith of Christ many sublime but obscure tenets,
which they derived from oriental philosophy, and even from the
religion of Zoroaster, concerning the eternity of matter, the
existence of two principles, and the mysterious hierarchy of the
invisible world. ^32 As soon as they launched out into that vast
abyss, they delivered themselves to the guidance of a disordered
imagination; and as the paths of error are various and infinite,
the Gnostics were imperceptibly divided into more than fifty
particular sects, ^33 of whom the most celebrated appear to have
been the Basilidians, the Valentinians, the Marcionites, and, in
a still later period, the Manichaeans. Each of these sects could
boast of its bishops and congregations, of its doctors and
martyrs; ^34 and, instead of the Four Gospels adopted by the
church, ^! the heretics produced a multitude of histories, in
which the actions and discourses of Christ and of his apostles
were adapted to their respective tenets. ^35 The success of the
Gnostics was rapid and extensive. ^36 They covered Asia and
Egypt, established themselves in Rome, and sometimes penetrated
into the provinces of the West. For the most part they arose in
the second century, flourished during the third, and were
suppressed in the fourth or fifth, by the prevalence of more
fashionable controversies, and by the superior ascendant of the
reigning power. Though they constantly disturbed the peace, and
frequently disgraced the name, of religion, they contributed to
assist rather than to retard the progress of Christianity. The
Gentile converts, whose strongest objections and prejudices were
directed against the law of Moses, could find admission into many
Christian societies, which required not from their untutored mind
any belief of an antecedent revelation. Their faith was
insensibly fortified and enlarged, and the church was ultimately
benefited by the conquests of its most inveterate enemies. ^37
[Footnote 31: Hegesippus, ap. Euseb. l. iii. 32, iv. 22.
Clemens Alexandrin Stromat. vii. 17.
Note: The assertion of Hegesippus is not so positive: it is
sufficient to read the whole passage in Eusebius, to see that the
former part is modified by the matter. Hegesippus adds, that up
to this period the church had remained pure and immaculate as a
virgin. Those who labored to corrupt the doctrines of the gospel
worked as yet in obscurity - G]
[Footnote 32: In the account of the Gnostics of the second and
third centuries, Mosheim is ingenious and candid; Le Clerc dull,
but exact; Beausobre almost always an apologist; and it is much
to be feared that the primitive fathers are very frequently
calumniators.
Note The Histoire du Gnosticisme of M. Matter is at once the
fairest and most complete account of these sects. - M.]
[Footnote 33: See the catalogues of Irenaeus and Epiphanius. It
must indeed be allowed, that those writers were inclined to
multiply the number of sects which opposed the unity of the
church.]
[Footnote 34: Eusebius, l. iv. c. 15. Sozomen, l. ii. c. 32.
See in Bayle, in the article of Marcion, a curious detail of a
dispute on that subject. It should seem that some of the
Gnostics (the Basilidians) declined, and even refused the honor
of Martyrdom. Their reasons were singular and abstruse. See
Mosheim, p. 539.]
[Footnote !: M. Hahn has restored the Marcionite Gospel with
great ingenuity. His work is reprinted in Thilo. Codex. Apoc.
Nov. Test. vol. i. - M.]
[Footnote 35: See a very remarkable passage of Origen, (Proem. ad
Lucam.) That indefatigable writer, who had consumed his life in
the study of the Scriptures, relies for their authenticity on the
inspired authority of the church. It was impossible that the
Gnostics could receive our present Gospels, many parts of which
(particularly in the resurrection of Christ) are directly, and as
it might seem designedly, pointed against their favorite tenets.
It is therefore somewhat singular that Ignatius (Epist. ad Smyrn.
Patr. Apostol. tom. ii. p. 34) should choose to employ a vague
and doubtful tradition, instead of quoting the certain testimony
of the evangelists.
Note: Bishop Pearson has attempted very happily to explain
this singularity.' The first Christians were acquainted with a
number of sayings of Jesus Christ, which are not related in our
Gospels, and indeed have never been written. Why might not St.
Ignatius, who had lived with the apostles or their disciples,
repeat in other words that which St. Luke has related,
particularly at a time when, being in prison, he could have the
Gospels at hand? Pearson, Vind Ign. pp. 2, 9 p. 396 in tom. ii.
Patres Apost. ed. Coteler - G.]
[Footnote 36: Faciunt favos et vespae; faciunt ecclesias et
Marcionitae, is the strong expression of Tertullian, which I am
obliged to quote from memory. In the time of Epiphanius (advers.
Haereses, p. 302) the Marcionites were very numerous in Italy,
Syria, Egypt, Arabia, and Persia.]
[Footnote 37: Augustin is a memorable instance of this gradual
progress from reason to faith. He was, during several years,
engaged in the Manichaear sect.]
But whatever difference of opinion might subsist between the
Orthodox, the Ebionites, and the Gnostics, concerning the
divinity or the obligation of the Mosaic law, they were all
equally animated by the same exclusive zeal; and by the same
abhorrence for idolatry, which had distinguished the Jews from
the other nations of the ancient world. The philosopher, who
considered the system of polytheism as a composition of human
fraud and error, could disguise a smile of contempt under the
mask of devotion, without apprehending that either the mockery,
or the compliance, would expose him to the resentment of any
invisible, or, as he conceived them, imaginary powers. But the
established religions of Paganism were seen by the primitive
Christians in a much more odious and formidable light. It was
the universal sentiment both of the church and of heretics, that
the daemons were the authors, the patrons, and the objects of
idolatry. ^38 Those rebellious spirits who had been degraded from
the rank of angels, and cast down into the infernal pit, were
still permitted to roam upon earth, to torment the bodies, and to
seduce the minds, of sinful men. The daemons soon discovered and
abused the natural propensity of the human heart towards
devotion, and artfully withdrawing the adoration of mankind from
their Creator, they usurped the place and honors of the Supreme
Deity. By the success of their malicious contrivances, they at
once gratified their own vanity and revenge, and obtained the
only comfort of which they were yet susceptible, the hope of
involving the human species in the participation of their guilt
and misery. It was confessed, or at least it was imagined, that
they had distributed among themselves the most important
characters of polytheism, one daemon assuming the name and
attributes of Jupiter, another of Aesculapius, a third of Venus,
and a fourth perhaps of Apollo; ^39 and that, by the advantage of
their long experience and aerial nature, they were enabled to
execute, with sufficient skill and dignity, the parts which they
had undertaken. They lurked in the temples, instituted festivals
and sacrifices, invented fables, pronounced oracles, and were
frequently allowed to perform miracles. The Christians, who, by
the interposition of evil spirits, could so readily explain every
preternatural appearance, were disposed and even desirous to
admit the most extravagant fictions of the Pagan mythology. But
the belief of the Christian was accompanied with horror. The
most trifling mark of respect to the national worship he
considered as a direct homage yielded to the daemon, and as an
act of rebellion against the majesty of God.
[Footnote 38: The unanimous sentiment of the primitive church is
very clearly explained by Justin Martyr, Apolog. Major, by
Athenagoras, Legat. c. 22. &c., and by Lactantius, Institut.
Divin. ii. 14 - 19.]
[Footnote 39: Tertullian (Apolog. c. 23) alleges the confession
of the daemons themselves as often as they were tormented by the
Christian exorcists]
Chapter XV: Progress Of The Christian Religion.
Part III.
In consequence of this opinion, it was the first but arduous
duty of a Christian to preserve himself pure and undefiled by the
practice of idolatry. The religion of the nations was not merely
a speculative doctrine professed in the schools or preached in
the temples. The innumerable deities and rites of polytheism
were closely interwoven with every circumstance of business or
pleasure, of public or of private life; and it seemed impossible
to escape the observance of them, without, at the same time,
renouncing the commerce of mankind, and all the offices and
amusements of society. ^40 The important transactions of peace
and war were prepared or concluded by solemn sacrifices, in which
the magistrate, the senator, and the soldier, were obliged to
preside or to participate. ^41 The public spectacles were an
essential part of the cheerful devotion of the Pagans, and the
gods were supposed to accept, as the most grateful offering, the
games that the prince and people celebrated in honor of their
peculiar festivals. ^42 The Christians, who with pious horror
avoided the abomination of the circus or the theatre, found
himself encompassed with infernal snares in every convivial
entertainment, as often as his friends, invoking the hospitable
deities, poured out libations to each other's happiness. ^43 When
the bride, struggling with well-affected reluctance, was forced
into hymenaeal pomp over the threshold of her new habitation, ^44
or when the sad procession of the dead slowly moved towards the
funeral pile; ^45 the Christian, on these interesting occasions,
was compelled to desert the persons who were the dearest to him,
rather than contract the guilt inherent to those impious
ceremonies. Every art and every trade that was in the least
concerned in the framing or adorning of idols was polluted by the
stain of idolatry; ^46 a severe sentence, since it devoted to
eternal misery the far greater part of the community, which is
employed in the exercise of liberal or mechanic professions. If
we cast our eyes over the numerous remains of antiquity, we shall
perceive, that besides the immediate representations of the gods,
and the holy instruments of their worship, the elegant forms and
agreeable fictions consecrated by the imagination of the Greeks,
were introduced as the richest ornaments of the houses, the
dress, and the furniture of the Pagan. ^47 Even the arts of music
and painting, of eloquence and poetry, flowed from the same
impure origin. In the style of the fathers, Apollo and the Muses
were the organs of the infernal spirit; Homer and Virgil were the
most eminent of his servants; and the beautiful mythology which
pervades and animates the compositions of their genius, is
destined to celebrate the glory of the daemons. Even the common
language of Greece and Rome abounded with familiar but impious
expressions, which the imprudent Christian might too carelessly
utter, or too patiently hear. ^48
[Footnote 40: Tertullian has written a most severe treatise
against idolatry, to caution his brethren against the hourly
danger of incurring that guilt. Recogita sylvam, et quantae
latitant spinae. De Corona Militis, c. 10.]
[Footnote 41: The Roman senate was always held in a temple or
consecrated place. (Aulus Gellius, xiv. 7.) Before they entered
on business, every senator dropped some wine and frankincense on
the altar. Sueton. in August. c. 35.]
[Footnote 42: See Tertullian, De Spectaculis. This severe
reformer shows no more indulgence to a tragedy of Euripides, than
to a combat of gladiators. The dress of the actors particularly
offends him. By the use of the lofty buskin, they impiously
strive to add a cubit to their stature. c. 23.]
[Footnote 43: The ancient practice of concluding the
entertainment with libations, may be found in every classic.
Socrates and Seneca, in their last moments, made a noble
application of this custom. Postquam stagnum, calidae aquae
introiit, respergens proximos servorum, addita voce, libare se
liquorem illum Jovi Liberatori. Tacit. Annal. xv. 64.]
[Footnote 44: See the elegant but idolatrous hymn of Catullus, on
the nuptials of Manlius and Julia. O Hymen, Hymenaee Io! Quis
huic Deo compararier ausit?]
[Footnote 45: The ancient funerals (in those of Misenus and
Pallas) are no less accurately described by Virgil, than they are
illustrated by his commentator Servius. The pile itself was an
altar, the flames were fed with the blood of victims, and all the
assistants were sprinkled with lustral water.]
[Footnote 46: Tertullian de Idololatria, c. 11.
Note: The exaggerated and declamatory opinions of Tertullian
ought not to be taken as the general sentiment of the early
Christians. Gibbon has too often allowed himself to consider the
peculiar notions of certain Fathers of the Church as inherent in
Christianity. This is not accurate. - G.]
[Footnote 47: See every part of Montfaucon's Antiquities. Even
the reverses of the Greek and Roman coins were frequently of an
idolatrous nature. Here indeed the scruples of the Christian
were suspended by a stronger passion.
Note: All this scrupulous nicety is at variance with the
decision of St. Paul about meat offered to idols, 1 Cor. x. 21 -
32. - M.]
[Footnote 48: Tertullian de Idololatria, c. 20, 21, 22. If a
Pagan friend (on the occasion perhaps of sneezing) used the
familiar expression of "Jupiter bless you," the Christian was
obliged to protest against the divinity of Jupiter.]
The dangerous temptations which on every side lurked in
ambush to surprise the unguarded believer, assailed him with
redoubled violence on the days of solemn festivals. So artfully
were they framed and disposed throughout the year, that
superstition always wore the appearance of pleasure, and often of
virtue. Some of the most sacred festivals in the Roman ritual
were destined to salute the new calends of January with vows of
public and private felicity; to indulge the pious remembrance of
the dead and living; to ascertain the inviolable bounds of
property; to hail, on the return of spring, the genial powers of
fecundity; to perpetuate the two memorable areas of Rome, the
foundation of the city and that of the republic, and to restore,
during the humane license of the Saturnalia, the primitive
equality of mankind. Some idea may be conceived of the
abhorrence of the Christians for such impious ceremonies, by the
scrupulous delicacy which they displayed on a much less alarming
occasion. On days of general festivity, it was the custom of the
ancients to adorn their doors with lamps and with branches of
laurel, and to crown their heads with a garland of flowers. This
innocent and elegant practice might perhaps have been tolerated
as a mere civil institution. But it most unluckily happened that
the doors were under the protection of the household gods, that
the laurel was sacred to the lover of Daphne, and that garlands
of flowers, though frequently worn as a symbol of joy or
mourning, had been dedicated in their first origin to the service
of superstition. The trembling Christians, who were persuaded in
this instance to comply with the fashion of their country, and
the commands of the magistrate, labored under the most gloomy
apprehensions, from the reproaches of his own conscience, the
censures of the church, and the denunciations of divine
vengeance. ^50
[Footnote 49: Consult the most labored work of Ovid, his
imperfect Fasti. He finished no more than the first six months
of the year. The compilation of Macrobius is called the
Saturnalia, but it is only a small part of the first book that
bears any relation to the title.]
[Footnote 50: Tertullian has composed a defence, or rather
panegyric, of the rash action of a Christian soldier, who, by
throwing away his crown of laurel, had exposed himself and his
brethren to the most imminent danger. By the mention of the
emperors, (Severus and Caracalla,) it is evident, notwithstanding
the wishes of M. de Tillemont, that Tertullian composed his
treatise De Corona long before he was engaged in the errors of
the Montanists. See Memoires Ecclesiastiques, tom. iii. p. 384.
Note: The soldier did not tear off his crown to throw it
down with contempt; he did not even throw it away; he held it in
his hand, while others were it on their heads. Solus libero
capite, ornamento in manu otioso. - G
Note: Tertullian does not expressly name the two emperors,
Severus and Caracalla: he speaks only of two emperors, and of a
long peace which the church had enjoyed. It is generally agreed
that Tertullian became a Montanist about the year 200: his work,
de Corona Militis, appears to have been written, at the earliest
about the year 202 before the persecution of Severus: it may be
maintained, then, that it is subsequent to the Montanism of the
author. See Mosheim, Diss. de Apol. Tertull. p. 53. Biblioth.
Amsterd. tom. x. part ii. p. 292. Cave's Hist. Lit. p. 92, 93. -
G.
The state of Tertullian's opinions at the particular period
is almost an idle question. "The fiery African" is not at any
time to be considered a fair representative of Christianity. -
M.]
Such was the anxious diligence which was required to guard
the chastity of the gospel from the infectious breath of
idolatry. The superstitious observances of public or private
rites were carelessly practised, from education and habit, by the
followers of the established religion. But as often as they
occurred, they afforded the Christians an opportunity of
declaring and confirming their zealous opposition. By these
frequent protestations their attachment to the faith was
continually fortified; and in proportion to the increase of zeal,
they combated with the more ardor and success in the holy war,
which they had undertaken against the empire of the demons.
II. The writings of Cicero ^51 represent in the most lively
colors the ignorance, the errors, and the uncertainty of the
ancient philosophers with regard to the immortality of the soul.
When they are desirous of arming their disciples against the fear
of death, they inculcate, as an obvious, though melancholy
position, that the fatal stroke of our dissolution releases us
from the calamities of life; and that those can no longer suffer,
who no longer exist. Yet there were a few sages of Greece and
Rome who had conceived a more exalted, and, in some respects, a
juster idea of human nature, though it must be confessed, that in
the sublime inquiry, their reason had been often guided by their
imagination, and that their imagination had been prompted by
their vanity. When they viewed with complacency the extent of
their own mental powers, when they exercised the various
faculties of memory, of fancy, and of judgment, in the most
profound speculations, or the most important labors, and when
they reflected on the desire of fame, which transported them into
future ages, far beyond the bounds of death and of the grave,
they were unwilling to confound themselves with the beasts of the
field, or to suppose that a being, for whose dignity they
entertained the most sincere admiration, could be limited to a
spot of earth, and to a few years of duration. With this
favorable prepossession they summoned to their aid the science,
or rather the language, of Metaphysics. They soon discovered,
that as none of the properties of matter will apply to the
operations of the mind, the human soul must consequently be a
substance distinct from the body, pure, simple, and spiritual,
incapable of dissolution, and susceptible of a much higher degree
of virtue and happiness after the release from its corporeal
prison. From these specious and noble principles, the
philosophers who trod in the footsteps of Plato deduced a very
unjustifiable conclusion, since they asserted, not only the
future immortality, but the past eternity, of the human soul,
which they were too apt to consider as a portion of the infinite
and self-existing spirit, which pervades and sustains the
universe. ^52 A doctrine thus removed beyond the senses and the
experience of mankind, might serve to amuse the leisure of a
philosophic mind; or, in the silence of solitude, it might
sometimes impart a ray of comfort to desponding virtue; but the
faint impression which had been received in the schools, was soon
obliterated by the commerce and business of active life. We are
sufficiently acquainted with the eminent persons who flourished
in the age of Cicero, and of the first Caesars, with their
actions, their characters, and their motives, to be assured that
their conduct in this life was never regulated by any serious
conviction of the rewards or punishments of a future state. At
the bar and in the senate of Rome the ablest orators were not
apprehensive of giving offence to their hearers, by exposing that
doctrine as an idle and extravagant opinion, which was rejected
with contempt by every man of a liberal education and
understanding. ^53
[Footnote 51: In particular, the first book of the Tusculan
Questions, and the treatise De Senectute, and the Somnium
Scipionis, contain, in the most beautiful language, every thing
that Grecian philosophy, on Roman good sense, could possibly
suggest on this dark but important object.]
[Footnote 52: The preexistence of human souls, so far at least as
that doctrine is compatible with religion, was adopted by many of
the Greek and Latin fathers. See Beausobre, Hist. du
Manicheisme, l. vi. c. 4.]
[Footnote 53: See Cicero pro Cluent. c. 61. Caesar ap. Sallust.
de Bell. Catilis n 50. Juvenal. Satir. ii. 149.
Esse aliquid manes, et subterranea regna,
- - - - - - -
Nec pueri credunt, nisi qui nondum aeree lavantae.]
Since therefore the most sublime efforts of philosophy can
extend no further than feebly to point out the desire, the hope,
or, at most, the probability, of a future state, there is
nothing, except a divine revelation, that can ascertain the
existence, and describe the condition, of the invisible country
which is destined to receive the souls of men after their
separation from the body. But we may perceive several defects
inherent to the popular religions of Greece and Rome, which
rendered them very unequal to so arduous a task. 1. The general
system of their mythology was unsupported by any solid proofs;
and the wisest among the Pagans had already disclaimed its
usurped authority. 2. The description of the infernal regions
had been abandoned to the fancy of painters and of poets, who
peopled them with so many phantoms and monsters, who dispensed
their rewards and punishments with so little equity, that a
solemn truth, the most congenial to the human heart, was opposed
and disgraced by the absurd mixture of the wildest fictions. ^54
3. The doctrine of a future state was scarcely considered among
the devout polytheists of Greece and Rome as a fundamental
article of faith. The providence of the gods, as it related to
public communities rather than to private individuals, was
principally displayed on the visible theatre of the present
world. The petitions which were offered on the altars of Jupiter
or Apollo, expressed the anxiety of their worshippers for
temporal happiness, and their ignorance or indifference
concerning a future life. ^55 The important truth of the of the
immortality of the soul was inculcated with more diligence, as
well as success, in India, in Assyria, in Egypt, and in Gaul; and
since we cannot attribute such a difference to the superior
knowledge of the barbarians, we we must ascribe it to the
influence of an established priesthood, which employed the
motives of virtue as the instrument of ambition. ^56
[Footnote 54: The xith book of the Odyssey gives a very dreary
and incoherent account of the infernal shades. Pindar and Virgil
have embellished the picture; but even those poets, though more
correct than their great model, are guilty of very strange
inconsistencies. See Bayle, Responses aux Questions d'un
Provincial, part iii. c. 22.]
