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, o