History Of The Decline And Fall Of The
Edward Gibbon, Esq.
With notes by the Rev. H. H. Milman
Vol. 1
1782 (Written), 1845 (Revised)
Introduction
Preface By The Editor.
The great work
of Gibbon is indispensable to the student of
history. The literature of
Decline and Fall of the
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
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
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
of
proceeds: -
"I have
had occasion, during my labors, to consult the
writings of philosophers, who have treated on the
finances of the
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
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 Extend Of The Empire In The Age Of The
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 Extend Of The Empire In The Age Of The
Anoninies.
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 Extend Of The Empire In The Age Of The
Anoninies.
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.]