[Footnote 55: See xvith epistle of the first book of Horace, the
xiiith Satire of Juvenal, and the iid Satire of Persius: these
popular discourses express the sentiment and language of the
multitude.]
[Footnote 56: If we confine ourselves to the Gauls, we may
observe, that they intrusted, not only their lives, but even
their money, to the security of another world. Vetus ille mos
Gallorum occurrit (says Valerius Maximus, l. ii. c. 6, p. 10)
quos, memoria proditum est pecunias montuas, quae his apud
inferos redderentur, dare solitos. The same custom is more
darkly insinuated by Mela, l. iii. c. 2. It is almost needless
to add, that the profits of trade hold a just proportion to the
credit of the merchant, and that the Druids derived from their
holy profession a character of responsibility, which could
scarcely be claimed by any other order of men.]
We might naturally expect that a principle so essential to
religion, would have been revealed in the clearest terms to the
chosen people of Palestine, and that it might safely have been
intrusted to the hereditary priesthood of Aaron. It is incumbent
on us to adore the mysterious dispensations of Providence, ^57
when we discover that the doctrine of the immortality of the soul
is omitted in the law of Moses it is darkly insinuated by the
prophets; and during the long period which clasped between the
Egyptian and the Babylonian servitudes, the hopes as well as
fears of the Jews appear to have been confined within the narrow
compass of the present life. ^58 After Cyrus had permitted the
exiled nation to return into the promised land, and after Ezra
had restored the ancient records of their religion, two
celebrated sects, the Sadducees and the Pharisees, insensibly
arose at Jerusalem. ^59 The former, selected from the more
opulent and distinguished ranks of society, were strictly
attached to the literal sense of the Mosaic law, and they piously
rejected the immortality of the soul, as an opinion that received
no countenance from the divine book, which they revered as the
only rule of their faith. To the authority of Scripture the
Pharisees added that of tradition, and they accepted, under the
name of traditions, several speculative tenets from the
philosophy or religion of the eastern nations. The doctrines of
fate or predestination, of angels and spirits, and of a future
state of rewards and punishments, were in the number of these new
articles of belief; and as the Pharisees, by the austerity of
their manners, had drawn into their party the body of the Jewish
people, the immortality of the soul became the prevailing
sentiment of the synagogue, under the reign of the Asmonaean
princes and pontiffs. The temper of the Jews was incapable of
contenting itself with such a cold and languid assent as might
satisfy the mind of a Polytheist; and as soon as they admitted
the idea of a future state, they embraced it with the zeal which
has always formed the characteristic of the nation. Their zeal,
however, added nothing to its evidence, or even probability: and
it was still necessary that the doctrine of life and immortality,
which had been dictated by nature, approved by reason, and
received by superstition, should obtain the sanction of divine
truth from the authority and example of Christ.
[Footnote 57: The right reverend author of the Divine Legation of
Moses as signs a very curious reason for the omission, and most
ingeniously retorts it on the unbelievers.
Note: The hypothesis of Warburton concerning this remarkable
fact, which, as far as the Law of Moses, is unquestionable, made
few disciples; and it is difficult to suppose that it could be
intended by the author himself for more than a display of
intellectual strength. Modern writers have accounted in various
ways for the silence of the Hebrew legislator on the immortality
of the soul. According to Michaelis, "Moses wrote as an
historian and as a lawgiver; he regulated the ecclesiastical
discipline, rather than the religious belief of his people; and
the sanctions of the law being temporal, he had no occasion, and
as a civil legislator could not with propriety, threaten
punishments in another world. See Michaelis, Laws of Moses, art.
272, vol. iv. p. 209, Eng. Trans.; and Syntagma Commentationum,
p. 80, quoted by Guizot. M. Guizot adds, the "ingenious
conjecture of a philosophic theologian," which approximates to an
opinion long entertained by the Editor. That writer believes,
that in the state of civilization at the time of the legislator,
this doctrine, become popular among the Jews, would necessarily
have given birth to a multitude of idolatrous superstitions which
he wished to prevent. His primary object was to establish a firm
theocracy, to make his people the conservators of the doctrine of
the Divine Unity, the basis upon which Christianity was hereafter
to rest. He carefully excluded everything which could obscure or
weaken that doctrine. Other nations had strangely abused their
notions on the immortality of the soul; Moses wished to prevent
this abuse: hence he forbade the Jews from consulting
necromancers, (those who evoke the spirits of the dead.) Deut.
xviii. 11. Those who reflect on the state of the Pagans and the
Jews, and on the facility with which idolatry crept in on every
side, will not be astonished that Moses has not developed a
doctrine of which the influence might be more pernicious than
useful to his people. Orat. Fest. de Vitae Immort. Spe., &c.,
auct. Ph. Alb. Stapfer, p. 12 13, 20. Berne, 1787.
Moses, as well from the intimations scattered in his
writings, the passage relating to the translation of Enoch, (Gen.
v. 24,) the prohibition of necromancy, (Michaelis believes him to
be the author of the Book of Job though this opinion is in
general rejected; other learned writers consider this Book to be
coeval with and known to Moses,) as from his long residence in
Egypt, and his acquaintance with Egyptian wisdom, could not be
ignorant of the doctrine of the immortality of the soul. But
this doctrine if popularly known among the Jews, must have been
purely Egyptian, and as so, intimately connected with the whole
religious system of that country. It was no doubt moulded up
with the tenet of the transmigration of the soul, perhaps with
notions analogous to the emanation system of India in which the
human soul was an efflux from or indeed a part of, the Deity.
The Mosaic religion drew a wide and impassable interval between
the Creator and created human beings: in this it differed from
the Egyptian and all the Eastern religions. As then the
immortality of the soul was thus inseparably blended with those
foreign religions which were altogether to be effaced from the
minds of the people, and by no means necessary for the
establishment of the theocracy, Moses maintained silence on this
point and a purer notion of it was left to be developed at a more
favorable period in the history of man. - M.]
[Footnote 58: See Le Clerc (Prolegomena ad Hist. Ecclesiast.
sect. 1, c. 8 His authority seems to carry the greater weight, as
he has written a learned and judicious commentary on the books of
the Old Testament.]
[Footnote 59: Joseph. Antiquitat. l. xiii. c. 10. De Bell. Jud.
ii. 8. According to the most natural interpretation of his words,
the Sadducees admitted only the Pentateuch; but it has pleased
some modern critics to add the Prophets to their creed, and to
suppose that they contented themselves with rejecting the
traditions of the Pharisees. Dr. Jortin has argued that point in
his Remarks on Ecclesiastical History, vol. ii. p. 103.]
When the promise of eternal happiness was proposed to
mankind on condition of adopting the faith, and of observing the
precepts, of the gospel, it is no wonder that so advantageous an
offer should have been accepted by great numbers of every
religion, of every rank, and of every province in the Roman
empire. The ancient Christians were animated by a contempt for
their present existence, and by a just confidence of immortality,
of which the doubtful and imperfect faith of modern ages cannot
give us any adequate notion. In the primitive church, the
influence of truth was very powerfully strengthened by an
opinion, which, however it may deserve respect for its usefulness
and antiquity, has not been found agreeable to experience. It
was universally believed, that the end of the world, and the
kingdom of heaven, were at hand. ^* The near approach of this
wonderful event had been predicted by the apostles; the tradition
of it was preserved by their earliest disciples, and those who
understood in their literal senses the discourse of Christ
himself, were obliged to expect the second and glorious coming of
the Son of Man in the clouds, before that generation was totally
extinguished, which had beheld his humble condition upon earth,
and which might still be witness of the calamities of the Jews
under Vespasian or Hadrian. The revolution of seventeen
centuries has instructed us not to press too closely the
mysterious language of prophecy and revelation; but as long as,
for wise purposes, this error was permitted to subsist in the
church, it was productive of the most salutary effects on the
faith and practice of Christians, who lived in the awful
expectation of that moment, when the globe itself, and all the
various race of mankind, should tremble at the appearance of
their divine Judge. ^60
[Footnote *: This was, in fact, an integral part of the Jewish
notion of the Messiah, from which the minds of the apostles
themselves were but gradually detached. See Bertholdt,
Christologia Judaeorum, concluding chapters - M.]
[Footnote 60: This expectation was countenanced by the
twenty-fourth chapter of St. Matthew, and by the first epistle of
St. Paul to the Thessalonians. Erasmus removes the difficulty by
the help of allegory and metaphor; and the learned Grotius
ventures to insinuate, that, for wise purposes, the pious
deception was permitted to take place.
Note: Some modern theologians explain it without discovering
either allegory or deception. They say, that Jesus Christ, after
having proclaimed the ruin of Jerusalem and of the Temple, speaks
of his second coming and the sings which were to precede it; but
those who believed that the moment was near deceived themselves
as to the sense of two words, an error which still subsists in
our versions of the Gospel according to St. Matthew, xxiv. 29,
34. In verse 29, we read, "Immediately after the tribulation of
those days shall the sun be darkened," &c. The Greek word
signifies all at once, suddenly, not immediately; so that it
signifies only the sudden appearance of the signs which Jesus
Christ announces not the shortness of the interval which was to
separate them from the "days of tribulation," of which he was
speaking. The verse 34 is this "Verily I say unto you, This
generation shall not pass till all these things shall be
fulfilled." Jesus, speaking to his disciples, uses these words,
which the translators have rendered by this generation, but which
means the race, the filiation of my disciples; that is, he speaks
of a class of men, not of a generation. The true sense then,
according to these learned men, is, In truth I tell you that this
race of men, of which you are the commencement, shall not pass
away till this shall take place; that is to say, the succession
of Christians shall not cease till his coming. See Commentary of
M. Paulus on the New Test., edit. 1802, tom. iii. p. 445, - 446.
- G.
Others, as Rosenmuller and Kuinoel, in loc., confine this
passage to a highly figurative description of the ruins of the
Jewish city and polity. - M.]
Chapter XV: Progress Of The Christian Religion.
Part IV.
The ancient and popular doctrine of the Millennium was
intimately connected with the second coming of Christ. As the
works of the creation had been finished in six days, their
duration in their present state, according to a tradition which
was attributed to the prophet Elijah, was fixed to six thousand
years. ^61 By the same analogy it was inferred, that this long
period of labor and contention, which was now almost elapsed, ^62
would be succeeded by a joyful Sabbath of a thousand years; and
that Christ, with the triumphant band of the saints and the elect
who had escaped death, or who had been miraculously revived,
would reign upon earth till the time appointed for the last and
general resurrection. So pleasing was this hope to the mind of
believers, that the New Jerusalem, the seat of this blissful
kingdom, was quickly adorned with all the gayest colors of the
imagination. A felicity consisting only of pure and spiritual
pleasure would have appeared too refined for its inhabitants, who
were still supposed to possess their human nature and senses. A
garden of Eden, with the amusements of the pastoral life, was no
longer suited to the advanced state of society which prevailed
under the Roman empire. A city was therefore erected of gold and
precious stones, and a supernatural plenty of corn and wine was
bestowed on the adjacent territory; in the free enjoyment of
whose spontaneous productions, the happy and benevolent people
was never to be restrained by any jealous laws of exclusive
property. ^63 The assurance of such a Millennium was carefully
inculcated by a succession of fathers from Justin Martyr, ^64 and
Irenaeus, who conversed with the immediate disciples of the
apostles, down to Lactantius, who was preceptor to the son of
Constantine. ^65 Though it might not be universally received, it
appears to have been the reigning sentiment of the orthodox
believers; and it seems so well adapted to the desires and
apprehensions of mankind, that it must have contributed in a very
considerable degree to the progress of the Christian faith. But
when the edifice of the church was almost completed, the
temporary support was laid aside. The doctrine of Christ's reign
upon earth was at first treated as a profound allegory, was
considered by degrees as a doubtful and useless opinion, and was
at length rejected as the absurd invention of heresy and
fanaticism. ^66 A mysterious prophecy, which still forms a part
of the sacred canon, but which was thought to favor the exploded
sentiment, has very narrowly escaped the proscription of the
church. ^67
[Footnote 61: See Burnet's Sacred Theory, part iii. c. 5. This
tradition may be traced as high as the the author of Epistle of
Barnabas, who wrote in the first century, and who seems to have
been half a Jew.
Note: In fact it is purely Jewish. See Mosheim, De Reb.
Christ. ii. 8. Lightfoot's Works, 8vo. edit. vol. iii. p. 37.
Bertholdt, Christologia Judaeorum ch. 38. - M.]
[Footnote 62: The primitive church of Antioch computed almost
6000 years from the creation of the world to the birth of Christ.
Africanus, Lactantius, and the Greek church, have reduced that
number to 5500, and Eusebius has contented himself with 5200
years. These calculations were formed on the Septuagint, which
was universally received during the six first centuries. The
authority of the vulgate and of the Hebrew text has determined
the moderns, Protestants as well as Catholics, to prefer a period
of about 4000 years; though, in the study of profane antiquity,
they often find themselves straitened by those narrow limits.
Note: Most of the more learned modern English Protestants,
Dr. Hales, Mr. Faber, Dr. Russel, as well as the Continental
writers, adopt the larger chronology. There is little doubt that
the narrower system was framed by the Jews of Tiberias; it was
clearly neither that of St. Paul, nor of Josephus, nor of the
Samaritan Text. It is greatly to be regretted that the
chronology of the earlier Scriptures should ever have been made a
religious question - M.]
[Footnote 63: Most of these pictures were borrowed from a
misrepresentation of Isaiah, Daniel, and the Apocalypse. One of
the grossest images may be found in Irenaeus, (l. v. p. 455,) the
disciple of Papias, who had seen the apostle St. John.]
[Footnote 64: See the second dialogue of Justin with Triphon, and
the seventh book of Lactantius. It is unnecessary to allege all
the intermediate fathers, as the fact is not disputed. Yet the
curious reader may consult Daille de Uus Patrum, l. ii. c. 4.]
[Footnote 65: The testimony of Justin of his own faith and that
of his orthodox brethren, in the doctrine of a Millennium, is
delivered in the clearest and most solemn manner, (Dialog. cum
Tryphonte Jud. p. 177, 178, edit. Benedictin.) If in the
beginning of this important passage there is any thing like an
inconsistency, we may impute it, as we think proper, either to
the author or to his transcribers.
Note: The Millenium is described in what once stood as the
XLIst Article of the English Church (see Collier, Eccles. Hist.,
for Articles of Edw. VI.) as "a fable of Jewish dotage." The
whole of these gross and earthly images may be traced in the
works which treat on the Jewish traditions, in Lightfoot,
Schoetgen, and Eisenmenger; "Das enthdeckte Judenthum" t. ii 809;
and briefly in Bertholdt, i. c. 38, 39. - M.]
[Footnote 66: Dupin, Bibliotheque Ecclesiastique, tom. i. p. 223,
tom. ii. p. 366, and Mosheim, p. 720; though the latter of these
learned divines is not altogether candid on this occasion.]
[Footnote 67: In the council of Laodicea, (about the year 360,)
the Apocalypse was tacitly excluded from the sacred canon, by the
same churches of Asia to which it is addressed; and we may learn
from the complaint of Sulpicius Severus, that their sentence had
been ratified by the greater number of Christians of his time.
From what causes then is the Apocalypse at present so generally
received by the Greek, the Roman, and the Protestant churches?
The following ones may be assigned. 1. The Greeks were subdued
by the authority of an impostor, who, in the sixth century,
assumed the character of Dionysius the Areopagite. 2. A just
apprehension that the grammarians might become more important
than the theologians, engaged the council of Trent to fix the
seal of their infallibility on all the books of Scripture
contained in the Latin Vulgate, in the number of which the
Apocalypse was fortunately included. (Fr. Paolo, Istoria del
Concilio Tridentino, l. ii.) 3. The advantage of turning those
mysterious prophecies against the See of Rome, inspired the
Protestants with uncommon veneration for so useful an ally. See
the ingenious and elegant discourses of the present bishop of
Litchfield on that unpromising subject. ^!
Note: The exclusion of the Apocalypse is not improbably
assigned to its obvious unfitness to be read in churches. It is
to be feared that a history of the interpretation of the
Apocalypse would not give a very favorable view either of the
wisdom or the charity of the successive ages of Christianity.
Wetstein's interpretation, differently modified, is adopted by
most Continental scholars. - M.]
Whilst the happiness and glory of a temporal reign were
promised to the disciples of Christ, the most dreadful calamities
were denounced against an unbelieving world. The edification of
a new Jerusalem was to advance by equal steps with the
destruction of the mystic Babylon; and as long as the emperors
who reigned before Constantine persisted in the profession of
idolatry, the epithet of babylon was applied to the city and to
the empire of Rome. A regular series was prepared of all the
moral and physical evils which can afflict a flourishing nation;
intestine discord, and the invasion of the fiercest barbarians
from the unknown regions of the North; pestilence and famine,
comets and eclipses, earthquakes and inundations. ^68 All these
were only so many preparatory and alarming signs of the great
catastrophe of Rome, when the country of the Scipios and Caesars
should be consumed by a flame from Heaven, and the city of the
seven hills, with her palaces, her temples, and her triumphal
arches, should be buried in a vast lake of fire and brimstone. It
might, however, afford some consolation to Roman vanity, that the
period of their empire would be that of the world itself; which,
as it had once perished by the element of water, was destined to
experience a second and a speedy destruction from the element of
fire. In the opinion of a general conflagration, the faith of
the Christian very happily coincided with the tradition of the
East, the philosophy of the Stoics, and the analogy of Nature;
and even the country, which, from religious motives, had been
chosen for the origin and principal scene of the conflagration,
was the best adapted for that purpose by natural and physical
causes; by its deep caverns, beds of sulphur, and numero is
volcanoes, of which those of Aetna, of Vesuvius, and of Lipari,
exhibit a very imperfect representation. The calmest and most
intrepid sceptic could not refuse to acknowledge that the
destruction of the present system of the world by fire, was in
itself extremely probable. The Christian, who founded his belief
much less on the fallacious arguments of reason than on the
authority of tradition and the interpretation of Scripture,
expected it with terror and confidence as a certain and
approaching event; and as his mind was perpetually filled with
the solemn idea, he considered every disaster that happened to
the empire as an infallible symptom of an expiring world. ^69
[Footnote 68: Lactantius (Institut. Divin. vii. 15, &c.) relates
the dismal talk of futurity with great spirit and eloquence.
Note: Lactantius had a notion of a great Asiatic empire,
which was previously to rise on the ruins of the Roman: quod
Romanum nomen animus dicere, sed dicam. quia futurum est)
tolletur de terra, et impere. Asiam revertetur. - M.]
[Footnote 69: On this subject every reader of taste will be
entertained with the third part of Burnet's Sacred Theory. He
blends philosophy, Scripture, and tradition, into one magnificent
system; in the description of which he displays a strength of
fancy not inferior to that of Milton himself.]
The condemnation of the wisest and most virtuous of the
Pagans, on account of their ignorance or disbelief of the divine
truth, seems to offend the reason and the humanity of the present
age. ^70 But the primitive church, whose faith was of a much
firmer consistence, delivered over, without hesitation, to
eternal torture, the far greater part of the human species. A
charitable hope might perhaps be indulged in favor of Socrates,
or some other sages of antiquity, who had consulted the light of
reason before that of the gospel had arisen. ^71 But it was
unanimously affirmed, that those who, since the birth or the
death of Christ, had obstinately persisted in the worship of the
daemons, neither deserved nor could expect a pardon from the
irritated justice of the Deity. These rigid sentiments, which
had been unknown to the ancient world, appear to have infused a
spirit of bitterness into a system of love and harmony. The ties
of blood and friendship were frequently torn asunder by the
difference of religious faith; and the Christians, who, in this
world, found themselves oppressed by the power of the Pagans,
were sometimes seduced by resentment and spiritual pride to
delight in the prospect of their future triumph. "You are fond
of spectacles," exclaims the stern Tertullian; "expect the
greatest of all spectacles, the last and eternal judgment of the
universe. How shall I admire, how laugh, how rejoice, how exult,
when I behold so many proud monarchs, so many fancied gods,
groaning in the lowest abyss of darkness; so many magistrates,
who persecuted the name of the Lord, liquefying in fiercer fires
than they ever kindled against the Christians; so many sage
philosophers blushing in red-hot flames with their deluded
scholars; so many celebrated poets trembling before the tribunal,
not of Minos, but of Christ; so many tragedians, more tuneful in
the expression of their own sufferings; so many dancers." ^* But
the humanity of the reader will permit me to draw a veil over the
rest of this infernal description, which the zealous African
pursues in a long variety of affected and unfeeling witticisms.
^72 ^!
[Footnote 70: And yet whatever may be the language of
individuals, it is still the public doctrine of all the Christian
churches; nor can even our own refuse to admit the conclusions
which must be drawn from the viiith and the xviiith of her
Articles. The Jansenists, who have so diligently studied the
works of the fathers, maintain this sentiment with distinguished
zeal; and the learned M. de Tillemont never dismisses a virtuous
emperor without pronouncing his damnation. Zuinglius is perhaps
the only leader of a party who has ever adopted the milder
sentiment, and he gave no less offence to the Lutherans than to
the Catholics. See Bossuet, Histoire des Variations des Eglises
Protestantes, l. ii. c. 19 - 22.]
[Footnote 71: Justin and Clemens of Alexandria allow that some of
the philosophers were instructed by the Logos; confounding its
double signification of the human reason, and of the Divine
Word.]
[Footnote *: This translation is not exact: the first sentence is
imperfect. Tertullian says, Ille dies nationibus insperatus, ille
derisus, cum tanta sacculi vetustas et tot ejus nativitates uno
igne haurientur. The text does not authorize the exaggerated
expressions, so many magistrates, so many sago philosophers, so
many poets, &c.; but simply magistrates, philosophers, poets. -
G.
It is not clear that Gibbon's version or paraphrase is
incorrect: Tertullian writes, tot tantosque reges item praesides,
&c. - M.]
[Footnote 72: Tertullian, de Spectaculis, c. 30. In order to
ascertain the degree of authority which the zealous African had
acquired it may be sufficient to allege the testimony of Cyprian,
the doctor and guide of all the western churches. (See Prudent.
Hym. xiii. 100.) As often as he applied himself to his daily
study of the writings of Tertullian, he was accustomed to say,
"Da mihi magistrum, Give me my master." (Hieronym. de Viris
Illustribus, tom. i. p. 284.)]
[Footnote !: The object of Tertullian's vehemence in his
Treatise, was to keep the Christians away from the secular games
celebrated by the Emperor Severus: It has not prevented him from
showing himself in other places full of benevolence and charity
towards unbelievers: the spirit of the gospel has sometimes
prevailed over the violence of human passions: Qui ergo putaveris
nihil nos de salute Caesaris curare (he says in his Apology)
inspice Dei voces, literas nostras. Scitote ex illis praeceptum
esse nobis ad redudantionem, benignitates etiam pro inimicis Deum
orare, et pro persecutoribus cona precari. Sed etiam nominatim
atque manifeste orate inquit (Christus) pro regibus et pro
principibus et potestatibus ut omnia sint tranquilla vobis Tert.
Apol. c. 31. - G.
It would be wiser for Christianity, retreating upon its
genuine records in the New Testament, to disclaim this fierce
African, than to identify itself with his furious invectives by
unsatisfactory apologies for their unchristian fanaticism. - M.]
Doubtless there were many among the primitive Christians of
a temper more suitable to the meekness and charity of their
profession. There were many who felt a sincere compassion for
the danger of their friends and countrymen, and who exerted the
most benevolent zeal to save them from the impending destruction.
The careless Polytheist, assailed by new and unexpected terrors,
against which neither his priests nor his philosophers could
afford him any certain protection, was very frequently terrified
and subdued by the menace of eternal tortures. His fears might
assist the progress of his faith and reason; and if he could once
persuade himself to suspect that the Christian religion might
possibly be true, it became an easy task to convince him that it
was the safest and most prudent party that he could possibly
embrace.
III. The supernatural gifts, which even in this life were
ascribed to the Christians above the rest of mankind, must have
conduced to their own comfort, and very frequently to the
conviction of infidels. Besides the occasional prodigies, which
might sometimes be effected by the immediate interposition of the
Deity when he suspended the laws of Nature for the service of
religion, the Christian church, from the time of the apostles and
their first disciples, ^73 has claimed an uninterrupted
succession of miraculous powers, the gift of tongues, of vision,
and of prophecy, the power of expelling daemons, of healing the
sick, and of raising the dead. The knowledge of foreign
languages was frequently communicated to the contemporaries of
Irenaeus, though Irenaeus himself was left to struggle with the
difficulties of a barbarous dialect, whilst he preached the
gospel to the natives of Gaul. ^74 The divine inspiration,
whether it was conveyed in the form of a waking or of a sleeping
vision, is described as a favor very liberally bestowed on all
ranks of the faithful, on women as on elders, on boys as well as
upon bishops. When their devout minds were sufficiently prepared
by a course of prayer, of fasting, and of vigils, to receive the
extraordinary impulse, they were transported out of their senses,
and delivered in ecstasy what was inspired, being mere organs of
the Holy Spirit, just as a pipe or flute is of him who blows into
it. ^75 We may add, that the design of these visions was, for the
most part, either to disclose the future history, or to guide the
present administration, of the church. The expulsion of the
daemons from the bodies of those unhappy persons whom they had
been permitted to torment, was considered as a signal though
ordinary triumph of religion, and is repeatedly alleged by the
ancient apoligists, as the most convincing evidence of the truth
of Christianity. The awful ceremony was usually performed in a
public manner, and in the presence of a great number of
spectators; the patient was relieved by the power or skill of the
exorcist, and the vanquished daemon was heard to confess that he
was one of the fabled gods of antiquity, who had impiously
usurped the adoration of mankind. ^76 But the miraculous cure of
diseases of the most inveterate or even preternatural kind, can
no longer occasion any surprise, when we recollect, that in the
days of Iranaeus, about the end of the second century, the
resurrection of the dead was very far from being esteemed an
uncommon event; that the miracle was frequently performed on
necessary occasions, by great fasting and the joint supplication
of the church of the place, and that the persons thus restored to
their prayers had lived afterwards among them many years. ^77 At
such a period, when faith could boast of so many wonderful
victories over death, it seems difficult to account for the
scepticism of those philosophers, who still rejected and derided
the doctrine of the resurrection. A noble Grecian had rested on
this important ground the whole controversy, and promised
Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch, that if he could be gratified with
the sight of a single person who had been actually raised from
the dead, he would immediately embrace the Christian religion.
It is somewhat remarkable, that the prelate of the first eastern
church, however anxious for the conversion of his friend, thought
proper to decline this fair and reasonable challenge. ^78
[Footnote 73: Notwithstanding the evasions of Dr. Middleton, it
is impossible to overlook the clear traces of visions and
inspiration, which may be found in the apostolic fathers.
Note: Gibbon should have noticed the distinct and remarkable
passage from Chrysostom, quoted by Middleton, (Works, vol. i. p.
105,) in which he affirms the long discontinuance of miracles as
a notorious fact. - M.]
[Footnote 74: Irenaeus adv. Haeres. Proem. p.3 Dr. Middleton
(Free Inquiry, p. 96, &c.) observes, that as this pretension of
all others was the most difficult to support by art, it was the
soonest given up. The observation suits his hypothesis.
Note: This passage of Irenaeus contains no allusion to the
gift of tongues; it is merely an apology for a rude and
unpolished Greek style, which could not be expected from one who
passed his life in a remote and barbarous province, and was
continually obliged to speak the Celtic language. - M.
Note: Except in the life of Pachomius, an Egyptian monk of
the fourth century. (see Jortin, Ecc. Hist. i. p. 368, edit.
1805,) and the latter (not earlier) lives of Xavier, there is no
claim laid to the gift of tongues since the time of Irenaeus; and
of this claim, Xavier's own letters are profoundly silent. See
Douglas's Criterion, p. 76 edit. 1807. - M.]
[Footnote 75: Athenagoras in Legatione. Justin Martyr, Cohort.
ad Gentes Tertullian advers. Marcionit. l. iv. These
descriptions are not very unlike the prophetic fury, for which
Cicero (de Divinat.ii. 54) expresses so little reverence.]
[Footnote 76: Tertullian (Apolog. c. 23) throws out a bold
defiance to the Pagan magistrates. Of the primitive miracles,
the power of exorcising is the only one which has been assumed by
Protestants.
Note: But by Protestants neither of the most enlightened
ages nor most reasoning minds. - M.]
[Footnote 77: Irenaeus adv. Haereses, l. ii. 56, 57, l. v. c. 6.
Mr. Dodwell (Dissertat. ad Irenaeum, ii. 42) concludes, that the
second century was still more fertile in miracles than the first.
Note: It is difficult to answer Middleton's objection to
this statement of Irenae us: "It is very strange, that from the
time of the apostles there is not a single instance of this
miracle to be found in the three first centuries; except a single
case, slightly intimated in Eusebius, from the Works of Papias;
which he seems to rank among the other fabulous stories delivered
by that weak man." Middleton, Works, vol. i. p. 59. Bp. Douglas
(Criterion, p 389) would consider Irenaeus to speak of what had
"been performed formerly." not in his own time. - M.]
[Footnote 78: Theophilus ad Autolycum, l. i. p. 345. Edit.
Benedictin. Paris, 1742.
Note: A candid sceptic might discern some impropriety in the
Bishop being called upon to perform a miracle on demand. - M.]
The miracles of the primitive church, after obtaining the
sanction of ages, have been lately attacked in a very free and
ingenious inquiry, ^79 which, though it has met with the most
favorable reception from the public, appears to have excited a
general scandal among the divines of our own as well as of the
other Protestant churches of Europe. ^80 Our different sentiments
on this subject will be much less influenced by any particular
arguments, than by our habits of study and reflection; and, above
all, by the degree of evidence which we have accustomed ourselves
to require for the proof of a miraculous event. The duty of an
historian does not call upon him to interpose his private
judgment in this nice and important controversy; but he ought not
to dissemble the difficulty of adopting such a theory as may
reconcile the interest of religion with that of reason, of making
a proper application of that theory, and of defining with
precision the limits of that happy period, exempt from error and
from deceit, to which we might be disposed to extend the gift of
supernatural powers. From the first of the fathers to the last
of the popes, a succession of bishops, of saints, of martyrs, and
of miracles, is continued without interruption; and the progress
of superstition was so gradual, and almost imperceptible, that we
know not in what particular link we should break the chain of
tradition. Every age bears testimony to the wonderful events by
which it was distinguished, and its testimony appears no less
weighty and respectable than that of the preceding generation,
till we are insensibly led on to accuse our own inconsistency, if
in the eighth or in the twelfth century we deny to the venerable
Bede, or to the holy Bernard, the same degree of confidence
which, in the second century, we had so liberally granted to
Justin or to Irenaeus. ^81 If the truth of any of those miracles
is appreciated by their apparent use and propriety, every age had
unbelievers to convince, heretics to confute, and idolatrous
nations to convert; and sufficient motives might always be
produced to justify the interposition of Heaven. And yet, since
every friend to revelation is persuaded of the reality, and every
reasonable man is convinced of the cessation, of miraculous
powers, it is evident that there must have been some period in
which they were either suddenly or gradually withdrawn from the
Christian church. Whatever aera is chosen for that purpose, the
death of the apostles, the conversion of the Roman empire, or the
extinction of the Arian heresy, ^82 the insensibility of the
Christians who lived at that time will equally afford a just
matter of surprise. They still supported their pretensions after
they had lost their power. Credulity performed the office of
faith; fanaticism was permitted to assume the language of
inspiration, and the effects of accident or contrivance were
ascribed to supernatural causes. The recent experience of genuine
miracles should have instructed the Christian world in the ways
of Providence, and habituated their eye (if we may use a very
inadequate expression) to the style of the divine artist. Should
the most skilful painter of modern Italy presume to decorate his
feeble imitations with the name of Raphael or of Correggio, the
insolent fraud would be soon discovered, and indignantly
rejected.
[Footnote 79: Dr. Middleton sent out his Introduction in the year
1747, published his Free Inquiry in 1749, and before his death,
which happened in 1750, he had prepared a vindication of it
against his numerous adversaries.]
[Footnote 80: The university of Oxford conferred degrees on his
opponents. From the indignation of Mosheim, (p. 221,) we may
discover the sentiments of the Lutheran divines.
Note: Yet many Protestant divines will now without
reluctance confine miracles to the time of the apostles, or at
least to the first century. - M]
[Footnote 81: It may seem somewhat remarkable, that Bernard of
Clairvaux, who records so many miracles of his friend St.
Malachi, never takes any notice of his own, which, in their turn,
however, are carefully related by his companions and disciples.
In the long series of ecclesiastical history, does there exist a
single instance of a saint asserting that he himself possessed
the gift of miracles?]
[Footnote 82: The conversion of Constantine is the aera which is
most usually fixed by Protestants. The more rational divines are
unwilling to admit the miracles of the ivth, whilst the more
credulous are unwilling to reject those of the vth century.
Note: All this appears to proceed on the principle that any
distinct line can be drawn in an unphilosophic age between
wonders and miracles, or between what piety, from their
unexpected and extraordinary nature, the marvellous concurrence
of secondary causes to some remarkable end, may consider
providential interpositions, and miracles strictly so called, in
which the laws of nature are suspended or violated. It is
impossible to assign, on one side, limits to human credulity, on
the other, to the influence of the imagination on the bodily
frame; but some of the miracles recorded in the Gospels are such
palpable impossibilities, according to the known laws and
operations of nature, that if recorded on sufficient evidence,
and the evidence we believe to be that of eye-witnesses, we
cannot reject them, without either asserting, with Hume, that no
evidence can prove a miracle, or that the Author of Nature has no
power of suspending its ordinary laws. But which of the
post-apostolic miracles will bear this test? - M.]
Whatever opinion may be entertained of the miracles of the
primitive church since the time of the apostles, this unresisting
softness of temper, so conspicuous among the believers of the
second and third centuries, proved of some accidental benefit to
the cause of truth and religion. In modern times, a latent and
even involuntary scepticism adheres to the most pious
dispositions. Their admission of supernatural truths is much
less an active consent than a cold and passive acquiescence.
Accustomed long since to observe and to respect the variable
order of Nature, our reason, or at least our imagination, is not
sufficiently prepared to sustain the visible action of the Deity.
But, in the first ages of Christianity, the situation of mankind
was extremely different. The most curious, or the most
credulous, among the Pagans, were often persuaded to enter into a
society which asserted an actual claim of miraculous powers. The
primitive Christians perpetually trod on mystic ground, and their
minds were exercised by the habits of believing the most
extraordinary events. They felt, or they fancied, that on every
side they were incessantly assaulted by daemons, comforted by
visions, instructed by prophecy, and surprisingly delivered from
danger, sickness, and from death itself, by the supplications of
the church. The real or imaginary prodigies, of which they so
frequently conceived themselves to be the objects, the
instruments, or the spectators, very happily disposed them to
adopt with the same ease, but with far greater justice, the
authentic wonders of the evangelic history; and thus miracles
that exceeded not the measure of their own experience, inspired
them with the most lively assurance of mysteries which were
acknowledged to surpass the limits of their understanding. It is
this deep impression of supernatural truths, which has been so
much celebrated under the name of faith; a state of mind
described as the surest pledge of the divine favor and of future
felicity, and recommended as the first, or perhaps the only merit
of a Christian. According to the more rigid doctors, the moral
virtues, which may be equally practised by infidels, are
destitute of any value or efficacy in the work of our
justification.
Chapter XV: Progress Of The Christian Religion.
Part V.
IV. But the primitive Christian demonstrated his faith by
his virtues; and it was very justly supposed that the divine
persuasion, which enlightened or subdued the understanding, must,
at the same time, purify the heart, and direct the actions, of
the believer. The first apologists of Christianity who justify
the innocence of their brethren, and the writers of a later
period who celebrate the sanctity of their ancestors, display, in
the most lively colors, the reformation of manners which was
introduced into the world by the preaching of the gospel. As it
is my intention to remark only such human causes as were
permitted to second the influence of revelation, I shall slightly
mention two motives which might naturally render the lives of the
primitive Christians much purer and more austere than those of
their Pagan contemporaries, or their degenerate successors;
repentance for their past sins, and the laudable desire of
supporting the reputation of the society in which they were
engaged. ^*
[Footnote *: These, in the opinion of the editor, are the most
uncandid paragraphs in Gibbon's History. He ought either, with
manly courage, to have denied the moral reformation introduced by
Christianity, or fairly to have investigated all its motives; not
to have confined himself to an insidious and sarcastic
description of the less pure and generous elements of the
Christian character as it appeared even at that early time. - M.]
It is a very ancient reproach, suggested by the ignorance or
the malice of infidelity, that the Christians allured into their
party the most atrocious criminals, who, as soon as they were
touched by a sense of remorse, were easily persuaded to wash
away, in the water of baptism, the guilt of their past conduct,
for which the temples of the gods refused to grant them any
expiation. But this reproach, when it is cleared from
misrepresentation, contributes as much to the honor as it did to
the increase of the church. ^83 The friends of Christianity may
acknowledge without a blush, that many of the most eminent saints
had been before their baptism the most abandoned sinners. Those
persons, who in the world had followed, though in an imperfect
manner, the dictates of benevolence and propriety, derived such a
calm satisfaction from the opinion of their own rectitude, as
rendered them much less susceptible of the sudden emotions of
shame, of grief, and of terror, which have given birth to so many
wonderful conversions. After the example of their divine Master,
the missionaries of the gospel disdained not the society of men,
and especially of women, oppressed by the consciousness, and very
often by the effects, of their vices. As they emerged from sin
and superstition to the glorious hope of immortality, they
resolved to devote themselves to a life, not only of virtue, but
of penitence. The desire of perfection became the ruling passion
of their soul; and it is well known, that while reason embraces a
cold mediocrity, our passions hurry us, with rapid violence, over
the space which lies between the most opposite extremes.
[Footnote 83: The imputations of Celsus and Julian, with the
defence of the fathers, are very fairly stated by Spanheim,
Commentaire sur les Cesars de Julian, p. 468.]
When the new converts had been enrolled in the number of the
faithful, and were admitted to the sacraments of the church, they
found themselves restrained from relapsing into their past
disorders by another consideration of a less spiritual, but of a
very innocent and respectable nature. Any particular society
that has departed from the great body of the nation, or the
religion to which it belonged, immediately becomes the object of
universal as well as invidious observation. In proportion to the
smallness of its numbers, the character of the society may be
affected by the virtues and vices of the persons who compose it;
and every member is engaged to watch with the most vigilant
attention over his own behavior, and over that of his brethren,
since, as he must expect to incur a part of the common disgrace,
he may hope to enjoy a share of the common reputation. When the
Christians of Bithynia were brought before the tribunal of the
younger Pliny, they assured the proconsul, that, far from being
engaged in any unlawful conspiracy, they were bound by a solemn
obligation to abstain from the commission of those crimes which
disturb the private or public peace of society, from theft,
robbery, adultery, perjury, and fraud. ^84 ^* Near a century
afterwards, Tertullian with an honest pride, could boast, that
very few Christians had suffered by the hand of the executioner,
except on account of their religion. ^85 Their serious and
sequestered life, averse to the gay luxury of the age, inured
them to chastity, temperance, economy, and all the sober and
domestic virtues. As the greater number were of some trade or
profession, it was incumbent on them, by the strictest integrity
and the fairest dealing, to remove the suspicions which the
profane are too apt to conceive against the appearances of
sanctity. The contempt of the world exercised them in the habits
of humility, meekness, and patience. The more they were
persecuted, the more closely they adhered to each other. Their
mutual charity and unsuspecting confidence has been remarked by
infidels, and was too often abused by perfidious friends. ^86
[Footnote 84: Plin. Epist. x. 97.
Note: Is not the sense of Tertullian rather, if guilty of
any other offence, be had thereby ceased to be a Christian? - M.]
[Footnote *: And this blamelessness was fully admitted by the
candid and enlightened Roman. - M.]
[Footnote 85: Tertullian, Apolog. c. 44. He adds, however, with
some degree of hesitation, "Aut si aliud, jam non Christianus."
Note: Tertullian says positively no Christian, nemo illic
Christianus; for the rest, the limitation which he himself
subjoins, and which Gibbon quotes in the foregoing note,
diminishes the force of this assertion, and appears to prove that
at least he knew none such. - G.]
[Footnote 86: The philosopher Peregrinus (of whose life and death
Lucian has left us so entertaining an account) imposed, for a
long time, on the credulous simplicity of the Christians of
Asia.]
It is a very honorable circumstance for the morals of the
primitive Christians, that even their faults, or rather errors,
were derived from an excess of virtue. The bishops and doctors
of the church, whose evidence attests, and whose authority might
influence, the professions, the principles, and even the practice
of their contemporaries, had studied the Scriptures with less
skill than devotion; and they often received, in the most literal
sense, those rigid precepts of Christ and the apostles, to which
the prudence of succeeding commentators has applied a looser and
more figurative mode of interpretation. Ambitious to exalt the
perfection of the gospel above the wisdom of philosophy, the
zealous fathers have carried the duties of self-mortification, of
purity, and of patience, to a height which it is scarcely
possible to attain, and much less to preserve, in our present
state of weakness and corruption. A doctrine so extraordinary
and so sublime must inevitably command the veneration of the
people; but it was ill calculated to obtain the suffrage of those
worldly philosophers, who, in the conduct of this transitory
life, consult only the feelings of nature and the interest of
society. ^87
[Footnote 87: See a very judicious treatise of Barbeyrac sur la
Morale des Peres.]
There are two very natural propensities which we may
distinguish in the most virtuous and liberal dispositions, the
love of pleasure and the love of action. If the former is
refined by art and learning, improved by the charms of social
intercourse, and corrected by a just regard to economy, to
health, and to reputation, it is productive of the greatest part
of the happiness of private life. The love of action is a
principle of a much stronger and more doubtful nature. It often
leads to anger, to ambition, and to revenge; but when it is
guided by the sense of propriety and benevolence, it becomes the
parent of every virtue, and if those virtues are accompanied with
equal abilities, a family, a state, or an empire, may be indebted
for their safety and prosperity to the undaunted courage of a
single man. To the love of pleasure we may therefore ascribe
most of the agreeable, to the love of action we may attribute
most of the useful and respectable, qualifications. The character
in which both the one and the other should be united and
harmonized, would seem to constitute the most perfect idea of
human nature. The insensible and inactive disposition, which
should be supposed alike destitute of both, would be rejected, by
the common consent of mankind, as utterly incapable of procuring
any happiness to the individual, or any public benefit to the
world. But it was not in this world, that the primitive
Christians were desirous of making themselves either agreeable or
useful. ^*
[Footnote *: El que me fait cette homelie semi-stoicienne,
semi-epicurienne? t'on jamais regarde l'amour du plaisir comme
l'un des principes de la perfection morale? Et de quel droit
faites vous de l'amour de l'action, et de l'amour du plaisir, les
seuls elemens de l'etre humain? Est ce que vous faites
abstraction de la verite en elle-meme, de la conscience et du
sentiment du devoir? Est ce que vous ne sentez point, par
exemple, que le sacrifice du moi a la justice et a la verite, est
aussi dans le coeur de l'homme: que tout n'est pas pour lui
action ou plaisir, et que dans le bien ce n'est pas le mouvement,
mais la verite, qu'il cherche? Et puis * * Thucy dide et Tacite.
ces maitres de l'histoire, ont ils jamais introduits dans leur
recits un fragment de dissertation sur le plaisir et sur
l'action. Villemain Cours de Lit. Franc part ii. Lecon v. - M.]
The acquisition of knowledge, the exercise of our reason or
fancy, and the cheerful flow of unguarded conversation, may
employ the leisure of a liberal mind. Such amusements, however,
were rejected with abhorrence, or admitted with the utmost
caution, by the severity of the fathers, who despised all
knowledge that was not useful to salvation, and who considered
all levity of discours eas a criminal abuse of the gift of
speech. In our present state of existence the body is so
inseparably connected with the soul, that it seems to be our
interest to taste, with innocence and moderation, the enjoyments
of which that faithful companion is susceptible. Very different
was the reasoning of our devout predecessors; vainly aspiring to
imitate the perfection of angels, they disdained, or they
affected to disdain, every earthly and corporeal delight. ^88
Some of our senses indeed are necessary for our preservation,
others for our subsistence, and others again for our information;
and thus far it was impossible to reject the use of them. The
first sensation of pleasure was marked as the first moment of
their abuse. The unfeeling candidate for heaven was instructed,
not only to resist the grosser allurements of the taste or smell,
but even to shut his ears against the profane harmony of sounds,
and to view with indifference the most finished productions of
human art. Gay apparel, magnificent houses, and elegant
furniture, were supposed to unite the double guilt of pride and
of sensuality; a simple and mortified appearance was more
suitable to the Christian who was certain of his sins and
doubtful of his salvation. In their censures of luxury, the
fathers are extremely minute and circumstantial; ^89 and among
the various articles which excite their pious indignation, we may
enumerate false hair, garments of any color except white,
instruments of music, vases of gold or silver, downy pillows, (as
Jacob reposed his head on a stone,) white bread, foreign wines,
public salutations, the use of warm baths, and the practice of
shaving the beard, which, according to the expression of
Tertullian, is a lie against our own faces, and an impious
attempt to improve the works of the Creator. ^90 When
Christianity was introduced among the rich and the polite, the
observation of these singular laws was left, as it would be at
present, to the few who were ambitious of superior sanctity. But
it is always easy, as well as agreeable, for the inferior ranks
of mankind to claim a merit from the contempt of that pomp and
pleasure which fortune has placed beyond their reach. The virtue
of the primitive Christians, like that of the first Romans, was
very frequently guarded by poverty and ignorance.
[Footnote 88: Lactant. Institut. Divin. l. vi. c. 20, 21, 22.]
[Footnote 89: Consult a work of Clemens of Alexandria, entitled
The Paedagogue, which contains the rudiments of ethics, as they
were taught in the most celebrated of the Christian schools.]
[Footnote 90: Tertullian, de Spectaculis, c. 23. Clemens
Alexandrin. Paedagog. l. iii. c. 8.]
The chaste severity of the fathers, in whatever related to
the commerce of the two sexes, flowed from the same principle;
their abhorrence of every enjoyment which might gratify the
sensual, and degrade the spiritual, nature of man. It was their
favorite opinion, that if Adam had preserved his obedience to the
Creator, he would have lived forever in a state of virgin purity,
and that some harmless mode of vegetation might have peopled
paradise with a race of innocent and immortal beings. ^91 The use
of marriage was permitted only to his fallen posterity, as a
necessary expedient to continue the human species, and as a
restraint, however imperfect, on the natural licentiousness of
desire. The hesitation of the orthodox casuists on this
interesting subject, betrays the perplexity of men, unwilling to
approve an institution which they were compelled to tolerate. ^92
The enumeration of the very whimsical laws, which they most
circumstantially imposed on the marriage-bed, would force a smile
from the young and a blush from the fair. It was their unanimous
sentiment, that a first marriage was adequate to all the purposes
of nature and of society. The sensual connection was refined
into a resemblance of the mystic union of Christ with his church,
and was pronounced to be indissoluble either by divorce or by
death. The practice of second nuptials was branded with the name
of a egal adultery; and the persons who were guilty of so
scandalous an offence against Christian purity, were soon
excluded from the honors, and even from the alms, of the church.
^93 Since desire was imputed as a crime, and marriage was
tolerated as a defect, it was consistent with the same principles
to consider a state of celibacy as the nearest approach to the
divine perfection. It was with the utmost difficulty that
ancient Rome could support the institution of six vestals; ^94
but the primitive church was filled with a great number of
persons of either sex, who had devoted themselves to the
profession of perpetual chastity. ^95 A few of these, among whom
we may reckon the learned Origen, judged it the most prudent to
disarm the tempter. ^96 Some were insensible and some were
invincible against the assaults of the flesh. Disdaining an
ignominious flight, the virgins of the warm climate of Africa
encountered the enemy in the closest engagement; they permitted
priests and deacons to share their bed, and gloried amidst the
flames in their unsullied purity. But insulted Nature sometimes
vindicated her rights, and this new species of martyrdom served
only to introduce a new scandal into the church. ^97 Among the
Christian ascetics, however, (a name which they soon acquired
from their painful exercise,) many, as they were less
presumptuous, were probably more successful. The loss of sensual
pleasure was supplied and compensated by spiritual pride. Even
the multitude of Pagans were inclined to estimate the merit of
the sacrifice by its apparent difficulty; and it was in the
praise of these chaste spouses of Christ that the fathers have
poured forth the troubled stream of their eloquence. ^98 Such are
the early traces of monastic principles and institutions, which,
in a subsequent age, have counterbalanced all the temporal
advantages of Christianity. ^99
[Footnote 91: Beausobro, Hist. Critique du Manicheisme, l. vii.
c. 3. Justin, Gregory of Nyssa, Augustin, &c., strongly incline
to this opinion.
Note: But these were Gnostic or Manichean opinions.
Beausobre distinctly describes Autustine's bias to his recent
escape from Manicheism; and adds that be afterwards changed his
views. - M.]
[Footnote 92: Some of the Gnostic heretics were more consistent;
they rejected the use of marriage.]
[Footnote 93: See a chain of tradition, from Justin Martyr to
Jerome, in the Morale des Peres, c. iv. 6 - 26.]
[Footnote 94: See a very curious Dissertation on the Vestals, in
the Memoires de l'Academie des Inscriptions, tom. iv. p. 161 -
227. Notwithstanding the honors and rewards which were bestowed
on those virgins, it was difficult to procure a sufficient
number; nor could the dread of the most horrible death always
restrain their incontinence.]
[Footnote 95: Cupiditatem procreandi aut unam scimus aut nullam.
Minutius Faelix, c. 31. Justin. Apolog. Major. Athenagoras in
Legat. c 28. Tertullian de Cultu Foemin. l. ii.]
[Footnote 96: Eusebius, l. vi. 8. Before the fame of Origen had
excited envy and persecution, this extraordinary action was
rather admired than censured. As it was his general practice to
allegorize Scripture, it seems unfortunate that in this instance
only, he should have adopted the literal sense.]
[Footnote 97: Cyprian. Epist. 4, and Dodwell, Dissertat.
Cyprianic. iii. Something like this rash attempt was long
afterwards imputed to the founder of the order of Fontevrault.
Bayle has amused himself and his readers on that very delicate
subject.]
[Footnote 98: Dupin (Bibliotheque Ecclesiastique, tom. i. p. 195)
gives a particular account of the dialogue of the ten virgins, as
it was composed by Methodius, Bishop of Tyre. The praises of
virginity are excessive.]
[Footnote 99: The Ascetics (as early as the second century) made
a public profession of mortifying their bodies, and of abstaining
from the use of flesh and wine. Mosheim, p. 310.]
The Christians were not less averse to the business than to
the pleasures of this world. The defence of our persons and
property they knew not how to reconcile with the patient doctrine
which enjoined an unlimited forgiveness of past injuries, and
commanded them to invite the repetition of fresh insults. Their
simplicity was offended by the use of oaths, by the pomp of
magistracy, and by the active contention of public life; nor
could their humane ignorance be convinced that it was lawful on
any occasion to shed the blood of our fellow-creatures, either by
the sword of justice, or by that of war; even though their
criminal or hostile attempts should threaten the peace and safety
of the whole community. ^100 It was acknowledged, that, under a
less perfect law, the powers of the Jewish constitution had been
exercised, with the approbation of Heaven, by inspired prophets
and by anointed kings. The Christians felt and confessed that
such institutions might be necessary for the present system of
the world, and they cheerfully submitted to the authority of
their Pagan governors. But while they inculcated the maxims of
passive obedience, they refused to take any active part in the
civil administration or the military defence of the empire. Some
indulgence might, perhaps, be allowed to those persons who,
before their conversion, were already engaged in such violent and
sanguinary occupations; ^101 but it was impossible that the
Christians, without renouncing a more sacred duty, could assume
the character of soldiers, of magistrates, or of princes. ^102
This indolent, or even criminal disregard to the public welfare,
exposed them to the contempt and reproaches of the Pagans who
very frequently asked, what must be the fate of the empire,
attacked on every side by the barbarians, if all mankind should
adopt the pusillanimous sentiments of the new sect. ^103 To this
insulting question the Christian apologists returned obscure and
ambiguous answers, as they were unwilling to reveal the secret
cause of their security; the expectation that, before the
conversion of mankind was accomplished, war, government, the
Roman empire, and the world itself, would be no more. It may be
observed, that, in this instance likewise, the situation of the
first Christians coincided very happily with their religious
scruples, and that their aversion to an active life contributed
rather to excuse them from the service, than to exclude them from
the honors, of the state and army.
[Footnote 100: See the Morale des Peres. The same patient
principles have been revived since the Reformation by the
Socinians, the modern Anabaptists, and the Quakers. Barclay, the
Apologist of the Quakers, has protected his brethren by the
authority of the primitive Christian; p. 542 - 549]
[Footnote 101: Tertullian, Apolog. c. 21. De Idololatria, c. 17,
18. Origen contra Celsum, l. v. p. 253, l. vii. p. 348, l. viii.
p. 423 - 428.]
[Footnote 102: Tertullian (de Corona Militis, c. 11) suggested to
them the expedient of deserting; a counsel which, if it had been
generally known, was not very proper to conciliate the favor of
the emperors towards the Christian sect.
Note: There is nothing which ought to astonish us in the
refusal of the primitive Christians to take part in public
affairs; it was the natural consequence of the contrariety of
their principles to the customs, laws, and active life of the
Pagan world. As Christians, they could not enter into the
senate, which, according to Gibbon himself, always assembled in a
temple or consecrated place, and where each senator, before he
took his seat, made a libation of a few drops of wine, and burnt
incense on the altar; as Christians, they could not assist at
festivals and banquets, which always terminated with libations,
&c.; finally, as "the innumerable deities and rites of polytheism
were closely interwoven with every circumstance of public and
private life," the Christians could not participate in them
without incurring, according to their principles, the guilt of
impiety. It was then much less by an effect of their doctrine,
than by the consequence of their situation, that they stood aloof
from public business. Whenever this situation offered no
impediment, they showed as much activity as the Pagans. Proinde,
says Justin Martyr, (Apol. c. 17,) nos solum Deum adoramus, et
vobis in rebus aliis laeti inservimus. - G.
This latter passage, M. Guizot quotes in Latin; if he had
consulted the original, he would have found it to be altogether
irrelevant: it merely relates to the payment of taxes. - M.
Tertullian does not suggest to the soldiers the expedient of
deserting; he says that they ought to be constantly on their
guard to do nothing during their service contrary to the law of
God, and to resolve to suffer martyrdom rather than submit to a
base compliance, or openly to renounce the service. (De Cor. Mil.
ii. p. 127.) He does not positively decide that the military
service is not permitted to Christians; he ends, indeed, by
saying, Puta denique licere militiam usque ad causam coronae. -
G.
M. Guizot is. I think, again unfortunate in his defence of
Tertullian. That father says, that many Christian soldiers had
deserted, aut deserendum statim sit, ut a multis actum. The
latter sentence, Puta, &c, &c., is a concession for the sake of
argument: wha follows is more to the purpose. - M.
Many other passages of Tertullian prove that the army was
full of Christians, Hesterni sumus et vestra omnia implevimus,
urbes, insulas, castella, municipia, conciliabula, castra ipsa.
(Apol. c. 37.) Navigamus et not vobiscum et militamus. (c. 42.)
Origen, in truth, appears to have maintained a more rigid
opinion, (Cont. Cels. l. viii.;) but he has often renounced this
exaggerated severity, perhaps necessary to produce great results,
and be speaks of the profession of arms as an honorable one. (l.
iv. c. 218.) - G.
On these points Christian opinion, it should seem, was much
divided Tertullian, when he wrote the De Cor. Mil., was evidently
inclining to more ascetic opinions, and Origen was of the same
class. See Neander, vol. l part ii. p. 305, edit. 1828. - M.]
[Footnote 103: As well as we can judge from the mutilated
representation of Origen, (1. viii. p. 423,) his adversary,
Celsus, had urged his objection with great force and candor.]
Chapter XV: Progress Of The Christian Religion.
Part VI.
V. But the human character, however it may be exalted or
depressed by a temporary enthusiasm, will return by degrees to
its proper and natural level, and will resume those passions that
seem the most adapted to its present condition. The primitive
Christians were dead to the business and pleasures of the world;
but their love of action, which could never be entirely
extinguished, soon revived, and found a new occupation in the
government of the church. A separate society, which attacked the
established religion of the empire, was obliged to adopt some
form of internal policy, and to appoint a sufficient number of
ministers, intrusted not only with the spiritual functions, but
even with the temporal direction of the Christian commonwealth.
The safety of that society, its honor, its aggrandizement, were
productive, even in the most pious minds, of a spirit of
patriotism, such as the first of the Romans had felt for the
republic, and sometimes of a similar indifference, in the use of
whatever means might probably conduce to so desirable an end.
The ambition of raising themselves or their friends to the honors
and offices of the church, was disguised by the laudable
intention of devoting to the public benefit the power and
consideration, which, for that purpose only, it became their duty
to solicit. In the exercise of their functions, they were
frequently called upon to detect the errors of heresy or the arts
of faction, to oppose the designs of perfidious brethren, to
stigmatize their characters with deserved infamy, and to expel
them from the bosom of a society whose peace and happiness they
had attempted to disturb. The ecclesiastical governors of the
Christians were taught to unite the wisdom of the serpent with
the innocence of the dove; but as the former was refined, so the
latter was insensibly corrupted, by the habits of government. If
the church as well as in the world, the persons who were placed
in any public station rendered themselves considerable by their
eloquence and firmness, by their knowledge of mankind, and by
their dexterity in business; and while they concealed from
others, and perhaps from themselves, the secret motives of their
conduct, they too frequently relapsed into all the turbulent
passions of active life, which were tinctured with an additional
degree of bitterness and obstinacy from the infusion of spiritual
zeal.
The government of the church has often been the subject, as
well as the prize, of religious contention. The hostile
disputants of Rome, of Paris, of Oxford, and of Geneva, have
alike struggled to reduce the primitive and apostolic model ^104
to the respective standards of their own policy. The few who
have pursued this inquiry with more candor and impartiality, are
of opinion, ^105 that the apostles declined the office of
legislation, and rather chose to endure some partial scandals and
divisions, than to exclude the Christians of a future age from
the liberty of varying their forms of ecclesiastical government
according to the changes of times and circumstances. The scheme
of policy, which, under their approbation, was adopted for the
use of the first century, may be discovered from the practice of
Jerusalem, of Ephesus, or of Corinth. The societies which were
instituted in the cities of the Roman empire, were united only by
the ties of faith and charity. Independence and equality formed
the basis of their internal constitution. The want of discipline
and human learning was supplied by the occasional assistance of
the prophets, ^106 who were called to that function without
distinction of age, of sex, ^* or of natural abilities, and who,
as often as they felt the divine impulse, poured forth the
effusions of the Spirit in the assembly of the faithful. But
these extraordinary gifts were frequently abused or misapplied by
the prophetic teachers. They displayed them at an improper
season, presumptuously disturbed the service of the assembly,
and, by their pride or mistaken zeal, they introduced,
particularly into the apostolic church of Corinth, a long and
melancholy train of disorders. ^107 As the institution of
prophets became useless, and even pernicious, their powers were
withdrawn, and their office abolished. The public functions of
religion were solely intrusted to the established ministers of
the church, the bishops and the presbyters; two appellations
which, in their first origin, appear to have distinguished the
same office and the same order of persons. The name of Presbyter
was expressive of their age, or rather of their gravity and
wisdom. The title of Bishop denoted their inspection over the
faith and manners of the Christians who were committed to their
pastoral care. In proportion to the respective numbers of the
faithful, a larger or smaller number of these episcopal
presbyters guided each infant congregation with equal authority
and with united counsels. ^108
[Footnote 104: The aristocratical party in France, as well as in
England, has strenuously maintained the divine origin of bishops.
But the Calvinistical presbyters were impatient of a superior;
and the Roman Pontiff refused to acknowledge an equal. See Fra
Paolo.]
[Footnote 105: In the history of the Christian hierarchy, I have,
for the most part, followed the learned and candid Mosheim.]
[Footnote 106: For the prophets of the primitive church, see
Mosheim, Dissertationes ad Hist. Eccles. pertinentes, tom. ii. p.
132 - 208.]
[Footnote *: St. Paul distinctly reproves the intrusion of
females into the prophets office. 1 Cor. xiv. 34, 35. 1 Tim.
ii. 11. - M.]
[Footnote 107: See the epistles of St. Paul, and of Clemens, to
the Corinthians.
Note: The first ministers established in the church were the
deacons, appointed at Jerusalem, seven in number; they were
charged with the distribution of the alms; even females had a
share in this employment. After the deacons came the elders or
priests, charged with the maintenance of order and decorum in the
community, and to act every where in its name. The bishops were
afterwards charged to watch over the faith and the instruction of
the disciples: the apostles themselves appointed several bishops.
Tertullian, (adv. Marium, c. v.,) Clement of Alexandria, and many
fathers of the second and third century, do not permit us to
doubt this fact. The equality of rank between these different
functionaries did not prevent their functions being, even in
their origin, distinct; they became subsequently still more so.
See Plank, Geschichte der Christ. Kirch. Verfassung., vol. i. p.
24. - G.
On this extremely obscure subject, which has been so much
perplexed by passion and interest, it is impossible to justify
any opinion without entering into long and controversial details.
It must be admitted, in opposition to Plank, that in the New
Testament, several words are sometimes indiscriminately used.
(Acts xx. v. 17, comp. with 28 Tit. i. 5 and 7. Philip. i. 1.)
But it is as clear, that as soon as we can discern the form of
church government, at a period closely bordering upon, if not
within, the apostolic age, it appears with a bishop at the head
of each community, holding some superiority over the presbyters.
Whether he was, as Gibbon from Mosheim supposes, merely an
elective head of the College of Presbyters, (for this we have, in
fact, no valid authority,) or whether his distinct functions were
established on apostolic authority, is still contested. The
universal submission to this episcopacy, in every part of the
Christian world appears to me strongly to favor the latter view.
- M.]
[Footnote 108: Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity, l. vii.]
But the most perfect equality of freedom requires the
directing hand of a superior magistrate: and the order of public
deliberations soon introduces the office of a president, invested
at least with the authority of collecting the sentiments, and of
executing the resolutions, of the assembly. A regard for the
public tranquillity, which would so frequently have been
interrupted by annual or by occasional elections, induced the
primitive Christians to constitute an honorable and perpetual
magistracy, and to choose one of the wisest and most holy among
their presbyterians to execute, during his life, the duties of
their ecclesiastical governor. It was under these circumstances
that the lofty title of Bishop began to raise itself above the
humble appellation of Presbyter; and while the latter remained
the most natural distinction for the members of every Christian
senate, the former was appropriated to the dignity of its new
president. ^109 The advantages of this episcopal form of
government, which appears to have been introduced before the end
of the first century, ^110 were so obvious, and so important for
the future greatness, as well as the present peace, of
Christianity, that it was adopted without delay by all the
societies which were already scattered over the empire, had
acquired in a very early period the sanction of antiquity, ^111
and is still revered by the most powerful churches, both of the
East and of the West, as a primitive and even as a divine
establishment. ^112 It is needless to observe, that the pious and
humble presbyters, who were first dignified with the episcopal
title, could not possess, and would probably have rejected, the
power and pomp which now encircles the tiara of the Roman
pontiff, or the mitre of a German prelate. But we may define, in
a few words, the narrow limits of their original jurisdiction,
which was chiefly of a spiritual, though in some instances of a
temporal nature. ^113 It consisted in the administration of the
sacraments and discipline of the church, the superintendency of
religious ceremonies, which imperceptibly increased in number and
variety, the consecration of ecclesiastical ministers, to whom
the bishop assigned their respective functions, the management of
the public fund, and the determination of all such differences as
the faithful were unwilling to expose before the tribunal of an
idolatrous judge. These powers, during a short period, were
exercised according to the advice of the presbyteral college, and
with the consent and approbation of the assembly of Christians.
The primitive bishops were considered only as the first of their
equals, and the honorable servants of a free people. Whenever
the episcopal chair became vacant by death, a new president was
chosen among the presbyters by the suffrages of the whole
congregation, every member of which supposed himself invested
with a sacred and sacerdotal character. ^114
[Footnote 109: See Jerome and Titum, c. i. and Epistol. 85, (in
the Benedictine edition, 101,) and the elaborate apology of
Blondel, pro sententia Hieronymi. The ancient state, as it is
described by Jerome, of the bishop and presbyters of Alexandria,
receives a remarkable confirmation from the patriarch Eutychius,
(Annal. tom. i. p. 330, Vers Pocock;) whose testimony I know not
how to reject, in spite of all the objections of the learned
Pearson in his Vindiciae Ignatianae, part i. c. 11.]
[Footnote 110: See the introduction to the Apocalypse. Bishops,
under the name of angels, were already instituted in the seven
cities of Asia. And yet the epistle of Clemens (which is
probably of as ancient a date) does not lead us to discover any
traces of episcopacy either at Corinth or Rome.]
[Footnote 111: Nulla Ecclesia sine Episcopo, has been a fact as
well as a maxim since the time of Tertullian and Irenaeus.]
[Footnote 112: After we have passed the difficulties of the first
century, we find the episcopal government universally
established, till it was interrupted by the republican genius of
the Swiss and German reformers.]
[Footnote 113: See Mosheim in the first and second centuries.
Ignatius (ad Smyrnaeos, c. 3, &c.) is fond of exalting the
episcopal dignity. Le Clerc (Hist. Eccles. p. 569) very bluntly
censures his conduct, Mosheim, with a more critical judgment, (p.
161,) suspects the purity even of the smaller epistles.]
[Footnote 114: Nonne et Laici sacerdotes sumus? Tertullian,
Exhort. ad Castitat. c. 7. As the human heart is still the same,
several of the observations which Mr. Hume has made on
Enthusiasm, (Essays, vol. i. p. 76, quarto edit.) may be applied
even to real inspiration.
Note: This expression was employed by the earlier Christian
writers in the sense used by St. Peter, 1 Ep ii. 9. It was the
sanctity and virtue not the power of priesthood, in which all
Christians were to be equally distinguished. - M.]
Such was the mild and equal constitution by which the
Christians were governed more than a hundred years after the
death of the apostles. Every society formed within itself a
separate and independent republic; and although the most distant
of these little states maintained a mutual as well as friendly
intercourse of letters and deputations, the Christian world was
not yet connected by any supreme authority or legislative
assembly. As the numbers of the faithful were gradually
multiplied, they discovered the advantages that might result from
a closer union of their interest and designs. Towards the end of
the second century, the churches of Greece and Asia adopted the
useful institutions of provincial synods, ^* and they may justly
be supposed to have borrowed the model of a representative
council from the celebrated examples of their own country, the
Amphictyons, the Achaean league, or the assemblies of the Ionian
cities. It was soon established as a custom and as a law, that
the bishops of the independent churches should meet in the
capital of the province at the stated periods of spring and
autumn. Their deliberations were assisted by the advice of a few
distinguished presbyters, and moderated by the presence of a
listening multitude. ^115 Their decrees, which were styled
Canons, regulated every important controversy of faith and
discipline; and it was natural to believe that a liberal effusion
of the Holy Spirit would be poured on the united assembly of the
delegates of the Christian people. The institution of synods was
so well suited to private ambition, and to public interest, that
in the space of a few years it was received throughout the whole
empire. A regular correspondence was established between the
provincial councils, which mutually communicated and approved
their respective proceedings; and the catholic church soon
assumed the form, and acquired the strength, of a great
foederative republic. ^116
[Footnote *: The synods were not the first means taken by the
insulated churches to enter into communion and to assume a
corporate character. The dioceses were first formed by the union
of several country churches with a church in a city: many
churches in one city uniting among themselves, or joining a more
considerable church, became metropolitan. The dioceses were not
formed before the beginning of the second century: before that
time the Christians had not established sufficient churches in
the country to stand in need of that union. It is towards the
middle of the same century that we discover the first traces of
the metropolitan constitution. (Probably the country churches
were founded in general by missionaries from those in the city,
and would preserve a natural connection with the parent church.)
- M.
The provincial synods did not commence till towards the
middle of the third century, and were not the first synods.
History gives us distinct notions of the synods, held towards the
end of the second century, at Ephesus at Jerusalem, at Pontus,
and at Rome, to put an end to the disputes which had arisen
between the Latin and Asiatic churches about the celebration of
Easter. But these synods were not subject to any regular form or
periodical return; this regularity was first established with the
provincial synods, which were formed by a union of the bishops of
a district, subject to a metropolitan. Plank, p. 90. Geschichte
der Christ. Kirch. Verfassung - G]
[Footnote 115: Acta Concil. Carthag. apud Cyprian. edit. Fell,
p. 158. This council was composed of eighty-seven bishops from
the provinces of Mauritania, Numidia, and Africa; some presbyters
and deacons assisted at the assembly; praesente plebis maxima
parte.]
[Footnote 116: Aguntur praeterea per Graecias illas, certis in
locis concilia, &c Tertullian de Jejuniis, c. 13. The African
mentions it as a recent and foreign institution. The coalition
of the Christian churches is very ably explained by Mosheim, p.
164 170.]
As the legislative authority of the particular churches was
insensibly superseded by the use of councils, the bishops
obtained by their alliance a much larger share of executive and
arbitrary power; and as soon as they were connected by a sense of
their common interest, they were enabled to attack with united
vigor, the original rights of their clergy and people. The
prelates of the third century imperceptibly changed the language
of exhortation into that of command, scattered the seeds of
future usurpations, and supplied, by scripture allegories and
declamatory rhetoric, their deficiency of force and of reason.
They exalted the unity and power of the church, as it was
represented in the Episcopal Office, of which every bishop
enjoyed an equal and undivided portion. ^117 Princes and
magistrates, it was often repeated, might boast an earthly claim
to a transitory dominion; it was the episcopal authority alone
which was derived from the Deity, and extended itself over this
and over another world. The bishops were the vicegerents of
Christ, the successors of the apostles, and the mystic
substitutes of the high priest of the Mosaic law. Their
exclusive privilege of conferring the sacerdotal character,
invaded the freedom both of clerical and of popular elections;
and if, in the administration of the church, they still consulted
the judgment of the presbyters, or the inclination of the people,
they most carefully inculcated the merit of such a voluntary
condescension. The bishops acknowledged the supreme authority
which resided in the assembly of their brethren; but in the
government of his peculiar diocese, each of them exacted from his
flock the same implicit obedience as if that favorite metaphor
had been literally just, and as if the shepherd had been of a
more exalted nature than that of his sheep. ^118 This obedience,
however, was not imposed without some efforts on one side, and
some resistance on the other. The democratical part of the
constitution was, in many places, very warmly supported by the
zealous or interested opposition of the inferior clergy. But
their patriotism received the ignominious epithets of faction and
schism; and the episcopal cause was indebted for its rapid
progress to the labors of many active prelates, who, like Cyprian
of Carthage, could reconcile the arts of the most ambitious
statesman with the Christian virtues which seem adapted to the
character of a saint and martyr. ^119
[Footnote 117: Cyprian, in his admired treatise De Unitate
Ecclesiae. p. 75 - 86]
[Footnote 118: We may appeal to the whole tenor of Cyprian's
conduct, of his doctrine, and of his epistles. Le Clerc, in a
short life of Cyprian, (Bibliotheque Universelle, tom. xii. p.
207 - 378,) has laid him open with great freedom and accuracy.]
[Footnote 119: If Novatus, Felicissimus, &c., whom the Bishop of
Carthage expelled from his church, and from Africa, were not the
most detestable monsters of wickedness, the zeal of Cyprian must
occasionally have prevailed over his veracity. For a very just
account of these obscure quarrels, see Mosheim, p. 497 - 512.]
The same causes which at first had destroyed the equality of
the presbyters introduced among the bishops a preeminence of
rank, and from thence a superiority of jurisdiction. As often as
in the spring and autumn they met in provincial synod, the
difference of personal merit and reputation was very sensibly
felt among the members of the assembly, and the multitude was
governed by the wisdom and eloquence of the few. But the order
of public proceedings required a more regular and less invidious
distinction; the office of perpetual presidents in the councils
of each province was conferred on the bishops of the principal
city; and these aspiring prelates, who soon acquired the lofty
titles of Metropolitans and Primates, secretly prepared
themselves to usurp over their episcopal brethren the same
authority which the bishops had so lately assumed above the
college of presbyters. ^120 Nor was it long before an emulation
of preeminence and power prevailed among the Metropolitans
themselves, each of them affecting to display, in the most
pompous terms, the temporal honors and advantages of the city
over which he presided; the numbers and opulence of the
Christians who were subject to their pastoral care; the saints
and martyrs who had arisen among them; and the purity with which
they preserved the tradition of the faith, as it had been
transmitted through a series of orthodox bishops from the apostle
or the apostolic disciple, to whom the foundation of their church
was ascribed. ^121 From every cause, either of a civil or of an
ecclesiastical nature, it was easy to foresee that Rome must
enjoy the respect, and would soon claim the obedience of the
provinces. The society of the faithful bore a just proportion to
the capital of the empire; and the Roman church was the greatest,
the most numerous, and, in regard to the West, the most ancient
of all the Christian establishments, many of which had received
their religion from the pious labors of her missionaries.
Instead of one apostolic founder, the utmost boast of Antioch, of
Ephesus, or of Corinth, the banks of the Tyber were supposed to
have been honored with the preaching and martyrdom of the two
most eminent among the apostles; ^122 and the bishops of Rome
very prudently claimed the inheritance of whatsoever prerogatives
were attributed either to the person or to the office of St.
Peter. ^123 The bishops of Italy and of the provinces were
disposed to allow them a primacy of order and association (such
was their very accurate expression) in the Christian aristocracy.
^124 But the power of a monarch was rejected with abhorrence, and
the aspiring genius of Rome experienced from the nations of Asia
and Africa a more vigorous resistance to her spiritual, than she
had formerly done to her temporal, dominion. The patriotic
Cyprian, who ruled with the most absolute sway the church of
Carthage and the provincial synods, opposed with resolution and
success the ambition of the Roman pontiff, artfully connected his
own cause with that of the eastern bishops, and, like Hannibal,
sought out new allies in the heart of Asia. ^125 If this Punic
war was carried on without any effusion of blood, it was owing
much less to the moderation than to the weakness of the
contending prelates. Invectives and excommunications were their
only weapons; and these, during the progress of the whole
controversy, they hurled against each other with equal fury and
devotion. The hard necessity of censuring either a pope, or a
saint and martyr, distresses the modern Catholics whenever they
are obliged to relate the particulars of a dispute in which the
champions of religion indulged such passions as seem much more
adapted to the senate or to the camp. ^126
[Footnote 120: Mosheim, p. 269, 574. Dupin, Antiquae Eccles.
Disciplin. p. 19, 20.]
[Footnote 121: Tertullian, in a distinct treatise, has pleaded
against the heretics the right of prescription, as it was held by
the apostolic churches.]
[Footnote 122: The journey of St. Peter to Rome is mentioned by
most of the ancients, (see Eusebius, ii. 25,) maintained by all
the Catholics, allowed by some Protestants, (see Pearson and
Dodwell de Success. Episcop. Roman,) but has been vigorously
attacked by Spanheim, (Miscellanes Sacra, iii. 3.) According to
Father Hardouin, the monks of the thirteenth century, who
composed the Aeneid, represented St. Peter under the allegorical
character of the Trojan hero.
Note: It is quite clear that, strictly speaking, the church
of Rome was not founded by either of these apostles. St. Paul's
Epistle to the Romans proves undeniably the flourishing state of
the church before his visit to the city; and many Roman Catholic
writers have given up the impracticable task of reconciling with
chronology any visit of St. Peter to Rome before the end of the
reign of Claudius, or the beginning of that of Nero. - M.]
[Footnote 123: It is in French only that the famous allusion to
St. Peter's name is exact. Tu es Pierre, et sur cette pierre. -
The same is imperfect in Greek, Latin, Italian, &c., and totally
unintelligible in our Tentonic languages.
Note: It is exact in Syro-Chaldaic, the language in which it
was spoken by Jesus Christ. (St. Matt. xvi. 17.) Peter was
called Cephas; and cepha signifies base, foundation, rock - G.]
[Footnote 124: Irenaeus adv. Haereses, iii. 3. Tertullian de
Praescription. c. 36, and Cyprian, Epistol. 27, 55, 71, 75. Le
Clere (Hist. Eccles. p. 764) and Mosheim (p. 258, 578) labor in
the interpretation of these passages. But the loose and
rhetorical style of the fathers often appears favorable to the
pretensions of Rome.]
[Footnote 125: See the sharp epistle from Firmilianus, bishop of
Caesarea, to Stephen, bishop of Rome, ap. Cyprian, Epistol. 75.]
[Footnote 126: Concerning this dispute of the rebaptism of
heretics, see the epistles of Cyprian, and the seventh book of
Eusebius.]
The progress of the ecclesiastical authority gave birth to
the memorable distinction of the laity and of the clergy, which
had been unknown to the Greeks and Romans. ^127 The former of
these appellations comprehended the body of the Christian people;
the latter, according to the signification of the word, was
appropriated to the chosen portion that had been set apart for
the service of religion; a celebrated order of men, which has
furnished the most important, though not always the most
edifying, subjects for modern history. Their mutual hostilities
sometimes disturbed the peace of the infant church, but their
zeal and activity were united in the common cause, and the love
of power, which (under the most artful disguises) could insinuate
itself into the breasts of bishops and martyrs, animated them to
increase the number of their subjects, and to enlarge the limits
of the Christian empire. They were destitute of any temporal
force, and they were for a long time discouraged and oppressed,
rather than assisted, by the civil magistrate; but they had
acquired, and they employed within their own society, the two
most efficacious instruments of government, rewards and
punishments; the former derived from the pious liberality, the
latter from the devout apprehensions, of the faithful.
[Footnote 127: For the origin of these words, see Mosheim, p.
141. Spanheim, Hist. Ecclesiast. p. 633. The distinction of
Clerus and Iaicus was established before the time of Tertullian.]
Chapter XV: Progress Of The Christian Religion.
Part VII
I. The community of goods, which had so agreeably amused
the imagination of Plato, ^128 and which subsisted in some degree
among the austere sect of the Essenians, ^129 was adopted for a
short time in the primitive church. The fervor of the first
proselytes prompted them to sell those worldly possessions, which
they despised, to lay the price of them at the feet of the
apostles, and to content themselves with receiving an equal share
out of the general distribution. ^130 The progress of the
Christian religion relaxed, and gradually abolished, this
generous institution, which, in hands less pure than those of the
apostles, would too soon have been corrupted and abused by the
returning selfishness of human nature; and the converts who
embraced the new religion were permitted to retain the possession
of their patrimony, to receive legacies and inheritances, and to
increase their separate property by all the lawful means of trade
and industry. Instead of an absolute sacrifice, a moderate
proportion was accepted by the ministers of the gospel; and in
their weekly or monthly assemblies, every believer, according to
the exigency of the occasion, and the measure of his wealth and
piety, presented his voluntary offering for the use of the common
fund. ^131 Nothing, however inconsiderable, was refused; but it
was diligently inculcated; that, in the article of Tithes, the
Mosaic law was still of divine obligation; and that since the
Jews, under a less perfect discipline, had been commanded to pay
a tenth part of all that they possessed, it would become the
disciples of Christ to distinguish themselves by a superior
degree of liberality, ^132 and to acquire some merit by resigning
a superfluous treasure, which must so soon be annihilated with
the world itself. ^133 It is almost unnecessary to observe, that
the revenue of each particular church, which was of so uncertain
and fluctuating a nature, must have varied with the poverty or
the opulence of the faithful, as they were dispersed in obscure
villages, or collected in the great cities of the empire. In the
time of the emperor Decius, it was the opinion of the
magistrates, that the Christians of Rome were possessed of very
considerable wealth; that vessels of gold and silver were used in
their religious worship, and that many among their proselytes had
sold their lands and houses to increase the public riches of the
sect, at the expense, indeed, of their unfortunate children, who
found themselves beggars, because their parents had been saints.
^134 We should listen with distrust to the suspicions of
strangers and enemies: on this occasion, however, they receive a
very specious and probable color from the two following
circumstances, the only ones that have reached our knowledge,
which define any precise sums, or convey any distinct idea.
Almost at the same period, the bishop of Carthage, from a society
less opulent than that of Rome, collected a hundred thousand
sesterces, (above eight hundred and fifty pounds sterling,) on a
sudden call of charity to redeem the brethren of Numidia, who had
been carried away captives by the barbarians of the desert. ^135
About a hundred years before the reign of Decius, the Roman
church had received, in a single donation, the sum of two hundred
thousand sesterces from a stranger of Pontus, who proposed to fix
his residence in the capital. ^136 These oblations, for the most
part, were made in money; nor was the society of Christians
either desirous or capable of acquiring, to any considerable
degree, the encumbrance of landed property. It had been provided
by several laws, which were enacted with the same design as our
statutes of mortmain, that no real estates should be given or
bequeathed to any corporate body, without either a special
privilege or a particular dispensation from the emperor or from
the senate; ^137 who were seldom disposed to grant them in favor
of a sect, at first the object of their contempt, and at last of
their fears and jealousy. A transaction, however, is related
under the reign of Alexander Severus, which discovers that the
restraint was sometimes eluded or suspended, and that the
Christians were permitted to claim and to possess lands within
the limits of Rome itself. ^138 The progress of Christianity, and
the civil confusion of the empire, contributed to relax the
severity of the laws; and before the close of the third century
many considerable estates were bestowed on the opulent churches
of Rome, Milan, Carthage, Antioch, Alexandria, and the other
great cities of Italy and the provinces.
[Footnote 128: The community instituted by Plato is more perfect
than that which Sir Thomas More had imagined for his Utopia. The
community of women, and that of temporal goods, may be considered
as inseparable parts of the same system.]
[Footnote 129: Joseph. Antiquitat. xviii. 2. Philo, de Vit.
Contemplativ.]
[Footnote 130: See the Acts of the Apostles, c. 2, 4, 5, with
Grotius's Commentary. Mosheim, in a particular dissertation,
attacks the common opinion with very inconclusive arguments.
Note: This is not the general judgment on Mosheim's learned
dissertation. There is no trace in the latter part of the New
Testament of this community of goods, and many distinct proofs of
the contrary. All exhortations to almsgiving would have been
unmeaning if property had been in common - M.]
[Footnote 131: Justin Martyr, Apolog. Major, c. 89. Tertullian,
Apolog. c. 39.]
[Footnote 132: Irenaeus ad Haeres. l. iv. c. 27, 34. Origen in
Num. Hom. ii Cyprian de Unitat. Eccles. Constitut. Apostol. l.
ii. c. 34, 35, with the notes of Cotelerius. The Constitutions
introduce this divine precept, by declaring that priests are as
much above kings as the soul is above the body. Among the
tithable articles, they enumerate corn, wine, oil, and wool. On
this interesting subject, consult Prideaux's History of Tithes,
and Fra Paolo delle Materie Beneficiarie; two writers of a very
different character.]
[Footnote 133: The same opinion which prevailed about the year
one thousand, was productive of the same effects. Most of the
Donations express their motive, "appropinquante mundi fine." See
Mosheim's General History of the Church, vol. i. p. 457.]
[Footnote 134: Tum summa cura est fratribus
(Ut sermo testatur loquax.)
Offerre, fundis venditis
Sestertiorum millia.
Addicta avorum praedia
Foedis sub auctionibus,
Successor exheres gemit
Sanctis egens Parentibus.]
Haec occuluntur abditis
Ecclesiarum in angulis.
Et summa pietas creditur
Nudare dulces liberos.
Prudent. Hymn 2.
The subsequent conduct of the deacon Laurence only proves how
proper a use was made of the wealth of the Roman church; it was
undoubtedly very considerable; but Fra Paolo (c. 3) appears to
exaggerate, when he supposes that the successors of Commodus were
urged to persecute the Christians by their own avarice, or that
of their Praetorian praefects.]
[Footnote 135: Cyprian, Epistol. 62.]
[Footnote 136: Tertullian de Praescriptione, c. 30.]
[Footnote 137: Diocletian gave a rescript, which is only a
declaration of the old law; "Collegium, si nullo speciali
privilegio subnixum sit, haereditatem capere non posse, dubium
non est." Fra Paolo (c. 4) thinks that these regulations had been
much neglected since the reign of Valerian.]
[Footnote 138: Hist. August. p. 131. The ground had been public;
and was row disputed between the society of Christians and that
of butchers.
Note *: Carponarii, rather victuallers. - M.]
The bishop was the natural steward of the church; the public
stock was intrusted to his care without account or control; the
presbyters were confined to their spiritual functions, and the
more dependent order of the deacons was solely employed in the
management and distribution of the ecclesiastical revenue. ^139
If we may give credit to the vehement declamations of Cyprian,
there were too many among his African brethren, who, in the
execution of their charge, violated every precept, not only of
evangelical perfection, but even of moral virtue. By some of
these unfaithful stewards the riches of the church were lavished
in sensual pleasures; by others they were perverted to the
purposes of private gain, of fraudulent purchases, and of
rapacious usury. ^140 But as long as the contributions of the
Christian people were free and unconstrained, the abuse of their
confidence could not be very frequent, and the general uses to
which their liberality was applied reflected honor on the
religious society. A decent portion was reserved for the
maintenance of the bishop and his clergy; a sufficient sum was
allotted for the expenses of the public worship, of which the
feasts of love, the agapoe, as they were called, constituted a
very pleasing part. The whole remainder was the sacred patrimony
of the poor. According to the discretion of the bishop, it was
distributed to support widows and orphans, the lame, the sick,
and the aged of the community; to comfort strangers and pilgrims,
and to alleviate the misfortunes of prisoners and captives, more
especially when their sufferings had been occasioned by their
firm attachment to the cause of religion. ^141 A generous
intercourse of charity united the most distant provinces, and the
smaller congregations were cheerfully assisted by the alms of
their more opulent brethren. ^142 Such an institution, which paid
less regard to the merit than to the distress of the object, very
materially conduced to the progress of Christianity. The Pagans,
who were actuated by a sense of humanity, while they derided the
doctrines, acknowledged the benevolence, of the new sect. ^143
The prospect of immediate relief and of future protection allured
into its hospitable bosom many of those unhappy persons whom the
neglect of the world would have abandoned to the miseries of
want, of sickness, and of old age. There is some reason likewise
to believe that great numbers of infants, who, according to the
inhuman practice of the times, had been exposed by their parents,
were frequently rescued from death, baptized, educated, and
maintained by the piety of the Christians, and at the expense of
the public treasure. ^144
[Footnote 139: Constitut. Apostol. ii. 35.]
[Footnote 140: Cyprian de Lapsis, p. 89. Epistol. 65. The
charge is confirmed by the 19th and 20th canon of the council of
Illiberis.]
[Footnote 141: See the apologies of Justin, Tertullian, &c.]
[Footnote 142: The wealth and liberality of the Romans to their
most distant brethren is gratefully celebrated by Dionysius of
Corinth, ap. Euseb. l. iv. c. 23.]
[Footnote 143: See Lucian iu Peregrin. Julian (Epist. 49) seems
mortified that the Christian charity maintains not only their
own, but likewise the heathen poor.]
[Footnote 144: Such, at least, has been the laudable conduct of
more modern missionaries, under the same circumstances. Above
three thousand new-born infants are annually exposed in the
streets of Pekin. See Le Comte, Memoires sur la Chine, and the
Recherches sur les Chinois et les Egyptians, tom. i. p. 61.]
II. It is the undoubted right of every society to exclude
from its communion and benefits such among its members as reject
or violate those regulations which have been established by
general consent. In the exercise of this power, the censures of
the Christian church were chiefly directed against scandalous
sinners, and particularly those who were guilty of murder, of
fraud, or of incontinence; against the authors or the followers
of any heretical opinions which had been condemned by the
judgment of the episcopal order; and against those unhappy
persons, who, whether from choice or compulsion, had polluted
themselves after their baptism by any act of idolatrous worship.
The consequences of excommunication were of a temporal as well as
a spiritual nature. The Christian against whom it was
pronounced, was deprived of any part in the oblations of the
faithful. The ties both of religious and of private friendship
were dissolved: he found himself a profane object of abhorrence
to the persons whom he the most esteemed, or by whom he had been
the most tenderly beloved; and as far as an expulsion from a
respectable society could imprint on his character a mark of
disgrace, he was shunned or suspected by the generality of
mankind. The situation of these unfortunate exiles was in itself
very painful and melancholy; but, as it usually happens, their
apprehensions far exceeded their sufferings. The benefits of the
Christian communion were those of eternal life; nor could they
erase from their minds the awful opinion, that to those
ecclesiastical governors by whom they were condemned, the Deity
had committed the keys of Hell and of Paradise. The heretics,
indeed, who might be supported by the consciousness of their
intentions, and by the flattering hope that they alone had
discovered the true path of salvation, endeavored to regain, in
their separate assemblies, those comforts, temporal as well as
spiritual, which they no longer derived from the great society of
Christians. But almost all those who had reluctantly yielded to
the power of vice or idolatry were sensible of their fallen
condition, and anxiously desirous of being restored to the
benefits of the Christian communion.
With regard to the treatment of these penitents, two
opposite opinions, the one of justice, the other of mercy,
divided the primitive church. The more rigid and inflexible
casuists refused them forever, and without exception, the meanest
place in the holy community, which they had disgraced or
deserted; and leaving them to the remorse of a guilty conscience,
indulged them only with a faint ray of hope that the contrition
of their life and death might possibly be accepted by the Supreme
Being. ^145 A milder sentiment was embraced in practice as well
as in theory, by the purest and most respectable of the Christian
churches. ^146 The gates of reconciliation and of heaven were
seldom shut against the returning penitent; but a severe and
solemn form of discipline was instituted, which, while it served
to expiate his crime, might powerfully deter the spectators from
the imitation of his example. Humbled by a public confession,
emaciated by fasting and clothed in sackcloth, the penitent lay
prostrate at the door of the assembly, imploring with tears the
pardon of his offences, and soliciting the prayers of the
faithful. ^147 If the fault was of a very heinous nature, whole
years of penance were esteemed an inadequate satisfaction to the
divine justice; and it was always by slow and painful gradations
that the sinner, the heretic, or the apostate, was readmitted
into the bosom of the church. A sentence of perpetual
excommunication was, however, reserved for some crimes of an
extraordinary magnitude, and particularly for the inexcusable
relapses of those penitents who had already experienced and
abused the clemency of their ecclesiastical superiors. According
to the circumstances or the number of the guilty, the exercise of
the Christian discipline was varied by the discretion of the
bishops. The councils of Ancyra and Illiberis were held about
the same time, the one in Galatia, the other in Spain; but their
respective canons, which are still extant, seem to breathe a very
different spirit. The Galatian, who after his baptism had
repeatedly sacrificed to idols, might obtain his pardon by a
penance of seven years; and if he had seduced others to imitate
his example, only three years more were added to the term of his
exile. But the unhappy Spaniard, who had committed the same
offence, was deprived of the hope of reconciliation, even in the
article of death; and his idolatry was placed at the head of a
list of seventeen other crimes, against which a sentence no less
terrible was pronounced. Among these we may distinguish the
inexpiable guilt of calumniating a bishop, a presbyter, or even a
deacon. ^148
[Footnote 145: The Montanists and the Novatians, who adhered to
this opinion with the greatest rigor and obstinacy, found
themselves at last in the number of excommunicated heretics. See
the learned and copious Mosheim, Secul. ii. and iii.]
[Footnote 146: Dionysius ap. Euseb. iv. 23. Cyprian, de Lapsis.]
[Footnote 147: Cave's Primitive Christianity, part iii. c. 5.
The admirers of antiquity regret the loss of this public
penance.]
[Footnote 148: See in Dupin, Bibliotheque Ecclesiastique, tom.
ii. p. 304 - 313, a short but rational exposition of the canons
of those councils, which were assembled in the first moments of
tranquillity, after the persecution of Diocletian. This
persecution had been much less severely felt in Spain than in
Galatia; a difference which may, in some measure account for the
contrast of their regulations.]
The well-tempered mixture of liberality and rigor, the
judicious dispensation of rewards and punishments, according to
the maxims of policy as well as justice, constituted the human
strength of the church. The Bishops, whose paternal care
extended itself to the government of both worlds, were sensible
of the importance of these prerogatives; and covering their
ambition with the fair pretence of the love of order, they were
jealous of any rival in the exercise of a discipline so necessary
to prevent the desertion of those troops which had enlisted
themselves under the banner of the cross, and whose numbers every
day became more considerable. From the imperious declamations of
Cyprian, we should naturally conclude that the doctrines of
excommunication and penance formed the most essential part of
religion; and that it was much less dangerous for the disciples
of Christ to neglect the observance of the moral duties, than to
despise the censures and authority of their bishops. Sometimes
we might imagine that we were listening to the voice of Moses,
when he commanded the earth to open, and to swallow up, in
consuming flames, the rebellious race which refused obedience to
the priesthood of Aaron; and we should sometimes suppose that we
hear a Roman consul asserting the majesty of the republic, and
declaring his inflexible resolution to enforce the rigor of the
laws. ^* "If such irregularities are suffered with impunity," (it
is thus that the bishop of Carthage chides the lenity of his
colleague,) "if such irregularities are suffered, there is an end
of Episcopal Vigor; ^149 an end of the sublime and divine power
of governing the Church, an end of Christianity itself." Cyprian
had renounced those temporal honors, which it is probable he
would never have obtained; ^* but the acquisition of such
absolute command over the consciences and understanding of a
congregation, however obscure or despised by the world, is more
truly grateful to the pride of the human heart, than the
possession of the most despotic power, imposed by arms and
conquest on a reluctant people.
[Footnote *: Gibbon has been accused of injustice to the
character of Cyprian, as exalting the "censures and authority of
the church above the observance of the moral duties."
Felicissimus had been condemned by a synod of bishops, (non
tantum mea, sed plurimorum coepiscorum, sententia condemnatum,)
on the charge not only of schism, but of embezzlement of public
money, the debauching of virgins, and frequent acts of adultery.
His violent menaces had extorted his readmission into the church,
against which Cyprian protests with much vehemence: ne pecuniae
commissae sibi fraudator, ne stuprator virginum, ne matrimoniorum
multorum depopulator et corruptor, ultra adhuc sponsam Christi
incorruptam praesentiae suae dedecore, et impudica atque incesta
contagione, violaret. See Chelsum's Remarks, p. 134. If these
charges against Felicissimus were true, they were something more
than "irregularities," A Roman censor would have been a fairer
subject of comparison than a consul. On the other hand, it must
be admitted that the charge of adultery deepens very rapidly as
the controversy becomes more violent. It is first represented as
a single act, recently detected, and which men of character were
prepared to substantiate: adulterii etiam crimen accedit. quod
patres nostri graves viri deprehendisse se nuntiaverunt, et
probaturos se asseverarunt. Epist. xxxviii. The heretic has now
darkened into a man of notorious and general profligacy. Nor can
it be denied that of the whole long epistle, very far the larger
and the more passionate part dwells on the breach of
ecclesiastical unity rather than on the violation of Christian
holiness. - M.]
[Footnote 149: Cyprian Epist. 69.]
[Footnote *: This supposition appears unfounded: the birth and
the talents of Cyprian might make us presume the contrary.
Thascius Caecilius Cyprianus, Carthaginensis, artis oratoriae
professione clarus, magnam sibi gloriam, opes, honores
acquisivit, epularibus caenis et largis dapibus assuetus,
pretiosa veste conspicuus, auro atque purpura fulgens, fascibus
oblectatus et honoribus, stipatus clientium cuneis, frequentiore
comitatu officii agminis honestatus, ut ipse de se loquitur in
Epistola ad Donatum. See De Cave, Hist. Liter. b. i. p. 87. - G.
Cave has rather embellished Cyprian's language. - M.]
In the course of this important, though perhaps tedious
inquiry, I have attempted to display the secondary causes which
so efficaciously assisted the truth of the Christian religion.
If among these causes we have discovered any artificial
ornaments, any accidental circumstances, or any mixture of error
and passion, it cannot appear surprising that mankind should be
the most sensibly affected by such motives as were suited to
their imperfect nature. It was by the aid of these causes,
exclusive zeal, the immediate expectation of another world, the
claim of miracles, the practice of rigid virtue, and the
constitution of the primitive church, that Christianity spread
itself with so much success in the Roman empire. To the first of
these the Christians were indebted for their invincible valor,
which disdained to capitulate with the enemy whom they were
resolved to vanquish. The three succeeding causes supplied their
valor with the most formidable arms. The last of these causes
united their courage, directed their arms, and gave their efforts
that irresistible weight, which even a small band of well-trained
and intrepid volunteers has so often possessed over an
undisciplined multitude, ignorant of the subject, and careless of
the event of the war. In the various religions of Polytheism,
some wandering fanatics of Egypt and Syria, who addressed
themselves to the credulous superstition of the populace, were
perhaps the only order of priests ^150 that derived their whole
support and credit from their sacerdotal profession, and were
very deeply affected by a personal concern for the safety or
prosperity of their tutelar deities. The ministers of
Polytheism, both in Rome and in the provinces, were, for the most
part, men of a noble birth, and of an affluent fortune, who
received, as an honorable distinction, the care of a celebrated
temple, or of a public sacrifice, exhibited, very frequently at
their own expense, the sacred games, ^151 and with cold
indifference performed the ancient rites, according to the laws
and fashion of their country. As they were engaged in the
ordinary occupations of life, their zeal and devotion were seldom
animated by a sense of interest, or by the habits of an
ecclesiastical character. Confined to their respective temples
and cities, they remained without any connection of discipline or
government; and whilst they acknowledged the supreme jurisdiction
of the senate, of the college of pontiffs, and of the emperor,
those civil magistrates contented themselves with the easy task
of maintaining in peace and dignity the general worship of
mankind. We have already seen how various, how loose, and how
uncertain were the religious sentiments of Polytheists. They
were abandoned, almost without control, to the natural workings
of a superstitious fancy. The accidental circumstances of their
life and situation determined the object as well as the degree of
their devotion; and as long as their adoration was successively
prostituted to a thousand deities, it was scarcely possible that
their hearts could be susceptible of a very sincere or lively
passion for any of them.
[Footnote 150: The arts, the manners, and the vices of the
priests of the Syrian goddess are very humorously described by
Apuleius, in the eighth book of his Metamorphosis.]
[Footnote 151: The office of Asiarch was of this nature, and it
is frequently mentioned in Aristides, the Inscriptions, &c. It
was annual and elective. None but the vainest citizens could
desire the honor; none but the most wealthy could support the
expense. See, in the Patres Apostol. tom. ii. p. 200, with how
much indifference Philip the Asiarch conducted himself in the
martyrdom of Polycarp. There were likewise Bithyniarchs,
Lyciarchs, &c.]
When Christianity appeared in the world, even these faint
and imperfect impressions had lost much of their original power.
Human reason, which by its unassisted strength is incapable of
perceiving the mysteries of faith, had already obtained an easy
triumph over the folly of Paganism; and when Tertullian or
Lactantius employ their labors in exposing its falsehood and
extravagance, they are obliged to transcribe the eloquence of
Cicero or the wit of Lucian. The contagion of these sceptical
writings had been diffused far beyond the number of their
readers. The fashion of incredulity was communicated from the
philosopher to the man of pleasure or business, from the noble to
the plebeian, and from the master to the menial slave who waited
at his table, and who eagerly listened to the freedom of his
conversation. On public occasions the philosophic part of mankind
affected to treat with respect and decency the religious
institutions of their country; but their secret contempt
penetrated through the thin and awkward disguise; and even the
people, when they discovered that their deities were rejected and
derided by those whose rank or understanding they were accustomed
to reverence, were filled with doubts and apprehensions
concerning the truth of those doctrines, to which they had
yielded the most implicit belief. The decline of ancient
prejudice exposed a very numerous portion of human kind to the
danger of a painful and comfortless situation. A state of
scepticism and suspense may amuse a few inquisitive minds. But
the practice of superstition is so congenial to the multitude,
that if they are forcibly awakened, they still regret the loss of
their pleasing vision. Their love of the marvellous and
supernatural, their curiosity with regard to future events, and
their strong propensity to extend their hopes and fears beyond
the limits of the visible world, were the principal causes which
favored the establishment of Polytheism. So urgent on the vulgar
is the necessity of believing, that the fall of any system of
mythology will most probably be succeeded by the introduction of
some other mode of superstition. Some deities of a more recent
and fashionable cast might soon have occupied the deserted
temples of Jupiter and Apollo, if, in the decisive moment, the
wisdom of Providence had not interposed a genuine revelation,
fitted to inspire the most rational esteem and conviction,
whilst, at the same time, it was adorned with all that could
attract the curiosity, the wonder, and the veneration of the
people. In their actual disposition, as many were almost
disengaged from their artificial prejudices, but equally
susceptible and desirous of a devout attachment; an object much
less deserving would have been sufficient to fill the vacant
place in their hearts, and to gratify the uncertain eagerness of
their passions. Those who are inclined to pursue this
reflection, instead of viewing with astonishment the rapid
progress of Christianity, will perhaps be surprised that its
success was not still more rapid and still more universal.
It has been observed, with truth as well as propriety, that
the conquests of Rome prepared and facilitated those of
Christianity. In the second chapter of this work we have
attempted to explain in what manner the most civilized provinces
of Europe, Asia, and Africa were united under the dominion of one
sovereign, and gradually connected by the most intimate ties of
laws, of manners, and of language. The Jews of Palestine, who
had fondly expected a temporal deliverer, gave so cold a
reception to the miracles of the divine prophet, that it was
found unnecessary to publish, or at least to preserve, any Hebrew
gospel. ^152 The authentic histories of the actions of Christ
were composed in the Greek language, at a considerable distance
from Jerusalem, and after the Gentile converts were grown
extremely numerous. ^153 As soon as those histories were
translated into the Latin tongue, they were perfectly
intelligible to all the subjects of Rome, excepting only to the
peasants of Syria and Egypt, for whose benefit particular
versions were afterwards made. The public highways, which had
been constructed for the use of the legions, opened an easy
passage for the Christian missionaries from Damascus to Corinth,
and from Italy to the extremity of Spain or Britain; nor did
those spiritual conquerors encounter any of the obstacles which
usually retard or prevent the introduction of a foreign religion
into a distant country. There is the strongest reason to
believe, that before the reigns of Diocletian and Constantine,
the faith of Christ had been preached in every province, and in
all the great cities of the empire; but the foundation of the
several congregations, the numbers of the faithful who composed
them, and their proportion to the unbelieving multitude, are now
buried in obscurity, or disguised by fiction and declamation.
Such imperfect circumstances, however, as have reached our
knowledge concerning the increase of the Christian name in Asia
and Greece, in Egypt, in Italy, and in the West, we shall now
proceed to relate, without neglecting the real or imaginary
acquisitions which lay beyond the frontiers of the Roman empire.
[Footnote 152: The modern critics are not disposed to believe
what the fathers almost unanimously assert, that St. Matthew
composed a Hebrew gospel, of which only the Greek translation is
extant. It seems, however, dangerous to reject their testimony.
Note: Strong reasons appear to confirm this testimony.
Papias, contemporary of the Apostle St. John, says positively
that Matthew had written the discourses of Jesus Christ in
Hebrew, and that each interpreted them as he could. This Hebrew
was the Syro-Chaldaic dialect, then in use at Jerusalem: Origen,
Irenaeus, Eusebius, Jerome, Epiphanius, confirm this statement.
Jesus Christ preached himself in Syro-Chaldaic, as is proved by
many words which he used, and which the Evangelists have taken
the pains to translate. St. Paul, addressing the Jews, used the
same language: Acts xxi. 40, xxii. 2, xxvi. 14. The opinions of
some critics prove nothing against such undeniable testimonies.
Moreover, their principal objection is, that St. Matthew quotes
the Old Testament according to the Greek version of the LXX.,
which is inaccurate; for of ten quotations, found in his Gospel,
seven are evidently taken from the Hebrew text; the threo others
offer little that differ: moreover, the latter are not literal
quotations. St. Jerome says positively, that, according to a
copy which he had seen in the library of Caesarea, the quotations
were made in Hebrew (in Catal.) More modern critics, among others
Michaelis, do not entertain a doubt on the subject. The Greek
version appears to have been made in the time of the apostles, as
St. Jerome and St. Augustus affirm, perhaps by one of them. - G.
Among modern critics, Dr. Hug has asserted the Greek
original of St. Matthew, but the general opinion of the most
learned biblical writer, supports the view of M. Guizot. - M.]
[Footnote 153: Under the reigns of Nero and Domitian, and in the
cities of Alexandria, Antioch, Rome, and Ephesus. See Mill.
Prolegomena ad Nov. Testament, and Dr. Lardner's fair and
extensive collection, vol. xv.
Note: This question has, it is well known, been most
elaborately discussed since the time of Gibbon. The Preface to
the Translation of Schleier Macher's Version of St. Luke contains
a very able summary of the various theories. - M.]
Chapter XV: Progress Of The Christian Religion.
Part VIII.
The rich provinces that extend from the Euphrates to the
Ionian Sea, were the principal theatre on which the apostle of
the Gentiles displayed his zeal and piety. The seeds of the
gospel, which he had scattered in a fertile soil, were diligently
cultivated by his disciples; and it should seem that, during the
two first centuries, the most considerable body of Christians was
contained within those limits. Among the societies which were
instituted in Syria, none were more ancient or more illustrious
than those of Damascus, of Berea or Aleppo, and of Antioch. The
prophetic introduction of the Apocalypse has described and
immortalized the seven churches of Asia; Ephesus, Smyrna,
Pergamus, Thyatira, ^154 Sardes, Laodicea and Philadelphia; and
their colonies were soon diffused over that populous country. In
a very early period, the islands of Cyprus and Crete, the
provinces of Thrace and Macedonia, gave a favorable reception to
the new religion; and Christian republics were soon founded in
the cities of Corinth, of Sparta, and of Athens. ^155 The
antiquity of the Greek and Asiatic churches allowed a sufficient
space of time for their increase and multiplication; and even the
swarms of Gnostics and other heretics serve to display the
flourishing condition of the orthodox church, since the
appellation of hereties has always been applied to the less
numerous party. To these domestic testimonies we may add the
confession, the complaints, and the apprehensions of the Gentiles
themselves. From the writings of Lucian, a philosopher who had
studied mankind, and who describes their manners in the most
lively colors, we may learn that, under the reign of Commodus,
his native country of Pontus was filled with Epicureans and
Christians. ^156 Within fourscore years after the death of
Christ, ^157 the humane Pliny laments the magnitude of the evil
which he vainly attempted to eradicate. In his very curious
epistle to the emperor Trajan, he affirms, that the temples were
almost deserted, that the sacred victims scarcely found any
purchasers, and that the superstition had not only infected the
cities, but had even spread itself into the villages and the open
country of Pontus and Bithynia. ^158
[Footnote 154: The Alogians (Epiphanius de Haeres. 51) disputed
the genuineness of the Apocalypse, because the church of Thyatira
was not yet founded. Epiphanius, who allows the fact, extricates
himself from the difficulty by ingeniously supposing that St.
John wrote in the spirit of prophecy. See Abauzit, Discours sur
l'Apocalypse.]
[Footnote 155: The epistles of Ignatius and Dionysius (ap. Euseb.
iv. 23) point out many churches in Asia and Greece. That of
Athens seems to have been one of the least flourishing.]
[Footnote 156: Lucian in Alexandro, c. 25. Christianity however,
must have been very unequally diffused over Pontus; since, in the
middle of the third century, there was no more than seventeen
believers in the extensive diocese of Neo-Caesarea. See M. de
Tillemont, Memoires Ecclesiast. tom. iv. p. 675, from Basil and
Gregory of Nyssa, who were themselves natives of Cappadocia.
Note: Gibbon forgot the conclusion of this story, that
Gregory left only seventeen heathens in his diocese. The
antithesis is suspicious, and both numbers may have been chosen
to magnify the spiritual fame of the wonder-worker. - M.]
[Footnote 157: According to the ancients, Jesus Christ suffered
under the consulship of the two Gemini, in the year 29 of our
present aera. Pliny was sent into Bithynia (according to Pagi)
in the year 110.]
[Footnote 158: Plin. Epist. x. 97.]
Without descending into a minute scrutiny of the expressions
or of the motives of those writers who either celebrate or lament
the progress of Christianity in the East, it may in general be
observed, that none of them have left us any grounds from whence
a just estimate might be formed of the real numbers of the
faithful in those provinces. One circumstance, however, has been
fortunately preserved, which seems to cast a more distinct light
on this obscure but interesting subject. Under the reign of
Theodosius, after Christianity had enjoyed, during more than
sixty years, the sunshine of Imperial favor, the ancient and
illustrious church of Antioch consisted of one hundred thousand
persons, three thousand of whom were supported out of the public
oblations. ^159 The splendor and dignity of the queen of the
East, the acknowledged populousness of Caesarea, Seleucia, and
Alexandria, and the destruction of two hundred and fifty thousand
souls in the earthquake which afflicted Antioch under the elder
Justin, ^160 are so many convincing proofs that the whole number
of its inhabitants was not less than half a million, and that the
Christians, however multiplied by zeal and power, did not exceed
a fifth part of that great city. How different a proportion must
we adopt when we compare the persecuted with the triumphant
church, the West with the East, remote villages with populous
towns, and countries recently converted to the faith with the
place where the believers first received the appellation of
Christians! It must not, however, be dissembled, that, in
another passage, Chrysostom, to whom we are indebted for this
useful information, computes the multitude of the faithful as
even superior to that of the Jews and Pagans. ^161 But the
solution of this apparent difficulty is easy and obvious. The
eloquent preacher draws a parallel between the civil and the
ecclesiastical constitution of Antioch; between the list of
Christians who had acquired heaven by baptism, and the list of
citizens who had a right to share the public liberality. Slaves,
strangers, and infants were comprised in the former; they were
excluded from the latter.
[Footnote 159: Chrysostom. Opera, tom. vii. p. 658, 810, [edit.
Savil. ii. 422, 329.]
[Footnote 160: John Malala, tom. ii. p. 144. He draws the same
conclusion with regard to the populousness of antioch.]
[Footnote 161: Chrysostom. tom. i. p. 592. I am indebted for
these passages, though not for my inference, to the learned Dr.
Lardner. Credibility of the Gospel of History, vol. xii. p. 370.
Note: The statements of Chrysostom with regard to the
population of Antioch, whatever may be their accuracy, are
perfectly consistent. In one passage he reckons the population
at 200,000. In a second the Christians at 100,000. In a third
he states that the Christians formed more than half the
population. Gibbon has neglected to notice the first passage,
and has drawn by estimate of the population of Antioch from other
sources. The 8000 maintained by alms were widows and virgins
alone - M.]
The extensive commerce of Alexandria, and its proximity to
Palestine, gave an easy entrance to the new religion. It was at
first embraced by great numbers of the Theraputae, or Essenians,
of the Lake Mareotis, a Jewish sect which had abated much of its
reverence for the Mosaic ceremonies. The austere life of the
Essenians, their fasts and excommunications, the community of
goods, the love of celibacy, their zeal for martyrdom, and the
warmth though not the purity of their faith, already offered a
very lively image of the primitive discipline. ^162 It was in the
school of Alexandria that the Christian theology appears to have
assumed a regular and scientific form; and when Hadrian visited
Egypt, he found a church composed of Jews and of Greeks,
sufficiently important to attract the notice of that inquisitive
prince. ^163 But the progress of Christianity was for a long time
confined within the limits of a single city, which was itself a
foreign colony, and till the close of the second century the
predecessors of Demetrius were the only prelates of the Egyptian
church. Three bishops were consecrated by the hands of
Demetrius, and the number was increased to twenty by his
successor Heraclas. ^164 The body of the natives, a people
distinguished by a sullen inflexibility of temper, ^165
entertained the new doctrine with coldness and reluctance; and
even in the time of Origen, it was rare to meet with an Egyptian
who had surmounted his early prejudices in favor of the sacred
animals of his country. ^166 As soon, indeed, as Christianity
ascended the throne, the zeal of those barbarians obeyed the
prevailing impulsion; the cities of Egypt were filled with
bishops, and the deserts of Thebais swarmed with hermits.
[Footnote 162: Basnage, Histoire des Juifs, l. 2, c. 20, 21, 22,
23, has examined with the most critical accuracy the curious
treatise of Philo, which describes the Therapeutae. By proving
that it was composed as early as the time of Augustus, Basnage
has demonstrated, in spite of Eusebius (l. ii. c. 17) and a crowd
of modern Catholics, that the Therapeutae were neither Christians
nor monks. It still remains probable that they changed their
name, preserved their manners, adopted some new articles of
faith, and gradually became the fathers of the Egyptian
Ascetics.]
[Footnote 163: See a letter of Hadrian in the Augustan History,
p. 245.]
[Footnote 164: For the succession of Alexandrian bishops, consult
Renaudot's History, p. 24, &c. This curious fact is preserved by
the patriarch Eutychius, Annal. tom. i. p. 334, Vers. Pocock,)
and its internal evidence would alone be a sufficient answer to
all the objections which Bishop Pearson has urged in the
Vindiciae Ignatianae.]
[Footnote 165: Ammian. Marcellin. xxii. 16.]
[Footnote 166: Origen contra Celsum, l. i. p. 40.]
A perpetual stream of strangers and provincials flowed into
the capacious bosom of Rome. Whatever was strange or odious,
whoever was guilty or suspected, might hope, in the obscurity of
that immense capital, to elude the vigilance of the law. In such
a various conflux of nations, every teacher, either of truth or
falsehood, every founder, whether of a virtuous or a criminal
association, might easily multiply his disciples or accomplices.
The Christians of Rome, at the time of the accidental persecution
of Nero, are represented by Tacitus as already amounting to a
very great multitude, ^167 and the language of that great
historian is almost similar to the style employed by Livy, when
he relates the introduction and the suppression of the rites of
Bacchus. After the Bacchanals had awakened the severity of the
senate, it was likewise apprehended that a very great multitude,
as it were another people, had been initiated into those abhorred
mysteries. A more careful inquiry soon demonstrated, that the
offenders did not exceed seven thousand; a number indeed
sufficiently alarming, when considered as the object of public
justice. ^168 It is with the same candid allowance that we should
interpret the vague expressions of Tacitus, and in a former
instance of Pliny, when they exaggerate the crowds of deluded
fanatics who had forsaken the established worship of the gods.
The church of Rome was undoubtedly the first and most populous of
the empire; and we are possessed of an authentic record which
attests the state of religion in that city about the middle of
the third century, and after a peace of thirty-eight years. The
clergy, at that time, consisted of a bishop, forty-six
presbyters, seven deacons, as many sub-deacons, forty-two
acolythes, and fifty readers, exorcists, and porters. The number
of widows, of the infirm, and of the poor, who were maintained by
the oblations of the faithful, amounted to fifteen hundred. ^169
From reason, as well as from the analogy of Antioch, we may
venture to estimate the Christians of Rome at about fifty
thousand. The populousness of that great capital cannot perhaps
be exactly ascertained; but the most modest calculation will not
surely reduce it lower than a million of inhabitants, of whom the
Christians might constitute at the most a twentieth part. ^170
[Footnote 167: Ingens multitudo is the expression of Tacitus, xv.
44.]
[Footnote 168: T. Liv. xxxix. 13, 15, 16, 17. Nothing could
exceed the horror and consternation of the senate on the
discovery of the Bacchanalians, whose depravity is described, and
perhaps exaggerated, by Livy.]
[Footnote 169: Eusebius, l. vi. c. 43. The Latin translator (M.
de Valois) has thought proper to reduce the number of presbyters
to forty-four.]
[Footnote 170: This proportion of the presbyters and of the poor,
to the rest of the people, was originally fixed by Burnet,
(Travels into Italy, p. 168,) and is approved by Moyle, (vol. ii.
p. 151.) They were both unacquainted with the passage of
Chrysostom, which converts their conjecture almost into a fact.]
The western provincials appeared to have derived the
knowledge of Christianity from the same source which had diffused
among them the language, the sentiments, and the manners of Rome.
In this more important circumstance, Africa, as well as Gaul, was
gradually fashioned to the imitation of the capital. Yet
notwithstanding the many favorable occasions which might invite
the Roman missionaries to visit their Latin provinces, it was
late before they passed either the sea or the Alps; ^171 nor can
we discover in those great countries any assured traces either of
faith or of persecution that ascend higher than the reign of the
Antonines. ^172 The slow progress of the gospel in the cold
climate of Gaul, was extremely different from the eagerness with
which it seems to have been received on the burning sands of
Africa. The African Christians soon formed one of the principal
members of the primitive church. The practice introduced into
that province of appointing bishops to the most inconsiderable
towns, and very frequently to the most obscure villages,
contributed to multiply the splendor and importance of their
religious societies, which during the course of the third century
were animated by the zeal of Tertullian, directed by the
abilities of Cyprian, and adorned by the eloquence of Lactantius.
But if, on the contrary, we turn our eyes towards Gaul, we must
content ourselves with discovering, in the time of Marcus
Antoninus, the feeble and united congregations of Lyons and
Vienna; and even as late as the reign of Decius, we are assured,
that in a few cities only, Arles, Narbonne, Thoulouse, Limoges,
Clermont, Tours, and Paris, some scattered churches were
supported by the devotion of a small number of Christians. ^173
Silence is indeed very consistent with devotion; but as it is
seldom compatible with zeal, we may perceive and lament the
languid state of Christianity in those provinces which had
exchanged the Celtic for the Latin tongue, since they did not,
during the three first centuries, give birth to a single
ecclesiastical writer. From Gaul, which claimed a just
preeminence of learning and authority over all the countries on
this side of the Alps, the light of the gospel was more faintly
reflected on the remote provinces of Spain and Britain; and if we
may credit the vehement assertions of Tertullian, they had
already received the first rays of the faith, when he addressed
his apology to the magistrates of the emperor Severus. ^174 But
the obscure and imperfect origin of the western churches of
Europe has been so negligently recorded, that if we would relate
the time and manner of their foundation, we must supply the
silence of antiquity by those legends which avarice or
superstition long afterwards dictated to the monks in the lazy
gloom of their convents. ^175 Of these holy romances, that of the
apostle St. James can alone, by its singular extravagance,
deserve to be mentioned. From a peaceful fisherman of the Lake
of Gennesareth, he was transformed into a valorous knight, who
charged at the head of the Spanish chivalry in their battles
against the Moors. The gravest historians have celebrated his
exploits; the miraculous shrine of Compostella displayed his
power; and the sword of a military order, assisted by the terrors
of the Inquisition, was sufficient to remove every objection of
profane criticism. ^176
[Footnote 171: Serius trans Alpes, religione Dei suscepta.
Sulpicius Severus, l. ii. With regard to Africa, see Tertullian
ad Scapulam, c. 3. It is imagined that the Scyllitan martyrs
were the first, (Acta Sincera Rumart. p. 34.) One of the
adversaries of Apuleius seems to have been a Christian. Apolog.
p. 496, 497, edit. Delphin.]
[Footnote 172: Tum primum intra Gallias martyria visa. Sulp.
Severus, l. ii. These were the celebrated martyrs of Lyons. See
Eusebius, v. i. Tillemont, Mem. Ecclesiast. tom. ii. p. 316.
According to the Donatists, whose assertion is confirmed by the
tacit acknowledgment of Augustin, Africa was the last of the
provinces which received the gospel. Tillemont, Mem. Ecclesiast.
tom. i. p. 754.]
[Footnote 173: Rarae in aliquibus civitatibus ecclesiae, paucorum
Christianorum devotione, resurgerent. Acta Sincera, p. 130.
Gregory of Tours, l i. c. 28. Mosheim, p. 207, 449. There is
some reason to believe that in the beginning of the fourth
century, the extensive dioceses of Liege, of Treves, and of
Cologne, composed a single bishopric, which had been very
recently founded. See Memoires de Tillemont, tom vi. part i. p.
43, 411.]
[Footnote 174: The date of Tertullian's Apology is fixed, in a
dissertation of Mosheim, to the year 198.]
[Footnote 175: In the fifteenth century, there were few who had
either inclination or courage to question, whether Joseph of
Arimathea founded the monastery of Glastonbury, and whether
Dionysius the Areopagite preferred the residence of Paris to that
of Athens.]
[Footnote 176: The stupendous metamorphosis was performed in the
ninth century. See Mariana, (Hist. Hispan. l. vii. c. 13, tom.
i. p. 285, edit. Hag. Com. 1733,) who, in every sense, imitates
Livy, and the honest detection of the legend of St. James by Dr.
Geddes, Miscellanies, vol. ii. p. 221.]
The progress of Christianity was not confined to the Roman
empire; and according to the primitive fathers, who interpret
facts by prophecy, the new religion, within a century after the
death of its divine Author, had already visited every part of the
globe. "There exists not," says Justin Martyr, "a people,
whether Greek or Barbarian, or any other race of men, by
whatsoever appellation or manners they may be distinguished,
however ignorant of arts or agriculture, whether they dwell under
tents, or wander about in covered wagons, among whom prayers are
not offered up in the name of a crucified Jesus to the Father and
Creator of all things." ^177 But this splendid exaggeration,
which even at present it would be extremely difficult to
reconcile with the real state of mankind, can be considered only
as the rash sally of a devout but careless writer, the measure of
whose belief was regulated by that of his wishes. But neither
the belief nor the wishes of the fathers can alter the truth of
history. It will still remain an undoubted fact, that the
barbarians of Scythia and Germany, who afterwards subverted the
Roman monarchy, were involved in the darkness of paganism; and
that even the conversion of Iberia, of Armenia, or of Aethiopia,
was not attempted with any degree of success till the sceptre was
in the hands of an orthodox emperor. ^178 Before that time, the
various accidents of war and commerce might indeed diffuse an
imperfect knowledge of the gospel among the tribes of Caledonia,
^179 and among the borderers of the Rhine, the Danube, and the
Euphrates. ^180 Beyond the last-mentioned river, Edessa was
distinguished by a firm and early adherence to the faith. ^181
From Edessa the principles of Christianity were easily introduced
into the Greek and Syrian cities which obeyed the successors of
Artaxerxes; but they do not appear to have made any deep
impression on the minds of the Persians, whose religious system,
by the labors of a well disciplined order of priests, had been
constructed with much more art and solidity than the uncertain
mythology of Greece and Rome. ^182
[Footnote 177: Justin Martyr, Dialog. cum Tryphon. p. 341.
Irenaeus adv. Haeres. l. i. c. 10. Tertullian adv. Jud. c. 7.
See Mosheim, p. 203.]
[Footnote 178: See the fourth century of Mosheim's History of the
Church. Many, though very confused circumstances, that relate to
the conversion of Iberia and Armenia, may be found in Moses of
Chorene, l. ii. c. 78 - 89.
Note: Mons. St. Martin has shown that Armenia was the first
nation that embraced Christianity. Memoires sur l'Armenie, vol.
i. p. 306, and notes to Le Beae. Gibbon, indeed had expressed
his intention of withdrawing the words "of Armenia" from the text
of future editions. (Vindication, Works, iv. 577.) He was
bitterly taunted by Person for neglecting or declining to fulfil
his promise. Preface to Letters to Travis. - M.]
[Footnote 179: According to Tertullian, the Christian faith had
penetrated into parts of Britain inaccessible to the Roman arms.
About a century afterwards, Ossian, the son of Fingal, is said to
have disputed, in his extreme old age, with one of the foreign
missionaries, and the dispute is still extant, in verse, and in
the Erse language. See Mr. Macpher son's Dissertation on the
Antiquity of Ossian's Poems, p. 10.]
[Footnote 180: The Goths, who ravaged Asia in the reign of
Gallienus, carried away great numbers of captives; some of whom
were Christians, and became missionaries. See Tillemont,
Memoires Ecclesiast. tom. iv. p. 44.]
[Footnote 181: The legends of Abgarus, fabulous as it is, affords
a decisive proof, that many years before Eusebius wrote his
history, the greatest part of the inhabitants of Edessa had
embraced Christianity. Their rivals, the citizens of Carrhae,
adhered, on the contrary, to the cause of Paganism, as late as
the sixth century.]
[Footnote 182: According to Bardesanes (ap. Euseb. Praepar.
Evangel.) there were some Christians in Persia before the end of
the second century. In the time of Constantine (see his epistle
to Sapor, Vit. l. iv. c. 13) they composed a flourishing church.
Consult Beausobre, Hist. Cristique du Manicheisme, tom. i. p.
180, and the Bibliotheca Orietalis of Assemani.]
Chapter XV: Progress Of The Christian Religion.
Part IX.
From this impartial though imperfect survey of the progress
of Christianity, it may perhaps seem probable, that the number of
its proselytes has been excessively magnified by fear on the one
side, and by devotion on the other. According to the
irreproachable testimony of Origen, ^183 the proportion of the
faithful was very inconsiderable, when compared with the
multitude of an unbelieving world; but, as we are left without
any distinct information, it is impossible to determine, and it
is difficult even to conjecture, the real numbers of the
primitive Christians. The most favorable calculation, however,
that can be deduced from the examples of Antioch and of Rome,
will not permit us to imagine that more than a themselves under
the banner of the cross before the important conversion of
Constantine. But their habits of faith, of zeal, and of union,
seemed to multiply their numbers; and the same causes which
contributed to their future increase, served to render their
actual strength more apparent and more formidable.
[Footnote 183: Origen contra Celsum, l. viii. p. 424.]
Such is the constitution of civil society, that whilst a few
persons are distinguished by riches, by honors, and by knowledge,
the body of the people is condemned to obscurity, ignorance and
poverty. The Christian religion, which addressed itself to the
whole human race, must consequently collect a far greater number
of proselytes from the lower than from the superior ranks of
life. This innocent and natural circumstance has been improved
into a very odious imputation, which seems to be less strenuously
denied by the apologists, than it is urged by the adversaries, of
the faith; that the new sect of Christians was almost entirely
composed of the dregs of the populace, of peasants and mechanics,
of boys and women, of beggars and slaves, the last of whom might
sometimes introduce the missionaries into the rich and noble
families to which they belonged. These obscure teachers (such
was the charge of malice and infidelity) are as mute in public as
they are loquacious and dogmatical in private. Whilst they
cautiously avoid the dangerous encounter of philosophers, they
mingle with the rude and illiterate crowd, and insinuate
themselves into those minds, whom their age, their sex, or their
education, has the best disposed to receive the impression of
superstitious terrors. ^184
[Footnote 184: Minucius Felix, c. 8, with Wowerus's notes.
Celsus ap. Origen, l. iii. p. 138, 142. Julian ap. Cyril. l. vi.
p. 206, edit. Spanheim.]
This unfavorable picture, though not devoid of a faint
resemblance, betrays, by its dark coloring and distorted
features, the pencil of an enemy. As the humble faith of Christ
diffused itself through the world, it was embraced by several
persons who derived some consequence from the advantages of
nature or fortune. Aristides, who presented an eloquent apology
to the emperor Hadrian, was an Athenian philosopher. ^185 Justin
Martyr had sought divine knowledge in the schools of Zeno, of
Aristotle, of Pythagoras, and of Plato, before he fortunately was
accosted by the old man, or rather the angel, who turned his
attention to the study of the Jewish prophets. ^186 Clemens of
Alexandria had acquired much various reading in the Greek, and
Tertullian in the Latin, language. Julius Africanus and Origen
possessed a very considerable share of the learning of their
times; and although the style of Cyprian is very different from
that of Lactantius, we might almost discover that both those
writers had been public teachers of rhetoric. Even the study of
philosophy was at length introduced among the Christians, but it
was not always productive of the most salutary effects; knowledge
was as often the parent of heresy as of devotion, and the
description which was designed for the followers of Artemon, may,
with equal propriety, be applied to the various sects that
resisted the successors of the apostles. "They presume to alter
the Holy Scriptures, to abandon the ancient rule of faith, and to
form their opinions according to the subtile precepts of logic.
The science of the church is neglected for the study of geometry,
and they lose sight of heaven while they are employed in
measuring the earth. Euclid is perpetually in their hands.
Aristotle and Theophrastus are the objects of their admiration;
and they express an uncommon reverence for the works of Galen.
Their errors are derived from the abuse of the arts and sciences
of the infidels, and they corrupt the simplicity of the gospel by
the refinements of human reason." ^187
[Footnote 185: Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iv. 3. Hieronym. Epist. 83.]
[Footnote 186: The story is prettily told in Justin's Dialogues.
Tillemont, (Mem Ecclesiast. tom. ii. p. 384,) who relates it
after him is sure that the old man was a disguised angel.]
[Footnote 187: Eusebius, v. 28. It may be hoped, that none,
except the heretics, gave occasion to the complaint of Celsus,
(ap. Origen, l. ii. p. 77,) that the Christians were perpetually
correcting and altering their Gospels.
Note: Origen states in reply, that he knows of none who had
altered the Gospels except the Marcionites, the Valentinians, and
perhaps some followers of Lucanus. - M.]
Nor can it be affirmed with truth, that the advantages of
birth and fortune were always separated from the profession of
Christianity. Several Roman citizens were brought before the
tribunal of Pliny, and he soon discovered, that a great number of
persons of every order of men in Bithynia had deserted the
religion of their ancestors. ^188 His unsuspected testimony may,
in this instance, obtain more credit than the bold challenge of
Tertullian, when he addresses himself to the fears as well as the
humanity of the proconsul of Africa, by assuring him, that if he
persists in his cruel intentions, he must decimate Carthage, and
that he will find among the guilty many persons of his own rank,
senators and matrons of nobles' extraction, and the friends or
relations of his most intimate friends. ^189 It appears, however,
that about forty years afterwards the emperor Valerian was
persuaded of the truth of this assertion, since in one of his
rescripts he evidently supposes, that senators, Roman knights,
and ladies of quality, were engaged in the Christian sect. ^190
The church still continued to increase its outward splendor as it
lost its internal purity; and, in the reign of Diocletian, the
palace, the courts of justice, and even the army, concealed a
multitude of Christians, who endeavored to reconcile the
interests of the present with those of a future life.
[Footnote 188: Plin. Epist. x. 97. Fuerunt alii similis
amentiae, cives Romani - - Multi enim omnis aetatis, omnis
ordinis, utriusque sexus, etiam vocuntur in periculum et
vocabuntur.]
[Footnote 189: Tertullian ad Scapulum. Yet even his rhetoric
rises no higher than to claim a tenth part of Carthage.]
[Footnote 190: Cyprian. Epist. 70.]
And yet these exceptions are either too few in number, or
too recent in time, entirely to remove the imputation of
ignorance and obscurity which has been so arrogantly cast on the
first proselytes of Christianity. ^* Instead of employing in our
defence the fictions of later ages, it will be more prudent to
convert the occasion of scandal into a subject of edification.
Our serious thoughts will suggest to us, that the apostles
themselves were chosen by Providence among the fishermen of
Galilee, and that the lower we depress the temporal condition of
the first Christians, the more reason we shall find to admire
their merit and success. It is incumbent on us diligently to
remember, that the kingdom of heaven was promised to the poor in
spirit, and that minds afflicted by calamity and the contempt of
mankind, cheerfully listen to the divine promise of future
happiness; while, on the contrary, the fortunate are satisfied
with the possession of this world; and the wise abuse in doubt
and dispute their vain superiority of reason and knowledge.
[Footnote *: This incomplete enumeration ought to be increased by
the names of several Pagans converted at the dawn of
Christianity, and whose conversion weakens the reproach which the
historian appears to support. Such are, the Proconsul Sergius
Paulus, converted at Paphos, (Acts xiii. 7 - 12.) Dionysius,
member of the Areopagus, converted with several others, al
Athens, (Acts xvii. 34;) several persons at the court of Nero,
(Philip. iv 22;) Erastus, receiver at Corinth, (Rom. xvi.23;)
some Asiarchs, (Acts xix. 31) As to the philosophers, we may add
Tatian, Athenagoras, Theophilus of Antioch, Hegesippus, Melito,
Miltiades, Pantaenus, Ammenius, all distinguished for their
genius and learning. - G.]
We stand in need of such reflections to comfort us for the
loss of some illustrious characters, which in our eyes might have
seemed the most worthy of the heavenly present. The names of
Seneca, of the elder and the younger Pliny, of Tacitus, of
Plutarch, of Galen, of the slave Epictetus, and of the emperor
Marcus Antoninus, adorn the age in which they flourished, and
exalt the dignity of human nature. They filled with glory their
respective stations, either in active or contemplative life;
their excellent understandings were improved by study; Philosophy
had purified their minds from the prejudices of the popular
superstition; and their days were spent in the pursuit of truth
and the practice of virtue. Yet all these sages (it is no less
an object of surprise than of concern) overlooked or rejected the
perfection of the Christian system. Their language or their
silence equally discover their contempt for the growing sect,
which in their time had diffused itself over the Roman empire.
Those among them who condescended to mention the Christians,
consider them only as obstinate and perverse enthusiasts, who
exacted an implicit submission to their mysterious doctrines,
without being able to produce a single argument that could engage
the attention of men of sense and learning. ^191
[Footnote 191: Dr. Lardner, in his first and second volumes of
Jewish and Christian testimonies, collects and illustrates those
of Pliny the younger, of Tacitus, of Galen, of Marcus Antoninus,
and perhaps of Epictetus, (for it is doubtful whether that
philosopher means to speak of the Christians.) The new sect is
totally unnoticed by Seneca, the elder Pliny, and Plutarch.]
It is at least doubtful whether any of these philosophers
perused the apologies ^* which the primitive Christians
repeatedly published in behalf of themselves and of their
religion; but it is much to be lamented that such a cause was not
defended by abler advocates. They expose with superfluous with
and eloquence the extravagance of Polytheism. They interest our
compassion by displaying the innocence and sufferings of their
injured brethren. But when they would demonstrate the divine
origin of Christianity, they insist much more strongly on the
predictions which announced, than on the miracles which
accompanied, the appearance of the Messiah. Their favorite
argument might serve to edify a Christian or to convert a Jew,
since both the one and the other acknowledge the authority of
those prophecies, and both are obliged, with devout reverence, to
search for their sense and their accomplishment. But this mode
of persuasion loses much of its weight and influence, when it is
addressed to those who neither understand nor respect the Mosaic
dispensation and the prophetic style. ^192 In the unskilful hands
of Justin and of the succeeding apologists, the sublime meaning
of the Hebrew oracles evaporates in distant types, affected
conceits, and cold allegories; and even their authenticity was
rendered suspicious to an unenlightened Gentile, by the mixture
of pious forgeries, which, under the names of Orpheus, Hermes,
and the Sibyls, ^193 were obtruded on him as of equal value with
the genuine inspirations of Heaven. The adoption of fraud and
sophistry in the defence of revelation too often reminds us of
the injudicious conduct of those poets who load their
invulnerable heroes with a useless weight of cumbersome and
brittle armor.
[Footnote *: The emperors Hadrian, Antoninus &c., read with
astonishment the apologies of Justin Martyr, of Aristides, of
Melito, &c. (See St. Hieron. ad mag. orat. Orosius, lviii. c.
13.) Eusebius says expressly, that the cause of Christianity was
defended before the senate, in a very elegant discourse, by
Apollonius the Martyr. - G.
Gibbon, in his severer spirit of criticism, may have
questioned the authority of Jerome and Eusebius. There are some
difficulties about Apollonius, which Heinichen (note in loc.
Eusebii) would solve, by suppose lag him to have been, as Jerome
states, a senator. - M.]
[Footnote 192: If the famous prophecy of the Seventy Weeks had
been alleged to a Roman philosopher, would he not have replied in
the words of Cicero, "Quae tandem ista auguratio est, annorum
potius quam aut raensium aut dierum?" De Divinatione, ii. 30.
Observe with what irreverence Lucian, (in Alexandro, c. 13.) and
his friend Celsus ap. Origen, (l. vii. p. 327,) express
themselves concerning the Hebrew prophets.]
[Footnote 193: The philosophers who derided the more ancient
predictions of the Sibyls, would easily have detected the Jewish
and Christian forgeries, which have been so triumphantly quoted
by the fathers, from Justin Martyr to Lactantius. When the
Sibylline verses had performed their appointed task, they, like
the system of the millennium, were quietly laid aside. The
Christian Sybil had unluckily fixed the ruin of Rome for the year
195, A. U. C. 948.]
But how shall we excuse the supine inattention of the Pagan
and philosophic world, to those evidences which were represented
by the hand of Omnipotence, not to their reason, but to their
senses? During the age of Christ, of his apostles, and of their
first disciples, the doctrine which they preached was confirmed
by innumerable prodigies. The lame walked, the blind saw, the
sick were healed, the dead were raised, daemons were expelled,
and the laws of Nature were frequently suspended for the benefit
of the church. But the sages of Greece and Rome turned aside
from the awful spectacle, and, pursuing the ordinary occupations
of life and study, appeared unconscious of any alterations in the
moral or physical government of the world. Under the reign of
Tiberius, the whole earth, ^194 or at least a celebrated province
of the Roman empire, ^195 was involved in a preternatural
darkness of three hours. Even this miraculous event, which ought
to have excited the wonder, the curiosity, and the devotion of
mankind, passed without notice in an age of science and history.
^196 It happened during the lifetime of Seneca and the elder
Pliny, who must have experienced the immediate effects, or
received the earliest intelligence, of the prodigy. Each of these
philosophers, in a laborious work, has recorded all the great
phenomena of Nature, earthquakes, meteors comets, and eclipses,
which his indefatigable curiosity could collect. ^197 Both the
one and the other have omitted to mention the greatest phenomenon
to which the mortal eye has been witness since the creation of
the globe. A distinct chapter of Pliny ^198 is designed for
eclipses of an extraordinary nature and unusual duration; but he
contents himself with describing the singular defect of light
which followed the murder of Caesar, when, during the greatest
part of a year, the orb of the sun appeared pale and without
splendor. The season of obscurity, which cannot surely be
compared with the preternatural darkness of the Passion, had been
already celebrated by most of the poets ^199 and historians of
that memorable age. ^200
[Footnote 194: The fathers, as they are drawn out in battle array
by Dom Calmet, (Dissertations sur la Bible, tom. iii. p. 295 -
308,) seem to cover the whole earth with darkness, in which they
are followed by most of the moderns.]
[Footnote 195: Origen ad Matth. c. 27, and a few modern critics,
Beza, Le Clerc, Lardner, &c., are desirous of confining it to the
land of Judea.]
[Footnote 196: The celebrated passage of Phlegon is now wisely
abandoned. When Tertullian assures the Pagans that the mention of
the prodigy is found in Arcanis (not Archivis) vestris, (see his
Apology, c. 21,) he probably appeals to the Sibylline verses,
which relate it exactly in the words of the Gospel.
Note: According to some learned theologians a
misunderstanding of the text in the Gospel has given rise to this
mistake, which has employed and wearied so many laborious
commentators, though Origen had already taken the pains to
preinform them. The expression does not mean, they assert, an
eclipse, but any kind of obscurity occasioned in the atmosphere,
whether by clouds or any other cause. As this obscuration of the
sun rarely took place in Palestine, where in the middle of April
the sky was usually clear, it assumed, in the eyes of the Jews
and Christians, an importance conformable to the received notion,
that the sun concealed at midday was a sinister presage. See Amos
viii. 9, 10. The word is often taken in this sense by
contemporary writers; the Apocalypse says the sun was concealed,
when speaking of an obscuration caused by smoke and dust.
(Revel. ix. 2.) Moreover, the Hebrew word ophal, which in the
LXX. answers to the Greek, signifies any darkness; and the
Evangelists, who have modelled the sense of their expressions by
those of the LXX., must have taken it in the same latitude. This
darkening of the sky usually precedes earthquakes. (Matt. xxvii.
51.) The Heathen authors furnish us a number of examples, of
which a miraculous explanation was given at the time. See Ovid.
ii. v. 33, l. xv. v. 785. Pliny, Hist. Nat. l. ii. c 30.
Wetstein has collected all these examples in his edition of the
New Testament.
We need not, then, be astonished at the silence of the Pagan
authors concerning a phenomenon which did not extend beyond
Jerusalem, and which might have nothing contrary to the laws of
nature; although the Christians and the Jews may have regarded it
as a sinister presage. See Michaelia Notes on New Testament, v.
i. p. 290. Paulus, Commentary on New Testament, iii. p. 760. -
G.]
[Footnote 197: Seneca, Quaest. Natur. l. i. 15, vi. l. vii. 17.
Plin. Hist. Natur. l. ii.]
[Footnote 198: Plin. Hist. Natur. ii. 30.]
[Footnote 199: Virgil. Georgic. i. 466. Tibullus, l. i. Eleg. v.
ver. 75. Ovid Metamorph. xv. 782. Lucan. Pharsal. i. 540. The
last of these poets places this prodigy before the civil war.]
[Footnote 200: See a public epistle of M. Antony in Joseph.
Antiquit. xiv. 12. Plutarch in Caesar. p. 471. Appian. Bell.
Civil. l. iv. Dion Cassius, l. xlv. p. 431. Julius Obsequens,
c. 128. His little treatise is an abstract of Livy's prodigies.]
End Of
The Project Gutenberg Etext of Volume 1:
The History of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire