Edward Gibbon — The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire vol. IV-VII

APPENDIX ADDITIONAL NOTES BY THE EDITOR

1.: LEGEND OF THE FINDING OF THE TRUE CROSS — ( P. 76 )

The legend of the discovery of the Cross by Judas for St. Helena has come down in Syriac, Greek, and Latin versions. See E. Nestle, Byz. Zeitschrift, iv. p. 319-345, who makes it probable that the original Helena legend was in Syriac, and prints the oldest Greek version extant from a Sinai MS. of the eighth century copied by Mr. Rendel Harris. (The Greek from later MSS. (1) in J. Gretser’s huge treatise, De Cruce Christi (1000), ii. 530 sqq., and Holder, Inventio verae crucis, 1889; (2) in Gretser, op. cit., ii. 543 sqq.; (3) Wotke, Wiener Studien, 1891, p. 300 sqq.; the Latin (1) in the Sanctuarium (a rather rare book; c. 1479) of Mombritius, and in Acta Sanct., May 4, I., 445 sqq.; (2) in Holder, op. cit.; (3) in Mombritius, op. cit.; the Syriac (1) from seventh century MS., in Nestle’s De sancta Cruce, 1889; (2) ib.; (3) in Bedjan’s Acta Martyrum et Sanctorum, 1890, p. 326 sqq. )

2.: ST. GEORGE — ( P. 98 )

The article on St. George by Zöckler in Herzog and Plitt’s Encyclopædia has been superseded by the discussion of F. Görres in the Zeitsch. f. wiss. Theologie, xvi. 1890, p. 454 sqq. “Ritter St. Georg in Geschichte, Legende, u. Kunst.” [There is no question that the Acta (in Act. Sanct. 23rd April) are apocryphal and legendary. They are remarkable for the horrible descriptions of scenes of martyrdom, which might serve as a text to elucidate the pictures on the walls of the curious round Church of San Stefano on the Esquiline.] Görres arrives at practically the same conclusion as Tillemont (Mém. eccl., v. 185-9, 658-60). All the details of St. George’s martyrdom are uncertain; but St. George existed and suffered as a martyr in the East in some pre-Constantinian persecution. Tillemont established the reality of St. George by the existence of his cult (he was a μεγαλόμαρτυς) in the sixth century; Görres proves that it already existed in the fifth century. (1) The round Church of St. George at Thessalonica is not younger than the fifth century and possibly belongs to the fourth; (2) Venantius (Carm. ii. 12, p. 41, ed. M.H.G.) mentions a Gallic basilica to St. George, founded by Sidonius Apollinaris; (3) the decree of Pope Gelasius de libris non recipiendis, at end of fifth century, condemns the Acta of St. George as apocryphal, but confesses his historical existence.

The connection of his name with a dragon-slaying legend does not relegate him to the region of myth. For over against the fabulous Christian dragonslayer, Theodore of the Bithynian Heraclea, we can set Agapetus of Synnada and Arsacius, who though celebrated as dragon-slayers were historical persons.

Gibbon’s theory which identifies St. George with George of Cappadocia has nothing to be said for it; but Görres points out that it is not open to any objection on the ground that George of Cappadocia was an Arian. For there are examples of Arians admitted into the Martyrologium: he cites Agapetus of Synnada and Auxentius, afterwards bishop of Mopsuestia. (It is to be noted that one recension of the Acta S. Georgii was edited by Arians.)

3.: CHURCHES OF CONSTANTINE AT JERUSALEM — ( P. 75 )

In regard to Constantine’s Churches at Jerusalem it may be said, without entering upon the question as to the true positions of Golgotha and the Holy Sepulchre, that it is certain that these Churches — (1) the round Church of the Anastasis which contained the Sepulchre, and the (2) adjacent Basilica, dedicated to the Cross — stood on the site of the present Church of the Holy Sepulchre. Injured by the Persians (614 AD ) they were restored some years later, and a plan of the buildings drawn up, towards the end of the seventh century, by the pilgrim Arculfus is extant, and is of great importance for the topography. Some traces of the old buildings still remain. “The relative position of the Churches is the same; the circular Church of the Anastasis has preserved its form; the south wall of the Basilica can be traced from ‘Calvary’ eastward, and one of the large cisterns constructed by Constantine has been discovered” (Sir C. Wilson, in Smith’s Dict. of the Bible, new ed., 1893, p. 1654). Mr. Fergusson’s theory which identified the Church of the Resurrection with the mosque known as Kubbet-es-Sakhrah, the Dome of the Rock (within the so-called “Haram area”), is now quite exploded.

The Dome of the Rock has its own question, but has nothing to do with Constantine. Is it of Saracenic origin dating from the end of the seventh century — built perhaps by a Greek architect? or was it originally a Christian Church, and converted into a mosque? It has been identified by Professor Sepp with a Church of St. Sophia built by Justinian. Sir C. Wilson thinks that it stands on the site of St. Sophia, which was destroyed by the Persians; “that it was rebuilt with the old material by Abdul-Melik who covered it with a dome, and that it was again repaired and redecorated by El Mamûn” ( ib., p. 1657).

The adjacent mosque el-Aksa occupies the site of the mosque of Omar. It was built by Abd al Malik, “out of the ruins of Justinian’s Church of St. Mary” (Wilson, ib. ), which is fully described by Procopius; but there is a difference of opinion whether the Church was on the same site as the mosque or (so Fergusson and others) in the south-eastern corner of the “Haram area,” where there are vaults apparently of the Justinianean age.

For further details see Sir C. Wilson’s article Jerusalem, cited above; Mr. T. H. Lewis’ essay on the Church of Constantine at Jerusalem in the Palestine Pilgrims’ Text Society, 1891; Sepp, Die Felsenkuppell eine Justinianische Sophien-kirche; various papers in the Palestine Exploration Fund publications.

4.: THE TIGRIS AND EUPHRATES — ( P. 127 )

The recent publication of a geographical description of Mesopotamia and Baghdād by an Arabic writer, Ibn Serapion, of whom nothing is known except that he wrote in the early years of the tenth century, by Mr. Guy Le Strange (with translation and commentary, in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Soc., 1895, January and April; cp. addenda in July, and 1896, October), is of considerable importance.

It shows that since the tenth century great alterations have taken place in the course of the Tigris and Euphrates, and shows what these alterations were; it gives a clear account of the canal system which drew the overflow of the Euphrates into the Tigris; and it supplies most important data for the reconstruction of the topography of Baghdād.

Before the Caliphate, the River Tigris followed its present course, from Kūt-al-Amarah (about 100 miles below Baghdād) flowing in a south-easterly direction to its junction with the Euphrates. But during the middle ages — in the tenth century for example — it flowed almost due south, “running down the channel now known as the Sha tt -al-Hay, and passing through the city of Wāsi t ” (Le Strange, ib., Jan., p. 3). The changes in the Euphrates are thus summed up by Mr. Le Strange (p. 4): A little above Al-Kūfa “the stream bifurcated. The branch to the right — considered then as the main stream of the Euphrates, but now known as the Hindiyya Canal — ran down past Al-Kūfa, and a short distance below the city became lost in the western part of the great Swamp,” which also swallowed up the waters of the Tigris. “The stream to the left or eastward called the Sūrā Canal — which, in its upper reach, follows the line of the modern Euphrates — ran a short course and then split up into numerous canals whose waters for the most part flowed out into the Tigris above Wāsi t. ” The great Swamp in which the streams of both Tigris and Euphrates lost themselves was drained by the Tidal Estuary which reached the sea at Abbadān, “a town which, on account of the recession of the Persian Gulf, now lies nearly twenty miles distant from the present shore-line.”

It should be carefully remembered in reading the account of the events after Julian’s death that the Tigris has also altered its course to the north of Ctesiphon since the tenth century. From a point below Samarrā to a point above Baghdād, it followed a shorter and more westerly channel than at the present day.

As to the canal Nahr-al-Malik (see above, p. 137), Mr. Le Strange says ( ib., Jan., p. 75), that “roughly speaking it followed the line of the modern Radhwāniyya Canal.”

It may be added that the geographical work of Abu-l-Fidā, mentioned by Gibbon, p. 127, n. 54, is not very valuable, being neither good nor early. The authoritative Arabic text is that of Reinaud, 1840, and there is a French translation by S. Guyard, 1883. On early geographical works in Arabic, see Le Strange’s Palestine under the Moslems (Pal. Explor. Fund).

5.: AUTHORITIES — ( C. XXV . sqq. )

For the works of LIBANIUS, cp. vol. ii. Appendix 10, p. 361-362. The chronology of the most important of his later orations is determined by Sievers as follows: —

ad 381.	Or. ii., πρὸς τοὺς βαρὺν αὐτὸν καλο ν̂ ντας. He contrasts the present with the reign of Julian; and refers to the Battle of Hadrianople.
ad 386.	Or. xxxi. Against Tisamenos (consularis of Syria). An interesting indictment of the governor’s exactions and oppression.
ad 387 (March).	Or. xix., περὶ τ η̂ ς στάσεως. On the sedition at Antioch, a petition to Theodosius for mercy.
ad 387.	Or. xxxiv., κατὰ τ ω̂ ν πεϕευγότων. Against those who fled from the city during the sedition. It was written during the sedition but μετὰ δικαστήρια καὶ κρίσιν καὶ δεσμόν.
ad 387.	Or. xx., πρὸς θεοδόσιον ἐπὶ τα ɩ̂ ς διαλλαγα ɩ̂ ς. The story of the sedition and the pardon is narrated.
ad 387.	Or. xxi., πρὸς Καισάριον Μάγιστρον. A thanksgiving to Cæsarius for his good offices in obtaining the pardon from Theodosius.
ad 387.	Or. xxii., πρὸς Ἐλλέβιχον. Describing the inquiry into the sedition, conducted by Ellebichus.
ad 388 (?).	Or. xxx., πρὸς θρασυδα ɩ̂ ον. Deals with events connected with the sedition.
After ad 388.	Or. xxviii., περὶ τ ω̂ ν ὶερ ω̂ ν. A complaint that although the offering of incence in pagan temples was not forbidden [by Cod. Theod. xvi. 10, 9. ad 385], the monks destroyed the temples.

There can be no question that Or. xxviii. on the Temples and many other of the orations of Libanius were not publicly delivered (in the Emperor’s presence, for instance), but were merely read to a private audience of sympathisers, or circulated as pamphlets.

For THEMISTIUS, cp. vol. ii. Appendix 10, p. 362. The orations which concern this and the following chapters are: —

ad 364.	Or. v. On the consulship of Jovian. Claims toleration for both Christians and pagans.
ad 364.	Or. vi., ϕιλάκελϕοι. To Valentinian and Valens on their accession.
ad 367.	Or. vii., περὶ τ ω̂ ν ήτυχηκότων ἐπὶ Οὐάλεντος. On the victory of Valens over Procopius. Praises the Emperor’s clemency.
ad 368.	Or. viii., πενταετηρικός. On the quinquennalia of Valens.
ad 369.	Or. ix., προτρεπτικὸς Οὐαλεντινιανῷ τῷ νέῳ. To Valentinian the younger, son of Valens, consul this year.
ad 370.	Or. x., ἐπὶ τ η̂ ς εἱρήνης, pronounced before the Senate of Constantinople, congratulating Valens on his peace with the Goths.
ad 373.	Or. xi., δεκετηρικός (March 28). On the decennalia of Valens, who was then in Syria.
ad 374.	Or. xii. An appeal for religious toleration.
ad 377.	Or. xiii., ἐρωτικός, pronounced in honour of Gratian at Rome, whither Themistius was sent by Valens.
ad 379.	Or. xiv., πρεσβευτικὸς εἰς θεοδόσιον αὐτοκράτορα (early in the year), pronounced at Thessalonica by Themistius as delegate of the Senate of Constantinople.
ad 381.	Or. xv., εἰς θεοδόσιον (February or March). On the virtues of a king.
ad 383.	Or. xvi., χαριστήριος τῷ αὐτοκράτορι ὑπὲρ τ η̂ ς εἰρήνης καὶ τ η̂ ς ὑπατείας το ν̂ στρατηγο ν̂ Σατορνίνου (January). On the peace with the Goths in 382.
ad 384.	Or. xvii., ἐπὶ τ ῃ̑ χειροτονίᾳ τ η̂ ς πολιαρχίας. Returning thanks for his own appointment to the Prefecture of Constantinople (c. Sept. 1?).
ad 384.	Or. xviii., περὶ τ η̂ ς το ν̂ βασιλέως ϕιληκοίας. Panegyric of Theodosius.
ad 385.	Or. xix., ἐπὶ τ ῃ̑ ϕιλανθρωπίᾳ το ν̂ αὐτοκράτορος θεοδοσίου, pronounced in the Senate; praises the clemency of Theodosius (before Sept. 14).

SYNESIUS of Cyrene (born 360-70 AD ) studied first at Alexandria, afterwards at Athens. When he had completed his academical course he returned to the Pentapolis and led the life of a cultivated country gentleman. In 397 AD he arrived in Constantinople to plead the cause of Cyrene at the court, and stayed there some years, where he enjoyed the friendship of Aurelian. During that time he delivered his speech on the office of king (see below, vol. v. p. 146), and witnessed the fall of Aurelian and rebellion of Gainas. He afterwards made these events the subject of a bold political “squib,” entitled “The Egyptians.” For the light which this throws on the political parties and intrigues in Constantinople, see below, vol. v. Appendix 19.

After the Gainas episode, Aurelian returned, and by his influence the petition of Synesius was granted. Synesius then returned to Africa (probably in 402 to Alexandria, and 404 to Cyrene; so Seeck, who has revised the chronology of the letters of Synesius in a very valuable study in Philologus, 52, p. 458 sqq., 1893). Translation of his interesting descriptions of the pleasures of country life will be found in Mr. Halcomb’s excellent article on “Synesius,” in the Dict. of Chr. Biography. These descriptions occur in his letters, of which 156 are extant 1 (included in the Epistolographi Græci of Hercher). The Cyrenaica, however, was exposed to the depredation of the nomads, owing to the incompetence of the governor Cerealis, and Synesius took an active part in defending the province. In 403 he had married a Christian wife; he came under the influence of Theophilus, Bishop of Alexandria (where he resided a couple of years); and was gradually converted to Christianity. In 410 he yielded to the wishes of the people of Ptolemais and became a bishop. He died a few years later. His works, which included philosophical poems, may be most conveniently consulted in Migne’s edition (Monograph: Volkmann, Synesios von Cyrene, 1869. See also A. Nieri, La Cirenaica nel secolo quinto giusta le lettere di Sinesio, in the Revista di filologia, 21, 220 sqq. (1892)).

PALLADIUS, Bishop of Helenopolis, wrote a biographical work on John Chrysostom (of whom he was a supporter) under the title “A Dialogue with Theodore the Deacon.” After Chrysostom’s banishment, not being safe in Constantinople, he went to Rome and explained to the Pope the true facts of Chrysostom’s treatment. Afterwards returning to the east he was thrown into prison, and then banished to a remote part of Egypt. At a later time his sentence was revoked; he seems to have been restored to Helenopolis, and was then translated to the See of Aspuna in Galatia I. (Socrates, vii. 36). A strict ascetic himself, he dedicated to Lausus the Chamberlain (of Theodosius ii. ?) a compilation of short biographies of men and women of his time who had embraced the ascetic life. It is known as the Historia Lausiaca (written about 420 AD ); more will be said of it in considering the sources for the growth of monasticism, in an appendix to vol. vi.

To what has been said of EUNAPIUS in vol. ii. Appendix 10 (p. 364) I must here add a reference to a paper of C. de Boor (in Rheinisches Museum, vol. xlvii. (1892) p. 321-3) on the new edition of the history of Eunapius, which, softened down and mutilated so as not to shock the susceptibilities of Christian readers, was subsequently issued (by the book-trade?). The Prooemium in the Excerpta de Sententiis was copied down from this expurgated edition, and is not the work of Eunapius but is the editor’s preface. Güldenpenning has attempted to explain the extraordinary fact that Zosimus does not even mention the greatest blot on the reign of Theodosius the Great — the massacre of Thessalonica — by supposing that he used the expurgated Eunapius. This seems hardly probable.

The History (λόγοι ἱστορικοὶ) of the pagan OLYMPIODORUS (of the Egyptian Thebes) in twenty-two books was a highly important work. It embraced eighteen years of contemporary history ( AD 407-425). It is unluckily lost, but valuable fragments are preserved in the Bibliotheca of Photius (amongst others a curious account of the initiation of new students at the university of Athens, fr. 28). The work was used as a source by the somewhat later writers, Philostorgius, Socrates, Sozomen, and later still by Zosimus, so that our historical material for the reign of Honorius and the first half of the reign of Theodosius ii. depends more largely on Olympiodorus than might be inferred from the extent of the Photian fragments. He himself described his work as material (ὕλη) for history. He dedicated it to Theodosius ii. The most convenient edition of the fragments is that in Müller’s Fragmenta, Hist. Græc., iv. p. 57 sqq.

In the same place (69 sqq. ) will be found the fragments of PRISCUS of Panium in Thrace, whose history probably began about AD 433 and ended at 474. The most famous is the account of his embassy to Hunland, but other very valuable notices from his work are preserved. So far as we can judge from these remains he was perhaps the best historian of the fifth century.

Q. Aurelius SYMMACHUS (of a rich but not an ancient family 2 ) was born not long after 340. The details of his career are rehearsed on the base of a statue which his son set up in his house: —

Q. Aur(elio) Symmacho v(iro) c(larissimo) quaest(ori) pret(ori) pontifici maiori, correctori Lucaniae et Brittiorum, comiti ordinis tertii, procons(uli) Africae, praef(ecto) urb(i), co(nsuli) ordinario, oratori disertissimo, Q. Fab(ius) Memm(ius) Symmachus v(ir) c(larissimus) patri optimo.

On the occasion of the quinquennalia of Valentinian ( AD 369, Feb. 25) he carried the Senate’s congratulations and aurum oblaticium to the Emperor and pronounced panegyrics on Valentinian and Gratian, of which fragments remain (Or. i. and Or. iii., ed. Seeck, p. 318 and 330). He remained with the court, and accompanied the Emperors on their Alamannic expedition in 369 (like Ausonius). He celebrated the campaign in a second panegyric in honour of Valentinian’s third consulship, AD 370 (Orat. ii.). He was proconsul of Africa at the time of the revolt of Firmus (373-375). He was prefect of Rome in 384, and his appointment probably marks a revival of the pagan influence after Gratian’s death. 3 In the same year he drew up the celebrated third Relatio to Theodosius for the restoration of the Altar of Victory, which had been removed by Gratian in 382. In 388, as the spokesman of the senate, he pronounced a panegyric on the tyrant Maximus, when he invaded Italy, and for this he was accused of treason on Valentinian’s restoration, and with difficulty escaped punishment. The Panegyric and the Apology to Theodosius which he wrote after his pardon are mentioned by Socrates (v. 14), but have not survived. In 391 he was consul, and took the occasion of a panegyric which he pronounced in the presence of Theodosius to recommend to him a petition which the Roman senate had recently preferred for the restoration of the Altar of Victory. The result is described by Gibbon (vol. v. p. 75). Next year Symmachus made another unsuccessful attempt with Valentinian. He probably survived the year 404 (see below, p. 350).

His works have been edited by Seeck (in M.G.H.). They consist of nine Books of Letters, and the Relationes (which used to be numbered as a tenth Book of Letters); and fragmentary remains of eight Orations (first published by Mai, and unknown to Gibbon).

The poems of Decimus Magnus AUSONIUS (born c. 310 at Burdigala) are more important for the literary than for the political history of the century. His uncle and preceptor Arborius, with whom he lived at Tolosa (320-28), had the honour of being for a time teacher of one of Constantine’s sons (Constantine or Constantius). He became a teacher of grammar (about 334) and soon afterwards of rhetoric, in his native town, and married about the same time. About 364 AD he was summoned to the court of Trier to instruct Gratian. In 368 and 369 he accompanied Valentinian and Gratian on their Alamannic campaigns. He refers to their victories in his Mosella (written at Trier in 370-1): —

Hostibus exactis Nicrum super et Lupodunum Et fontem Latiis ignotum annalibus Histri (423-4).

In 370 he obtained the rank of comes and in 375 was promoted to be quæstor sacri palatii. His son Hesperius ( AD 376 proconsul of Africa) became in 377 Prætorian Prefect of Italy, while his son-in-law Thalassius became in 378 proconsul of Africa. Ausonius himself was appointed Prætorian Prefect of Gaul in first months of 378 (see Cod. Th. 815, 35). But in his Epicedion in Patrem he describes his son Hesperius as,

Præfectus Gallis et Libyæ et Latio.

By coupling this with words in the Gratiarum Actio to Gratian, § 7, ad præfecturæ collegium filius cum patre coniunctus, and Liber Protrept. ad Nepotem, v. 91, præfecturam duplicem, it has been concluded (see Peiper’s preface to his ed. p. ci.) that, in consequence of the relationship between the two prefects, the prefectures of Gaul and Italy were temporarily united into a single administration under the collegial government of father and son, and, when Ausonius laid down the office in the last month of 379, again divided. In 379 he was consul. His death occurred later than 393. One of his most intimate friends was his pupil Pontius Paulinus, and he was in touch with many other men of literary importance, such as Symmachus and Drepanius Pacatus. His son-in-law Thalassius was the father (by a first wife) of the poet Paulinus of Pella. The works of Ausonius have been edited by Schenkl (in Mon. Germ. Hist.) and by Peiper (1886).

Of Pontius PAULINUS of Nola, the most important of various people of the same name (to be distinguished from (1) Paulinus of Pella, (2) the author of the Life of St. Ambrose, and (3) Paulinus of Périgueux, who in the latter half of fifth century wrote a Life of St. Martin), there are extant various works both poetical and, in prose, epistles and a panegyric on Theodosius i. Born about 354, he retired to Nola in 394 and died 431 (there is an account of his death in a letter of Uranius to Pacatus, printed in Migne, Patr. Lat., vol. 53). His descriptions of Churches at Nola, in Epistle 32 and in some of his poems (18, 21, 27, 28), are of great importance for the history of Christian architecture. A new edition of his works is much wanted. That in Migne’s Patrologia is most convenient for reference (Monograph: A. Bose, Paulin und seine Zeit, 1856).

PAULINUS of Pella (his father, a native of Burdigala, was Prætorian Prefect of Illyricum; which explains the birth of Paulinus in Macedonia) is known by his poem entitled Eucharisticon Deo sub ephemeridis meæ textu (published in De la Bigne, Bibliot. Patr., Appendix col. 281, ed. 1579); contains one or two important notices of events in Aquitania at the time of Ataulf’s invasion. The poet, thirty years old then, was appointed comes largitionum by the tyrant Attalus,

Ut me conquirens solacia vana tyrannus Attalus absentem casso oneraret honoris Nomine, private comitivae largitionis.

Burdigala was burnt down by the Goths, who, not knowing that he held this dignity, stripped him and his mother of their property. He went to the neighbouring Vasates; induced the Alans to separate from the Goths and undertake the Roman cause; and the town was delivered by their intervention.

It is probable that Claudius CLAUDIANUS was born in Egypt and certain that he belonged to Alexandria and spent his early years there (cp. Sidonius Apoll. ix. 275, and Birt’s preface to his ed. of Claudian, ad init.). His father Claudian (cp. C.I.L., 6, 1710) may be identical with Claudian the brother of the philosopher Maximus, Julian’s teacher (Eunapius, Vit. Soph., p. 47 and 101, ed. Boiss.; Birt, ib. p. vi.). At Alexandria he wrote poems in Greek, and a fragment of his Γιγαντομαχία has been preserved. (There seems to have been another Greek poet of the same name, who wrote in the reign of Theodosius ii., and to him may be ascribed perhaps some Christian epigrams. But it is certain that the great Claudian wrote in Greek, 4 and his authorship of the Γιγαντομαχία has been successfully vindicated by Birt.) He seems to have come to Italy in or before AD 394, where he obtained a small post in one of the departments (scrinia) under the control of the magister officiorum; and his poetical talents were discovered in the senatorial circles of Rome. He was patronised by Rufinus Synesius Hadrianus, a countryman of his own, who held the post of Count of the Sacred Largesses ( AD 395; he was Mag. Offic., 397-399, and subsequently Praet. Praef. of Italy), and by members of the great Anician family, in the years 394 and 395, before he was discovered and “taken up” by Stilicho and the court of Honorius. From 396 to 404 he was a sort of poet laureate to the Imperial court; Honorius was his Augustus, Stilicho his Maecenas. His fame and favour did not bring any remarkable advancement in his career in the civil service; by the year 400 he had become tribune and notary. But he enjoyed the ample honour of having his statue erected (perhaps at the beginning of AD 400; Birt, op. cit., xliv.) in the Forum of Trajan, and the inscription of this statue is preserved in the Museum of Naples. It is printed in C.I.L., 6, 1710, and runs as follows:—

CL] CLAVDIANI V C CLA]VDIO CLAVDIANO V C TRI BV]NO ET NOTARIO INTER CETERAS DE]CENTES ARTES PRAEGLORIOSISSIMO PO] ETARVM LICET AD MEMORIAM SEM PITERNAM CARMINA AB EODEM | SCRIPTA SVFFICIANT ADTAMEN TESTIMONII CRATIA OB IVDICII SVI EIDEM DDNN ARCADIVS ET HONORIVS EILICISSIMI AC DOCTISSIMI IMPERATORES SENATV PETENTE STATVAM IN FORO DIVI TRAIANI ERIGI COLLOCARIQVE IVSSERVNT ΕΙΝ ΕΝΙ ΒΙΡΓΙΛΙΟΙΟ ΝΟΟΝ ΚΑΙ ΜΟΤΑCΝ ΟΜΗΡΟΥ ΚΛΑΥΔΙΑΝΙΝ ΡΩΜΗ ΚΑΙ ΒΑCΙΛΗC ΕΘΕCΑΝ

We have no record of Claudian’s death; but it is a probability closely approaching certainty that he died in AD 404 (so Birt, p. lix.). The silence of his muse after this date, amidst the public events which ensued, is unintelligible on any other supposition. Here, if ever, a conclusion from silence is justified.

C HRONOLOGICAL T ABLE OF C LAUDIAN’S P OEMS ( AFTER B IRT )

Γιγαντομαχία	ad 394, or shortly before.
Panegyricus dictus Probino et Olybrio consulibus	ad 394 between Sept. and Dec.
Letters to Olybrius and Probinus (= Carm. Min., 40, 41)	ad 395.
Raptus Proserpinae	between ad 395 and 397.
Panegyr. de iii. consulatu Honorii	ad 395 between Sept. and Dec.
In Rufinum Libri i. and ii.	between ad 395 Dec. and ad 396 July.
Carm. Min., 32	ad 396 or later.
Carm. Min., 21, 22	ad 396.
Carm. Min., 19	ad 397 or later.
Præfatio to Bk. ii. in Rufinum, and the whole work published	ad 397.
Panegyricus de iv. cons. Honorii	ad 397 between Sept. and Dec.
Epithalamium de nuptiis Honorii, and Fescennina de nupt. Hon.	ad 398 Jan., Feb.
Carm. Min., 45, 46, 47	between ad 398 and ad 404.
De Bello Gildonico	ad 398 Aug., Sept.
Panegyricus dictus Manlio Theodoro consuli	ad 398 between Oct. and Dec.
In Eutropium Bk. i., written and published by itself	ad 399 between Jan. and June.
In Eutropium Bk. ii. and Præfatio	ad 399 between June and Sept.
Carm. Min., 25 (Epithalamium dict. Palladio)	ad 399.
De consul. Stilichonis and Præfatio	between ad 399 Sept. and ad 400 Jan.
Carm. Min., 48, Carm. Min., appendix 4	between ad 400 and 404.
Carm. Min., 41	ad 400 or 401.
Carm. Min., 20	before ad 401.
Carm. Min., 50	autumn 401.
De bello Gothico	ad 402 April, May.
Panegyr. dict. de vi. cons. Honorii	ad 403 between Sept. and Dec.
Carm. Min., 30 and 53	ad 404 early months.

This table may be found convenient by those who have the older editions of Claudian. More details, and the proofs of the chronology, will be found in Th. Birt’s Preface to his complete and admirable edition of Claudian (in Mon. Germ. Hist.). A handy text founded on Birt’s work has been published by I. Koch (1893). Cp. also Jeep, Cl. Claudiani Carmina, 1876-9. Vogt, de Claudiani carminum quæ Stiliconem prædicant fide historica, 1863. Ney, Vindiciæ Claudianeæ, 1865.

Aurelius PRUDENTIUS Clemens — the first distinctly Christian Latin poet — was a Spaniard by birth (born AD 348). He gave up a secular career at the age of fifty-seven and spent the remainder of his life in composing Christian poetry. For historical purposes his most important work is the Contra Symmachum in two Books, on the question of the Altar of Victory. It is important to determine the date of this work. It seems decisive (as Birt has observed in his Preface to Claudian) that in Bk. ii. Prudentius sings of the victory over Alaric at Pollentia but does not mention the triumph of Verona (see below, vol. v. Appendix 9). It follows that the work Contra Symmachum appeared between May 402 and August 403; another inference is that Symmachus was alive (cp. Gibbon, chap. xxviii. n. 22) in the year 402-3. (Birt points out a number of verbal echoes which show that the muse of the Christian poet was stimulated by the “Gothic War” of the pagan.) It seems highly probable that this controversial poem was called forth by an actual permission granted by Honorius to restore the Altar of Victory in AD 399. At least this is a very plausible inference from a line (19) of Claudian in the Præf. to De cons. Stil. iii. (a poem of that year): —

advexit reduces secum Victoria Musas,

combined with de vi. cons. Hon. 597: —

adfuit ipsa suis ales Victoria templis Romanae tutela togae: quae divite penna Patricii reverenda fovet sacraria cœtus castrorumque eadem comes indefessa tuorum nunc tandem fruitur votis atque omne futurum te Romae seseque tibi promittit in aevum.

(Edition of Prudentius: H. Dressel, 1860. “Translations from Prudentius,” Rev. F. St. J. Thackeray, 1890.)

The most distinguished poet 5 in the reign of Valentinian iii., before the rise of Sidonius, was the Spaniard, Flavius MEROBAUDES. Sidonius mentions, without naming him, in Carm. ix. 296 sqq., as one who was honoured (like Claudian) by a statue in the Forum of Trajan.

sed nec tertius ille nunc legetur Baetin qui patrium semel relinquens undosae petiit sitim Ravennae, plosores cui fulgidam Quirites et carus popularitate princeps Traiano statuam foro locarunt.

Sirmondus brilliantly guessed the identity of the poet referred to in these lines, and his guess was confirmed by the discovery of the basis of the statue, with the full inscription, beginning Fl.: Merobaudi vs com. sc., and ending: dedicata iv. kal. Aug. Conss. DD NN Theodosio vx. et Valentiniano iv. About the same time fragments of a poet of that age were discovered in a MS. of St. Gall, and the text of the Inscription enabled Niebuhr (by means of verbal similarities) to establish that these relics belonged to Merobaudes. First edited by Niebuhr, they were printed by Bekker in the Bonn Corpus Byz. (in the same volume as Corippus). The following are some of the points of historical interest in these fragments: —

Carmina I. and II. reflect the establishment of Galla Placidia and her son Valentinian in the West after the overthrow of the usurper John by the help of Theodosius ii. The verse on the child Valentinian (I., 11): —

hic ubi sacra parens placidi petit oscula nati,

has a curious interest owing to the epithet. The child who is here placidus (with a play on his mother’s name) is destined to be more familiar as the mature, effeminate placidus, branded for ever with infamy by another poet: —

Aetium Placidus mactavit semivir amens.

The victory over John and the betrothal of Valentinian with Eudoxia are thus referred to (l. 9): —

cui natura dedit, victoria reddidit orbem claraque longinquos praebuit aula toros.

For the intimate relation between the courts of Ravenna and Constantinople, such a full and candid expression of gratitude to the Eastern sovereign, as the following, on the part of a poet of Ravenna, is of much significance, C. ii., 13, 14: —

sic dominos secura sui de stemmate regni continuat proprios dum creat aula novos.

C. iv. is a hendecasyllabic poem on the birthday of Gaudentius the son of Aetius. The sojourn of Aetius as a hostage with the Goths is mentioned: —

vix puberibus pater sub annis objectus Geticis puer catenis, bellorum mora, fœderis sequester.

The most important fragment is that of the Panegyric on the third consulship of Aetius ( AD 446) with a Preface in prose. He refers to his exploits against the Armorici (l. 8): —

lustrat Aremoricos iam mitior incola saltus;

he describes the peace of AD 442 with Gaiseric ( insessor Libyes ) and alludes to the marriage of Huneric with Eudoxia (ll. 24-30).

27 nunc hostem exutus pactis propioribus arsit Romanam vincire fidem Latiosque parentes adnumerare sibi sociamque intexere prolem.

The death of the father of Aetius and the story of that general’s youth are narrated (l. 110 sqq. ), and the suppression of troubles in Gaul, probably caused by the bagaudae, is celebrated (148 sqq. ). 6 The deliverance of Narbo is specially emphasised (l. 20): —

sed belliger ultor captivum reseravit iter clausasque recepit expulso praedone vias, c.

PROSPER TIRO, of Aquitaine, lived in the first half of the fifth century. He was probably in holy orders, and was an admirer of St. Augustine. He compiled an Epitome chronicon, based almost entirely on Jerome’s chronicle, and published it in AD 433 ( first edition ). (1) From the crucifixion forward, Prosper added the consuls of each year, derived from a consular list. (2) He continued the chronicle of Jerome to AD 433, the year of publication. (3) He introduced notices from some of St. Augustine’s works. The second edition appeared AD 443, the third AD 445, the fourth (which some of the extant MSS. represent) AD 451, in each case brought down to the date of publication. The fifth and last edition appeared AD 455, after the death of Valentinian, which it records. The compilation has been very carelessly done, both in the earlier part which is based on Jerome and in the later independent part, AD 378-455. But in lack of other sources Prosper is very important for the first half of the fifth century. The authoritative edition is that of Mommsen (in Chronica Minora, i. p. 343 sqq., 1892), on whose preface this notice is based.

From the true Prosper Tiro (whom Gibbon always cites as Prosper) we must carefully distinguish another chronicle, which for some time went under Prosper’s name. This is what used to be called the Chronicon Imperiale. 7 It ended with the year 452, and was ascribed to Prosper, because the last notices of Prosper’s chronicle, AD 453-455, were added to it in the MSS. But it came to be seen that the two chronicles were not from the same author; the Chronicon Imperiale gives Imperial not Consular years; and the strange practice was adopted of distinguishing it from the work of the true Prosper by giving it the true Prosper’s full name — “Prosper Tiro.” This practice was followed by Gibbon. It must therefore be carefully remembered that in Gibbon’s references “Prosper” means Prosper Tiro, while “Prosper Tiro” means a totally distinct chronicle with which neither Prosper Tiro nor any one of Prosper’s name had anything to do.

This anonymous chronicle has been edited by Mommsen in Chron. Min. i. p. 617 sqq., along with another anonymous chronicle 8 (which goes down to AD 511), under the title CHRONICA GALLICA. The earlier part is based on Jerome’s chronicle. The compiler also used the additions made by Rufinus to the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius; some works of Ambrose, Augustine and Cassian; and the Life of Ambrose by Paulinus. From AD 395 to the end he either used written sources now lost or verbal information. He is quite independent of Prosper, and sympathises with the opponents of Augustine in the Pelagian controversy. His work contains two important notices on the Saxon conquest of Britain ( AD 408 and 441).

This later part of the work represents a Gallic chronicle, perhaps written at Massilia (cp. Mommsen, p. 628), which was used by the compiler of the other chronicle, mentioned above, which goes down to AD 511. The later part of this chronicle is taken doubtless from a continuation of the Gallic chronicle. The author of the chronicle of AD 511 drew also upon Orosius and Idatius and upon the Chronicle of Constantinople (Mommsen, p. 627).

In future it would be convenient to refer to Gibbon’s “Prosper Tiro” and this second chronicle as the CHRONICLE OF 452 and the CHRONICLE OF 511. The South-Gallic Annals were continued in the sixth century and were used by Marius of Avenches, Maximus of Saragossa, and Isidore of Seville. See vol. v. Appendix 2. With the South-Gallic Chronicles Mommsen has published (from a Brussels and a Madrid MS.) a short untitled NARRATION concerning Emperors of the Valentinianean and Theodosian House (Valentinian, Valens, Gratian, Theodosius, Arcadius, and Honorius), written by a “contemporary and admirer” of Theodosius ii. It contains no new historical fact; but is interesting in having the notice that Honorius died of dropsy, which is found in no other Latin record, and among Greek writers only in Philostorgius (12, 13).

The second of the two fragments which, accidentally joined together in an MS. and hence falsely supposed to belong to the same work, go under the name of ANONYMUS VALESII, 9 is highly important for events in Italy for the period which it covers from AD 475 to 526, that is to say, for Odovacar and Theodoric. It is a fragment of annals written at Ravenna in the sixth century, when that city had been recovered by the Empire. The fragment (of which more will be said in vol. v. Appendix 2) is mentioned here, because it is edited by Mommsen (in Chronica Minora, I. p. 259 sqq. ) as belonging to one of a series of annals and chronicles which had a common source in a lost document which he calls CHRONICA ITALICA and which had formerly been called by Waitz the Ravennate Annals, a name which disguises the fact that the compilation had been begun before Ravenna became the seat of the western Emperors.

The other chief documents which contain the material for arriving at the original constitution of the Chronica Italica are as follows: —

FASTI VINDOBONENSES, preserved in a Vienna MS. in two recensions (distinguished as priores and posteriores ), to which are to be added some excerpts in a St. Gall MS. (excerpta Sangallensia). This chronicle used to be known as the Anonymus Cuspiniani, having been first published by Cuspinianus in 1553. The prior recension comes down to AD 493, the posterior to AD 539, but both are mutilated, the prior omitting the years 404-454.

The CONTINUATION OF PROSPER, preserved in a Copenhagen MS. 10 (compiled in the seventh century towards the end of the reign of Heraclius, probably in Italy). In the later part of his work he made use of the chronicle of Isidore (who himself used the Chronica Italica) and the Chronica Italica.

The Latin version of a Greek chronicle (written at Alexandria after AD 387), known as the BARBARUS of Scaliger.

Excerpts in the Liber Pontificalis of Ravenna, written by Agnellus in the ninth century.

These documents are edited by Mommsen in parallel columns in vol. i. of Chronica Minora. But as the Chronica Italica were utilised by Prosper, Marcellinus Comes, Cassiodorius, Marius of Aventicum, Isidore, Paulus Diaconus, Theophanes, these authors must be also taken into account. The “Chronica Italica” seems to have been first published in AD 387, and its basis was the chronicle of Constantinople. Afterwards it was from time to time brought up to date, perhaps, as Mommsen suggests, by the care of booksellers. In the sixth century it was probably re-edited and carried on, after the overthrow of the Gothic kingdom, by Archbishop Maximian of Ravenna, whose “chronicle” is cited by Agnellus. But there is no reason to suppose that he had anything to do with the illiterate fragment of the socalled Anonymus Valesii.

The so-called HISTORIA MISCELLA is made up of three distinct works of different ages: (1) Books 1-10 = the history of Eutropius, coming down to the death of Jovian; cp. vol. i. Appendix 1; (2) Books 11-16, the work of Paulus Diaconus, who lived at the end of the eighth century and is more famous by his History of the Lombards; (3) the continuation of Landulfus Sagax, who lived more than 200 years later. The second part, which concerns us here, is compiled from Prosper, Orosius, Jordanes and others, but contains some notices drawn from lost sources. The work may be consulted in Muratori’s Scriptores Rerum Italicarum, vol. i., or in Migne’s Patrol. Lat., vol. xcv.

Paulus OROSIUS of Tarraco in Spain dedicated to his friend St. Augustine his Historiae adversum Paganos in 7 Books. He was young when, at St. Augustine’s suggestion, he wrote the work shortly after AD 417. It was intended to illustrate and vindicate the Divine dispensation of a history of the world from the deluge to his own day, and to show that Christianity was not the cause of the evil times (see below on Salvian). The only part of importance as historical material is the last portion of Bk. vii., which deals with the latter part of the fourth, and first seventeen years of the fifth, century. His spirit is that of a narrow-minded provincial bigot, but he has some very important entries for the history of his own time — for example on the campaign of Pollentia and the invasion of Radagaisus. [Edition C. Zangemeister in the Corpus Script. Eccles. Lat. 1882; and text (Teubner) by same editor 1889.]

The importance of the work of SALVIAN on the Divine Government ( De Gubernatione Dei, in 8 Books) for the state of the Empire in the fifth century is not adequately realised by Gibbon. It is (as Mr. Hodgkin justly says, i. p. 918, in his admirable chapter on the book) “one of our most valuable sources of information as to the inner life of the dying Empire and the moral character of its foes.” Salvian was a presbyter of Massilia. He was married, but after the birth of a daughter he and his wife took a vow of chastity for life. He seems to have been born c. 400 and was still living in 480. He wrote his book before the middle of the century.

The purpose of this book was to answer the great problem which at that time was perplexing thoughtful people: Why is civilised society dissolving and breaking up before the barbarians, if there is a Divine governance of the world? This question had been dealt with before by Augustine in the De Civitate Dei, and by Orosius in the Hist. adversus Paganos. Their various answers have been well compared by Mr. Hodgkin. Augustine’s answer was merely negative: the evils which had come upon Rome were not the effect of the introduction of Christianity. Orosius denied the existence of the evils. But a good deal had happened between 417 and 440; and in 440 even Orosius could hardly have ventured to maintain his thesis. Salvian’s answer was: these evils are the effects of our vices. He draws a vivid and highly exaggerated contrast between Roman vices and Teutonic virtues. He dwells especially on a matter which came very directly within his own knowledge, the abuses and unjust exactions practised by Gallic officials.

So far as Salvian’s arguments are concerned there is nothing to be added to Gibbon’s criticism (xxxv. n. 12): “Salvian has attempted to explain the moral government of the Deity: a task which may be readily performed by supposing that the calamities of the wicked are judgments, and those of the righteous trials. ”

Tyrannius RUFINUS (born at Concordia C. AD 345, died in Sicily, AD 410) lived in Egypt for some time, where he was thrown into prison, on the occasion of the persecution which was conducted with the permission of the Emperor Valens, by Lucius, the Arian successor of Athanasius at Alexandria. Having quitted Egypt, on his release, he spent nearly twenty years as a monk on the Mount of Olives. During this period he became acquainted with Bacurius the first Christian king of the Iberians, and with Oedesius the companion of Frumentius, the apostle of the Ethiopians. He returned to Italy in 397 and spent the later part of his life at Aquileia. This period was troubled by a famous controversy with his friend Jerome. Rufinus translated many Greek works into Latin, among others Origen’s treatise περὶ ἀρχω̂ν. The controversy arose out of certain references to Jerome in the Preface to this translation, and it was represented that Rufinus misused the authority of Jerome’s name to cover heretical doctrines of Origen. The most important works of Rufinus are his Ecclesiastical History in two Books, being a continuation of that of Eusebius, which he rendered into Latin; and his history of Egyptian Anchorets. For the origin of monasticism the latter work is of considerable importance.

MODERN WORKS. Besides those mentioned in Appendix 1, vol. i., and Appendix 10, vol. ii.: H. Richter, Das weströmische Reich, besonders unter den Kaisern Gratian, Valentinian II. und Maximus (375-388), 1865; J. Ifland and A. Güldenpenning, der Kaiser Theodosius der Grosse, 1878; A. Güldenpenning, Geschichte des oströmischen Reiches unter den Kaisern Arcadius und Theodosius ii., 1885. V. Schultze, Geschichte des Untergangs des griechisch-römischen Heidentums, 1887.

For the barbarian invasions and the Teutonic Kingdoms: Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders, vol. i. and ii. (ed. 2, 1892); F. Dahn, Könige der Germanen; and the same writer’s Urgeschichte der germanischen und romanischen Völker; R. Pallmann’s Geschichte der Völkerwanderung; E. von Wietersheim’s Geschichte der Völkerwanderung (ed. 2 by Dahn, 1880-1); Köpke’s Anfänge des Königthums bei den Gothen. There are also special histories of the chief German invaders: I. Aschbach, Geschichte der Westgothen; F. Papencordt’s Geschichte der vandalischen Herrschaft in Afrika; C. Binding’s Geschichte des burgundisch-romanischen Königreichs. The work of Zeuss: Die Deutschen und die Nachbarstämme, is a most valuable storehouse of references.

Special Monographs: on Stilicho (cp. above, under Claudian): R. Keller, Stilicho, 1884; Rosenstein, Alarich und Stilicho, in Forsch. zur deutschen Geschichte, vol. 3, 1863; Vogt, Die politischen Bestrebungen Stilichos, 1870; on Chrysostom: F. Ludwig, Der heilige Johannes Chrys. in seinem Verhältniss zum byzantinischen Hof, 1883, and Rev. W. R. W. Stephens, Life and Times of John Chrysostom. (Others are referred to in the footnotes.)

6.: PICTS AND SCOTS — ( P. 226, 227 )

“Cæsar tells us that the inhabitants of Britain in his day painted themselves with a dye extracted from wood; by the time, however, of British independence under Carausius and Allectus, in the latter part of the third century, the fashion had so far fallen off in Roman Britain that the word Picti, Picts, or painted men, had got to mean the peoples beyond the Northern Wall, and the people on the Solway were probably included under the same name, though they also went by the separate denomination of Atecotti. Now all these Picts were natives of Britain, and the word Picti is found applied to them for the first time in a panegyric by Eumenius, in the year 296; but in the year 360 another painted people appeared on the scene. They came from Ireland, and to distinguish these two sets of painted foes from one another Latin historians left the painted natives to be called Picti, as had been done before, and for the painted invaders from Ireland they retained, untranslated, a Celtic word of the same (or nearly the same) meaning, namely Scotti. Neither the Picts nor the Scotti probably owned these names, the former of which is to be traced to Roman authors, while the latter was probably given the invaders from Ireland by the Brythons, whose country they crossed the sea to ravage. The Scots, however, did recognise a national name, which described them as painted or tattooed men. . . . This word was Cruithnig, which is found applied equally to the painted people of both Islands.” “The portion of Ireland best known to history as Pictish was a pretty well-defined district consisting of the present county of Antrim and most of that of Down.” (Professor Rhŷs, Early Britain, p. 235 sqq. ) But Professor Rhŷs now takes another view of Picti, which he regards not as Latin, but as native and connected with the Gallic Pictones. See Scottish Review, July, 1891.

Ammianus (278) divided the inhabitants of the North of Britain (the Picts) into two nations, the Dicalidonæ and Verturiones. “Under the former name, which seems to mean the people of the two Caledonias, we appear to have to do with the Caledonias proper . . . while in later times the word Verturiones yielded in Goidelic the well-known name of the Brythons of the kingdom of Fortrenn: they were possibly the people previously called Boresti, but that is by no means certain.” (Rhŷs, ib. p. 93.)

The Atecotti seem to have occupied part of the land between the walls of Hadrian and Antoninus, where the Maeatae dwelled (see Mr. Haverfield’s map of Roman Britain, in Poole’s Historical Atlas of Modern Europe). Professor Rhŷs proposes to identify them with the earlier Genunians (Γενουνία μοɩ̂ρα of Pausanias, 8, 43) and the later Picts of Galloway ( ib. p. 89, 90).

7.: THE DEATH OF COUNT THEODOSIUS — ( P. 236 )

The cause of the sudden execution of Theodosius at Carthage in 396 AD is obscure. We can only suppose that he had powerful enemies — friends of the governor Romanus. H. Richter (das weströmische Reich, p. 401) imputes the responsibility to Merobaudes. But Merobaudes was the minister of Gratian in Gaul, and not of Justina and Valentinian in Mediolanum (as Mr. Hodgkin observes). Mr. Hodgkin conjectures that the blow came not from Mediolanum but from Antioch. The name of Theodosius began with the four fatal letters Θ ε ο δ, “and it seems therefore allowable to suppose that the incantation scene at Antioch four years previously — the laurel tripod, the person in linen mantle and with linen socks, who shook the magic cauldron and made the ring dance up and down among the twenty-four letters of the alphabet — were links in the chain of causation which led the blameless veteran to his doom” (Italy and her Invaders, i. p. 292). And certainly we can well imagine that the superstitious Valens watched with apprehension the career of every eminent officer whose name began with those four letters, and observing the distinguished services of the Count of Africa used influence at Milan to procure his fall.

8.: MELLOBAUDES — ( P. 236, 257 )

Gibbon has confused Mellobaudes with the more eminent Merobaudes in two places (p. 236 and 257). Mellobaudes (or Mallobaudes: the MSS. of Ammian vary) was a Frank king and held the post of comes domesticorum under Gratian. See Ammian, 30, 3, 7, and 31, 10, 6; and cp. above p. 306.

This Mellobaudes must also be distinguished from another less important Mellobaudes (or Mallobaudes), a Frank who was tribunus armaturarum under Constantius; see Ammian, 14, 11, 21, and 15, 5, 6. These namesakes are confounded in the index of Gardthausen’s Ammianus. See Richter, Das weströmische Reich, p. 283.

Merobaudes deserves prominence as the first of a series of men of barbarian origin who rose to power in the Imperial service; Merobaudes, Arbogast, Stilicho, Aetius, Ricimer. He married into the family of Valentinian (Victor, Epit. 45), and was consul in AD 377.

9.: LIST OF KINGS OF PERSIA, FROM SAPOR II. TO KOBAD — ( P. 242 )

Sapor (Shāpūr) ii. dies AD 379.

Ardashir ii. succeeds AD 379, Aug. 19.

Sapor iii. succeeds AD 383, Aug. 18.

Bahrām iv. succeeds AD 388, Aug. 16.

Yezdegerd i. succeeds AD 399, Aug. 14.

Bahrām v. succeeds AD 420, Aug. 8.

Yezdegerd ii. succeeds AD 438, Aug. 4.

Hormizd iii. succeeds AD 457, July 30.

Pērōz came to the throne in 459, but counted from the first year of Hormizd, whom he deposed.

Balāsh succeeds AD 484, July 23

Kobad (Kavādh) succeeds AD 488, July 22; died Sept. 13, AD 531.

The dates given are those of the beginning of the Persian year in which the king succeeded and from which he counted, not the actual days of accession; and are taken from Nöldeke, Excurs i. to his Geschichte der Perser und Araber zur Zeit der Sassaniden. Thus Bahrām v. did not actually possess the throne till 421 (spring).

10.: THE ORIGIN OF THE HUNS — ( C. XXVI .)

Excerpts of ethnological interest from the voluminous Annals of the Han dynasty (in about a hundred volumes) 1 were translated by Mr. Wylie (at Sir H. Howorth’s request) and published in the third and fourth volumes of the Journal of the Anthropol. Institute. Sir H. Howorth wrote a preface, arguing that the Hiung-Nu cannot be identified with the Huns. His argument is: the Hiung-Nu were Turks; the Huns were Ugrians; therefore the Huns were not Hiung-Nu. “The Huns, as I have elsewhere argued, were a race of Ugrians led by a caste of another race now represented by some of the Lesghian tribes of the Caucasus. The Hiung-Nu were not Ugrians. It was Klaproth, whose grasp of the whole subject of the ethnography of Northern Asia was most masterly, and who, notwithstanding some failures, I hold to have been facile princeps among Asiatic ethnologists, first proved that the Hiung-Nu were Turks, and his conclusions were endorsed by the very competent authority of Abel Remusat, and since by other scholars.”

That the Hiung-Nu were a Turkic race (the correct way of stating it is: the Turks were Hiung-Nu) may indeed be regarded as certain; but so much cannot be said of Sir H. Howorth’s other premiss, that the Huns were Ugrians.

For Klaproth’s proof that the Huns were Lesghians, see his Tableaux historiques de l’Asie, and Howorth, Journal Anth. Inst. iii. p. 453-4. His comparative list of Hunnic and Lesghian names presents such strikingly close resemblances that it is hard to resist his conclusions; and his identification of the Hunnic var “river” (Jordanes, Get. 52) with Lesghian or, ouor, is plausible. While admitting that the Huns may be connected with this Caucasian race, I cannot follow Sir H. Howorth in his further speculations, or admit that an affinity has been proved with the Finno-Ugrian languages. Sir H. Howorth’s comparative table of Hunnic with Hungarian names (p. 470) is quite unconvincing.

On the other hand I cannot accept as proven, or as more than a brilliant conjecture, the identification of the Huns with the Hiung-Nu. The thesis has been recently defended by Mr. E. H. Parker, a Chinese scholar, whose work I have used and referred to in additional footnotes on Gibbon’s account of the Hiung-Nu in this volume. In “A Thousand Years of the Tartars,” p. 99, Mr. Parker puts it thus: The Northern Hiung-Nu, unable to maintain their ground against various enemies, “disappeared far away to the North, many of them no doubt finding their way by the upper waters of the Selinga and the Irtysh to Issekul, the Aral, and the Caspian, struggling with the Bashkirs, the Alans, and the unknown tribes then occupying Russia into Europe.” And again in an article on “The Origin of the Turks” in the English Hist. Review, July, 1896, p. 434, he defends the view that “the Hiung-Nu were in fact the Huns, who afterwards appeared as the Hunni in Europe.”

While I am not convinced that on the ethnographical side there is any a priori objection to the identification of the Huns with the “Hiung” slaves — Mr. Parker observes that to this day Hiung “is in some parts of China still pronounced Hiln ” — I cannot, from the historical side, see the justification for asserting the identity. The resemblance of the name is in fact the only proof. It is a mortal leap from the kingdom of the northern Zenghi to the steppes of Russia, and he who takes it is supported on the wings of fancy, not on the ground of fact. On this question research in the Chinese annals has added nothing to the data which were so ably manipulated by Deguignes.

The Geougen, who will be more important afterwards in connection with the Turks (see chapter xlii.), were wrongly identified with the Avars by Deguignes. Mr. Parker (Eng. Hist. Rev. loc. cit. p. 435) is unable to decide whether they were of Hunnic or Tungusic origin, and suspects a mixture of both races.

The close connection of the Huns and Avars seems clear. Professor Vámbéry in his A Magyarok Eredete (1882), p. 415 sqq., has collected the Hun and Avar words and names that can be gleaned from literature, and attempted to interpret them by the help of Turkish. His list however is not complete.

11.: THE SARMATIAN WAR OF ad 378 — ( P. 324 , n. 112 )

A Sarmatian campaign of Theodosius in 378 AD after his recall from Spain is mentioned by Theodoret, v. 5; and Theodoret’s statement, which has been questioned by some, is confirmed, as H. Richter has pointed out (das weströmische Reich, p. 691), by Themistius and Pacatus. In his Panegyric of AD 379 Themistius refers to it thus (xiv. 182 C): ἐξ ἐκείνου δὲ καὶ σὲ ἐκάλουν ἐπὶ τὴν βασιλείαν Ῥωμαɩ̂οι, ἐξότου Σαυρομάτας λυττω̂ντας καὶ τὴν πρὸς τῷ ποταμῷ γη̂ν ἄπασαν ἐπιδραμόντας μόνος ἀνέστειλας κ.τ.λ. Pacatus, c. 10: vix tecta Hispana susceperas, iam Sarmatias tabernaculis tegebaris; vix emerita arma suspenderas, iam hosti armatus instabas; vix Iberum tuum videras, iam Istro prætendebas. Cp. Ifland, p. 59, and Kaufmann, Philologus, 31, p. 472 sqq.

12.: CHRONOLOGY OF THE PACIFICATION OF THE GOTHS, ad 379, 380 — ( P. 329 sqq. )

The account given in our sources of the warfare in Thrace and Illyricum during the years 379-80 and the subjugation of the Goths is very confused, and Gibbon has made no attempt to distinguish the events of the two years. With the help of laws in the Codex Theod. (of which the dates however cannot be implicitly trusted) Ifland has extracted with some pains the following chronology from Zosimus, Jordanes, and the ecclesiastical historians, with an occasional indication from Ambrose (Der Kaiser Theodosius, p. 65-86).

379, Spring:	Theodosius with Gratian at Sirmium.
379, before middle of June:	Theodosius at Thessalonica (c. Th. x. 1, 12); Embassy of senate of Constantinople greets Theodosius there; Themistius delivers his panegyric, written for the occasion, some weeks later (Or. 14). Having organised his army Theodosius divides his forces. One part he leads northward to act against the Goths in Dacia and Moesia; the other under Modares is to operate in Thrace.
379, 6 July:	Theodosius at Scupi (c. Th. vi. 30, 2).
379,	Modares gains a great victory in Thrace.
379, Aug.:	Theodosius at Vicus Augusti (on the Danube?), c. Th. xii. 13, 4.
379,	Roman victories during autumn (see chronicles of Idatius and Prosper; Aur. Victor, 48; Socrates, 5, 6; Sozomen, vii. 4);
379,	fœdus made with the Goths, who give hostages (Sozomen, vii. 4);
379, Nov. 17:	proclamation of Roman victories over Goths, Alans and Huns (Idatius Fasti, ad ann.).
380, January:	Theodosius again in Thessalonica (c. Th. ix. 27, 1).
380, February:	illness of Theodosius (Feb. 27, his intolerant edict, C. Th. xvi. 1, 2); his illness lasts during the summer.
380,	Goths begin new hostilities; two movements distinguished: (1) West Gothic under Fritigern against Epirus, Thessaly, Achaia; (2) East Gothic under Alatheus and Safrax against Pannonia and Upper Moesia.
380,	Difficulties of Theodosius in coping with the Goths. Gratian sends troops to his aid, under Bauto and Arbogastes. Cp. Zosimus, iv. 33.
380, Second half of year:	Fritigern disappears; Athanaric crosses the Danube into Roman territory; Gratian himself acts against the Goths in Pannonia (Zos., ib.; Jordanes, 27).
380, 17 August:	Theodosius at Hadrianople; 8 September, at Sirmium.
380, 14 or 24 November:	Theodosius enters Constantinople in triumph (cp. below, vol. v. p. 18, n. 37).

Omnes qui plus poterant in palatio, adulandi professores jam docti, recte consulta prospereque completa vertebant in deridiculum: talia sine modo strepentes insulse; in odium venit cum victoriis suis capella, non homo; ut hirsutum Julianum carpentes, appellantesque loquacem talpam, et purpuratam simiam, et litterionem Græcum: et his congruentia plurima atque vernacula [ legendum cum Ungero aeque ut tintinnabula] principi resonantes, audire hæc taliaque gestienti, virtutes ejus obruere verbis impudentibus conabantur, ut segnem incessentes et timidum et umbratilem, gestaque secus verbis comptioribus exornantem. Ammianus, xvii. 11.

Ammian. xvi. 12. The orator Themistius (iv. p. 56, 57) believed whatever was contained in the Imperial letters which were addressed to the senate of Constantinople. Aurelius Victor, who published his Abridgment in the last year of Constantius, ascribes the German victories to the wisdom of the emperor, and the fortune of the Cæsar. Yet the historian, soon afterwards, was indebted to the favour or esteem of Julian for the honour of a brass statue, and the important offices of consular of the second Pannonia, and prefect of the city. Ammian. xxi. 10.

Callido nocendi artificio, accusatoriam diritatem laudum titulis peragebant. . . . Hæ voces fuerunt ad inflammanda odia probris omnibus potentiores. See Mamertin in Actione Gratiarum in Vet. Panegyr. xi. 5, 6.

[These are auxilia palatina (not legions; see vol. iii. Appendix 7); the best troops in the army, τέτταρας ἀριθμοὺς ( numeros ) τω̂ν κρατίστων πεζω̂ν, Julian, ad S. P. Q. Ath. p. 361, ed. Hertl.]

[ Ex numeris aliis (Amm. 20, 4, 2), a general expression for “from other troops,” inclusive of the legions.]

The minute interval, which may be interposed, between the hyeme adultâ and the primo vere of Ammianus (xx. 1 [3], 4, [2]), instead of allowing a sufficient space for a march of three thousand miles, would render the orders of Constantius as extravagant as they were unjust. The troops of Gaul could not have reached Syria till the end of autumn. The memory of Ammianus must have been inaccurate, and his language incorrect. [As to this criticism, see vol. ii. Appendix 10.]

Ammianus, xx. l. The valour of Lupicinus, and his military skill, are acknowledged by the historian, who, in his affected language, accuses the general of exalting the horns of his pride, bellowing in a tragic tone, and exciting a doubt whether he was more cruel or avaricious. The danger from the Scots and Picts was so serious that Julian himself had some thoughts of passing over into the island. [Constantius was doubtless ignorant of this danger.]

He granted them the permission of the cursus clavularis, or clabularis. These post-waggons are often mentioned in the Code, and were supposed to carry fifteen hundred pounds’ weight. See Vales. ad Ammian. xx. 4.

[So quarto rightly (Zos. iii. 9); Smith’s text and others give bows! ]

Most probably the palace of the baths ( Thermarum ), of which a solid and lofty hall still subsists in the rue de la Harpe. The buildings covered a considerable space of the modern quarter of the University; and the gardens, under the Merovingian kings, communicated with the abbey of St. Germain des Prez. By the injuries of time and the Normans, this ancient palace was reduced, in the twelfth century, to a maze of ruins; whose dark recesses were the scene of licentious love.

Explicat aula sinus montemque amplectitur alis; Multiplici latebrâ scelerum tersura ruborem. . . . . pereuntis sæpe pudoris Celatura nefas, Venerisque accommoda furtis.

(These lines are quoted from the Architrenius, l. iv. c. 8, a poetical work of John de Hauteville, or Hanville [Altavilla or Auvilla, near Rouen], a Monk of St. Alban’s about the year 1190 [1184]. See Warton’s Hist. of English Poetry, vol. i. dissert. ii.) Yet such thefts might be less pernicious to mankind than the theological disputes of the Sorbonne, which have been since agitated on the same ground. Bonamy, Mém. de l’Académie, tom. xv. p. 678-682.

Even in this tumultuous moment, Julian attended to the forms of superstitious ceremony, and obstinately refused the inauspicious use of a female necklace, or a horse-collar, which the impatient soldiers would have employed in the room of a diadem.

An equal proportion of gold and silver, five pieces of the former, one pound of the latter; the whole amounting to about five pounds ten shillings of our money.

For the whole narrative of this revolt, we may appeal to authentic and original materials; Julian himself (ad S. P. Q. Atheniensem, p. 282, 283, 284 [p. 362-366, ed. Hertl.]), Libanius (Orat. Parental. c. 44-48, in Fabricius Bibliot. Græc. t. vii. p. 269-273), Ammianus (xx. 4), and Zosimus (l. iii. p. 151, 152, 153 [c. 9]), who, in the reign of Julian, appears to follow the more respectable authority of Eunapius. With such guides we might neglect the abbreviators and ecclesiastical historians.

Eutropius, a respectable witness, uses a doubtful expression, “consensu militum” (x. 15). Gregory Nazianzen, whose ignorance might excuse his fanaticism, directly charges the apostate with presumption, madness, and impious rebellion, αὐθάδεια, ἀπόνοια, ἀσέβεια. Orat. iii. [= iv. ed. Migne] p. 67 [c. 26].

Julian. ad S. P. Q. Athen. p. 284 [p. 365, ed. H.]. The devout Abbé de la Bléterie (Vie de Julien, p. 159) is almost inclined to respect the devout protestations of a Pagan.

Ammian. xx. 5, with a note of Lindenbrogius on the Genius of the empire. Julian himself, in a confidential letter to his friend and physician, Oribasius (Epist. xvii. p. 384 [p. 496, ed. H.]), mentions another dream, to which, before the event, he gave credit; of a stately tree thrown to the ground, of a small plant striking a deep root into the earth. Even in his sleep, the mind of Cæsar must have been agitated by the hopes and fears of his fortune. Zosimus (l. iii. p. 155 [c. 9]) relates a subsequent dream.

The difficult situation of the prince of a rebellious army is finely described by Tacitus (Hist. 1, 80-85). But Otho had much more guilt, and much less abilities, than Julian.

To this ostensible epistle he added, says Ammianus, private letters, objurgatorias et mordaces, which the historian had not seen, and would not have published. Perhaps they never existed.

See the first transactions of his reign, in Julian. ad S. P. Q. Athen. p. 285, 286 [p. 367, 368]. Ammianus, xx. 5, 8. Liban. Orat. Parent. c. 49, 50, p. 273-275.

Liban. Orat. Parent. c. 50, p. 275, 276. A strange disorder, since it continued above seven years. In the factions of the Greek republics, the exiles amounted to 20,000 persons; and Isocrates assures Philip that it would be easier to raise an army from the vagabonds than from the cities. See Hume’s Essays, tom. i. p. 426, 427.

Julian (Epist. xxxviii. p. 414 [p. 535, ed. H.]) gives a short description of Vesontio, or Besançon; a rocky peninsula almost encircled by the river Doux [Doubs]; once a magnificent city, filled with temples, c., now reduced to a small town, emerging however from its ruins.

Vadomair entered into the Roman service, and was promoted from a Barbarian kingdom to the military rank of duke of Phœnicia. He still retained the same artful character (Ammian. xxi. 4): but, under the reign of Valens, he signalised his valour in the Armenian war (xxix. 1).

Ammian. xx. 10, xxi. 3, 4. Zosimus, l. iii. p. 155 [10].

Her remains were sent to Rome, and interred near those of her sister Constantina, in the suburb of the Via Nomentana, Ammian. xxi. 1. Libanius has composed a very weak apology to justify his hero from a very absurd charge: of poisoning his wife, and rewarding her physician with his mother’s jewels. (See the seventh of seventeen new orations, published at Venice 1754 [by A. Bongiovanni], from a MS. in St. Mark’s library, p. 117-127 [Or. 36, ed. Reiske].) Elpidius, the Prætorian prefect of the East, to whose evidence the accuser of Julian appeals, is arraigned by Libanius as effeminate and ungrateful; yet the religion of Elpidius is praised by Jerom (tom. i. p. 243), and his humanity by Ammianus (xxi. 6) [and Libanius praises him elsewhere, cp. Epp. 176 and 192].

Feriarum die quem celebrantes mense Januario Christiani Epiphania dictitant, progressus in eorum ecclesiam, solemniter numine orato discessit. Ammian. xxi. 2. Zonaras observes that it was on Christmas-day, and his assertion is not inconsistent; since the churches of Egypt, Asia, and perhaps Gaul celebrated on the same day (the sixth of January) the nativity and the baptism of their Saviour. The Romans, as ignorant as their brethren of the real date of his birth, fixed the solemn festival on the 25th of December, the Brumalia, or winter solstice, when the Pagans annually celebrated the birth of the Sun. See Bingham’s Antiquities of the Christian Church, l. xx. c. 4, and Beausobre, Hist. Critique du Manichéisme, tom. ii. p. 690-700.

The public and secret negotiations between Constantius and Julian must be extracted, with some caution, from Julian himself (Orat. ad S. P. Q. Athen. p. 286), Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 51, p. 276), Ammianus (xx. 9), Zosimus (l. iii. p. 154 [c. 9]) and even Zonaras (tom. ii. l. xiii. p. 20, 21, 22 [c. 10]), who, on this occasion, appears to have possessed and used some valuable materials.

Three hundred myriads or three millions of medimni, a corn-measure familiar to the Athenians, and which contained six Roman modii. Julian explains, like a soldier and a statesman, the danger of his situation, and the necessity and advantages of an offensive war (ad S. P. Q. Athen. p. 286, 287).

See his oration, and the behaviour of the troops, in Ammian. xxi. 5.

He sternly refused his hand to the suppliant prefect, whom he sent into Tuscany (Ammian. xxi. 5). Libanius, with savage fury, insults Nebridius, applauds the soldiers, and almost censures the humanity of Julian (Orat. Parent. c. 53, p. 278).

Ammian. xxi. 8. In this promotion, Julian obeyed the law which he publicly imposed on himself. Neque civilis quisquam judex nec militaris [ leg. militiæ] rector, allo quodam præter merita suffragante, ad potiorum [ leg. potiorem] veniat gradum (Ammian. xx. 5). Absence did not weaken his regard for Sallust, with whose name ( AD 363) he honoured the consulship.

Ammianus (xxi. 8) ascribes the same practice, and the same motive, to Alexander the Great and other skilful generals.

This wood was a part of the great Hercynian forest, which, in the time of Cæsar, stretched away from the country of the Rauraci (Basil) into the boundless regions of the North. See Cluver. Germania Antiqua, l. iii. c. 47.

Compare Libanius, Orat. Parent. c. 53, p. 278, 279, with Gregory Nazianzen, Orat. iii. p. 68 [iv. c. 47]. Even the saint admires the speed and secrecy of this march. A modern divine might apply to the progress of Julian the lines which were originally designed for another apostate:—

— So eagerly the fiend, O’er bog, or steep, through strait, rough, dense, or rare, With head, hands, wings, or feet, pursues his way And swims, or sinks, or wades, or creeps, or flies.

In that interval the Notitia places two or three fleets, the Lauriacensis (at Lauriacum, or Lorch), the Arlapensis, the Maginensis; and mentions five legions, or cohorts, of Liburnarii, who should be a sort of marines. Sect. lviii. edit. Labb.

Zosimus alone (l. iii. p. 156 [c. 10]) has specified this interesting circumstance. Mamertinus (in Panegyr. Vet. xi. 6, 7, 8), who accompanied Julian, as count of the sacred largesses, describes this voyage in a florid and picturesque manner, challenges Triptolemus and the Argonauts of Greece, c.

The description of Ammianus, which might be supported by collateral evidence, ascertains the precise situation of the Angustiæ Succorum, or passes of Succi. M. d’Anville, from the trifling resemblance of names, has placed them between Sardica and Naissus. For my own justification, I am obliged to mention the only error which I have discovered in the maps or writings of that admirable geographer. [The road from Constantinople crosses here the mountains which form the watershed between the Thracian plain and the basin of Sofia. Jireček, Gesch. der Bulgaren, p. 15.]

Whatever circumstances we may borrow elsewhere, Ammianus (xxi. 8, 9, 10) still supplies the series of the narrative.

Ammian. xxi. 9, 10. Libanius, Orat. Parent. c. 54, p. 279, 280. Zosimus, l. iii. p. 156, 157 [c. 10].

Julian (ad S. P. Q. Athen. p. 286 [p. 368, ed. H.]) positively asserts that he intercepted the letters of Constantius to the Barbarians: and Libanius as positively affirms that he read them on his march to the troops and the cities. Yet Ammianus (xxi. 4) expresses himself with cool and candid hesitation, si famæ solius admittenda est fides. He specifies, however, an intercepted letter from Vadomair to Constantius, which supposes an intimate correspondence between them: “Cæsar tuus disciplinam non habet.”

Zosimus mentions his epistles to the Athenians, the Corinthians, and the Lacedæmonians. The substance was probably the same, though the address was properly varied. The epistle to the Athenians is still extant (p. 268-287), and has afforded much valuable information. It deserves the praises of the Abbé de la Bléterie (Préf. à l’Histoire de Jovien, p. 24, 25), and is one of the best manifestoes to be found in any language.

Auctori tuo reverentiam rogamus. Ammian. xxi. 10. It is amusing enough to observe the secret conflicts of the senate between flattery and fear. See Tacit. Hist. i. 85.

Tanquam venaticiam prædam caperet: hoc enim ad leniendum suorum metum subinde prædicabat. Ammian. xxi. 7.

See the speech and preparations in Ammianus, xxi. 13. The vile Theodotus afterwards implored and obtained his pardon from the merciful conqueror, who signified his wish of diminishing his enemies, and increasing the number of his friends (xxii. 14).

Ammian, xxi. 7, 11, 12. He seems to describe, with superfluous labour, the operations of the siege of Aquileia, which, on this occasion, maintained its impregnable fame. Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. iii. p. 68 [iv. c. 48]) ascribes this accidental revolt to the wisdom of Constantius, whose assured victory he announces with some appearance of truth. Constantio quem credebat procul dubio fore victorem: nemo enim omnium tunc ab hac constanti sententia discrepabat. Ammian. xxi. 7.

His death and character are faithfully delineated by Ammianus (xxi. 14, 15, 16); and we are authorised to despise and detest the foolish calumny of Gregory (Orat. iii. p. 68), who accuses Julian of contriving the death of his benefactor. The private repentance of the emperor that he had spared and promoted Julian (p. 69, and Orat. xxi. p. 389) is not improbable in itself, nor incompatible with the public verbal testament which prudential considerations might dictate in the last moments of his life. [Our text of Ammianus gives 5th Oct. as date of death of Constantius, cp. Ranke, Weltgeschichte, iv. 102. Idatius and Socrates give 3rd Nov. See Büttner Wobst, der Tod des K. Julians (Philologus, 52, p. 561), who points out that the astronomical datum of the oracle in Amm. 21, 2, 2 agrees neither with 5th Oct. nor 3rd Nov. but is rather nearer the latter.]

In describing the triumph of Julian, Ammianus (xxii. 1, 2) assumes the lofty tone of an orator or poet: while Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 56, p. 281) sinks to the grave simplicity of an historian.

The funeral of Constantius is described by Ammianus (xxi. 16), Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. iv. [v. ed. Migne] p. 119 [c. 17]), Mamertinus in Panegyr. Vet. xi. 27), Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. lvi. p. 283), and Philostorgius (l. vi. c. 6, with Godefroy’s Dissertations, p. 265). These writers, and their followers, Pagans, Catholics, Arians, beheld with very different eyes both the dead and the living emperor.

The day and year of the birth of Julian are not perfectly ascertained. The day is probably the sixth of November, and the year must be either 331 or 332. Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, tom. iv. p. 693. Ducange, Fam. Byzantin. p. 50. I have preferred the earlier date.

Julian himself (p. 253-267) has expressed these philosophical ideas with much eloquence, and some affectation, in a very elaborate epistle to Themistius. The Abbé de la Bléterie (tom. ii. p. 146-193), who has given an elegant translation, is inclined to believe that it was the celebrated Themistius, whose orations are still extant.

Julian. ad Themist. p. 258 [p. 334]. Petavius (note, p. 95) observes that this passage is taken from the fourth book de Legibus; but either Julian quoted from memory, or his MSS. were different from ours. Xenophon opens the Cyropædia with a similar reflection.

Ὁ δὲ ἄνθρωπον κελεύων ἄρχειν, προστίθησι καὶ θηρίον. Arist. ap. Julian. p. 261 [338, ed. Hertl.] The MS. of Vossius, unsatisfied with a single beast, affords the stronger reading of θηρία, which the experience of despotism may warrant. [This (Leiden) MS. is the best; θηρία is right.]

Libanius (Orat. Parentalis, c. lxxxiv. lxxxv. p. 310, 311, 312) has given this interesting detail of the private life of Julian. He himself (in Misopogon. p. 350) mentions his vegetable diet, and upbraids the gross and sensual appetite of the people of Antioch.

Lectulus . . . Vestalium toris purior, is the praise which Mamertinus (Panegyr. Vet. xi. 13) addresses to Julian himself. Libanius affirms, in sober peremptory language, that Julian never knew a woman before his marriage or after the death of his wife (Orat. Parent. c. lxxxviii. p. 313). The chastity of Julian is confirmed by the impartial testimony of Ammianus (xxv. 4), and the partial silence of the Christians. Yet Julian ironically urges the reproach of the people of Antioch that he almost always (ὼς ἐπίπαν, in Misopogon. p. 345 [p. 445, ed. H.]) lay alone. This suspicious expression is explained by the Abbé de la Bléterie (Hist. de Jovien, tom. ii. p. 103-109) with candour and ingenuity.

See Salmasius ad Sueton. in Claud. c. xxi. A twenty-fifth race, or missus, was added, to complete the number of one hundred chariots, four of which, the four colours, started each heat.

Centum quadrijugos agitabo ad humina currus.

It appears that they ran five or seven times round the Meta (Sueton. in Domitian. c. 4); and (from the measure of the Circus Maximus at Rome, the Hippodrome at Constantinople, c.) it might be about a four-mile course.

Julian. in Misopogon. p. 340 [p. 437, ed. H.]. Julius Cæsar had offended the Roman people by reading his despatches during the actual race. Augustus indulged their taste, or his own, by his constant attention to the important business of the circus, for which he professed the warmest inclination. Sueton. in August. c. xlv.

The reformation of the palace is described by Ammianus (xxii. 4), Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. lxii. p. 288, c.), Mamertinus (in Panegyr. Vet. xi. 11), Socrates (l. iii. c. 1), and Zonaras (tom. ii. l. xiii. p. 24 [c. 12]).

Ego non rationalem jussi sed tonsorem acciri. Zonaras uses the less natural image of a senator. Yet an officer of the finances, who was satiated with wealth, might desire and obtain the honours of the senate.

Μαγείρους μὲν χιλίους, κουρέας δὲ οὐκ ἐλάττους, οἰνοχόους δὲ πλείους, σμήνη τραπεζοποιω̂ν, εὐνούχους ὑπὲρ τὰς μυίας παρὰ τοɩ̂ς ποιμέσι ἐν ἠρι, are the original words of Libanius, which I have faithfully quoted, lest I should be suspected of magnifying the abuses of the royal household.

The expressions of Mamertinus are lively and forcible. Quin etiam prandiorum et cenarum laboratas magnitudines Romanus populus sensit [ leg. pop. Rom. sentiebat]; cum quæsitissimæ dapes non gustu sed difficultatibus æstimarentur; miracula avium longinqui maris pisces, alieni temporis poma, æstivæ nives, hibernæ rosæ.

Yet Julian himself was accused of bestowing whole towns on the eunuchs (Orat. vii. against Polyclet. p. 117-127). Libanius contents himself with a cold but positive denial of the fact, which seems indeed to belong more properly to Constantius. This charge however may allude to some unknown circumstance.

In the Misopogon (p. 338, 339 [p. 434-436]) he draws a very singular picture of himself, and the following words are strangely characteristic: αὐτὸς προστέθεικα τὸν βαθὺν τουτονὶ πώγωνα . . . ταν̂τά τοι διαθεόντων ἀνέχομαι τω̂ν ϕθειρω̂ν ὥσπερ ἐν λοχμῃ̑ τω̂ν θηρίων. The friends of the Abbé de la Bléterie adjured him, in the name of the French nation, not to translate this passage, so offensive to their delicacy (Hist. de Jovien, tom. ii. p. 94). Like him, I have contented myself with a transient allusion; but the little animal, which Julian names, is a beast familiar to man, and signifies love.

Julian, Epist. xxiii. p. 389 [p. 503, ed. H.]. He uses the words πολυκέϕαλον [Editor: illegible character]δραν, in writing to his friend Hermogenes, who, like himself, was conversant with the Greek poets.

The two Sallusts, the prefect of Gaul and the prefect of the East, must be carefully distinguished (Hist. des Empereurs, tom. iv. p. 696). I have used the surname of Secundus, as a convenient epithet. The second Sallust extorted the esteem of the Christians themselves; and Gregory Nazianzen, who condemned his religion, has celebrated his virtues (Orat. iii. p. 90 [iv. c. 91]). See a curious note of the Abbé de la Bléterie, Vie de Julien, p. 363.

Mamertinus praises the emperor (xi. 1) for bestowing the offices of Treasurer and Prefect on a man of wisdom, firmness, integrity, c., like himself. Yet Ammianus ranks him (xxi. 1) among the ministers of Julian, quorum merita nôrat et fidem.

The proceedings of this chamber of justice are related by Ammianus (xxii. 3), and praised by Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 74, p. 299, 300).

Ursuli vero necem ipsa mihi videtur flêsse justitia. Libanius, who imputes his death to the soldiers, attempts to criminate the count of the largesses.

Such respect was still entertained for the venerable names of the commonwealth that the public was surprised and scandalised to hear Taurus summoned as a criminal under the consulship of Taurus. The summons of his colleague Florentius was probably delayed till the commencement of the ensuing year.

Ammian. xx. 7.

For the guilt and punishment of Artemius, see Julian (Epist. x. p. 379) and Ammianus (xxii. 6, and Vales. ad loc.). The merit of Artemius, who demolished temples, and was put to death by an apostate, has tempted the Greek and Latin churches to honour him as a martyr. But, as ecclesiastical history attests that he was not only a tyrant, but an Arian, it is not altogether easy to justify this indiscreet promotion. Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. vii. p. 1319.

See Ammian. xxii. 6, and Vales. ad locum; and the Codex Theodosianus, l. ii. tit. xxxix. leg. 1; and Godefroy’s Commentary, tom. i. p. 218, ad locum.

The president Montesquieu (Considérations sur la Grandeur, c., des Romains, c. xiv., in his works, tom. iii. p. 448, 449) excuses this minute and absurd tyranny, by supposing that actions the most indifferent in our eyes might excite, in a Roman mind, the idea of guilt and danger. This strange apology is supported by a strange misapprehension of the English laws, “chez une nation . . . où il est défendu de boire à la santé d’une certaine personne.”

The clemency of Julian, and the conspiracy which was formed against his life at Antioch, are described by Ammianus (xxii. 9, 10, and Vales. ad loc.), and Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 99, p. 323).

According to some, says Aristotle (as he is quoted by Julian ad Themist. p. 261 [p. 338, ed. H.]), the form of absolute government, the παμβασίλεια, is contrary to nature. [Politics, iii. 16, 2 = 1287a.] Both the prince and the philosopher choose, however, to involve this eternal truth in artful and laboured obscurity.

That sentiment is expressed almost in the words of Julian himself. Ammian. xxii. 10.

Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 95, p. 320), who mentions the wish and design of Julian, insinuates, in mysterious language (θεω̂ν οὔτω γνόντων . . . ἀλλ’ [Editor: illegible character]ν ἀμείνων ὁ κωλύων), that the emperor was restrained by some particular revelation.

Julian. in Misopogon. p. 343 [p. 442, ed. H.]. As he never abolished, by any public law, the proud appellations of Despot or Dominus, they are still extant on his medals (Ducange, Fam. Byzantin. p. 38, 39); and the private displeasure which he affected to express only gave a different tone to the servility of the court. The Abbé de la Bléterie (Hist. de Jovien, tom. ii. p. 99-102) has curiously traced the origin and progress of the word Dominus under the Imperial government.

Ammian. xxii. 7. The consul Mamertinus (in Panegyr. Vet. xi. 28, 29, 30) celebrates the auspicious day, like an eloquent slave, astonished and intoxicated by the condescension of his master.

Personal satire was condemned by the laws of the twelve tables:

Si male condiderit in quem quis carmina, jus est Judiciumque —

Julian (in Misopogon. p. 337 [ad init.]) owns himself subject to the law; and the Abbé de la Bléterie (Hist. de Jovien, tom. ii. p. 92) has eagerly embraced a declaration so agreeable to his own system, and indeed to the true spirit of the Imperial constitution.

Zosimus, l. iii. p. 158.

Ἡ τη̂ς βουλη̂ς ἴσχυς ψύχη πόλεώς ὲστιν. See Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 71, p. 296), Ammianus (xxii. 9), and the Theodosian Code (l. xii. tit. i. leg. 50-55)., with Godefroy’s Commentary (tom. iv. p. 390-402). Yet the whole subject of the Curiæ, notwithstanding very ample materials, still remains the most obscure in the legal history of the empire.

Quæ paulo ante arida et siti anhelantia visebantur, ea nunc perlui, mundari, madere; Fora, Deambulacra, Gymnasia, lætis et gaudentibus populis frequentari; dies festos, et celebrari veteres, et novos in honorem principis consecrari (Mamertin. xi. 9). He particularly restored the city of Nicopolis, and the Actiac games, which had been instituted by Augustus.

Julian. Epist. xxxv. p. 407-411. This epistle, which illustrates the declining age of Greece, is omitted by the Abbé de la Bléterie; and strangely disfigured by the Latin translator, who, by rendering ἀτέλεια, tributum, and ἰδιω̂ται, populus, directly contradicts the sense of the original.

He reigned in Mycenæ, at the distance of fifty stadia, or six miles, from Argos: but these cities, which alternately flourished, are confounded by the Greek poets. Strabo, l. viii. p. 579, edit. Amstel. p. 1707.

Marsham, Canon. Chron. p. 421. This pedigree from Temenus and Hercules may be suspicious; yet it was allowed, after a strict inquiry by the judges of the Olympic games (Herodot. l. v. c. 22) at a time when the Macedonian kings were obscure and unpopular in Greece. When the Achæan league declared against Philip, it was thought decent that the deputies of Argos should retire (T. Liv. xxxii. 22).

His eloquence is celebrated by Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 75, 76, p. 300, 301), who distinctly mentions the orators of Homer. Socrates (l. iii. c. 1) has rashly asserted that Julian was the only prince, since Julius Cæsar, who harangued the senate. All the predecessors of Nero (Tacit. Annal. xiii. 3), and many of his successors, possessed the faculty of speaking in public; and it might be proved, by various examples, that they frequently exercised it in the senate.

Ammianus (xxii. 10) has impartially stated the merits and defects of his judicial proceedings. Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 90, 91, p. 315, c.) has seen only the fair side, and his picture, if it flatters the person, expresses at least the duties, of the Judge. Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. iv. p. 120), who suppresses the virtues, and exaggerates even the venial faults, of the apostate, triumphantly asks, Whether such a judge was fit to be seated between Minos and Rhadamanthus, in the Elysian fields.

Of the laws which Julian enacted in a reign of sixteen months, fifty-four have been admitted into the Codes of Theodosius and Justinian (Gothofred. Chron. Legum, p. 64-67). The Abbé de la Bléterie (tom. ii. p. 329-336) has chosen one of these laws to give an idea of Julian’s Latin style, which is forcible and elaborate, but less pure than his Greek.

. . . . . . Ductor fortissimus armis; Conditor et legum celeberrimus; ore manûque Consultor patriæ; sed non consultor habendæ Religionis; amans tercentûm millia Divûm. Perfidus ille Deo, sed non et [ leg. quamuis non] perfidus orbi. — Prudent. Apotheosis, 450, c. [ed. Dressel, p. 102].

The consciousness of a generous sentiment seems to have raised the Christian poet above his usual mediocrity.

I shall transcribe some of his own expressions from a short religious discourse which the Imperial pontiff composed to censure the bold impiety of a Cynic: Ἄλλ’ ὅμως οὕτω δή τι τοὺς θεοὺς πέϕρικα, καὶ ϕιλω̂, καὶ σέβω, καὶ ἄζομαι, καὶ πάνθ’ ἁπλω̂ς τὰ τοιαν̂τα πάσχω, ὄσαπερ ἄν τις καὶ ο[Editor: illegible character]α πρὸς ἀγαθοὺς δεσπότας, πρὸς διδασκάλους, πρὸς πατέρας, πρὸς κηδεμὁνας. Orat. vii. p. 212 [275, ed. Hertl.]. The variety and copiousness of the Greek tongue seem inadequate to the fervour of his devotion.

The orator, with some eloquence, much enthusiasm, and more vanity, addresses his discourse to heaven and earth, to men and angels, to the living and the dead; and above all, to the great Constantius (εἴ τις αἴσθησις, an odd Pagan expression [cp. Isocr. Evagoras, 1, 2]). He concludes with a bold assurance that he has erected a monument not less durable, and much more portable, than the columns of Hercules. See Greg. Nazianzen, Orat. iii. p. 50, iv. p. 134 [iv. c. 3, v. ad fin. c. 42].

See this long invective, which has been injudiciously divided into two orations in Gregory’s Works, tom. i. p. 49-134. Paris, 1630. It was published by Gregory and his friend Basil (iv. p. 133 [v. c. 39]) about six months after the death of Julian, when his remains had been carried to Tarsus (iv. p. 120 [v. c. 18]); but while Jovian was still on the throne (iii. p. 54, iv. p. 117 [v. c. 15]). I have derived much assistance from a French version and remarks, printed at Lyons 1735.

Nicomediæ ab Eusebio educatus Episcopo, quem genere longius contingebat (Ammian. xxii. 9). Julian never expresses any gratitude towards that Arian prelate; but he celebrates his preceptor, the eunuch Mardonius, and describes his mode of education, which inspired his pupil with a passionate admiration for the genius, and perhaps the religion, of Homer. Misopogon. p. 351, 352.

Greg. Naz. iii. p. 70 [iv. c. 52]. He laboured to efface that holy mark in the blood, perhaps, of a Taurobolium. Baron. Annal. Eccles. AD 361, No. 3, 4.

Julian himself (Epist. li. p. 434 [558, ed. Hertl.]) assures the Alexandrians that he had been a Christian (he must mean a sincere one) till the twentieth year of his age.

See his Christian and even ecclesiastical education, in Gregory (iii. p. 58 [iv. c. 23 sqq. ]), Socrates (l. iii. c. 1), and Sozomen (l. v. c. 2). He escaped very narrowly from being a bishop, and perhaps a saint.

The share of the work which had been allotted to Gallus was prosecuted with vigour and success; but the earth obstinately rejected and subverted the structures which were imposed by the sacrilegious hand of Julian. Greg. iii. p. 59, 60, 61 [c. 26 sqq. ]. Such a partial earthquake, attested by many living spectators, would form one of the clearest miracles in ecclesiastical story.

The philosopher (Fragment, p. 228) ridicules the iron chains, c., of these solitary fanatics (see Tillemont, Mém Ecclés. tom. ix. p. 661, 662), who had forgot that man is by nature a gentle and social animal, ἀνθρώπου ϕύσει πολιτικον̂ ξώου καὶ ἡμέρου. The Pagan supposes that, because they had renounced the gods, they were possessed and tormented by evil dæmons.

See Julian apud Cyril. l. vi. p. 206, l. viii. p. 253, 262. “You persecute,” says he, “those heretics who do not mourn the dead man precisely in the way which you approve.” He shews himself a tolerable theologian; but he maintains that the Christian Trinity is not derived from the doctrine of Paul, of Jesus, or of Moses.

Libanius, Orat. Parentalis, c. 9, 10, p. 232, c. Greg. Nazianzen, Orat. iii. p. 61 [iv. c. 31]. Eunap. Vit. Sophist. in Maximo, p. 68, 69, 70, edit. Commelin.

A modern philosopher has ingeniously compared the different operation of theism and polythesim, with regard to the doubt or conviction which they produce in the human mind. See Hume’s Essays, vol. ii. p. 444, 457, in 8vo edit. 1777.

The Idæan mother landed in Italy about the end of the second Punic war. The miracle of Claudia, either virgin or matron, who cleared her fame by disgracing the graver modesty of the Roman ladies, is attested by a cloud of witnesses. Their evidence is collected by Drakenborch (ad Silium Italicum, xvii. 33): but we may observe that Livy (xxix. 14) slides over the transaction with discreet ambiguity.

I cannot refrain from transcribing the emphatical words of Julian: ἐμοὶ δὲ δοκεɩ̂ ταɩ̂ς πόλεσι πιστεύειν μα̂λλον τὰ τοιαν̂τα, ἢ τουτοισὶ τοɩ̂ς κομψοɩ̂ς, ὠν τὸ ψυχάριον δριμὺ μὲν, ὑγιὲς δὲ οὐδὲ ἐν βλέπει. Orat. v. p. 161 [209, ed. Hertl.]. Julian likewise declares his firm belief in the ancilia, the holy shields, which dropt from heaven on the Quirinal hill; and pities the strange blindness of the Christians, who preferred the cross to these celestial trophies. Apud Cyril. l. vi. p. 194.

See the principles of allegory in Julian (Orat. vii. p. 216, 222 [280, 288, ed. Hertl.]). His reasoning is less absurd than that of some modern theologians, who assert that an extravagant or contradictory doctrine must be divine; since no man alive could have thought of inventing it.

Eunapius has made these sophists the subject of a partial and fanatical history; and the learned Brucker (Hist. Philosoph. tom. ii. p. 217-303) has employed much labour to illustrate their obscure lives and incomprehensible doctrines.

Julian, Orat. vii. p. 222 [288]. He swears with the most fervent and enthusiastic devotion; and trembles lest he should betray too much of these holy mysteries, which the profane might deride with an impious sardonic laugh.

See the fifth oration of Julian. But all the allegories which ever issued from the Platonic school are not worth the short poem of Catullus on the same extraordinary subject. The transition of Atys from the wildest enthusiasm to sober pathetic complaint, for his irretrievable loss, must inspire a man with pity, an eunuch with despair.

The true religion of Julian may be deduced from the Cæsars, p. 308 [395, ed. Hertl.], with Spanheim’s notes and illustrations, from the fragments in Cyril, l. ii. p. 57, 58, and especially from the theological oration in Solem Regem, p. 130-158 [168-205, Or. iv.], addressed, in the confidence of friendship, to the prefect Sallust.

Julian adopts this gross conception, by ascribing it to his favourite Marcus Antoninus (Cæsares, p. 333 [428]). The Stoics and Platonists hesitated between the analogy of bodies and the purity of spirits; yet the gravest philosophers inclined to the whimsical fancy of Aristophanes and Lucian that an unbelieving age might starve the immortal gods. See Observations de Spanheim, p. 284, 444, c.

Ἥλιον λέγω, τὸ ζω̂ν ἄγαλμα καὶ ἔμψυχον, καὶ ἔννουν, καὶ άγαθόεργον τον̂ νοητον̂ πατρός. Julian, Epist. xli. [ leg. li.; p. 558, ed. Hertl.]. In another place (apud Cyril. l. ii. p. 69), he calls the Sun, God, and the throne of God. Julian believed the Platonician Trinity; and only blames the Christians for preferring a mortal, to an immortal, Logos.

The sophists of Eunapius perform as many miracles as the saints of the desert; and the only circumstance in their favour is that they are of a less gloomy complexion. Instead of devils with horns and tails, Iamblichus evoked the genii of love, Eros and Anteros, from two adjacent fountains. Two beautiful boys issued from the water, fondly embraced him as their father, and retired at his command, p. 26, 27.

The dexterous management of these sophists, who played their credulous pupil into each other’s hands, is fairly told by Eunapius (p. 69-76), with unsuspecting simplicity. The Abbé de la Bléterie understands, and neatly describes, the whole comedy (Vie de Julien, p. 61-67).

When Julian, in a momentary panic, made the sign of the cross, the dæmons instantly disappeared (Greg. Naz. Orat. iii. p. 71 [iv. c. 55]). Gregory supposes that they were frightened, but the priests declared that they were indignant. The reader, according to the measure of his faith, will determine this profound question.

A dark and distant view of the terrors and joys of initiation is shewn by Dion Chrysostom, Themistius, Proclus, and Stobæus. The learned author of the Divine Legation has exhibited their words (vol. i. p. 239, 247, 248, 280, edit. 1765), which he dexterously or forcibly applies to his own hypothesis.

[Not in caverns at Eleusis, but in a great Hall, the Telesterion. ]

Julian’s modesty confined him to obscure and occasional hints; but Libanius expatiates with pleasure on the fasts and visions of the religious hero (Legat. ad Julian. p. 157, and Orat. Parental. c. lxxxiii. p. 309, 310).

Libanius, Orat. Parent. c. x. p. 233, 234. Gallus had some reasons to suspect the secret apostacy of his brother; and in a letter, which may be received as genuine, he exhorts Julian to adhere to the religion of their ancestors; an argument which, as it should seem, was not yet perfectly ripe. See Julian. Op. p. 454 [613, ed. Hertl.], and Hist. de Jovien, tom. ii. p. 141. [The letter of Gallus is rejected by Petavius.]

Gregory (iii. p. 50 [iv. c. 3]), with inhuman zeal, censures Constantius for sparing the infant apostate (κακω̂ς σωθέντα). His French translator (p. 265) cautiously observes that such expressions must not be prises à la lettre. [The phrase implies no censure of the preserver.]

Libanius, Orat. Parental. c. ix. p. 233.

Fabricius (Biblioth. Græc. l. v. c. viii. p. 88-90) and Lardner (Heathen Testimonies, vol. iv. p. 44-47) have accurately compiled all that can now be discovered of Julian’s work against the Christians. [These compilations are superseded by the work of C. J. Neumann; see vol. ii. Appendix 10.]

About seventy years after the death of Julian, he executed a task which had been feebly attempted by Philip of Side, a prolix and contemptible writer. Even the work of Cyril has not entirely satisfied the most favourable judges: and the Abbé de la Bléterie (Préface à l’Hist. de Jovien, p. 30, 32) wishes that some théologien philosophe (a strange centaur) would undertake the refutation of Julian.

Libanius (Orat. Parental. c. lxxxvii. p. 313), who has been suspected of assisting his friend, prefers this divine vindication (Orat. ix. in necem Julian, p. 255, edit. Morel.) to the writings of Porphyry. His judgment may be arraigned (Socrates, l. iii. c. 23), but Libanius cannot be accused of flattery to a dead prince.

Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. lviii. p. 283, 284) has eloquently explained the tolerating principles and conduct of his Imperial friend. In a very remarkable epistle to the people of Bostra, Julian himself (Epist. lii.) professes his moderation, and betrays his zeal; which is acknowledged by Ammianus, and exposed by Gregory, Orat. iii. p. 72 [iv. c. 57].

In Greece the temples of Minerva were opened by his express command, before the death of Constantius (Liban. Orat. Parent. c. 55, p. 280); and Julian declares himself a Pagan in his public manifesto to the Athenians. This unquestionable evidence may correct the hasty assertion of Ammianus, who seems to suppose Constantinople to be the place where he discovered his attachment to the gods.

Ammian. xxii. 5. Sozomen, l. v. c. 5. Bestia moritur, tranquillitas redit . . . omnes episcopi, qui de propriis sedibus fuerant exterminati, per indulgentiam novi principis ad ecclesias redeunt. Jerom. adversus Luciferianos, tom. ii. p. 143. Optatus accuses the Donatists for owing their safety to an apostate (l. ii. c. 16, p. 36, 37 edit. Dupin).

The restoration of the pagan worship is described by Julian (Misopogon, p. 346 [446, ed. Hert.]), Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 60, p. 286, 287, and Orat. Consular. ad Julian, p. 245, 246, edit. Morel.), Ammianus (xxii. 12), and Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. iv. p. 121). These writers agree in the essential, and even minute, facts; but the different lights in which they view the extreme devotion of Julian are expressive of the gradations of self-applause, passionate admiration, mild reproof, and partial invective.

See Julian. Epistol. xlix. lxii. lxiii. and a long and curious fragment, without beginning or end, p. 288-305 [371-392]. The supreme pontiff derides the Mosaic history and the Christian discipline, prefers the Greek poets to the Hebrew prophets, and palliates, with the skill of a Jesuit, the relative worship of images.

The exultation of Julian (p. 301) that these impious sects, and even their writings, are extinguished may be consistent enough with the sacerdotal character: but it is unworthy of a philosopher to wish that any opinions and arguments the most repugnant to his own should be concealed from the knowledge of mankind.

Yet he insinuates that the Christians, under the pretence of charity, inveigled children from their religion and parents, conveyed them on shipboard, and devoted those victims to a life of poverty or servitude in a remote country (p. 305 [391]). Had the charge been proved, it was his duty, not to complain, but to punish. [It is very questionable whether Julian meant to insinuate this charge. He compares the conduct of the “Galilæans” in looking after the poor for the sake of proselytising to that of kidnappers who inveigle children by giving them a cake; the simile does not seem to be applied literally to the Christians.]

Gregory Nazianzen is facetious, ingenious, and argumentative. Orat. iii. p. 101, 102, c. [iv., c. 115 sqq. ]. He ridicules the folly of such vain imitation; and amuses himself with inquiring, what lessons, moral or theological, could be extracted from the Grecian fables.

He accuses one of his pontiffs of a secret confederacy with the Christian bishops and presbyters. Epist. lxii. [p. 583]. Ὁρω̂ν ο[Editor: illegible character]ν πολλὴν μὲν ὁλιγωρίαν οὔσαν ἡμɩ̂ν πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς, and again, ἡμα̂ς δὲ οὔτω ῥαθύμως, c. Epist. lxiii. [p. 587].

He praises the fidelity of Callixene, priestess of Ceres, who had been twice as constant as Penelope, and rewards her with the priesthood of the Phrygian goddess at Pessinus. (Julian. Epist. xxi.) He applauds the firmness of Sopater of Hierapolis, who had been repeatedly pressed by Constantius and Gallus to apostatise. (Epist. xxvii. p. 401 [518].)

Ὁ δὲ νομίζων ὰδελϕὰ λύγους τε καὶ θεω̂ν ὶερά. Orat. Parent. c. 77, p. 302. The same sentiment is frequently inculcated by Julian, Libanius, and the rest of their party.

The curiosity and credulity of the emperor, who tried every mode of divination, are fairly exposed by Ammianus, xxii. 12.

Julian. Epist. xxxviii. Three other epistles (xv. xvi. xxxix.) in the same style of friendship and confidence are addressed to the philosopher Maximus.

Eunapius (in Maximo, p. 77, 78, 79, and in Chrysanthio, p. 147, 148) has minutely related these anecdotes, which he conceives to be the most important events of the age. Yet he fairly confesses the frailty of Maximus. His reception at Constantinople is described by Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 86, p. 301) and Ammianus (xxii. 7).

Chrysanthius, who had refused to quit Lydia, was created high-priest of the province. His cautious and temperate use of power secured him after the revolution; and he lived in peace; while Maximus, Priscus, c., were persecuted by the Christian ministers. See the adventures of those fanatic sophists, collected by Brucker, tom. ii. p. 281-293.

See Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 101, 102, p. 324, 325, 326) and Eunapius (Vit. Sophist. in Proæresio, p. 126). Some students, whose expectations perhaps were groundless or extravagant, retired in disgust. Greg. Naz. Orat. iv. p. 120. It is strange that we should not be able to contradict the title of one of Tillemont’s chapters (Hist. des Empereurs, tom. iv. p. 960): “La Cour de Julien est pleine de philosophes et de gens perdus.”

Under the reign of Lewis XIV. his subjects of every rank aspired to the glorious title of Convertisseur, expressive of their zeal and success in making proselytes. The word and the idea are growing obsolete in France; may they never be introduced into England!

See the strong expressions of Libanius, which were probably those of Julian himself. (Orat. Parent. c. 59, p. 285.)

When Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. x. p. 167) is desirous to magnify the Christian firmness of his brother Cæsarius, physician to the Imperial court, he owns that Cæsarius disputed with a formidable adversary, πόλυν ἐν ὅπλοις, καὶ μέγαν ὲν λόγων δεινότητι. In his invectives he scarcely allows any share of wit or courage to the apostate.

Julian Epist. xxxviii. Ammianus, xxii. 12 [6]. Adeo ut in dies pæne singulos milites carnis distentiore sagina victitantes incultius, potusque aviditate correpti [read, corrupti ] humeris impositi transeuntium per plateas, ex publicis ædibus . . . ad sua diversoria portarentur. The devout prince and the indignant historian describe the same scene; and in Illyricum or Antioch similar causes must have produced similar effects.

Gregory (Orat. iii. p. 74, 75, 83-86 [iv., c. 65 sqq., 82 sqq. ]) and Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. lxxxi. lxxxii. p. 307, 308), περὶ ταύτην τὴν σπουδὴν, οὐκ ἀρνον̂μαι πλον̂τον ἀνηλω̂σθαι μέγαν. The sophist owns and justifies the expense of these military conversions.

Julian’s epistle (xxv.) is addressed to the community of the Jews. Aldus (Venet. 1499) has branded it with an εἰ γνήσως; but this stigma is justly removed by the subsequent editors, Petavius and Spanheim. The epistle is mentioned by Sozomen (l. v. c. 22), and the purport of it is confirmed by Gregory (Orat. iv. p. 111), and by Julian himself (Fragment. p. 295). [In a Syriac chronicle (early 6th cent.) a story is told that a number of Jews from Palestine met Julian at Tarsus, to ask leave to rebuild their Temple. As it was known that Julian objected to the Jewish monotheism, they exhibited seven idols to propitiate him, and offered incense on the altars of his heathen deities. He acceded to their request, but on their way home the Jews were murdered by Christian soldiers. See Hoffmann, Julianos der Abtrünnige, 1880 (Leiden).]

The Misnah denounced death against those who abandoned the foundation. The judgment of zeal is explained by Marsham (Canon. Chron. p. 161, 162, edit. fol. London, 1672) and Basnage (Hist. des Juifs, tom. viii. p. 120). Constantine made a law to protect Christian converts from Judaism. Cod. Theod. l. xvi. tit. viii. leg. 1. Godefroy, tom. vi. p. 215.

Et interea (during the civil war of Magnentius) Judæorum seditio, qui Patricium nefarie in regni speciem sustulerunt, oppressa. Aurelius Victor, in Constantio, c. xlii. See Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, tom. iv. p. 379 in 4to.

The city and synagogue of Tiberias are curiously described by Reland, Palestin. tom. ii. p. 1036-1042.

Basnage has fully illustrated the state of the Jews under Constantine and his successors (tom. viii. c. iv. p. 111-153). [Cp. Grätz, Ges. der Juden, iv., c. 19-21.]

Reland (Palestin. l. i. p. 309, 390, l. iii. p. 838) describes, with learning and perspicuity, Jerusalem, and the face of the adjacent country. [See the article “Jerusalem” by Sir Charles Wilson, in the new ed. of Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible; also the series of memoirs of the Palestine Exploration Fund; the “ordnance survey of Jerusalem,” by Sir Charles Wilson, 1866. Cp. Appendix 3.]

I have consulted a rare and curious treatise of M. d’Anville (sur l’ancienne Jérusalem, Paris, 1747, p. 75). The circumference of the ancient city (Euseb. Præparat. Evangel. l. ix. c. 36) was twenty-seven stadia, or 2550 toises. A plan taken on the spot assigns no more than 1980 for the modern town. The circuit is defined by natural landmarks which cannot be mistaken or removed. [Josephus (B. J. v. 4) gives 33 stadia; Sir C. Wilson calculates not more than 25. The dimensions of the modern town are about 1000 yards from E. to W. and the same from N. to S. A map showing the various theories as to the line of the old walls is given in the book of Mr. T. H. Lewis, The Holy Places of Jerusalem, 1888.]

See two curious passages in Jerom (tom. i. p. 102, t. vi. p. 315), and the ample details of Tillemont (Hist. des Empereurs, tom. i. p. 569, tom. ii. p. 289, 294, 4to edition).

Eusebius, in Vit. Constantin. l. iii. c. 25-47, 51-53. The emperor likewise built churches at Bethlem, the Mount of Olives, and the oak of Mambre. The holy sepulchre is described by Sandys (Travels, p. 125-133), and curiously delineated by Le Bruyn (Voyage au Levant, p. 288-296). [For the churches of Constantine at Jerusalem, see the publication for 1891 of the Palestine Pilgrims’ Text Soc., where the original sources are translated by Mr. J. H. Bernard. Cp. Appendix 3.]

The Itinerary from Bourdeaux to Jerusalem was composed in the year 333, for the use of pilgrims; among whom Jerom (tom. i. p. 126) mentions the Britons and the Indians. The causes of this superstitious fashion are discussed in the learned and judicious preface of Wesseling (Itin. p. 537-545). [A translation of this itinerary by Mr. A. Stewart is published by the Palestine Pilgrims’ Text Soc., 1887.]

Cicero (de Finibus, v. 1) has beautifully expressed the common sense of mankind.

Baronius (Annal. Eccles. AD 326, No. 42-50) and Tillemont (Mém. Ecclés. tom. vii. p. 8-16) are the historians and champions of the miraculous invention of the cross, under the reign of Constantine. Their oldest witnesses are Paulinus, Sulpicius Severus, Rufinus, Ambrose, and perhaps Cyril of Jerusalem. The silence of Eusebius and the Bourdeaux pilgrim, which satisfies those who think, perplexes those who believe. See Jortin’s sensible remarks, vol. ii. p. 238-248. [Cp. Appendix 1.]

This multiplication is asserted by Paulinus (Epist. xxxvii. See Dupin, Biblioth. Ecclés. tom. iii. p. 149), who seems to have improved a rhetorical flourish of Cyril into a real fact. The same supernatural privilege must have been communicated to the Virgin’s milk (Erasmi Opera, tom. i. p. 778. Lug. Bat. 1703, in Colloq. de Peregrinat. Religionis ergo), saints’ heads, c., and other relics, which were repeated in so many different churches.

Jerom (tom. i. p. 103), who resided in the neighbouring village of Bethlem, describes the vices of Jerusalem from his personal experience.

Gregor. Nyssen, apud Wesseling, p. 539. The whole epistle, which condemns either the use or the abuse of religious pilgrimage, is painful to the Catholic divines, while it is dear and familiar to our Protestant polemics.

He renounced his orthodox ordination, officiated as a deacon, and was reordained by the hands of the Arians. But Cyril afterwards changed with the times, and prudently conformed to the Nicene faith. Tillemont (Mém. Ecclés. tom. viii.), who treats his memory with tenderness and respect, has thrown his virtues into the text, and his faults into the notes, in decent obscurity, at the end of the volume.

Imperii sui memoriam magnitudine operum gestiens propagare. Ammian. xxiii. 1. The temple of Jerusalem had been famous even among the Gentiles. They had many temples in each city (at Sichem five, at Gaza eight, at Rome four hundred and twenty-four); but the wealth and religion of the Jewish nation was centred in one spot.

The secret intentions of Julian are revealed by the late bishop of Gloucester, the learned and dogmatic Warburton; who, with the authority of a theologian, prescribes the motives and conduct of the Supreme Being. The discourse entitled Julian (2d edition, London, 1751) is strongly marked with all the peculiarities which are imputed to the Warburtonian school.

I shelter myself behind Maimonides, Marsham, Spencer, Le Clerc, Warburton, c., who have fairly derided the fears, the folly, and the falsehood of some superstitious divines. See Divine Legation, vol. iv. p. 25, c.

Julian (Fragment. p. 295) respectfully styles him μέγας θεός, and mentions him elsewhere (Epist. lxiii.) with still higher reverence. He doubly condemns the Christians: for believing and for renouncing the religion of the Jews. Their Deity was a true, but not the only, God. Apud Cyril. l. ix. p. 305, 306.

1 Kings viii. 63. 2 Chronicles vii. 5. Joseph. Antiquitat. Judaic. l. viii. c. 4, p. 431, edit. Havercamp. As the blood and smoke of so many hecatombs might be inconvenient, Lightfoot, the Christian Rabbi, removes them by a miracle. Le Clerc (ad loca) is bold enough to suspect the fidelity of the numbers.

Julian, Epist. xxix. xxx. La Bléterie has neglected to translate the second of these epistles.

See the zeal and impatience of the Jews in Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. iv. p. 111 [v., c. 4]) and Theodoret (l. iii. c. 20).

Built by Omar, the second Khalif, who died AD 644. This great mosque covers the whole consecrated ground of the Jewish temple, and constitutes almost a square of 760 toises, or one Roman mile in circumference. See d’Anville, Jérusalem, p. 45.

Ammianus records the consuls of the year 363, before he proceeds to mention the thoughts of Julian. Templum . . . instaurare sumptibus cogitabat immodicis. Warburton has a secret wish to anticipate the design; but he must have understood, from former examples, that the execution of such a work would have demanded many years. [An examination of the evidence, — especially of Julian’s own statement (ep. 25, p. 514, l. 8) that he intends to rebuild Jerusalem when he has finished the Persian War (διορθωσάμενος) — leads us to believe that the work of building was never even begun. The whole story seems to have been (as Dr. Adler concludes in his full discussion of the subject, Jewish Quarterly Review, 1893, p. 615 sqq. ) a deliberate fiction of Gregory Nazianzen, from whose Invective against Julian it passed into Ambrose, Chrysostom, and then (embellished with contradictions) into the ecclesiastical historians Socrates, c. (see next notes). Ammianus, who liked a miracle, can have got the tale from the same source. Dr. Adler has disposed of the late Jewish authorities who are mustered in Wagenseil’s Tela Ignea Satanae. ]

The subsequent witnesses, Socrates, Sozomen, Theodoret, Philostorgius, c., add contradictions rather than authority. Compare the objections of Basnage (Hist. des Juifs, tom. viii. p. 157-168) with Warburton’s answer (Julian, p. 174-258). The bishop has ingeniously explained the miraculous crosses which appeared on the garments of the spectators by a similar instance, and the natural effects of lightning.

Ambros. tom. ii. Epist. xl. p. 946, edit. Benedictin. He composed this fanatic epistle ( AD 388) to justify a bishop, who had been condemned by the civil magistrate for burning a synagogue.

Chrysostom, tom. i. p. 580, advers. Judæos et Gentes; tom. ii. p. 574, de Sancto Babylâ, edit. Montfaucon. I have followed the common and natural supposition; but the learned Benedictine, who dates the composition of these sermons in the year 383, is confident they were never pronounced from the pulpit.

Greg. Nazianzen, Orat. iv. p. 110-113 [v., c. 2 sqq. ]. Τὸ δὲ ο[Editor: illegible character]ν περιβόητον πα̂σι θαν̂μα, καὶ οὐδὲ τοɩ̂ς ἀθέοις αὐτοɩ̂ς ἀπιστούμενον λέξων ἔρχομαι.

Ammian. xxiii. 1. Cum itaque rei fortiter instaret Alypius, juvaretque provinciæ rector, metuendi globi flammarum prope fundamenta crebris assultibus erumpentes fecere locum exustis aliquoties operantibus inaccessum: hocque modo elemento destinatius repellente, cessavit inceptum. Warburton labours (p. 60-90) to extort a confession of the miracle from the mouths of Julian and Libanius, and to employ the evidence of a rabbi who lived in the fifteenth century. Such witnesses can only be received by a very favourable judge.

Dr. Lardner, perhaps alone of the Christian critics, presumes to doubt the truth of this famous miracle (Jewish and Heathen Testimonies, vol. iv. p. 47-71). The silence of Jerom would lead to a suspicion that the same story, which was celebrated at a distance, might be despised on the spot. [Dr. Adler (loc. cit.) also notices the silence of Prudentius, Orosius (7, 30) and the two Cyrils.]

Greg. Naz. Orat. iii. p. 81. And this law was confirmed by the invariable practice of Julian himself. Warburton has justly observed (p. 35) that the Platonists believed in the mysterious virtue of words; and Julian’s dislike for the name of Christ might proceed from superstition, as well as from contempt.

Fragment. Julian. p. 288 [371, ed. Hertl.]. He derides the μωρία Γαλιλαίων (Epist. vii.), and so far loses sight of the principles of toleration as to wish (Epist. xlii.) ἄκοντας ία̂σθαι.

Οὐ γάρ μοι θέμις ἐστὶ κομιζέμεν [Editor: illegible character] έλεαἱρειν. Ἅνδρας [ leg. ένέρας] οί κε θεοɩ̂[Editor: illegible character]ιν άπέχθωντ’ ἀθανάτοισιν.

These two lines, which Julian has changed and perverted in the true spirit of a bigot. (Epist. xlix.), are taken from the speech of Æolus, when he refuses to grant Ulysses a fresh supply of winds (Odyss. x. 73). Libanius (Orat. Parental. c. lix. p. 286) attempts to justify this partial behaviour by an apology in which persecution peeps through the mask of candour.

These laws which affected the clergy may be found in the slight hints of Julian himself (Epist. lii.), in the vague declamations of Gregory (Orat. iii. p. 86, 87), and in the positive assertions of Sozomen (l. v. c. 5). [See Cod. Theod. 12, 1, 50.]

Inclemens . . . perenni obruendum silentio. Ammian. xxii. 10, xxv. 5.

The edict itself, which is still extant among the epistles of Julian (xlii.), may be compared with the loose invectives of Gregory (Orat. iii. p. 96). Tillemont (Mém. Ecclés. t. vii. p. 1291-1294) has collected the seeming differences of ancients and moderns. They may be easily reconciled. The Christians were directly forbid to teach, they were indirectly forbid to learn; since they would not frequent the schools of the Pagans.

Codex Theodos. l. xiii. tit. iii. de medicis et professoribus, leg. 5 (published the 17th June, received, at Spoleto in Italy, the 29th of July, AD 363), with Godefroy’s Illustrations, tom. v. p. 31.

Orosius celebrates their disinterested resolution, Sicut a majoribus nostris compertum habemus, omnes ubique propemodum . . . officium quam fidem deserere maluerunt, vii. 30. Proæresius, a Christian sophist, refused to accept the partial favour of the emperor, Hieronym. in Chron. p. 185, edit. Scaliger. Eunapius in Proæresio. p. 126.

They had recourse to the expedient of composing books for their own schools. Within a few months Apollinaris produced his Christian imitations of Homer (a sacred history in xxiv books), Pindar, Euripides, and Menander; and Sozomen is satisfied that they equalled, or excelled, the originals.

It was the instruction of Julian to his magistrates (Epist. vii.), προτιμα̂σθαι μεν τοι τοὺς θεοσεβεɩ̂ς καὶ πάνυ ϕημὶ δεɩ̂ν. Sozomen (l. v. c. 18) and Socrates (l. iii. c. 13) must be reduced to the standard of Gregory (Orat. iii. p. 95), not less prone to exaggeration, but more restrained by the actual knowledge of his contemporary readers.

Ψήϕῳ θεω̂ν καὶ διδοὐς καὶ μὴ διδούς. Libanius, Orat. Parent. c. 88, p. 314.

Greg. Naz. Orat. iii. p. 74, 91, 92. Socrates, l. iii. c. 14. Theodoret, l. iii. c. 6. Some drawback may however be allowed for the violence of their zeal, not less partial than the zeal of Julian. [On Julian’s persecutions, compare Mr. Gwatkin’s Arianism, p. 215 sqq. ]

If we compare the gentle language of Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 60, p. 286) with the passionate exclamations of Gregory (Orat. iii. p. 86, 87), we may find it difficult to persuade ourselves that the two orators are really describing the same events.

Restan, or Arethusa, at the equal distance of sixteen miles between Emesa ( Hems ) and Epiphania ( Hamath ), was founded, or at least named, by Seleucus Nicator. Its peculiar era dates from the year of Rome 685 according to the medals of the city. In the decline of the Seleucides, Emesa and Arethusa were usurped by the Arab Sampsiceramus, whose posterity, the vassals of Rome, were not extinguished in the reign of Vespasian. See d’Anville’s Maps and Géographie Ancienne, tom. ii. p. 134. Wesseling. Itineraria, p. 188, and Noris. Epoch. Syro-Macedon. p. 80, 481, 482.

100

Sozomen, l. v. c. 10. It is surprising that Gregory and Theodoret should suppress a circumstance which, in their eyes, must have enhanced the religious merit of the confessor.

101

The sufferings and constancy of Mark, which Gregory has so tragically painted (Orat. iii. p. 88-91 [iv., c. 88 sqq. ]), are confirmed by the unexceptionable and reluctant evidence of Libanius. Μάρκος ἑκεɩ̂νος κρεμάμενος, καὶ μαστιγούμενος, καὶ τον̂ πώγωνος αὐτῷ τιλλομένου πάντα ἑνεγκὼν ἀνδρείως νν̂ν ἰσόθεός ἐστι ταɩ̂ς τιμαɩ̂ς, κ[Editor: illegible character]ν ϕανῃ̑ πουπεριμάχητος εὐθύς. Epist. 730, p. 350, 351, edit. Wolf. Amstel. 1738.

102

Περιμάχητος, certatim eum sibi (Christiani) vindicant. It is thus that La Croze and Wolfius (ad loc.) have explained a Greek word whose true signification had been mistaken by former interpreters, and even by Le Clerc (Bibliothèque Ancienne et Moderne, tom. iii. p. 371). Yet Tillemont is strangely puzzled to understand (Mém. Ecclés. tom. vii. p. 1309) how Gregory and Theodoret could mistake a Semi-Arian bishop for a saint.

103

See the probable advice of Sallust (Greg. Nazianzen, Orat. iii. 90, 91). Libanius intercedes for a similar offender, lest they should find many Marks; yet he allows that, if Orion had secreted the consecrated wealth, be deserved to suffer the punishment of Marsyas: to be flayed alive (Epist. 730, p. 349-551).

104

Gregory (Orat. iii. p. 90 [iv., c. 91]) is satisfied that, by saving the apostate, Mark had deserved still more than he had suffered.

105

The grove and temple of Daphne are described by Strabo (l. xvi. p. 1089, 1090, edit. Amstel. 1707), Libanius (Nenia, p. 185, 188, Antiochic. Orat. xi. p. 380, 381), and Sozomen (l. v. c. 19). Wesseling (Itinerar. p. 581) and Casaubon (ad Hist. August. p. 64) illustrate this curious subject.

106

Simulacrum in eo Olympiaci Jovis imitamenti æquiparans magnitudinem. Ammian. xxii. 13. The Olympic Jupiter was sixty feet high, and his bulk was consequently equal to that of a thousand men. See a curious Mémoire of the Abbé Gedoyn (Académie des Inscriptions, tom. ix. p. 198).

107

Hadrian read the history of his future fortunes on a leaf dipped in the Castalian stream; a trick which, according to the physician Vandale (De Oraculis, p. 281, 282), might be easily performed by chemical preparations. The emperor stopped the source of such dangerous knowledge; which was again opened by the devout curiosity of Julian.

108

It was purchased, AD 44, in the year 92 of the era of Antioch (Noris. Epoch. Syro-Maced. p. 139-174) for the term of ninety Olympiads. But the Olympic games of Antioch were not regularly celebrated till the reign of Commodus. [Rather, Caracalla, 212 AD ; see Clinton, Fasti Rom.] See the curious details in the Chronicle of John Malala (tom. i. p. 293, 320, 372-381), a writer whose merit and authority are confined within the limits of his native city.

109

Fifteen talents of gold, bequeathed by Sosibius, who died in the reign of Augustus. The theatrical merits of the Syrian cities, in the age of Constantine, are compared in the Expositio totius Mundi, p. 6 (Hudson, Geograph. Minor, tom. iii.).

110

Avidio Cassio Syriacos legiones dedi luxuriâ diffluentes et Daphnicis moribus. These are the words of the emperor Marcus Antoninus in an original letter preserved by his biographer in Hist. August. p. 41 [vi. 6]. Cassius dismissed or punished every soldier who was seen at Daphne.

111

Aliquantum agrorum Daphnensibus dedit ( Pompey ), quo lucus ibi spatiosior fieret; delectatus amœnitate loci et aquarum abundantiâ. Eutropius, vi. 14. Sextus Rufus, de Provinciis, c. 16.

112

Julian (Misopogon. p. 361, 362) discovers his own character with that naïveté, that unconscious simplicity, which always constitutes genuine humour.

113

Babylas is named by Eusebius in the succession of the bishops of Antioch (Hist. Eccles. l. vi. c. 29, 39). His triumph over two emperors (the first fabulous, the second historical) is diffusely celebrated by Chrysostom (tom. ii. p. 536-579, edit. Montfaucon). Tillemont (Mém. Ecclés. t. iii. part ii. p. 287-302, 459-465) becomes almost a sceptic. [The history of the remains of Babylas is told, accurately for the most part, by Tillemont, and has been fully discussed by Bishop Lightfoot (in Apostolic Fathers, part ii. vol. i. p. 41 sqq. ), who uncovers a nest of errors in the account of Gibbon. (1) From Sozomen, v. 20, it is clear that persecutions intervened between the procession and the outbreak of the fire. Consequently Tillemont and Gibbon are wrong in stating that the fire broke out “during the night which terminated this indiscreet procession” — a false inference from Amm. xxii. 13 (Lightfoot, p. 43, n. 5). (2) Gibbon seems to confound Theodorus, a young man mentioned by Rufinus, x. 36 (to whom he was known), and Socrates, 3, 19, with the presbyter and martyr Theodoret put to death by Julian’s uncle, Count Julian (Soz. v. 8; Ruinart, Acta Mart. Sinc. p. 605 sqq. ). (3) Ammian’s expression levissimus rumor relates not to the charge against Christians, but to the story that the fire was accidentally caused by the philosopher Asclepiades. Gibbon wrongly connected hac ex causa with the preceding sentence: Amm. 22, 13, 3. (4) Babylas, removed by Julian’s orders, was placed in his former martyrium within the city (Chrysostom, ii. 564-5); soon afterwards a splendid church was built in his honour, outside the city on the other side of the Orontes, and his bones were placed in it, during the bishopric of Meletius, who died 381 AD (Chrys. de Hier. Bab. p. 535). Gibbon apparently confounds the martyrium in Daphne with this new church, when he says, “A magnificent church was erected over his remains.” (5) “The church of St. Babylas was subsequently demolished” is inconsistent with Chrysostom’s statement (p. 565) that the martyrium in Daphne was left standing after the fire.]

114

Ecclesiastical critics, particularly those who love relics, exult in the confession of Julian (Misopogon. p. 361) and Libanius (Nenia, p. 185), that Apollo was disturbed by the vicinity of one dead man. Yet Ammianus (xxii. 12) clears and purifies the whole ground, according to the rites which the Athenians formerly practised in the isle of Delos.

115

Julian (in Misopogon. p. 361) rather insinuates than affirms their guilt. Ammianus (xxii. 13) treats the imputation as levissimus rumor, and relates the story with extraordinary candour. [See above, p. 91, n. 113.]

116

Quo non atroci casû repente consumpto, ad id usque imperatoris ira provexit, ut quæstiones agitare juberet solito acriores (yet Julian blames the lenity of the magistrates of Antioch), et majorem ecclesiam Antiochiæ claudi. This interdiction was performed with some circumstances of indignity and profanation: and the seasonable death of the principal actor, Julian’s uncle, is related with much superstitious complacency by the Abbé de la Bléterie. Vie de Julien, p. 362-369.

117

Besides the ecclesiastical historians, who are more or less to be suspected, we may allege the passion of St. Theodore, in the Acta Sincera of Ruinart, p. 591. The complaint of Julian gives it an original and authentic air.

118

Julian, Misopogon. p. 361.

119

See Gregory Nazianzen, Orat. iii. p. 87 [iv., c. 86]. Sozomen (l. v. c. 9) may be considered as an original, though not impartial, witness. He was a native of Gaza, and had conversed with the confessor Zeno, who, as bishop of Miauma, lived to the age of an hundred (l. vii. c. 28). Philostorgius (l. vii. c. 4, with Godefroy’s Dissertations, p. 284) adds some tragic circumstances, of Christians who were literally sacrificed at the altars of the gods, c.

120

The life and death of George of Cappadocia are described by Am. mianus (xxii. 11), Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. xxi. p. 382, 385, 389, 390 [c. 16 sqq. ]) and Epiphanius (Hæres. lxxvi.). The invectives of the two saints might not deserve much credit, unless they were confirmed by the testimony of the cool and impartial infidel.

121

After the massacre of George, the emperor Julian repeatedly sent orders to preserve the library for his own use, and to torture the slaves who might be suspected of secreting any books. He praises the merit of the collection, from whence he had borrowed and transcribed several manuscripts while he pursued his studies in Cappadocia. He could wish indeed that the works of the Galilæans might perish: but he requires an exact account even of those theological volumes, lest other treatises more valuable should be confounded in their loss. Julian. Epist. ix. xxxvi.

122

Philostorgius, with cautious malice, insinuates their guilt, καὶ τον̂ Ἀθανασίου γνώμην στρατηγη̂σαι τη̂ς πράξεως, l. vii. c. 2, Godefroy, p. 267.

123

Cineres projecit in mare, id metuens, ut clamabat, ne, collectis supremis, ædes illis exstruerent [ leg. extruerentur] ut reliquis, qui deviare a religione compulsi pertulere cruciabiles pœnas, ad usque gloriosam mortem intemeratâ fide progressi, et nunc MARTYRES appellantur. Ammian. xxii. 11. Epiphanius proves to the Arians that George was not a martyr.

124

Some Donatists (Optatus Milev. p. 60, 303, edit. Dupin; and Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. vi. p. 713, in 4to) and Priscillianists (Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. viii. p. 517, in 4to) have in like manner usurped the honours of Catholic saints and martyrs.

125

The saints of Cappadocia, Basil and the Gregories, were ignorant of their holy companion. Pope Gelasius ( AD 494), the first Catholic who acknowledges St. George, places him among the martyrs, “qui Deo magis quam hominibus noti sunt.” He rejects his Acts as the composition of heretics. Some, perhaps not the oldest, of the spurious Acts are still extant; and, through a cloud of fiction, we may yet distinguish the combat which St. George of Cappadocia sustained, in the presence of Queen Alexandra, against the magician Athanasius.

126

This transformation is not given as absolutely certain, but as extremely probable. See the Longueruana, tom. i. p. 194. [Cp. Appendix 2. St. George was made patron saint of England by Edward III.]

127

A curious history of the worship of St. George, from the sixth century (when he was already revered in Palestine, in Armenia, at Rome, and at Treves in Gaul), might be extracted from Dr. Heylin (History of [that most famous saynt and souldier of Christ Jesus] St. George, 2d edition, London, 1633, in 4to, pp. 429), and the Bollandists (Act. SS. Mens. April. tom. iii. p. 100-163). His fame and popularity in Europe, and especially in England, proceeded from the Crusades. [Add Dr. J. Milner’s Historical and Critical Inquiry into the Existence and Character of St. George, London 1792, attempting to prove that St. George of England was orthodox.]

128

Julian. Epist. xliii.

129

Julian. Epist. x. He allowed his friends to assuage his anger. Ammian. xxii. 11.

130

See Athanas. ad Rufin. tom. ii. p. 40, 41; and Greg. Nazianzen, Orat. iii. [ leg. xxi.] p. 395, 396, who justly states the temperate zeal of the primate as much more meritorious than his prayers, his fasts, his persecutions, c.

131

I have not leisure to follow the blind obstinacy of Lucifer of Cagliari. See his adventures in Tillemont (Mém. Ecclés. tom. vii. p. 900-916); and observe how the colour of the narrative insensibly changes, as the confessor becomes a schismatic.

132

Assensus est huic sententiæ Occidens, et, per tam necessarium concilium, Satanæ faucibus mundus ereptus. The lively and artful Dialogue of Jerom against the Luciferians (tom. ii. p. 135-155) exhibits an original picture of the ecclesiastical policy of the times.

133

Tillemont, who supposes that George was massacred in August, crowds the actions of Athanasius into a narrow space (Mém. Ecclés. tom. viii. p. 360). An original fragment, published by the Marquis Maffei, from the old Chapter-library of Verona (Osservazioni Litterarie, tom. iii. p. 60-92) affords many important dates, which are authenticated by the computation of Egyptian months.

134

Τὸν μιαρὸν, δς ἑτόλμησεν Ἑλληνίδας, ἐπ’ ὲμον̂, γυναɩ̂κας τω̂ν ἐπισήμων βαπτίσαι διώκεσθαι. I have preserved the ambiguous sense of the last word, the ambiguity of a tyrant who wished to find, or to create, guilt. [P. 485, ed. Hertl. With the reading διώκεσθαι (to which Gibbon seems, by a curious blunder, to give an active meaning) we should have to render “than that Athanasius should be expelled from all Egypt, and persecuted, the abominable wretch, who dared to baptize Greek ladies.” But read with best MS. — βαπτίσαι, διωκέσθω: “let him be persecuted.”]

135

The three epistles of Julian which explain his intentions and conduct with regard to Athanasius should be disposed in the following chronological order, xxvi., x., vi. See likewise Greg. Nazianzen, xxi. p. 393; Sozomen, l. v. c. 15; Socrates, l. iii. c. 14; Theodoret, l. iii. c. 9, and Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. viii. p. 361-368, who has used some materials prepared by the Bollandists. [Cp. Schwarz, de Vit. et Scr. Julian. i. p. 20. He assigns Ep. 10 to end of Jan., Ep. 26 to end of March, Ep. 6 to beginning of Oct., 362 AD Rode regards 6 and 26 as written at the same time.]

136

See the fair confession of Gregory (Orat. iii. p. 61, 62).

137

Hear the furious and absurd complaint of Optatus (de Schismat. Donatist. l. ii. c. 16, 17).

138

Greg. Nazianzen. Orat. iii. p. 91, iv. p. 133. He praises the rioters of Cæsarea, τούτων δὲ τω̂ν μεγαλοϕυω̂ν καὶ θερμω̂ν εὶς εὐσέβειαν. See Sozomen, l. v. 4, 11. Tillemont (Mém. Ecclés. tom. vii. p. 649, 650) owns that their behaviour was not dans l’ordre commun; but he is perfectly satisfied, as the great St. Basil always celebrated the festival of these blessed martyrs.

139

Julian determined a lawsuit against the new Christian city at Maiuma, the port of Gaza; and his sentence, though it might be imputed to bigotry, was never reversed by his successors. Sozomen, l. v. c. 3. Reland, Palestine, tom. ii. p. 791.

140

Gregory (Orat. iii. p. 93, 94, 95 [iv. c. 93 sqq. ]; Orat. iv. p. 114 [v. ad init.]) pretends to speak from the information of Julian’s confidants, whom Orosius (vii. 30) could not have seen.

141

Gregory (Orat. iii. p. 91) charges the Apostate with secret sacrifices of boys and girls; and positively affirms that the dead bodies were thrown into the Orontes. See Theodoret, l. iii. c. 26, 27; and the equivocal candour of the Abbé de la Bléterie, Vie de Julien, p. 351, 352. Yet contemporary malice could not impute to Julian the troops of martyrs, more especially in the West, which Baronius so greedily swallows, and Tillemont so faintly rejects (Mém. Ecclés. tom. vii. p. 1295-1315).

142

The resignation of Gregory is truly edifying (Orat. iv. p. 123, 124). Yet, when an officer of Julian attempted to seize the Church of Nazianzus, he would have lost his life, if he had not yielded to the zeal of the bishop and people (Orat. xix. p. 308 [c. 32]). See the reflections of Chrysostom, as they are alleged by Tillemont (Mém. Ecclés. tom. vii. p. 575).

See this fable or satire, p. 306-336 of the Leipzig edition of Julian’s works. The French version of the learned Ezekiel Spanheim (Paris, 1683) is coarse, languid, and incorrect; and his notes, proofs, illustrations, c., are piled on each other till they form a mass of 557 close-printed quarto pages. The Abbé de la Bléterie (Vie de Jovien, tom. i. p. 241-393) has more happily expressed the spirit, as well as the sense, of the original, which he illustrates with some concise and curious notes.

Spanheim (in his preface) has most learnedly discussed the etymology, origin, resemblance, and disagreement of the Greek satyrs, a dramatic piece, which was acted after the tragedy; and the Latin satires (from satura ), a miscellaneous composition, either in prose or verse. But the Cæsars of Julian are of such an original cast that the critic is perplexed to which class he should ascribe them.

This mixed character of Silenus is finely painted in the sixth eclogue of Virgil.

Every impartial reader must perceive and condemn the partiality of Julian against his uncle Constantine and the Christian religion. On this occasion, the interpreters are compelled, by a more sacred interest, to renounce their allegiance, and to desert the cause of their author.

Julian was secretly inclined to prefer a Greek to a Roman. But, when he seriously compared a hero with a philosopher, he was sensible that mankind had much greater obligations to Socrates than to Alexander (Orat. ad Themistium, p. 264).

Inde nationibus Indicis certatum cum donis optimates mittentibus . . . ab usque Divis et Serendivis. Ammian. xxii. 7. This island to which the names of Taprobana, Serendib, and Ceylon have been successively applied manifests how imperfectly the seas and lands to the east of Cape Comorin were known to the Romans. 1. Under the reign of Claudius, a freedman, who farmed the customs of the Red Sea, was accidentally driven by the winds upon this strange and undiscovered coast: he conversed six months with the natives; and the king of Ceylon, who heard, for the first time, of the power and justice of Rome, was persuaded to send an embassy to the emperor (Plin. Hist. Nat. vi. 24). 2. The geographers (and even Ptolemy) have magnified, above fifteen times, the real size of this new world, which they extended as far as the equator and the neighbourhood of China.

These embassies had been sent to Constantius. Ammianus, who unwarily deviates into gross flattery, must have forgotten the length of the way, and the short duration of the reign of Julian.

Gothos sæpe fallaces et perfidos; hostes quærere se meliores aiebat: illis enim sufficere mercatores Galatas per quos ubique sine conditionis discrimine venundantur [Amm. loc. cit.]. Within less than fifteen years, these Gothic slaves threatened and subdued their masters.

Alexander reminds his rival Cæsar, who deprecated the fame and merit of an Asiatic victory, that Crassus and Antony had felt the Persian arrows; and that the Romans, in a war of three hundred years, had not yet subdued the single province of Mesopotamia or Assyria (Cæsares, p. 324 [p. 417, ed. Hertl.]).

The design of the Persian war is declared by Ammianus (xxii. 7, 12), Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 79, 80, p. 305, 306), Zosimus (l. iii. p. 158 [c. 11]), and Socrates (l. iii. c. 19).

The satire of Julian and the Homilies of St. Chrysostom exhibit the same picture of Antioch. The miniature which the Abbé de la Bléterie has copied from thence (Vie de Julien, p. 332) is elegant, and correct. [The date of Julian’s arrival at Antioch has been contested. The first half of July seems most probable (cp. Sievers, Das Leben des Libanius, p. 247, and Gwatkin, Arianism, p. 222). Mücke (Flavius Claudius Julianus, 2, 106) puts it in September.]

11a

[ Sic quarto; should be corrected to reverend.]

Laodicea furnished charioteers; Tyre and Berytus, comedians; Cæsarea, pantomimes; Heliopolis, singers; Gaza, gladiators; Ascalon, wrestlers; and Castabala, rope-dancers. See the Expositio totius Mundi, p. 6, in the third tome of Hudson’s Minor Geographers.

Χριστὸν δὲ ἀγαπω̂ντες, ἔχετε πολιον̂χον ἀντὶ τον̂ Διός. The people of Antioch ingeniously professed their attachment to the Chi (Christ), and the Kappa (Constantius). Julian. in Misopogon. p. 357 [460, ed. Hertl.].

The schism of Antioch, which lasted eighty-five years ( AD 330-415), was inflamed, while Julian resided in that city, by the indiscreet ordination of Paulinus. See Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. vii. p. 803, of the quarto edition (Paris, 1701, c. [same page in earlier ed.]), which henceforward I shall quote.

Julian states three different proportions of five, ten, or fifteen modii of wheat, for one piece of gold, according to the degrees of plenty and scarcity (in Misopogon. p. 369 [477]). From this fact, and from some collateral examples, I conclude that under the successors of Constantine the moderate price of whest was about thirty-two shillings the English quarter, which is equal to the average price of the sixty-four first years of the present century. See Arbuthnot’s Tables of Coins, Weights, and Measures, p. 88, 89; Plin. Hist. Natur. xviii. 12; Mém. de l’Académie des Inscriptions, t. xxviii. p. 718-721; Smith’s Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, vol. i. p. 246. This last I am proud to quote, as the work of a sage and a friend.

Nunquam a proposito declinabat, Galli similis fratris, licet incruentus, Ammian. xxii. 14. The ignorance of the most enlightened princes may claim some excuse: but we cannot be satisfied with Julian’s own defence (in Misopogon. p. 368, 369 [p. 475-8, ed. H.]), or the elaborate apology of Libanius (Orat. Parental. c. xcvii. p. 321 [i. 587, ed. Reiske]).

Their short and easy confinement is gently touched by Libanius, Orat. Parental. c. xcviii. p. 322, 323. [Schiller, Gesch. der röm. Kaiserzeit, ii. p. 325, says they were released on the following day. But Libanius, p. 322 (ap. Fabric.), says ἀλλ’ οὐδὲ νὺξ ἐπεγένετο τῷ βραχεɩ̂ τούτῳ καὶ κούϕῳ κ.τ.λ.]

Libanius (ad Antiochenos de Imperatoris irâ, c. 17, 18, 19, in Fabricius Bibliot. Græc. tom. vii. p. 221-223), like a skilful advocate, severely censures the folly of the people, who suffered for the crime of a few obscure and drunken wretches.

Libanius (ad Antiochen. c. vii. p. 213) reminds Antioch of the recent chastisement of Cæsarea: and even Julian (in Misopogon. p. 355 [p. 459, ed. H.]) insinuates how severely Tarentum had expiated the insult to the Roman ambassadors.

On the subject of the Misopogon, see Ammianus (xxii. 14), Libanius (Orat. Parentalis, c. xcix. p. 323), Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. iv. p. 133 [v., c. 41]), and the Chronicle of Antioch, by John Malala (tom. ii. p. 15, 16 [p. 328, ed. Bonn]). I have essential obligations to the translation and notes of the Abbé de la Bléterie (Vie de Jovien, tom. ii. p. 1-138).

Ammianus very justly remarks, Coactus dissimulare pro tempore irâ sufflabatur internâ. The elaborate irony of Julian at length bursts forth into serious and direct invective.

Ipse autem Antiochiam egressurus, Heliopoliten quendam Alexandrum Syriacæ jurisdictioni præfecit, turbulentum et sævum; dicebatque non illum meruisse, sed Antiochensibus avaris et contumeliosis hujusmodi judicem convenire. Ammian. xxiii. 2. Libanius (Epist. 722, p. 346, 347), who confesses to Julian himself that he had shared the general discontent, pretends that Alexander was an useful, though harsh, reformer of the manners and religion of Antioch.

Julian. in Misopogon. p. 364 [p. 470, ed. H.]. Ammian. xxiii. 2, and Valesius ad loc. Libanius, in a professed oration, invites him to return to his loyal and penitent city of Antioch.

Libanius, Orat. Parent. c. vii. p. 230, 231.

Eunapius reports that Libanius refused the honorary rank of Prætorian prefect, as less illustrious than the title of Sophist (in Vit. Sophist. p. 135.) The critics have observed a similar sentiment in one of the epistles (xviii. edit. Wolf) of Libanius himself.

Near two thousand of his letters a mode of composition, in which Libanius was thought to excel, are still extant, and already published. The critics may praise their subtle and elegant brevity; yet Dr. Bentley (Dissertation upon Phalaris, p. 487) might justly, though quaintly, observe that “you feel, by the emptiness and deadness of them, that you converse with some dreaming pedant, with his elbow on his desk.”

His birth is assigned to the year 314. He mentions the seventy-sixth year of his age ( AD 390), and seems to allude to some events of a still later date.

Libanius has composed the vain, prolix, but curious narrative of his own life (tom. ii. p. 1-84, edit. Morell.), of which Eunapius (p. 130-135) has left a concise and unfavourable account. Among the moderns, Tillemont (Hist. des Empereurs, tom. iv. p. 571-576), Fabricius (Bibliot. Græc. tom. vii. p. 376-414) and Lardner (Heathen Testimonies, tom. iv. p. 127-163) have illustrated the character and writings of this famous sophist. [See vol. ii. Appendix 10.]

From Antioch to Litarbe, on the territory of Chalcis, the road, over hills and through morasses, was extremely bad; and the loose stones were cemented only with sand. Julian. Epist. xxvii. It is singular enough that the Romans should have neglected the great communication between Antioch and the Euphrates. See Wesseling, Itinerar. p. 190; Bergier, Hist. des Grands Chemins, tom. ii. p. 100.

Julian alludes to this incident (Epist. xxvii.), which is more distinctly related by Theodoret (l. iii. c. 22). The intolerant spirit of the father is applauded by Tillemont (Hist. des Empereurs, tom. iv. p. 534), and even by La Bléterie (Vie de Julien, p. 413).

[Not to be confounded with Batnæ beyond the Euphrates, which was also a halting place of Julian. See map.]

See the curious treatise de Deâ Syriâ, inserted among the works of Lucian (tom. iii. p. 451-490, edit. Reitz). The singular appellation of Ninus vetus (Ammian. xiv. 8) might induce a suspicion that Hierapolis had been the royal seat of the Assyrians.

Julian (Epistle xxviii. [xxvii.]) kept a regular account of all the fortunate omens; but he suppresses the inauspicious signs, which Ammianus (xxiii. 2) has carefully recorded.

Julian, Epistle xxvii. p. 399-402 [515-519].

I take the earliest opportunity of acknowledging my obligations to M. d’Anville, for his recent geography of the Euphrates and Tigris (Paris, 1780, in 4to), which particularly illustrates the expedition of Julian. [Cp. App. 4.]

There are three passages within a few miles of each other: 1. Zeugma, celebrated by the ancients; 2. Bir, frequented by the moderns; and, 3. the bridge of Menbigz, or Hierapolis, at the distance of four parasangs from the city. [Membij is Hierapolis, and the city is more than twenty miles from the river.]

Haran, or Carrhæ, was the ancient residence of the Sabæans and of Abraham. See the Index Geographicus of Schultens (ad calcem Vit. Saladin.), a work from which I have obtained much Oriental knowledge concerning the ancient and modern geography of Syria and the adjacent countries.

See Xenophon. Cyropæd. l. iii. p. 189, edit. Hutchinson [c. 1, § 33, 34]. Artavasdes might have supplied Mark Antony with 16,000 horse, armed and disciplined after the Parthian manner (Plutarch, in M. Antonio, tom. v. p. 117 [c. 50]).

Moses of Chorene (Hist. Armeniac. l. iii. c. 11, p. 242) fixes his accession ( AD 357) to the seventeenth year of Constantius. [See vol. iii. App. 13.]

Ammian. xx. 11. Athanasius (tom. i. p. 856) says, in general terms, that Constantius gave his brother’s widow τοɩ̂ς βαρβάροις, an expression more suitable to a Roman than a Christian.

Ammianus (xxiii. 2) uses a word much too soft for the occasion, monuerat. Muratori (Fabricius, Bibliothec. Græc. tom. vii. p. 86) has published an epistle from Julian to the satrap Arsaces; fierce, vulgar, and (though it might deceive Sozomen, l. vi. c. 5), most probably spurious. La Bléterie (Hist. de Jovien, tom. ii. p. 339) translates and rejects it. [The text of this forgery will be found in Hertlein’s ed. of Julian, p. 589.]

[For a description of the locality (now Ar-Ra kk a) see Sachau, Reise in Syrien und Mesopotamien, p. 241 sqq. ]

Latissimum flumem Euphraten artabat. Ammian. xxiii. 3. Somewhat higher, at the fords of Thapsacus, the river is four stadia, or 800 yards, almost half an English mile broad (Xenophon, Anabasis, l. i. p. 41, edit. Hutchinson, with Foster’s Observations, p. 29, c., in the second volume of Spelman’s translation). If the breadth of the Euphrates at Bir and Zeugma is no more than 130 yards (Voyages de Niebuhr, tom. ii. p. 335), the enormous difference must chiefly arise from the depth of the channel.

Monumentum tutissimum et fabre politum, cujus mœnia Abora (the Orientals aspire Chaboras or Chabour) et Euphrates ambiunt flumina, velut spatium insulare fingentes. Ammian. xxiii. 5.

The enterprise and armament of Julian are described by himself (Epist. xxvii.), Ammianus Marcellinus (xxiii. 3, 4, 5), Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 108, 109, p. 332, 333), Zosimus (l. iii. p. 160, 161, 162 [c. 12]), Sozomen (l. vi. c. 1), and John Malala (tom. ii. p. 17 [p. 328, ed. Bonn]). [Tabari’s account of the war of Julian has no value (Nöldeke, p. 59 sqq. ). It is derived from the Syriac Romance of Julian and Jovian, for which see Nöldeke in Ztsch. d. Morg. Ges., 28, 263 sqq., but also, in one point at least, from a second source which was also used by Malalas (p. 332, cp. Tabari, p. 61); see Büttner-Wobst, Philologus, 51, p. 576.]

Before he enters Persia, Ammianus copiously describes (xxiii. 6, p. 396-419, edit. Gronov. in 4to) the eighteen great satrapies, or provinces (as far as the Seric, or Chinese, frontiers), which were subject to the Sassanides.

Ammianus (xxiv. 1) and Zosimus (l. iii. p. 162, 163 [13]) have accurately expressed the order of march.

The adventures of Hormisdas are related with some mixture of fable (Zosimus, l. ii. p. 100-102 [c. 27]; Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, tom. iv. p. 198). It is almost impossible that he should be the brother (frater germanus) of an eldest and posthumous child: nor do I recollect that Ammianus ever gives him that title. [Possibly an elder stepbrother, St. Martin suggests (on Lebeau, ii. 24).]

See the first book of the Anabasis, p. 45, 46 [c. 5, § 1 sqq. ]. This pleasing work is original and authentic. Yet Xenophon’s memory, perhaps many years after the expedition, has sometimes betrayed him; and the distances which he marks are often larger than either a soldier or a geographer will allow.

Mr. Spelman, the English translator of the Anabasis (vol. i. p. 51), confounds the antelope with the roe-buck, and the wild ass with the zebra.

See Voyages de Tavernier, part i. l. iii. p. 316, and more especially Viaggi di Pietro della Valle, tom. i. let. xvii. p. 671, c. He was ignorant of the old name and condition of Annah. Our blind travellers seldom possess any previous knowledge of the countries which they visit. Shaw and Tournefort deserve an honourable exception.

Famosi nominis latro, says Ammianus; an high encomium for an Arab. The tribe of Gassan had settled on the edge of Syria, and reigned some time in Damascus, under a dynasty of thirty-one kings, or emirs, from the time of Pompey to that of the Khalif Omar. D’Herbelot, Bibliothèque Orientale, p. 360. Pocock, Specimen Hist. Arabicæ, p. 75-78. The name of Rodosaces does not appear in the list. [The identification of Ammian’s Assanitarum with the tribe of Gassan has been questioned.]

See Ammianus (xxiv. 1, 2), Libanius (Orat. Parental. c. 110, 111, p. 334), Zosimus (l. iii. p. 164-168).

The description of Assyria is furnished by Herodotus (l. i. c. 192, c.), who sometimes writes for children, and sometimes for philosophers; by Strabo (l. xvi. p. 1070-1082), and by Ammianus (l. xxiii. c. 6). The most useful of the modern travellers are Tavernier (part i. l. ii. p. 226-258), Otter (tom. ii. p. 35-69, and 189-224), and Niebuhr (tom. ii. p. 172-288). Yet I much regret that the Irak Arabi of Abulfeda has not been translated. [A translation by Reiske appeared in Büsching’s Magazin for modern Hist. and Geogr. (iv. 121 sqq., v. 299 sqq. ) in Gibbon’s lifetime.]

Ammianus remarks that the primitive Assyria, which comprehended Ninus (Nineveh) and Arbela, had assumed the more recent and peculiar appellation of Adiabene: and he seems to fix Teredon, Vologesia, and Apollonia as the extreme cities of the actual province of Assyria.

The two rivers unite at Apamea, or Corna (one hundred miles from the Persian Gulf), into the broad stream of the Pasitigris, or Shat-ul-Arab. The Euphrates formerly reached the sea by a separate channel, which was obstructed and diverted by the citizens of Orchoe, about twenty miles to the south-east of modern Basra (d’Anville, in the Mémoires de l’Acad. des Inscriptions, tom. xxx. p. 170-191). [The lower courses of the Tigris and Euphrates underwent considerable changes since the middle ages; see Appendix 4.]

56a

[Milman has pointed out that this is not so at the present day.]

The learned Kæmpfer, as a botanist, an antiquary, and a traveller, has exhausted (Amœnitat. Exoticæ, Fascicul. iv. p. 660-764) the whole subject of palm-trees.

Assyria yielded to the Persian satrap an artaba of silver each day. The well-known proportion of weights and measures (see Bishop Hooper’s elaborate Inquiry), the specific gravity of water and silver, and the value of that metal, will afford, after a short process, the annual revenue which I have stated. Yet the Great King received no more than 1000 Euboic, or Tyrian, talents (252,000 l. ) from Assyria. The comparison of two passages in Herodotus (l. i. c. 192, l. iii. c. 89-96) reveals an important difference between the gross, and the net, revenue of Persia; the sums paid by the province, and the gold or silver deposited in the royal treasure. The monarch might annually save three millions six hundred thousand pounds, of the seventeen or eighteen millions raised upon the people.

[The foundation of this place (Anbār — Ἄμβαρα, Ἄβαρα = Pêrôz — Shâpûr) is noticed in the chronicle of Tabari (Nöldeke, p. 67). Al-Anbār means “the granaries,” and is to be sought in the ruins of Sifeyra (acc. to Mr. Le Strange).]

The operations of the Assyrian war are circumstantially related by Ammianus (xxiv. 2, 3, 4, 5), Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 112-123, p. 335-347), Zosimus (l. iii. p. 168-180), and Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. iv. p. 113, 144). The military criticisms of the saint are devoutly copied by Tillemont, his faithful slave.

Libanius de ulciscendâ Juliani nece, c. 13, p. 162.

The famous examples of Cyrus, Alexander, and Scipio were acts of justice. Julian’s chastity was voluntary, and, in his opinion, meritorious.

Sallust (ap. Vet. Scholiast. Juvenal, Satir. i. 104) observes that nihil corruptius moribus. The matrons and virgins of Babylon freely mingled with the men, in licentious banquets: and, as they felt the intoxication of wine and love, they gradually, and almost completely, threw aside the encumbrance of dress; ad ultimum ima corporum velamenta projiciunt. Q. Curtius, v. 1.

Ex virginibus autem, quæ speciosæ sunt captæ, et in Perside, ubi fœminarum pulchritudo excellit, nec contrectare aliquam voluit nec videre. Ammian. xxiv. 4. The native race of Persians is small and ugly; but it has been improved by the perpetual mixture of Circassian blood (Herodot. l. iii. c. 97. Buffon, Hist. Naturelle, tom. iii. p. 420).

Obsidionalibus coronis donati. Ammian. xxiv. 4. Either Julian or his historian were unskilful antiquaries. He should have given mural crowns. The obsidional were the reward of a general who had delivered a besieged city (Aulus Gellius, Noct. Attic. v. 6).

I give this speech as original and genuine. Ammianus might hear, could transcribe, and was incapable of inventing it. I have used some slight freedoms, and conclude with the most forcible sentence.

Ammian. xxiv. 3. Libanius, Orat. Parent. c. 122, p. 346.

M. d’Anville (Mém. de l’Académie des Inscriptions, tom. xxviii. p. 246-259) has ascertained the true position and distance of Babylon, Seleucia, Ctesiphon, Bagdad, c. The Roman traveller, Pietro della Valle (tom. i. lett. xvii. p. 650-780), seems to be the most intelligent spectator of that famous province. He is a gentleman and a scholar, but intolerably vain and prolix.

The royal canal ( Nahar Malcha ) might be successively restored, altered, divided, c. (Cellarius, Geograph. Antiq. tom. ii. p. 453); and these changes may serve to explain the seeming contradictions of antiquity. In the time of Julian, it must have fallen into the Euphrates [ leg. Tigris] below Ctesiphon. [Ibn Serapion describes it as falling into the Tigris three leagues below Al-Madäin. Cp. Appendix 4.]

Καὶ μεγέθεσιν ἐλεϕάντων, οἷς ίσον ἔργον διὰ σταχύων ἐλθεɩ̂ν, καὶ ϕάλαγγος [Ἐπιτάϕ. c. 125]. Rien n’est beau que le vrai; a maxim which should be inscribed on the desk of every rhetorician.

[We are not told that eighty vessels were unladen, but that each unladen vessel was manned with eighty soldiers — octogenis armatis, Amm. xxiv. 6, 4.]

Libanius alludes to the most powerful of the generals. I have ventured to name Sallust. Ammianus says, of all the leaders, quod acri metû territi duces concordi precatû fieri prohibere tentarent.

Hinc Imperator . . . (says Ammianus) ipse cum levis armaturæ auxiliis per prima postremaque discurrens, c. Yet Zosimus, his friend, does not allow him to pass the river till two days after the battle.

Secundum Homericam dispositionem. A similar disposition is ascribed to the wise Nestor, in the fourth book of the Iliad; and Homer was never absent from the mind of Julian.

Persas terrore subito miscuerunt, versisque agminibus totius gentis apertas Ctesphontis portas victor miles intrâsset, ni major prædarum occasio fuisset, quam cura victoriæ (Sextus Rufus de Provinciis [= Festus, Breviarium], c. 28). Their avarice might dispose them to hear the advice of Victor.

The labour of the canal, the passage of the Tigris, and the victory are described by Ammianus (xxiv. 5, 6), Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 124-128, p. 347-353), Greg. Nazianzen (Orat. iv. p. 115), Zosimus (l. iii. p. 181-183 [c. 24 sq. ]), and Sextus Rufus (de Provinciis, c. 28).

The fleet and army were formed in three divisions, of which the first only had passed during the night (Ammian. xxiv. 6). The πα̂σα δορυϕορία whom Zosimus transports on the third day (l. iii. p. 183), might consist of the protectors, among whom the historian Ammianus, and the future emperor Jovian, actually served, some schools of the domestics, and perhaps the Jovians and Herculians, who often did duty as guards.

Moses of Chorene (Hist. Armen. l. iii. c. 15, p. 246) supplies us with a national tradition, and a spurious letter. I have borrowed only the leading circumstance, which is consistent with truth, probability, and Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 131, p. 355).

Civitas inexpugnabilis, facinus audax et importunum. Ammianus, xxiv. 7. His fellow-soldier, Eutropius, turns aside from the difficulty, Assyriamque populatus, castra apud Ctesiphontem stativa aliquandiu habuit: remeansque victor, c. x. 16. Zosimus is artful or ignorant, and Socrates inaccurate.

Libanius, Orat. Parent. c. 130, p. 354, c. 139, p. 361; Socrates, l. iii. c. 21. The ecclesiastical historian imputes the refusal of peace to the advice of Maximus. Such advice was unworthy of a philosopher; but the philosopher was likewise a magician, who flattered the hopes and passions of his master.

The arts of this new Zopyrus (Greg. Nazianzen, Orat. iv. p. 115, 116 [v. c. 11]) may derive some credit from the testimony of two abbreviators (Sextus Rufus and Victor), and the casual hints of Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 134, p. 357) and Ammianus (xxiv. 7). The course of genuine history is interrupted by a most unseasonable chasm in the text of Ammianus.

See Ammianus (xxiv. 7), Libanius (Orat. Parentalis, c. 132, 133, p. 356,357), Zosimus (l. iii. p. 183), Zonaras (tom. ii. l. xiii. p. 26), Gregory (Orat. iv. p. 116 [c. 12]), Augustin (De Civitate Dei, l. iv. c. 29, l. v. c. 21). Of these, Libanius alone attempts a faint apology for his hero; who, according to Ammianus, pronounced his own condemnation, by a tardy and ineffectual attempt to extinguish the flames.

Consult Herodotus (l. i. c. 194), Strabo (l. xvi. p. 1074), and Tavernier (p. i. l. ii. p. 152).

A celeritate Tigris incipit vocari, ita appellant Medi sagittam. Plin. Hist. Natur. vi. 31.

One of these dikes, which produces an artificial cascade or cataract, is described by Tavernier (part i. l. ii. p. 226), and Thévenot (part ii. l. i. p. 193). The Persians, or Assyrians, laboured to interrupt the navigation of the river (Strabo, l. xv. p. 1075. D’Anville, l’Euphrate et le Tigre, p. 98, 99).

Recollect the successful and applauded rashness of Agathocles and Cortez, who burnt their ships on the coasts of Africa and Mexico.

See the judicious reflections of the author of the Essai sur la Tactique, tom. ii. p. 287-353, and the learned remarks of M. Guichardt (Nouveaux Mémoires Militaires, tom. i. p. 351-382) on the baggage and subsistence of the Roman armies.

The Tigris rises to the south, the Euphrates to the north, of the Armenian mountains. The former overflows in March, the latter in July. These circumstances are well explained in the Geographical Dissertation of Foster, inserted in Spelman’s Expedition of Cyrus, vol. ii. p. 26.

Ammianus (xxiv. 8) describes, as he had felt, the inconveniency of the flood, the heat, and the insects. The lands of Assyria, oppressed by the Turks, and ravaged by the Curds, or Arabs, yield an increase of ten, fifteen, and twenty-fold, for the seed which is cast into the ground by the wretched and unskilful husbandmen. Voyages de Niebuhr, tom. ii. p. 279, 285.

Isidore of Charax (Mansion. Parthic. p. 5, 6, in Hudson, Geograph. Minor. tom. ii.) reckons 129 schœni from Seleucia, and Thévenot (part i. l. i. ii. p. 209-245) 128 hours of march from Bagdad, to Ecbatana, or Hamadam. These measures cannot exceed an ordinary parasang, or three Roman miles.

The march of Julian from Ctesiphon is circumstantially, but not clearly, described by Ammianus (xxiv. 7, 8), Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 134, p. 357), and Zosimus (l. iii. p. 183). The two last seem ignorant that their conqueror was retreating; and Libanius absurdly confines him to the banks of the Tigris.

Chardin, the most judicious of modern travellers, describes (tom. iii. p. 57, 58, c., edit. in 4to) the education and dexterity of the Persian horsemen. Brissonius (de Regno Persico, p. 650, 661, c.) has collected the testimonies of antiquity.

In Mark Antony’s retreat, an attic chœnix sold for fifty drachmæ, or, in other words, a pound of flour for twelve or fourteen shillings: barley bread was sold for its weight in silver. It is impossible to peruse the interesting narrative of Plutarch (tom. v. p. 102-116 [c. 45]) without perceiving that Mark Antony and Julian were pursued by the same enemies and involved in the same distress.

Ammian. xxiv. 8, xxv. 1. Zosimus, l. iii. p. 184, 185, 186. Libanius, Orat. Parent. c. 134, 135, p. 357, 358, 359. The sophist of Antioch appears ignorant that the troops were hungry.

Ammian. xxv. 2. Julian had sworn in a passion, nunquam se Marti sacra facturum (xxiv. 6). Such whimsical quarrels were not uncommon between the gods and their insolent votaries; and even the prudent Augustus, after his fleet had been twice shipwrecked, excluded Naptune from the honours of public processions. See Hume’s Philosophical Reflections. Essays, vol. ii. p. 418.

They still retained the monopoly of the vain, but lucrative, science which had been invented in Etruria; and professed to derive their knowledge of signs and omens from the ancient books of Tarquitius, a Tuscan sage.

Clamabant hinc inde candidati (see the note of Valesius) quos disjecerat terror, ut fugientium molem tanquam ruinam male compositi culminis declinaret. Ammian. xxv. 3. [It was unknown who threw the javelin, according to Ammian (25, 3, 23, incertum unde ) and Magnus of Carrhæ (abridged in Malalas, p. 328-330; see vol. ii. App. 10), who were present. Eutropius says hostili manu; on the other hand the tale was soon invented that the dart was from the hand of a Christian in Julian’s army. The question is discussed by Büttner-Wobst in Philologus, 51, p. 561 sqq. (1892). Libanius (ii. 31, Reiske) adopted a rumour that the man whose dart dealt death to the Emperor was Ταϊηνός τις, which was not understood until O. Crusius recently (Philologus, ib. p. 735 sqq. ) pointed to a notice in Stephanus (p. 598) that the Taêni were an Arabic tribe to the south of the Saracens. Libanius’ statement would thus prove not that a Taene killed Julian, but that there were Taenes in his army. Nöldeke (Philol. 52, p. 736) has confirmed Crusius, and showed that the name Taene first occurs in a Syriac book (c. 210 AD ) and is rendered in the Praepar. Evangel. of Eusebius, vi. 10, 14 (Hein.), by Ταινοɩ̂ς.]

Sapor himself declared to the Romans that it was his practice to comfort the families of his deceased satraps by sending them, as a present, the heads of the guards and officers who had not fallen by their master’s side. Libanius, de nece Julian. ulcis. c. xiii. p. 163.

The character and situation of Julian might countenance the suspicion that he had previously composed the elaborate oration which Ammianus heard and has transcribed. The version of the Abbé de la Bléterie is faithful and elegant. I have followed him in expressing the Platonic idea of emanations, which is darkly insinuated in the original.

100

Herodotus (l. i. c. 31) has displayed that doctrine in an agreeable tale. Yet the Jupiter (in the 16th book of the Iliad) who laments with tears of blood the death of Sarpedon his son had a very imperfect notion of happiness or glory beyond the grave.

101

The soldiers who made their verbal, or nuncupatory, testaments upon actual service (in procinctu) were exempted from the formalities of the Roman law. See Heineccius (Antiquit. Jur. Roman. tom. i. p. 504), and Montesquieu (Esprit des Loix, l. xxvii.).

102

This union of the human soul with the divine ætherial substance of the universe is the ancient doctrine of Pythagoras and Plato; but it seems to exclude any personal or conscious immortality. See Warburton’s learned and rational observations, Divine Legation, vol. ii. p. 199-216.

103

The whole relation of the death of Julian is given by Ammianus (xxv. 3), an intelligent spectator. Libanius, who turns with horror from the scene, has supplied some circumstances (Orat. Parental. c. 136-140, p. 359-362). The calumnies of Gregory, and the legends of more recent saints, may now be silently despised.

104

Honoratior aliquis miles; perhaps Ammianus himself. The modest and judicious historian describes the scene of the election, at which he was undoubtedly present (xxv. 5).

105

The primus, or primicerius, enjoyed the dignity of a senator; and, though only a tribune, he ranked with the military dukes. Cod. Theodosian. l. vi. tit. xxiv. These privileges are perhaps more recent than the time of Jovian.

106

The ecclesiastical historians, Socrates (l. iii. c. 22), Sozomen (l. vi. c. 3), and Theodoret (l. iv. c. 1), ascribe to Jovian the merit of a confessor under the preceding reign; and piously suppose that he refused the purple, till the whole army unanimously exclaimed that they were Christians. Ammianus, calmly pursuing his narrative, overthrows the legend by a single sentence. Hostiis pro Joviano extisque inspectis pronuntiatum est, c. xxv. 6.

107

Ammianus (xxv. 10) has drawn from the life an impartial portrait of Jovian: to which the younger Victor has added some remarkable strokes. The Abbé de la Bléterie (Histoire de Jovien, tom. i. p. 1-238) has composed an elaborate history of his short reign; a work remarkably distinguished by elegance of style, critical disquisition, and religious prejudice.

108

Regius equitatus. It appears from Procopius that the Immortals, so famous under Cyrus and his successors, were revived, if we may use that improper word, by the Sassanides. Brisson de Regno Persico, p. 268, c.

109

The obscure villages of the inland country are irrecoverably lost; nor can we name the field of battle where Julian fell: but M. d’Anville has demonstrated the precise situation of Sumere, Carche, and Dura, along the banks of the Tigris (Géographie Ancienne, tom. ii. p. 248. L’Euphrate et le Tigre, p. 95, 97). In the ninth century, Sumere, or Samara, became, with a slight change of name, the royal residence of the Khalifs of the house of Abbas. [Among the palaces at Samarrā was that of Al-Hārūnī, built by Caliph Al-Wāthik.]

110

Dura was a fortified place in the wars of Antiochus against the rebels of Media and Persia (Polybius, l. v. c. 48, 52, p. 548, 552, edit. Casaubon, in 8vo).

111

A similar expedient was proposed to the leaders of the ten thousand, and wisely rejected. Xenophon, Anabasis, l. iii. p. 255, 256, 257. It appears from our modern travellers that rafts floating on bladders performed the trade and navigation of the Tigris. [On the course of the Tigris here cp. Appendix 4.]

112

The first military acts of the reign of Jovian are related by Ammianus (xxv. 6), Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 146, p. 364), and Zosimus (l. iii. p. 189, 190, 191 [c. 30]). Though we may distrust the fairness of Libanius, the ocular testimony of Eutropius (uno a Persis atque altero prœlio victus, x. 17) must incline us to suspect that Ammianus has been too jealous of the honour of the Roman arms.

113

Sextus Rufus (de Provinciis, c. 29) embraces a poor subterfuge of national vanity. Tanta reverentia nominis Romani fuit, ut a Persis primus de pace sermo haberetur.

114

It is presumptuous to controvert the opinion of Ammianus, a soldier and a spectator. Yet it is difficult to understand how the mountains of Corduene could extend over the plain of Assyria, as low as the conflux of the Tigris and the great Zab; or how an army of sixty thousand men could march one hundred miles in four days.

115

The treaty of Dura is recorded with grief or indignation by Ammianus (xxv. 7), Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 142, p. 364), Zosimus (l. iii. p. 190, 191 [c. 31]), Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. iv. p. 117, 118 [v. c. 15], who imputes the distress to Julian, the deliverance to Jovian), and Eutropius (x. 17). The last-mentioned writer, who was present in a military station, styles this peace necessariam quidem sed ignobilem.

116

Libanius, Orat. Parent. c. 143, p. 364, 365.

117

Conditionibus . . . dispendiosis Romanæ reipublicæ impositis . . . quibus cupidior regni quam gloriæ Jovianus imperio rudis adquievit. Sextus Rufus de Provinciis, c. 29. La Bléterie has expressed, in a long direct oration, these specious considerations of public and private interest. Hist. de Jovien, tom. i. p. 39, c.

118

The generals were murdered on the banks of the Zabatus (Anabasis, l. ii. p. 156, l. iii. p. 226), or great Zab, a river of Assyria, 400 feet broad, which falls into the Tigris [at Al-Hadītha] fourteen hours below Mosul. The error of the Greeks bestowed on the great and lesser Zab the names of the Wolf (Lycus), and the Goat (Capros). They created these animals to attend the Tiger of the East. [Another tributary of the Tigris, the Arzan Sū, is called Nahr-adh-Dhīb or Wolf-river.]

119

The Cyropædia is vague and languid: the Anabasis circumstantial and animated. Such is the eternal difference between fiction and truth.

120

According to Rufinus, an immediate supply of provisions was stipulated by the treaty; and Theodoret affirms that the obligation was faithfully discharged by the Persians. Such a fact is probable, but undoubtedly false. See Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, tom. iv. p. 702.

121

We may recollect some lines of Lucan (Pharsal. iv. 95), who describes a similar distress of Cæsar’s army in Spain:

Sæva fames aderat — Miles eget: toto censû non prodigus emit Exiguam Cererem. Proh lucri pallida tabes! Non deest prolato jejunus venditor auro.

See Guichardt (Nouveaux Mémoires Militaires, tom. i. p. 379-382). His Analysis of the two Campaigns in Spain and Africa is the noblest monument that has ever been raised to the fame of Cæsar.

122

M. d’Anville (see his Maps, and l’Euphrate et le Tigre, p. 92, 93) traces their march, and assigns the true position of Hatra [Al-Hadr], Ur, and Thilsaphata, which Ammianus has mentioned. He does not complain of the Samiel, the deadly hot wind, which Thévenot (Voyages, part ii. li. p. 192) so much dreaded.

123

The retreat of Jovian is described by Ammianus (xxv. 9), Libanius (Orat. Parent. c. 143, p. 365), and Zosimus (l. iii. p. 194 [c. 33]).

124

Libanius, Orat. Parent. c. 145, p. 366. Such were the natural hopes and wishes of a rhetorician.

125

The people of Carrhæ, a city devoted to Paganism, buried the inauspicious messenger under a pile of stones. Zosimus, l. iii. p. 196 [c. 34]. Libanius, when he received the fatal intelligence, cast his eye on his sword; but he recollected that Plato had condemned suicide, and that he must live to compose the panegyric of Julian (Libanius de Vitâ suâ, tom. ii. p. 45, 46).

126

Ammianus and Eutropius may be admitted as fair and credible witnesses of the public language and opinions. The people of Antioch reviled an ignominious peace, which exposed them to the Persians on a naked and defenceless frontier. (Excerpt. Valesiana, p. 845, ex Johanne Antiocheno.)

127

The Abbé de la Bléterie (Hist. de Jovien, tom. i. p. 212-227), though a severe casuist, has pronounced that Jovian was not bound to execute his promise; since he could not dismember the empire, nor alienate, without their consent, the allegiance of his people. I have never found much delight or instruction in such political metaphysics.

128

At Nisibis he performed a royal act. A brave officer, his namesake, who had been thought worthy of the purple, was dragged from supper, thrown into a well, and stoned to death, without any form of trial or evidence of guilt. Ammian. xxv. 8.

129

See xxv. 9, and Zosimus, l. iii. p. 194, 195 [c. 33].

130

Chron. Paschal. p. 300 [vol. i. p. 554, ed. Bonn]. The ecclesiastical Notitiæ may be consulted.

131

Zosimus, l. iii. p. 192, 193 [c. 32]. Sextus Rufus de Provinciis, c. 29. Augustin. de Civitat. Dei, l. iv. c. 29. This general position must be applied and interpreted with some caution.

132

Ammianus, xxv. 9. Zosimus, l. iii. p. 196 [c. 34]. He might be edax, et vino Venerique indulgens. But I agree with La Bléterie (tom. i. p. 148-154) in rejecting the foolish report of a Bacchanalian riot (ap. Suidam) celebrated at Antioch, by the emperor, his wife, and a troop of concubines.

133

The Abbé de la Bléterie (tom. i. p. 156, 209) handsomely exposes the brutal bigotry of Baronius, who would have thrown Julian to the dogs, ne cespititiâ quidem sepulturâ dignus.

134

Compare the sophist and the saint (Libanius, Monod. tom. ii. p. 251 and Orat. Parent. c. 145, p. 367, c. 156, p. 377, with Gregory Nazianzen, Orat. iv. p. 125-132 [v. c. 36-38]). The Christian orator faintly mutters some exhortations to modesty and forgiveness: but he is well satisfied that the real sufferings of Julian will far exceed the fabulous torments of Ixion or Tantalus.

134a

[A necessary correction of acknowledge, which appears in quarto ed.]

135

Tillemont (Hist. des Empereurs, tom. iv. p. 549) has collected these visions. Some saint or angel was observed to be absent in the night on a secret expedition, c.

136

Sozomen (l. vi. 2) applauds the Greek doctrine of tyrannicide; but the whole passage, which a Jesuit might have translated, is prudently suppressed by the president Cousin.

137

Immediately after the death of Julian, an uncertain rumour was scattered, telo cecidisse Romano. It was carried, by some deserters, to the Persian camp; and the Romans were reproached as the assassins of the emperor by Sapor and his subjects (Ammian. xxv. 6. Libanius de ulciscendâ Juliani nece, c. xiii. p. 162, 163). It was urged, as a decisive proof, that no Persian had appeared to claim the promised reward (Liban. Orat. Parent. c. 141, p. 363). But the flying horseman, who darted the fatal javelin, might be ignorant of its effect; or he might be slain in the same action. Ammianus neither feels nor inspires a suspicion.

138

Ὅστις ἐντολὴν πληρω̂ν τῷ σϕω̂ν αὐτ ω̂ν ἄρχοντι. This dark and ambiguous expression may point to Athanasius, the first, without a rival, of the Christian clergy (Libanius de ulcis. Jul. nece, c. 5, p. 149. La Bléterie, Hist. de Jovien, t. i. p. 179).

139

The Orator (Fabricius, Bibliot. Græc. tom. vii. p. 145-179) scatters suspicions, demands an inquiry, and insinuates that proofs might still be obtained. He ascribes the success of the Huns to the criminal neglect of revenging Julian’s death.

140

At the funeral of Vespasian, the comedian who personated that frugal emperor anxiously inquired, how much it cost? — Fourscore thousand pounds (centies). — Give me the tenth part of the sum, and throw my body into the Tiber. Sueton. in Vespasian. c. 19, with the notes of Casaubon and Gronovius.

141

Gregory (Orat. iv. p. 119, 120 [v. c. 16]) compares this supposed ignominy and ridicule to the funeral honours of Constantius, whose body was chaunted over Mount Taurus by a choir of angels.

142

Quintus Curtius, i. iii. c. 4. The luxuriancy of his descriptions has been often censured. Yet it was almost the duty of the historian to describe a river, whose waters had nearly proved fatal to Alexander.

143

Libanius, Orat. Parent. c. 156, p. 377. Yet he acknowledges with gratitude the liberality of the two royal brothers in decorating the tomb of Julian (de ulcis. Jul. nece, c. 7, p. 152).

144

Cujus suprema et cineres, si qui tunc juste consuleret, non Cydnus videre deberet, quamvis gratissimus amnis et liquidus: sed ad perpetuandam gloriam recte factorum praeterlambere Tiberis, intersecans urbem aeternam divorumque veterum monumenta praestringens. Ammian. xxv. 10.

The medals of Jovian adorn him with victories, laurel crowns, and prostrate captives. Ducange, Famil. Byzantin. p. 52. Flattery is a foolish suicide; she destroys herself with her own hands.

Jovian restored to the church τὸν ἀρχαɩ̂ον κόσμον; a forcible and comprehensive expression (Philostorgius, l. viii. c. 5, with Godefroy’s Dissertations, p. 329. Sozomen, l. vi. c. 3. [The phrase means the policy of Constantius, cp. Schiller, ii. 349.]). The new law which condemned the rape or marriage of nuns (Cod. Theod. l. ix. tit. xxv. leg. 2) is exaggerated by Sozomen, who supposes that an amorous glance, the adultery of the heart, was punished with death by the evangelic legislator. [Jovian’s Corcyræan inscription boasts that he destroyed pagan temples Ἑλλήνων τεμένη καὶ βωμοὺς ἑξαλαπάξας, C.I.G. 8608.]

Compare Socrates, l. iii. c. 25, and Philostorgius, l. viii. c. 6, with Godefroy’s Dissertations, p. 330.

The word celestial faintly expresses the impious and extravagant flattery of the emperor to the archbishop, τη̂ς πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν τω̂ν ὄλων ὁμοιώσεως. See the original epistle in Athanasius, tom. ii. p. 33 [Migne’s Patr. Græc. vol. 26, p. 813]. Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. xxi. p. 392 [Migne, vol. 35, p. 1121]) celebrates the friendship of Jovian and Athanasius. The primate’s journey was advised by the Egyptian monks (Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. viii. p. 221).

Athanasius, at the court of Antioch, is agreeably represented by La Bléterie (Hist. de Jovien, tom. i. p. 121-148): he translates the singular and original conferences of the emperor, the primate of Egypt, and the Arian deputies. The Abbé is not satisfied with the coarse pleasantry of Jovian; but his partiality for Athanasius assumes, in his eyes, the character of justice.

The true era of his death is perplexed with some difficulties (Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. viii. p. 719-725). But the date ( AD 373, May 2) which seems the most consistent with history and reason is ratified by his authentic life. Maffei, Osservazioni Letterarie, tom. iii. p. 81. [So Index of Heortastic Letters; the Hist. Aceph. gives 3rd May.]

See the observations of Valesius and Jortin (Remarks on Ecclesiastical History, vol. iv. p. 38) on the original letter of Athanasius, which is preserved by Theodoret (l. iv. c. 3. [See Migne’s Patr. Gr. vol. 26, p. 813.]). In some MSS. this indiscreet promise is omitted; perhaps by the Catholics, jealous of the prophetic fame of their leader.

Athanasius (apud Theodoret, l. iv. c. 3) magnifies the number of the orthodox, who composed the whole world, πάρεξ ὀλίγων τω̂ν τὰ Ἀρείου ϕρονούντων. This assertion was verified in the space of thirty or forty years.

Socrates, l. iii. c. 24. Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. iv. p. 131) and Libanius (Orat. Parentalis, c. 148, p. 369) express the living sentiments of their respective factions.

Themistius, Orat. v. p. 63-71, edit. Harduin, Paris, 1684. The Abbé de la Bléterie judiciously remarks (Hist. de Jovien, tom. i. p. 199) that Sozomen has forgot the general toleration, and Themistius the establishment of the Catholic religion. Each of them turned away from the object which he disliked, and wished to suppress the part of the edict the least honourable, in his opinion, to the emperor Jovian. [We cannot infer from Themistius that an edict of toleration was issued; the orator wished to induce Jovian to issue such an edict. Cp. the fears of Libanius, loc. cit., and Epitaph., p. 614. So Schiller, Gesch. der röm. Kaiserzeit, ii. 347.]

Οἱ δὲ Ἀντιοχεɩ̂ς οὐχ ἡδέως διέκειντο πρὸς αὐτόν: ἀλλ’ ἀπέσκωπτον αὐτὸν ᾠδαɩ̂ς καὶ παρῳδίαις, καὶ τοɩ̂ς καλουμένοις ϕαμώσσοις ( famosis libellis ). Johan. Antiochen. in Excerpt. Valesian. p. 845 [Müller, F.G.H. iv. p. 607]. The libels of Antioch may be admitted on very slight evidence.

Compare Ammianus (xxv. 10), who omits the name of the Batavians, with Zosimus (l. iii. p. 197 [c. 35]), who removes the scene of action from Rheims to Sirmium.

Quos capita scholarum ordo castrensis appellat. Ammian. xxv. 10, and Vales. ad locum.

Cujus vagitus, pertinaciter reluctantis, ne in curuli sellâ veheretur ex more, id quod mox accidit protendebat. Augustus and his successors respectfully solicited a dispensation of age for the sons or nephews whom they raised to the consulship. But the curule chair of the first Brutus had never been dishonoured by an infant.

The Itinerary of Antoninus fixes Dadastana 125 [ leg. 117] Roman miles from Nice; 117 [ leg. 125] from Ancyra. Wesseling, Itinerar. p. 142. The pilgrim of Bordeaux, by omitting some stages, reduces the whole space from 242 to 181 miles. Wesseling, p. 574. [Dadastana, border town between Bithynia and Galatia, seems before Diocletian to have been in Bithynia, but at this time was in Galatia. See Ramsay, Hist. Geography of Asia Minor, p. 241.]

See Ammianus (xxv. 10), Eutropius (x. 18), who might likewise be present; Jerom (tom. i. p. 26, ad Heliodorum [ep. 60]), Orosius (vii. 31), Sozomen (l. vi. c. 6), Zosimus (l. iii. p. 197, 198 [c. 35]), and Zonaras (tom. ii. l. xiii. p. 28, 29 [c. 14]). We cannot expect a perfect agreement, and we shall not discuss minute differences.

Ammianus, unmindful of his usual candour and good sense, compares the death of the harmless Jovian to that of the second Africanus, who had excited the fears and resentment of the popular faction.

Chrysostom, tom. i. p. 336, 344, edit. Montfaucon. The Christian orator attempts to comfort a widow by the examples of illustrious misfortunes; and observes that, of nine emperors (including the Cæsar Gallus) who had reigned in his time, only two (Constantine and Constantius) died a natural death. Such vague consolations have never wiped away a single tear.

Ten days appeared scarcely sufficient for the march and election. But it may be observed: 1. That the generals might command the expeditious use of the public posts for themselves, their attendants, and messengers. 2. That the troops, for the ease of the cities, marched in many divisions; and that the head of the column might arrive at Nice, when the rear halted at Ancyra.

Ammianus, xxvi. 1. Zosimus, l. iii. p. 198 [c. 36]. Philostorgius, l. viii. c. 8, and Godefroy, Dissertat. p. 334. Philostorgius, who appears to have obtained some curious and authentic intelligence, ascribes the choice of Valentinian to the prefect Sallust [Secundus; not Sallust], the master-general Arintheus, Dagalaiphus count of the domestics, and the Patrician Datianus, whose pressing recommendations from Ancyra had a weighty influence in the election.

Ammianus (xxx. 7, 9), and the younger Victor [Epit. 45], have furnished the portrait of Valentinian; which naturally precedes and illustrates the history of his reign. [Additional material in Symmachus, Or. i; cp. Appendix 5.]

[Inscription in memory of Gratian C.I.L. 8, 7014.]

At Antioch, where he was obliged to attend the emperor to the temple, he struck a priest, who had presumed to purify him with lustral water (Sozomen, l. vi. c. 6. Theodoret, l. iii. c. 15 [ leg. 12]). Such public defiance might become Valentinian; but it could leave no room for the unworthy delation of the philosopher Maximus, which supposes some more private offence (Zosimus, l. iv. p. 200, 201 [c. 2]).

Socrates, l. iv. A previous exile to Melitene, or Thebais (the first might be possible), is interposed by Sozomen (l. vi. c. 6) and Philostorgius (l. vii. c. 7, with Godefroy’s Dissertations, p. 293).

Ammianus, in a long, because unseasonable, digression (xxvi. 1 and Valesius ad locum), rashly supposes that he understands an astronomical question of which his readers are ignorant. It is treated with more judgment and propriety by Censorinus (de Die Natali, c. 20) and Macrobius (Saturnal. l. i. cap. 12-16). The appellation of Bissextile, which marks the inauspicious year (Augustin. ad Januarium, Epist. 119), is derived from the repetition of the sixth day of [ i.e. before] the calends of March. [Both 24th Feb. and 25th Feb. were called ad vi. Kal. Mart. ]

Valentinian’s first speech is full in Ammianus (xxvi. 2); concise and sententious in Philostorgius (l. viii. c. 8).

Si tuos amas, Imperator optime, ha bes fratrem; si Rempublicam, quære quem vestias. Ammian. xxvi. 4. In the division of the empire, Valentinian retained that sincere counsellor for himself (c. 6).

In suburbano, Ammianus, xxvi. 4. The famous Hebdomon, or field of Mars, was distant from Constantinople either seven stadia or seven miles. See Valesius and his brother, ad loc., and Ducange, Const. l. ii. p. 140, 141, 172, 173. [On the Propontis, not at Blachernae, where Ducange put it. See above, vol. iii. Appendix 4.]

Participem quidem legitimum potestatis; sed in modum apparitoris morigerum, ut progrediens aperiet textus. Ammian. xxvi. 4. [Formally Valens was fully co-ordinate, cp. Symmachus, Orat. 1, 11, Augustum pari iure confirmans.]

Notwithstanding the evidence of Zonaras, Suidas, and the Paschal Chronicle, M. de Tillemont (Hist. des Empereurs, tom. v. p. 671) wishes to disbelieve these stories, si avantageuses à un payen.

Eunapius celebrates and exaggerates the sufferings of Maximus (p. 82, 83 [Commelin’s ed. 1616; p. 102, ed. 1596]); yet he allows that this sophist or magician, the guilty favourite of Julian and the personal enemy of Valentinian, was dismissed on the payment of a small fine.

The loose assertions of a general disgrace (Zosimus, l. iv. p. 201 [c. 2]) are detected and refuted by Tillemont (tom. v. p. 21).

Ammianus, xxvi. 5.

Ammianus says, in general terms, subagrestis ingenii, nec bellicis nec liberalibus studiis eruditus. Ammian. xxxi. 14. The orator Themistius, with the genuine impertinence of a Greek, wished for the first time to speak the Latin language, the dialect of his sovereign, τὴν διάλεκτον κρατον̂σαν. Orat. vi. p. 71.

The uncertain degree of alliance, or consanguinity, is expressed by the words ἀνεψιός, cognatus, consobrinus (see Valesius ad Ammian. xxiii. 3). The mother of Procopius might be a sister of Basilina and Count Julian, the mother and uncle of the apostate. Ducange, Fam. Byzantin. p. 49.

Ammian. xxiii. 3, xxvi. 6. He mentions the report with much hesitation: susurravit obscurior fama; nemo enim dicti auctor exstitit verus. It serves, however, to mark that Procopius was a Pagan. Yet his religion does not appear to have promoted, or obstructed, his pretensions.

One of his retreats was a country-house of Eunomius, the heretic. The master was absent, innocent, ignorant; yet he narrowly escaped a sentence of death, and was banished into the remote parts of Mauritania (Philostorg. l. ix. c. 5, 8, and Godefroy’s Dissert. p. 369-378).

[Sister of Constantius. The site seems not to have been determined.]

Hormisdæ maturo juveni, Hormisdæ regalis illius filio, potestatem Proconsulis detulit; et civilia, more veterum, et bella recturo. Ammian. xxvi. 8. The Persian prince escaped with honour and safety, and was afterwards ( AD 380) restored to the same extraordinary office of proconsul of Bithynia (Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, tom. v. p. 204). I am ignorant whether the race of Sassan was propagated. I find ( AD 514) a pope Hormisdas; but he was a native of Frusino, in Italy (Pagi, Brev. Pontific. tom. i. p. 247).

The infant rebel was afterwards the wife of the emperor Gratian; but she died young and childless. See Ducange, Fam. Byzantin. p. 48, 59.

Sequimini culminis summi prosapiam was the language of Procopius, who affected to despise the obscure birth and fortuitous election of the upstart Pannonian. Ammian. xxvi. 7.

Et dedignatus hominem superare certamine despicabilem, auctoritatis et celsi fiduciâ corporis, ipsis hostibus jussit suum vincire rectorem: atque ita turmarum antesignanus umbratilis comprensus suorum manibus. The strength and beauty of Arintheus, the new Hercules, are celebrated by St. Basil, who supposes that God had created him as an inimitable model of the human species. The painters and sculptors could not express his figure: the historians appeared fabulous when they related his exploits (Ammian. xxvi. [8] and Vales. ad loc.).

The same field of battle is placed by Ammianus in Lycia, and by Zosimus at Thyatira, which are at the distance of 150 miles from each other. But Thyatira alluitur Lyco (Plin. Hist. Natur. v. 31. Cellarius, Geograph. Antiq. t. ii. p. 79); and the transcribers might easily convert an obscure river into a well-known province. [Ammianus does not mention the battle of Thyatira, and merely says: ire tendebat ad Lyciam. Nacolia is now Seidi Ghazi.]

The adventures, usurpation, and fall of Procopius are related, in a regular series, by Ammianus (xxvi. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10) and Zosimus (l. iv. p. 203-210 [c. 4-8]). They often illustrate, and seldom contradict, each other. Themistius (Orat. vii. p. 91, 95) adds some base panegyric; and Eunapius (p. 83, 84 [Müller iv. p. 26, 27]) some malicious satire. [For date of defeat see Idatius Fast. cons., ed. Mommsen, Chron. Min. i. p. 241. See also account in Symmachus, Or. i. 17 sqq. ]

Libanius de ulciscend. Julian. nece, c. ix. p. 158, 159. The sophist deplores the public frenzy, but he does not (after their deaths) impeach the justice of the emperors. [Milman observes, “The persecution against philosophers and their libraries was carried on with so much fury that from this time ( AD 374) the names of the Gentile philosophers became almost extinct, and the Christian philosophy and religion, especially in the East, established their ascendancy.”]

The French and English lawyers of the present age allow the theory, and deny the practice, of witchcraft. Denisart, Recueil des Décisions de Jurisprudence, au mot Sorciers, t. [iv. p. 553. Blackstone’s Commentaries, vol. iv. p. 60. As private reason always prevents or outstrips public wisdom, the president Montesquieu (Esprit des Loix, l. xii. c. 5, 6) rejects the existence of magic.

See Oeuvres de Bayle, tom. iii. p. 567-589. The sceptic of Rotterdam exhibits, according to his custom, a strange medley of loose knowledge and lively wit.

The Pagans distinguished between good and bad magic, the Theurgic and the Goetic (Hist. de l’Académie, c., t. vii. p. 25). But they could not have defended this obscure distinction against the acute logic of Bayle. In the Jewish and Christian system all demons are infernal spirits, and all commerce with them is idolatry, apostacy, c., which deserves death and damnation. [For ancient magic, consult L. F. A. Maury, La magie et l’astrologie dans l’antiquité, 1860.]

The Canidia of Horace (Carm. l. v. od. 5 with Dacier’s and Sanadon’s illustrations) is a vulgar witch. The Erichtho of Lucan (Pharsal. vi. 430-830) is tedious, disgusting, but sometimes sublime. She chides the delay of the Furies, and threatens, with tremendous obscurity, to pronounce their real names, to reveal the true infernal countenance of Hecate, to invoke the secret powers that lie below hell, c.

Genus hominum potentibus infidum, sperantibus fallax, quod in civitate nostrâ et vetabitur semper et retinebitur. Tacit. Hist. i. 22. See Augustin. de Civitate Dei, l. viii. c. 19, and the Theodosian Code, l. ix. tit. xvi. with Godefroy’s Commentary.

The persecution of Antioch was occasioned by a criminal consultation. The twenty-four letters of the alphabet were arranged round a magic tripod; and a dancing ring, which had been placed in the centre, pointed to the first four letters in the name of the future emperor, Θ. Ε. Ο. Δ. Theodorus (perhaps with many others who owned the fatal syllables) was executed. Theodosius succeeded. Lardner (Heathen Testimonies, vol. iv. p. 353-372) has copiously and fairly examined this dark transaction of the reign of Valens.

Limus ut hic durescit, et hæc ut cera liquescit Uno eodemque igni — — Virgil. Bucolic. viii. 80.

Devovet absentes, simulacraque cerea figit. — Ovid. in Epist. Hypsip. ad Jason. [Her. vi.] 91.

Such vain incantations could affect the mind and increase the disease of Germanicus. Tacit. Annal. ii. 69.

See Heineccius Antiquitat. Juris Roman. tom. ii. p. 353, c. Cod. Theodosian. l. ix. tit. 7 with Godefroy’s Commentary.

The cruel persecution of Rome and Antioch is described, and most probably exaggerated, by Ammianus (xxviii. 1, xxix. 1, 2), and Zosimus (l. iv. p. 216-218 [c. 13]). The philosopher Maximus, with some justice, was involved in the charge of magic (Eunapius in Vit. Sophist. p. 88, 89 [ed. Commelin, 1616]); and young Chrysostom, who had accidentally found one of the proscribed books, gave himself for lost. Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, tom. v. p. 340.

Consult the six last books of Ammianus, and more particularly the portraits of the two royal brothers (xxx. 8, 9, xxxi. 14). Tillemont has collected (tom. v. p. 12-18, p. 127-133) from all antiquity their virtues and vices.

The younger Victor asserts [Epit. 46] that he was valde timidus: yet he behaved, as almost every man would do, with decent resolution at the head of an army. The same historian attempts to prove that his anger was harmless. Ammianus observes [31, 14] with more candour and judgment, incidentia crimina ad contemptam vel læsam principis amplitudinem trahens, in sanguinem sæviebat.

Cum esset ad acerbitatem naturæ calore propensior . . . pœnas per ignes augebat et gladios. Ammian. xxx. 8. See xxvii. 7.

I have transferred the reproach of avarice from Valens to his servants. Avarice more properly belongs to ministers than to kings; in whom that passion is commonly extinguished by absolute possession.

He sometimes expressed a sentence of death with a tone of pleasantry: “Abi, Comes, et muta ei caput, qui sibi mutari provinciam cupit.” A boy, who had slipped too hastily a Spartan hound; an armourer, who had made a polished cuirass that wanted some grains of the legitimate weight, c., were the victims of his fury.

The innocents of Milan were an agent and three apparitors, whom Valentinian condemned for signifying a legal summons. Ammianus (xxvii. 7) strangely supposes that all who had been unjustly executed were worshipped as martyrs by the Christians. His impartial silence does not allow us to believe that the great chamberlain Rhodanus was burnt alive for an act of oppression (Chron. Paschal. p. 302 [i. 558, ed. Bonn]).

Ut bene meritam in silvas jussit abire Innoxiam. Ammian. xxix. 3, and Valesius ad locum.

See the Code of Justinian, l. viii. tit. lii. leg. 2 Unusquisque sobolem suam nutriat. Quod si exponendam putaverit animadversioni quæ constituta est subjacebit. For the present I shall not interfere in the dispute between Noodt and Binkershoek; how far, or how long, this unnatural practice had been condemned or abolished by law, philosophy, and the more civilised state of society. [C. Theod. ix. 14, 1.]

These salutary institutions are explained in the Theodosian Code, l. xiii. t. iii. De professoribus et Medicis, and l. xiv. tit. ix. De Studiis liberalibus Urbis Romæ. Besides our usual guide (Godefroy), we may consult Giannone (Istoria di Napoli. tom. i. p. 105-111), who has treated the interesting subject with the zeal and curiosity of a man of letters who studies his domestic history.

Cod. Theodos. l. i. tit. xi. with Godefroy’s Paratitlon, which diligently gleans from the rest of the Code.

Three lines from Ammianus (xxxi. 14) countenance a whole oration of Themistius (viii. p. 101-120), full of adulation, pedantry, and common-place morality. The eloquent M. Thomas (tom. i. p. 366-396) has amused himself with celebrating the virtues and genius of Themistius, who was not unworthy of the age in which he lived.

Zosimus, l. iv. p. 202 [c. 3]. Ammian. xxx. 9. His reformation of costly abuses might entitle him to the praise of: in provinciales admodum parcus, tributorum ubique molliens sarcinas. By some, his frugality was styled avarice (Jerom. Chron. p. 186).

Testes sunt leges a me in exordio Imperii mei datæ: quibus unicuique quod animo imbibisset colendi libera facultas tributa est. Cod. Theodos. l. ix. tit. xvi. leg. 9. To this declaration of Valentinian we may add the various testimonies of Ammianus (xxx. 9), Zosimus (l. iv. p. 204 [c. 3]), and Sozomen (l. vi. c. 7, 21). Baronius would naturally blame such rational toleration (Annal. Eccles. AD 370, No. 129-132, AD 376, No. 3, 4).

Eudoxus was of a mild and timid disposition. When he baptised Valens ( AD 367), he must have been extremely old; since he had studied theology fifty-five years before, under Lucian, a learned and pious martyr. Philostorg. l. ii. c. 14-16, l. iv. c. 4, with Godefroy, p. 82, 206, and Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. v. p. 474-480, c.

Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. xxv. [=33] p. 432 [ap. Migne, vol. 36, p. 217 sqq. ]) insults the persecuting spirit of the Arians, as an infallible symptom of error and heresy.

This sketch of the ecclesiastical government of Valens is drawn from Socrates (l. iv.), Sozomen (l. vi.), Theodoret (l. iv.), and the immense compilations of Tillemont (particularly tom. vi. viii. and ix.).

Dr. Jortin (Remarks on Ecclesiastical History, vol. iv. p. 78) has already conceived and intimated the same suspicion.

This reflection is so obvious and forcible that Orosius (l. vii. c. 32, 33) delays the persecution till after the death of Valentinian. Socrates, on the other hand, supposes (l. iii. [ leg. iv.] c. 32) that it was appeased by a philosophical oration, which Themistius pronounced in the year 374 (Orat. xii. p. 154, in Latin only [Greek in Dindorf’s ed.]). Such contradictions diminish the evidence, and reduce the term, of the persecution of Valens.

Tillemont, whom I follow and abridge, has extracted (Mém. Ecclés. tom. viii. p. 153-167) the most authentic circumstances from the Panegyrics of the two Gregories: the brother, and the friend, of Basil. The letters of Basil himself (Dupin, Bibliothèque Ecclésiastique, tom. ii. p. 155-180) do not present the image of a very lively persecution.

Basilius Cæsariensis episcopus Cappadociæ clarus habetur . . . qui multa continentiæ et ingenii bona uno superbiæ malo perdidit. This irreverent passage is perfectly in the style and character of St. Jerom. It does not appear in Scaliger’s edition of his Chronicle; but Isaac Vossius found it in some old MSS. which had not been reformed by the monks [ad ann. 2392, cp. note in Migne’s edition, 8, p. 699].

This noble and charitable foundation (almost a new city) surpassed in merit, if not in greatness, the pyramids, or the walls of Babylon. It was principally intended for the reception of lepers (Greg. Nazianzen, Orat. xx. [=43] p. 439 [c. 63]).

Cod. Theodos. l. xii. tit. i. leg. 63. Godefroy (tom. iv. p. 409-413) performs the duty of a commentator and advocate. Tillemont (Mém. Ecclés. tom. viii. p. 808) supposes a second law to excuse his orthodox friends, who had misrepresented the edict of Valens and suppressed the liberty of choice.

See D’Anville, Description de l’Egypte, p. 74. Hereafter I shall consider the monastic institutions.

Socrates, l. iv. c. 24, 25. Orosius, l. vii. c. 33. Jerom in Chron. p. 189, and tom. ii. p. 212. The monks of Egypt performed many miracles, which prove the truth of their faith. Right, says Jortin (Remarks, vol. iv. p. 79), but what proves the truth of those miracles?

Cod. Theodos. l. xvi. tit. ii. leg. 20, Godefroy (tom. vi. p. 49), after the example of Baronius, impartially collects all that the fathers have said on the subject of this important law; whose spirit was long afterwards revived by the emperor Frederic II., Edward I. of England, and other Christian princes who reigned after the twelfth century.

The expressions which I have used are temperate and feeble, if compared with the vehement invectives of Jerom (tom. i. p. 13, 45, 144, c.). In his turn, he was reproached with the guilt which he imputed to his brother monks: and the Sceleratus, the Versipellis, was publicly accused as the lover of the widow Paula (tom. ii. p. 363). He undoubtedly possessed the affections both of the mother and the daughter; but he declares that he never abused his influence to any selfish or sensual purpose.

Pudet dicere, sacerdotes idolorum, mimi et aurigæ, et scorta, hæreditates capiunt; solis clericis ac monachis hâc [hoc] lege prohibetur. Et non prohibetur a persecutoribus, sed a principibus Christianis. Nec de lege queror; sed doleo cur merucrimus hanc legem. Jerom (tom. i. p. 13) discreetly insinuates the secret policy of his patron Damasus.

Three words of Jerom, sanctæ memoriæ Damasus (tom. ii. p. 109), wash away all his stains, and blind the devout eyes of Tillemont (Mém. Ecclés. tom. viii. p. 386-424). [A collection of the epigrams of Damasus has been edited by Ihm.]

[Read Viventius with the MSS.]

Jerom himself is forced to allow, crudelissimæ interfectiones diversi sexus perpetratæ (in Chron. p. 186). But an original libel or petition of two presbyters of the adverse party has unaccountably escaped. They affirm that the doors of the Basilica were burnt, and that the roof was untiled; that Damasus marched at the head of his own clergy, grave-diggers, charioteers, and hired gladiators; that none of his party were killed, but that one hundred and sixty dead bodies were found. This petition is published by the P. Sirmond, in the first volume of his works.

The Basilica of Sicininus, or Liberius, is probably the church of Sancta Maria Maggiore, on the Esquiline hill. Baronius, AD 367, No. 3; and Donatus, Roma Antiqua et Nova, l. iv. c. 3, p. 462. [It is disputed whether the Basilica Liberiana was a new building or a reconstruction of the Basilica Sicinina.]

The enemies of Damasus styled him Auriscalpius Matronarum, the ladies’ ear-scratcher.

Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. xxxii. [=42] p. 526 [c. 24]) describes the pride and luxury of the prelates who reigned in the Imperial cities; their gilt car, fiery steeds, numerous train, c. The crowd gave way as to a wild beast.

Ammian. xxvii. 3. Perpetuo Numini, verisque ejus cultoribus. The incomparable pliancy of a Polytheist!

Ammianus, who makes a fair report of his prefecture (xxvii. 9), styles him præclaræ indolis gravitatisque senator (xxii. 7, and Vales. ad loc.). A curious inscription (Gruter MCII. No. 2) records, in two columns, his religious and civil honours. In one line he was Pontiff of the Sun, and of Vesta, Augur, Quindecemvir, Hierophant, c., c. In the other, 1. Quæstor candidatus, more probably titular. 2. Prætor. 3. Corrector of Tuscany and Umbria. 4. Consular of Lusitania. 5. Proconsul of Achaia. 6. Prefect of Rome. 7. Prætorian prefect of Italy. 8. Of Illyricum. [This is incorrect: the writer states that he was Præt. Præf. Italiae et Illyrici, — which formed one prefecture. See above, vol. iii. Appendix 10.] 9. Consul elect; but he died before the beginning of the year 385. See Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, tom. v. p. 241, 736. [See C.I.L. 6, 1778. Cp. 1777 and 1779, of which the latter contains a most remarkable iambic and pagan poem to his wife Paulina.]

Facite me Romanæ urbis episcopum; et ero protinus Christianus (Jerom, tom. ii. p. 165). It is more than probable that Damasus would not have purchased his conversion at such a price.

Ammian. xxvi. 5. Valesius adds a long and good note on the master of the offices. [For the chronology of these campaigns, see Reiche, Chronologie der sechs letzten Bücher des Amm. Marc., 1889.]

Ammian. xxvii. 1. Zosimus, l. iv. p. 208 [c. 9]. The disgrace of the Batavians is suppressed by the contemporary soldier, from a regard for military honour, which could not affect a Greek rhetorician of the succeeding age.

See D’Anville, Notice de l’Ancienne Gaule, p. 587. The name of the Moselle, which is not specified by Ammianus, is clearly understood by Mascou (Hist. of the ancient Germans, vii. 2). [Dagalaiphus did take the command, but was recalled to enter on the consulate as colleague of Gratian.]

The battles are described by Ammianus (xxvii. 2), and by Zosimus (l. iv. p. 209 [c. 9]), who supposes Valentinian to have been present.

Studio solicitante nostrorum, occubuit. Ammian. xxvii. 10. [This murder did not happen in 366, as might be inferred from the text, but (1) beginning of 368 (Sievers), or (2) summer 368 (Reiche), or (3) autumn 368 (Maurer). Tillemont put it at end of 367, and also the surprisal of Mainz, with which it was doubtless connected. But cp. Reiche, p. 23.]

The expedition of Valentinian is related by Ammianus (xxvii. 10); and celebrated by Ausonius (Mosell. 421, c.), who foolishly supposes that the Romans were ignorant of the sources of the Danube. [As Smith points out, Ausonius only says, “unknown to Roman annals,” Latiis ignotum annalibus.]

Immanis enim natio, jam inde ab incunabulis primis varietate casuum imminuta; ita sæpius adolescit, ut fuisse longis sæculis æstimetur intacta. Ammian. xxviii. 5. The Count de Buat (Hist. des Peuples de l’Europe, tom. vi. p. 370) ascribes the fecundity of the Alemanni to their easy adoption of strangers. [For the activity of Valentinian in the defence of the frontiers cp. an inscription on the construction of the Castra of Salva (365-367 AD ) in Ephem. Epig. 2, p. 389, and C.I.L. 3 suppl. 10596; also C.I.L. 3, 5670 a and 3771.]

Ammian. xxviii. 2. Zosimus, l. iv. p. 214 [c. 16]. The younger Victor mentions the mechanical genius of Valentinian, nova arma meditari; fingere terrâ seu limo simulacra [Epit. 45].

Bellicosos et pubis immensæ viribus affluentes; et ideo metuendos finitimis universis. Ammian. xxviii. 5. [Pliny represented them as a subdivision of the Vandalic branch. They were closely allied to the Goths and Vandals.]

100

I am always apt to suspect historians and travellers of improving extraordinary facts into general laws. Ammianus ascribes a similar custom to Egypt: and the Chinese have imputed it to the Tatsin, or Roman empire (de Guignes, Hist. des Huns, tom. ii. part i. p. 79).

101

Salinarum finiumque causâ Alemannis sæpe jurgabant. Ammian. xxviii. 5. Possibly they disputed the possession of the Sala, a river which produced salt, and which had been the object of ancient contention. Tacit. Annal. xiii. 57, and Lipsius ad loc.

102

Jam inde temporibus priscis sobolem se esse Romanam Burgundii sciunt: and the vague tradition gradually assumed a more regular form. Oros. l. vii. c. 32. It is annihilated by the decisive authority of Pliny, who composed the history of Drusus, and served in Germany (Plin. Secund. Epist. iii. 5) within sixty years after the death of that hero. Germanorum genera quinque; Vindili, quorum pars Burgundiones, c. Hist. Natur. iv. 28.

103

The wars and negotiations relative to the Burgundians and Alemanni are distinctly related by Ammianus Marcellinus (xxviii. 5, xxix. 4, xxx. 3). Orosius (l. vii. c. 32) and the Chronicles of Jerom and Cassiodorius fix some dates and add some circumstances.

104

Ἑπὶ τὸν αὐχένα τη̂ς Κιμβρικη̂ς χερσονήσου, Σάξονες. At the northern extremity of the peninsula (the Cimbric promontory of Pliny, iv. 27) Ptolemy fixes the remnant of the Cimbri. He fills the interval between the Saxons and the Cimbri with six obscure tribes, who were united, as early as the sixth century, under the national appellation of Danes. See Cluver. German. Antiq. l. iii. c. 21, 22, 23.

105

M. d’Anville (Etablissement des Etats de l’Europe, c., p. 19-26) has marked the extensive limits of the Saxony of Charlemagne.

106

The fleet [ sic ] of Drusus had failed in their attempt to pass, or even to approach, the Sound (styled, from an obvious resemblance, the columns of Hercules); and the naval enterprise was never resumed (Tacit. de Moribus German. c. 34). The knowledge which the Romans acquired of the naval powers of the Baltic (c. 44, 45) was obtained by their land journeys in search of amber.

107

Quin et Aremoricus piratam Saxona tractus Sperabat; cui pelle salum sulcare Britannum Ludus et assuto glaucum mare findere lembo. — Sidon. in Panegyr. Avit. 369.

The genius of Cæsar imitated, for a particular service, these rude, but light vessels, which were likewise used by the natives of Britain (Comment. de Bell. Civil. i. 51, and Guichardt, Nouveaux Mémoires Militaires, tom. ii. p. 41, 42). The British vessels would now astonish the genius of Cæsar.

108

The best original account of the Saxon pirates may be found in Sidonius Apollinaris (l. viii. epist. 6, p. 223, edit. Sirmond.), and the best commentary in the Abbé du Bos (Hist. Critique de la Monarchie Françoise, c., tom. i. l. i. c. 16, p. 148-155. See likewise p. 77, 78.). [The Saxons seem to have made a settlement in the north of Gaul.]

109

Ammian. (xxviii. 5) justifies this breach of faith to pirates and robbers; and Orosius (l. vii. c. 32) more clearly expresses their real guilt; virtute atque agilitate terribiles.

110

Symmachus (l. ii. epist. 46) still presumes to mention the sacred names of Socrates and philosophy. Sidonius, bishop of Clermont, might condemn (l. viii. epist. 6 [§ 15]) with less inconsistency the human sacrifices of the Saxons.

111

In the beginning of the last century the learned Cambden was obliged to undermine, with respectful scepticism, the romance of Brutus the Trojan, who is now buried in silent oblivion with Scota, the daughter of Pharaoh, and her numerous progeny. Yet I am informed that some champions of the Milesian colony may still be found among the original natives of Ireland. A people dissatisfied with their present condition grasp at any visions of their past or future glory.

112

Tactius, or rather his father-in-law Agricola, might remark the German or Spanish complexion of some British tribes. But it was their sober, deliberate opinion: “In universum tamen æstimanti Gallos vicinum solum occupâsse credibile est. Eorum sacra deprehendas . . . sermo haud multum diversus (in Vit. Agricol. c. xi.).” Cæsar had observed their common religion (Comment. de Bello Gallico, vi. 13); and in his time the emigration from the Belgic Gaul was a recent, or at least an historical, event (v. 10). Cambden, the British Strabo, has modestly ascertained our genuine antiquities (Britannia, vol. i. Introduction, p. ii.-xxxi.).

113

In the dark and doubtful paths of Caledonian antiquity, I have chosen for my guides two learned and ingenious Highlanders, whom their birth and education had peculiarly qualified for that office. See Critical Dissertations on the Origin, Antiquities, c., of the Caledonians, by Dr. John Macpherson, London, 1768, in 4to; and Introduction to the History of Great Britain and Ireland, by James Macpherson, Esq., London, 1773, in 4to, third edit. Dr. Macpherson was a minister in the Isle of Sky: and it is a circumstance honourable for the present age that a work, replete with erudition and criticism, should have been composed in the most remote of the Hebrides. [See Appendix 6.]

114

The Irish descent of the Scots has been revived, in the last moments of its decay, and strenuously supported, by the Rev. Mr. Whitaker (Hist. of Manchester, vol. i. p. 430, 431; and Genuine History of the Britons asserted, c., p. 154-293). Yet he acknowledges, 1. That the Scots of Ammianus Marcellinus ( AD 340) were already settled in Caledonia; and that the Roman authors do not afford any hints of their emigration from another country. 2. That all the accounts of such emigrations, which have been asserted, or received, by Irish bards, Scotch historians, or English antiquaries (Buchanan, Cambden, Usher, Stillingfleet, c.), are totally fabulous. 3. That three of the Irish tribes which are mentioned by Ptolemy ( AD 150) were of Caledonian extraction. 4. That a younger branch of Caledonian princes, of the house of Fingal, acquired and possessed the monarchy of Ireland. After these concessions, the remaining difference between Mr. Whitaker and his adversaries is minute and obscure. The genuine history which he produces of a Fergus, the cousin of Ossian, who was transplanted ( AD 320) from Ireland to Caledonia, is built on a conjectural supplement to the Erse poetry, and the feeble evidence of Richard of Cirencester, a monk of the fourteenth century. The lively spirit of the learned and ingenious antiquarian has tempted him to forget the nature of a question, which he so vehemently debates, and so absolutely decides. [It is now generally admitted that the Scots of Scotland were immigrants from (the north-east of) Ireland. See Appendix 6.]

115

Hyeme tumentes ac sævientes undas calcâstis Oceani sub remis vestris; . . . insperatam imperatoris faciem Britannus expavit. Julius Firmicus Maternus de errore Profan. Relig. p. 464, edit. Gronov. ad calcem Minuc. Fel. See Tillemont (Hist. des Empereurs, tom. iv. p. 336).

116

Libanius, Orat. Parent. c. xxxix. p. 264. This curious passage has escaped the diligence of our British antiquaries.

117

The Caledonians praised and coveted the gold, the steeds, the lights, c., of the stranger. See Dr. Blair’s Dissertation on Ossian, vol. ii. p. 343; and Mr. Macpherson’s Introduction, p. 242-286.

118

Lord Lyttleton has circumstantially related (History of Henry II. vol. i. p. 182), and Sir David Dalrymple has slightly mentioned (Annals of Scotland, vol. i. p. 69), a barbarous inroad of the Scots, at a time ( AD 1137) when law, religion, and society must have softened their primitive manners.

119

Attacotti bellicosa hominum natio. Ammian. xxvii. 8. Cambden (Introduct. p. clii.) has restored their true name in the text of Jerom. The bands of Attacotti, which Jerom had seen in Gaul, were afterwards stationed in Italy and Illyricum (Notitia, S. viii. xxxix. xl.).

120

Cum ipse adolescentulus in Galliâ viderim Attacottos (or Scotos) gentem Britannicam humanis vesci carnibus; et cum per silvas procorum greges, et armentorum pecudumque reperiant, pastorum nates et feminarum papillas solere abscindere; et has solas ciborum delicias arbitrari. Such is the evidence of Jerom (tom. ii. p. 75), whose veracity I find no reason to question.

121

[Theodosius had the task too of suppressing a tyrant, Valentinus; Amm. xxxviii. 3.

122

Ammianus has concisely represented (xx. 1, xxvi. 4, xxvii. 8, xxviii. 3) the whole series of the British war. [It is generally said that the name Valentia was in honour of Valentinian. But would it not, in that case, be Valentiniana? It seems more likely that it was a compliment to Valens on the part of his brother.]

123

Horrescit . . . ratibus . . . impervia Thule. Ille . . . nec falso nomine Pictos Edomuit. Scotumque vago mucrone secutus. Fregit Hyperboreas remis audacibus undas. — Claudian, in iii. Cons. Honorii, ver. 53, c.

— Maduerunt Saxone fuso Orcades: incaluit Pictorum sanguine Thule. Scotorum cumulos flevit glacialis Ierne. — In iv. Cons. Hon. ver. 31, c.

See likewise Pacatus (in Panegyr. Vet. xii. 5). But it is not easy to appreciate the intrinsic value of flattery and metaphor. Compare the British victories of Bolanus (Statius. Silv. v. 2) with his real character (Tacit. in Vit. Agricol. c. 16).

124

Ammianus frequently mentions their concilium annuum, legitimum, c. Leptis and Sabrata are long since ruined; but the city of Oea, the native country of Apuleius, still flourishes under the provincial denomination of Tripoli. See Cellarius (Geograph. Antiqua, tom. ii. part ii. p. 81), D’Anville (Géographie Ancienne, tom. iii. p. 71, 72), and Marmol (Afrique, tom. ii. p. 562).

125

Ammian. xviii. 6. Tillemont (Hist. des Empereurs, tom. v. p. 25, 676) has discussed the chronological difficulties of the history of Count Romanus. [Attacks of the barbarians on the Tripolitan towns are fixed by Reiche, op. cit., to winter 363 and summer 365; Valentinian despatches Nestorius and others to protect Africa, winter 365 (Amm. xxvi. 5, 14); Tripolis again invaded, summer 366; commission of Palladuis, end of 366; embassy from Leptis, and return of Palladius, winter 367; second visit of Palladius to Africa, spring 368; Firmus rebels, winter 371; Theodosius arrives, summer 372 (between May and June 372 and Feb. 373: Sievers, Studien, p. 288).]

126

The chronology of Ammianus is loose and obscure: and Orosius (l. vii. c. 33, p. 551, edit. Havercamp.) seems to place the revolt of Firmus after the deaths of Valentinian and Valens. [Not so; Gibbon has misread Orosius.] Tillemont (Hist. des Emp. tom. v. p. 691) endeavours to pick his way. The patient and sure-footed mule of the Alps may be trusted in the most slippery paths. [Sievers and Reiche agree that the revolt was suppressed in 373; Cagnat prefers the date 374, L’armée romaine d’Afrique, p. 78.]

127

Ammian. xxix. 5. The text of this long chapter (fifteen quarto pages) is broken and corrupted, and the narrative is perplexed by the want of chronological and geographical landmarks. [For the revolt, cp. also Pacatus, 5.]

128

Ammianus, xxviii. 4. Orosius, l. vii. c. 33, p. 551, 552. Jerom, in Chron. p. 187. [For confusion of Merobaudes and Mellobaudes, cp. p. 257 and Appendix 8.]

129

Leo Africanus (in the Viaggi di Ramusio, tom. i. fol. 78-83) has traced a curious picture of the people and the country, which are more minutely described in the Afrique de Marmol, tom. iii. p. 1-54.

130

This uninhabitable zone was gradually reduced, by the improvements of ancient geography, from forty-five to twenty-four, or even sixteen, degrees of latitude. See a learned and judicious note of Dr. Robertson, Hist. of America, vol. i. p. 426.

131

Intra, si credere libet, vix jam homines et magis semiferi . . . Blemmyes, Satyri, c. Pomponius Mela, i. 4, p. 26, edit. Voss. in 8vo. Pliny philosophically explains (vi. 35) the irregularities of nature, which he had credulously admitted (v. 8).

132

If the satyr was the Orang-outang, the great human ape (Buffon, Hist. Nat. tom. xiv. p. 43, c.), one of that species might actually be shown alive at Alexandria in the reign of Constantine. Yet some difficulty will still remain about the conversation which St. Anthony held with one of these pious savages in the desert of Thebais (Jerom, in Vit. Paul. Eremit. tom. i. p. 238).

133

St. Anthony likewise met one of these monsters, whose existence was seriously asserted by the emperor Claudius. The public laughed; but his prefect of Egypt had the address to send an artful preparation, the embalmed corpse of an Hippocentaur, which was preserved almost a century afterwards in the Imperial palace. See Pliny (Hist. Natur. vii. 3), and the judicious observations of Fréret (Mémoires de l’Acad. tom. vii. p. 321, c.).

134

The fable of the pygmies is as old as Homer (Iliad, iii. 6). The pygmies of India and Æthiopia were (trispithami) twenty-seven inches high. Every spring their cavalry (mounted on rams and goats) marched in battle array to destroy the cranes’ eggs, aliter (says Pliny) futuris gregibus non resisti. Their houses were built of mud, feathers, and egg-shells. See Pliny (vi. 35, vii. 2), and Strabo (l. ii. p. 121 [§ 1, 9]).

135

The third and fourth volumes of the valuable Histoire des Voyages describe the present state of the negroes. The nations of the sea-coast have been polished by European commerce, and those of the inland country have been improved by Moorish colonies.

136

Histoire Philosophique et Politique, c., tom. iv. p. 192.

137

The evidence of Ammianus is original and decisive (xxvii. 12). Moses of Chorene (l. iii. c. 17, p. 249, and c. 34, p. 269) and Procopius (de Bell Persico, l. i. c. 5, p. 17, edit. Louvre) have been consulted; but those historians, who confound distinct facts, repeat the same events, and introduce strange stories, must be used with diffidence and caution. [The account in the text of the war about Armenia is vitiated by numerous confusions. The only good sources are Faustus and Ammian. See above, vol. iii. Appendix 13.]

138

[Castle of Aniush (Ammian calls it Agabana), in Susiana; exact locality is uncertain. For the events (Gibbon makes Arshak into Tiran) see Faustus, iv. 54.]

139

Perhaps Artagera, or Ardis [= Ardakers]; under whose walls Gaius, the grandson of Augustus, was wounded. This fortress was situate above Amida, near one of the sources of the Tigris. See d’Anville, Géographie Ancienne, tom. ii. p. 106.

140

Tillemont (Hist. des Empereurs, tom. v. p. 701) proves from chronology that Olympias must have been the mother of Para. [The wife was Pharandzēm, not Olympias; Faustus, iv. 55.]

141

Ammianus (xxvii. 12, xxix. 1, xxx. 1, 2) has described the events, without the dates, of the Persian war. Moses of Chorene (Hist. Armen. l. iii. c. 28, p. 261, c. 31, p. 266, c. 35, p. 271) affords some additional facts; but it is extremely difficult to separate truth from fable.

142

Artaxerxes was the successor and brother ( the cousin-german ) of the great Sapor; and the guardian of his son Sapor III. (Agathias, l. iv. p. 136, edit. Louvre [c. 26, p. 263, ed. Bonn]). See the Universal History, vol. xi. p. 86, 161. The authors of that unequal work have compiled the Sassanian dynasty with erudition and diligence: but it is a preposterous arrangement to divide the Roman and Oriental accounts into two distinct histories. [The first year of Ardeshir, successor of Sapor, was reckoned from 19 Aug. 379, Nöldeke, Gesch. der Perser und Araber, c., p. 418. For dates of his successors see Appendix 9.]

143

Pacatus in Panegyr. Vet. xii. 22, and Orosius, l. vii. c. 34. Ictumque tum fœdus est, quo universus Oriens usque ad nunc ( AD 416) tranquillissimè fruitur.

144

See in Ammianus (xxx. 1) the adventures of Para. [Pap is the true name, Faustus, B. H. passim. Moses of Chorene calls him Tiridates; and tells a long and not improbable story of his son Gnelus; who afterwards made himself popular in Armenia, and provoked the jealousy of the reigning king (l. iii. c. 21, c., p. 253, c.). [Knel was nephew of Arshak, who killed him and married his wife Pharandzēm. Faustus, iv. 15.]

145

The concise account of the reign and conquests of Hermanric seems to be one of the valuable fragments which Jornandes (c. 28) borrowed from the Gothic histories of Ablavius, or Cassiodorus.

146

[Dahn agrees that the Visigoths belonged to a (loose) confederacy of which Hermanric was chief, Kön. der Germanen, ii. 90. But he doubts the legitimacy of inferring from the case of Athanaric (called Judge by Themistius, Or. X., and Ammian.) that the other chiefs were called Judges (v. 10).]

147

M. de Buat (Hist. des Peuples de l’Europe, t. vi. p. 311-329) investigates, with more industry than success, the nations subdued by the arms of Hermanric. He denies the existence of the Vasinobroncæ, on account of the immoderate length of their name. Yet the French envoy to Ratisbon, or Dresden, must have traversed the country of the Mediomatrici.

148

The edition of Grotius (Jornandes, p. 642 [xxiii. § 120]) exhibits the name of Æstri. But reason and the Ambrosian MS. have restored the Æstii, whose manners and situation are expressed by the pencil of Tacitus (Germania, c. 45).

149

Ammianus (xxxi. 3) observes, in general terms: Ermenrichi . . . nobilissimi Regis, et, per multa variaque fortiter facta, vicinis gentibus formidati, c.

150

Valens . . . docetur relationibus Ducum, gentem Gothorum, ea tempestate intactam ideoque sævissimam conspirantem in unum, ad pervadenda parari collimitia Thraciarum. Ammian. xxvi. 6.

151

M. de Buat. (Hist. des Peuples de l’Europe, tom. vi. p. 332) has curiously ascertained the real number of these auxiliaries. The 3000 of Ammianus, and the 10,000 of Zosimus, were only the first divisions of the Gothic army.

152

The march and subsequent negotiation are described in the Fragments of Eunapius (Excerpt. Legat. p. 18, edit. Louvre [fr. 37. F.H.G. iv.]). The provincials, who afterwards became familiar with the Barbarians, found that their strength was more apparent than real. They were tall of stature; but their legs were clumsy, and their shoulders were narrow.

153

Valens enim, ut consulto placuerat fratri, cujus regebatur arbitrio, arma concussit in Gothos ratione justâ permotus. Ammianus (xxvii. 4) then proceeds to describe, not the country of the Goths, but the peaceful and obedient province of Thrace, which was not affected by the war.

154

Eunapius, in Excerpt. Legat. p. 18, 19 [ ib. ]. The Greek sophist must have considered as one and the same war the whole series of Gothic history till the victories and peace of Theodosius.

155

The Gothic war is described by Ammianus (xxvii. 5), Zosimus (l. iv. p. 211-214 [c. 10]), and Themistius (Orat. x. p. 129-141). The orator Themistius was sent from the senate of Constantinople to congratulate the victorious emperor; and his servile eloquence compares Valens on the Danube to Achilles in the Scamander. Jordandes forgets a war peculiar to the Visi -Goths, and inglorious to the Gothic name (Mascou’s Hist. of the Germans, vii. 3).

156

[The measures taken for the security of Valeria are illustrated by an inscription found near Gran (C.I.L. 3, 3653), which records the construction of a burgum named Commercium. In 377 AD Frigeridus was dux of Valeria, and his name is preserved inscribed on several tiles, C.I.L. 3, 3761. Cp. also Mommsen, Hermes, 17, p. 523.]

157

Ammianus (xxix. 6) and Zosimus (l. iv. p. 219, 220 [c. 16]) carefully mark the origin and progress of the Quadic and Sarmatian war. [Cp. Ranke, Weltgeschichte, iv. 1, 168. But the victory of Theodosius was probably won after his recall in 378 AD So Richter, Weström. Reich, 691; Sievers, Stud., 294; Kaufmann, Philologus, 31, 472 sqq. The authority is Theodoret, v. 5, 6, and perhaps Pacatus, Paneg. 9, 10.]

158

Ammianus (xxx. 5), who acknowledges the merit, has censured, with becoming asperity, the oppressive administration, of Petronius Probus. When Jerom translated and continued the Chronicle of Eusebius ( AD 380. See Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. xii. p. 53, 626.), he expressed the truth, or at least the public opinion of his country, in the following words: “Probus P. P. Illyrici iniquissimis tributorum exactionibus, ante provincias quas regebat, quam a Barbaris vastarentur, erasit ” (Chron. edit. Scaliger, p. 187. Animadvers. p. 259). The saint afterwards formed an intimate and tender friendship with the widow of Probus; and the name of Count Equitius, with less propriety, but without much injustice, has been substituted in the text.

159

Julian (Orat. vi. p. 198) represents his friend Iphicles as a man of virtue and merit, who had made himself ridiculous and unhappy by adopting the extravagant dress and manners of the Cynics.

160

Ammian. xxx. 5. Jerom, who exaggerates the misfortune of Valentinian, refuses him even this last consolation of revenge. Genitali vastato solo, et inultam patriam derelinquens (tom. i. p. 26 [ep. 60]).

161

See, on the death of Valentinian, Ammianus (xxx. 6), Zosimus (l. iv. p. 221 [c. 17]), Victor (in Epitom. [45]), Socrates (l. iv. c. 31), and Jerom (in Chron. p. 187, and tom. i. p. 26, ad Heliodor.). There is much variety of circumstances among them, and Ammianus is so eloquent that he writes nonsense.

162

Socrates (l. iv. c. 31) is the only original witness of this foolish story, so repugnant to the laws and manners of the Romans that it scarcely deserves the formal and elaborate dissertation of M. Bonamy (Mém. de l’Académie, tom. xxx. p. 394-405). Yet I would preserve the natural circumstance of the bath, instead of following Zosimus, who represents Justina as an old woman, the widow of Magnentius. [For the divorce of Valeria Severa Marina, and marriage with Aviana Justina, cp. Richter, Das west-römische Reich, p. 278.]

163

Ammianus (xxvii. 6) describes the form of this military election and august investiture. Valentinian does not appear to have consulted, or even informed, the senate of Rome. [Date: Idatius, Fast. Cons.]

163a

[See Appendix 8.]

164

Ammianus, xxx. 10. Zosimus, l. iv. p. 222, 223 [c. 19]. Tillemont has proved (Hist. des Empereurs, tom. v. p. 707-709) that Gratian reigned in Italy, Africa, and Illyricum. I have endeavoured to express his authority over his brother’s dominions, as he used it, in an ambiguous style.

Such is the bad taste of Ammianus (xxvi. 10) that it is not easy to distinguish his facts from his metaphors. Yet he positively affirms that he saw the rotten carcase of a ship, ad secundum lapidem, at Methone, or Modon, in Peloponnesus.

The earthquakes and inundations are variously described by Libanius (Orat. de ulciscendâ Juliani nece, c. x. in Fabricius, Bibl. Græc. tom. vii. p. 158, with a learned note of Olearius), Zosimus (l. iv. p. 221 [c. 18]), Sozomen (l. vi. c. 2), Cedrenus (p. 310, 314), and Jerom (in Chron. p. 186, and t. i. p. 250, in Vit. Hilarion). Epidaurus must have been overwhelmed, had not the prudent citizens placed St. Hilarion, an Egyptian monk, on the beach. He made the sign of the cross; the mountain wave stopped, bowed, and returned. [The earthquakes in Greece mentioned by Zosimus belong to AD 375.]

Dicæarchus, the Peripatetic, composed a formal treatise, to prove this obvious truth; which is not the most honourable to the human species. Cicero, de Officiis, ii. 5.

The original Scythians of Herodotus (l. iv. c. 47-57, 99-101) were confined by the Danube and the Palus Mæotis, within a square of 4000 stadia (400 Roman miles). See d’Anville (Mém. de l’Académie, tom. xxxv. p. 573-591). Diodorus Siculus (tom. i. l. ii. p. 155, edit. Wesseling) has marked the gradual progress of the name and nation.

The Tatars, or Tartars, were a primitive tribe, the rivals, and at length the subjects, of the Moguls. In the victorious armies of Zingis Khan, and his successors, the Tartars formed the vanguard; and the name, which first reached the ears of foreigners, was applied to the whole nation (Fréret, in the Hist. de l’Académie, tom. xviii. p. 60). In speaking of all, or any, of the northern shepherds of Europe, or Asia, I indifferently use the appellations of Scythians or Tartars.

Imperium Asiæ ter quæsivere: ipsi perpetuo ab alieno imperio aut intacti aut invicti mansere. Since the time of Justin (ii. 2), they have multiplied this account. Voltaire, in a few words (tom. x. p. 64, Hist. Générale, c. 156), has abridged the Tartar conquests.

Oft o’er the trembling nations from afar Has Scythia breath’d the living cloud of war.

The fourth book of Herodotus affords a curious, though imperfect, portrait of the Scythians. Among the moderns, who describe the uniform scene, the Khan of Khowaresm, Abulghazi Bahadur, expresses his native feelings; and his Genealogical History of the Tartars has been copiously illustrated by the French and English editors. Carpin, Ascelin, and Rubruquis (in the Hist. des Voyages, tom. vii.) represent the Moguls of the fourteenth century. To these guides I have added Gerbillon, and the other Jesuits (Description de la Chine, par du Halde, tom. iv.), who accurately surveyed the Chinese Tartary; and that honest and intelligent traveller, Bell of Antermony (two volumes in 4to, Glasgow, 1763).

The Uzbecks are the most altered from their primitive manners: 1, by the profession of the Mahometan religion; and, 2, by the possession of the cities and harvests of the great Bucharia.

Il est certain que les grands mangeurs de viande sont en général cruels et féroces plus que les autres hommes. Cette observation est de tous les lieux, et de tous les tems: la barbare Angloise est connue, c. Emile de Rousseau, tom. i. p. 274. Whatever we may think of the general observation, we shall not easily allow the truth of his example. The good-natured complaints of Plutarch, and the pathetic lamentations of Ovid, seduce our reason by exciting our sensibility.

These Tartar emigrations have been discovered by M. de Guignes (Histoire des Huns, tom. i. ii.), a skilful and laborious interpreter of the Chinese language; who has thus laid open new and important scenes in the history of mankind. [The account of the Hiung-nu (= “Hiung slaves”) and their relations to China, which Gibbon has derived from De Guignes, is on the whole accurate. I have compared it with the work of a living Chinese scholar, Mr. E. H. Parker, A Thousand Years of the Tartars, 1895. But this episode ceases to be relevant, when we recognise that there is no good ground for identifying the Hiung-nu with the Huns; in fact, that identification rested entirely on the resemblance of name between the two nomad peoples. Sir H. Howorth decided against the theory, on the ground that the Hiung-nu are certainly Turks, while he regards the Huns as Ugrians. But see Appendix 10.]

A plain in the Chinese Tartary, only eighty leagues from the great wall, was found by the missionaries to be three thousand geometrical paces above the level of the sea. Montesquieu, who has used, and abused, the relations of travellers, deduces the revolutions of Asia from this important circumstance that heat and cold, weakness and strength, touch each other without any temperate zone (Esprit des Loix, l. xvii. c. 3).

Petit de la Croix (Vie de Gengiscan, l. iii. c. 7) represents the full glory and extent of the Mogul chase. The Jesuits Gerbillon and Verbiest followed the emperor Kamhi when he hunted in Tartary (Duhalde, Description de la Chine, tom. iv. p. 81, 290, c., folio edit.). His grandson, Kienlong, who unites the Tartar discipline with the laws and learning of China, describes (Eloge de Moukden, p. 273-285), as a poet, the pleasures which he had often enjoyed as a sportsman.

See the second volume of the Genealogical History of the Tartars, and the list of the Khans, at the end of the life of Gengis, or Zingis. Under the reign of Timur, or Tamerlane, one of his subjects, a descendant of Zingis, still bore the regal appellation of Khan; and the conqueror of Asia contented himself with the title of Emir, or Sultan. Abulghazi, p. v. c. 4. D’Herbelot, Bibliothèque Orientale, p. 878.

See the Diets of the ancient Huns (de Guignes, tom. ii. p. 26), and a curious description of those of Zingis (Vie de Gengiscan, l. i. c. 6, l. iv. c. 11). Such assemblies are frequently mentioned in the Persian history of Timur; though they served only to countenance the resolutions of their master. [“Every New Year the Zenghi (title of the king) held a great religious festival at what the Chinese call Dragon City: it was evidently much the same kind of affair as the Mongol couroultai of Marco Polo’s time.” Parker, p. 19.]

Montesquieu labours to explain a difference which has not existed between the liberty of the Arabs and the perpetual slavery of the Tartars (Esprit des Loix, l. xvii. c. 5; l. xviii. c. 19, c.).

Abulghazi Khan, in the two first parts of his Genealogical History, relates the miserable fables and traditions of the Uzbek Tartars concerning the times which preceded the reign of Zingis.

In the thirteenth book of the Iliad Jupiter turns away his eyes from the bloody fields of Troy to the plains of Thrace and Scythia. He would not, by changing the prospect, behold a more peaceful or innocent scene.

Thucydides, l. ii. c. 97.

See the fourth book of Herodotus. When Darius advanced into the Moldavian desert, between the Danube and the Dniester, the king of the Scythians sent him a mouse, a frog, a bird, and five arrows; a tremendous allegory!

These wars and heroes may be found under their respective titles in the Bibliothèque Orientale of d’Herbelot. They have been celebrated in an epic poem of sixty thousand rhymed couplets by Ferdusi, the Homer of Persia. See the History of Nadir Shah, p. 145, 165. The public must lament that Mr. Jones has suspended the pursuit of oriental learning.

The Caspian Sea, with its rivers and adjacent tribes, are laboriously illustrated in the Examen Critique des Historiens d’Alexandre, which compares the true geography and the errors produced by the vanity or ignorance of the Greeks.

The original seat of the nation appears to have been in the North-west of China, in the provinces of Chensi and Chansi. Under the two first dynasties, the principal town was still a movable camp; the villages were thinly scattered; more land was employed in pasture than in tillage; the exercise of hunting was ordained to clear the country from wild beasts; Petcheli (where Pekin stands) was a desert, and the southern provinces were peopled with Indian savages. The dynasty of the Han (before Christ 206) gave the empire its actual form and extent.

The era of the Chinese monarchy has been variously fixed, from 2952 to 2132 years before Christ; and the year 2637 has been chosen for the lawful epoch by the authority of the present emperor. The difference arises from the uncertain duration of the two first dynasties; and the vacant space that lies beyond them as far as the real, or fabulous, times of Fohi, or Hoangti. Sematsien dates his authentic chronology from the year 841: the thirty-six eclipses of Confucius (thirty-one of which have been verified) were observed between the years 722 and 480 before Christ. The historical period of China does not ascend above the Greek Olympiads.

After several ages of anarchy and despotism, the dynasty of the Han (before Christ 206) was the era of the revival of learning. The fragments of ancient literature were restored; the characters were improved and fixed, and the future preservation of books was secured by the useful inventions of ink, paper, and the art of printing. Ninety-seven years before Christ Sematsien published the first history of China. His labours were illustrated and continued by a series of one hundred and eighty historians. The substance of their works is still extant, and the most considerable of them are now deposited in the king of France’s library.

China has been illustrated by the labours of the French; of the missionaries at Pekin, and Messrs. Freret and de Guignes at Paris. The substance of the three preceding notes is extracted from the Chou-king with the preface and notes of M. de Guignes, Paris, 1770; the Tong-Kien-Kang-Mou translated by the P. de Mailla, under the name of Hist. Générale de la Chine, tom. i. p. xlix.-cc.; the Mémoires sur la Chine, Paris, 1776, c., tom. i. p. 1-323, tom. ii. p. 5-364; the Histoire des Huns, tom. i. p. 1-131, tom. v. p. 345-362; and the Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions, tom. x. p. 377-402, tom. xv. p. 495-564, tom. xviii. p. 178-295, tom. xxxvi. p. 164-238.

See the Histoire Générale des Voyages, tom. xviii., and the Genealogical History, vol. ii. p. 620-664.

M. de Guignes (tom. ii. p. 1-124) has given the original history of the ancient Hiong-nou, or Huns. The Chinese geography of their country (tom. i. part ii. p. lv.-lxiii.) seems to comprise a part of their conquests.

See in Duhalde (tom. iv. p. 18-65) a circumstantial description with a correct map of the country of the Mongous.

The Igours, or Vigours [Ouigours], were divided into three branches: hunters, shepherds, and husbandmen; and the last class was despised by the two former. See Abulghazi, part ii. c. 7.

Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions, tom. xxv. p. 17-33. The comprehensive view of M. de Guignes has compared these distant events.

The fame of Sovou, or So-ou, his merit, and his singular adventures are still celebrated in China. See the Eloge de Moukden, p. 20, and notes, p. 241-247; and Mémoires sur la Chine, tom. iii. p. 317-360.

See Isbrand Ives, in Harris’s collection, vol. ii. p. 931; Bell’s Travels, vol. i. p. 247-254; and Gmelin, in the Hist. Générale des Voyages, tom. xviii. p. 283-329. They all remark the vulgar opinion that the holy sea grows angry and tempestuous if any one presumes to call it a lake. This grammatical nicety often excites a dispute between the absurd superstition of the mariners and the absurd obstinacy of travellers.

The construction of the wall of China is mentioned by Duhalde (tom. ii. p. 45) and de Guignes (tom. ii. p. 59).

See the life of Lieoupang, or Kaoti, in the Hist. de la Chine, published at Paris, 1777, c., tom. i. p. 442-522. This voluminous work is the translation (by the P. de Mailla) of the Tong-Kien-Kang-Mou, the celebrated abridgment of the great History of Semakouang ( AD 1084) and his continuators.

See a free and ample memorial presented by a Mandarin to the emperor Venti [Wên Ti] (before Christ 180-157) in Duhalde (tom. ii. p. 412-426); from a collection of State papers marked with the red pencil by Kamhi himself (p. 384-612). Another memorial from the minister of war (Kang Mou, t. ii. p. 555) supplies some curious circumstances of the manners of the Huns.

A supply of women is mentioned as a customary article of treaty and tribute (Hist. de la conquête de la Chine par les Tartares Mantcheoux, tom. i. p. 186, 187, with the note of the editor).

De Guignes, Hist. des Huns, tom. ii. p. 62.

See the reign of the emperor Vouti, in the Kang-Mou, t. iii. p. 1-98. His various and inconsistent character seems to be impartially drawn.

This expression is used in the memorial to the emperor Venti (Duhalde, tom. ii. p. 417). Without adopting the exaggerations of Marco-Polo and Isaac Vossius, we may rationally allow for Pekin two millions of inhabitants. The cities of the South, which contain the manufactures of China, are still more populous.

See the Kang-Mou, tom. iii. p. 150, and the subsequent events under the proper years. This memorable festival is celebrated in the Eloge de Moukden, and explained in a note by the P. Gaubil, p. 89, 90.

This inscription was composed on the spot by Pankou, President of the Tribunal of History (Kang-Mou, tom. iii. p. 392). Similar monuments have been discovered in many parts of Tartary (Histoire des Huns, tom. ii. p. 122). [Parker, p. 100.]

M. de Guignes (tom. i. p. 189) has inserted a short account of the Sienpi.

The era of the Huns is placed, by the Chinese, 1210 years before Christ. But the series of their kings does not commence till the year 230 (Hist. des Huns, tom. ii. p. 21, 123). [The southern Zenghis continued till nearly the end of the second cent. AD ; Parker, p. 102.]

The various accidents, the downfall, and flight of the Huns are related in the Khan-Mou, tom. iii. p. 88, 91, 95, 139, c. The small numbers of each hord may be ascribed to their losses and divisions.

M. de Guignes has skilfully traced the footsteps of the Huns through the vast deserts of Tartary (tom. ii. p. 123, 277, c., 325, c.).

[The Ephthalites were not part of the Hiung-nu, but seem to have been the Yüeh-chih, who possessed part of “the long straggling province now known as Kan Suh”; were conquered by Meghder, were driven westward by his successor before 162 BC , and divided Bactria with the Parthians. See Parker, p. 29, 30.]

Mohammed, Sultan of Carizme, reigned in Sogdiana, when it was invaded ( AD 1218) by Zingis and his Moguls. The Oriental Historians (see d’Herbelot, Petit de la Croix, c.) celebrate the populous cities which he ruined, and the fruitful country which he desolated. In the next century, the same provinces of Chorasmia and Mawaralnahr were described by Abulfeda (Hudson, Geograph. Minor. tom. iii.). Their actual misery may be seen in the Genealogical History of the Tartars, p. 423-469.

Justin (xli. 6) has left a short abridgment of the Greek kings of Bactriana. To their industry I should ascribe the new and extraordinary trade, which transported the merchandises of India into Europe, by the Oxus, the Caspian, the Cyrus, the Phasis, and the Euxine. The other ways, both of the land and sea, were possessed by the Seleucides and the Ptolemies. See l’Esprit des Loix, l. xxi.

Procopius de Bell. Persico, l. i. c. 3, p. 9.

[There is no evidence that the Huns of the Volga had migrated from the borders of China.]

In the thirteenth century, the monk Rubruquis (who traversed the immense plain of Kipzak, in his journey to the court of the Great Khan) observed the remarkable name of Hungary, with the traces of a common language and origin. Hist. des Voyages, tom. vii. p. 269.

Bell (vol. i. p. 29-34), and the editors of the Genealogical History (p. 539), have described the Calmucks of the Volga in the beginning of the present century.

This great transmigration of 300,000 Calmucks, or Torgouts, happened in the year 1771. The original narrative of Kien-long, the reigning emperor of China, which was intended for the inscription of a column, has been translated by the missionaries of Pekin (Mémoire sur la Chine, tom. i. p. 401-418). The emperor affects the smooth and specious language of the Son of Heaven and the Father of his People.

The Kang-Mou (tom. iii. p. 447) ascribes to their conquest a space of 14,000 lis. According to the present standard, 200 lis (or more accurately 193) are equal to one degree of latitude; and one English mile consequently exceeds three miles of China. But there are strong reasons to believe that the ancient li scarcely equalled one-half of the modern. See the elaborate researches of M. d’Anville, a geographer who is not a stranger in any age, or climate of the globe. Mémoires de l’Acad. tom. ii. p. 125-502. Mesures Itinéraires, p. 154-167.

See the Histoire des Huns, tom. ii. p. 125-144. The subsequent history (p. 145-277) of three or four Hunnic dynasties evidently proves that their martial spirit was not impaired by a long residence in China.

Utque hominibus quietis et placidis otium est voluptabile, ita illos pericula juvant et bella. Judicatur ibi beatus qui in prœlio profuderit animam: senescentes etiam et fortuitis mortibus mundo digressos, ut degeneres et ignavos conviciis atrocibus insectantur. We must think highly of the conquerors of such men.

On the subject of the Alani, see Ammianus (xxxi. 2), Jornandes (de Rebus Geticis, c. 24), M. de Guignes (Hist. des Huns, tom. ii. p. 279), and the Genealogical History of the Tartars (tom. ii. p. 617).

As we are possessed of the authentic history of the Huns, it would be impertinent to repeat, or to refute, the fables, which misrepresent their origin and progress, their passage of the mud or water of the Mæotis, in pursuit of an ox or stag, les Indes qu’ils avoient découvertes, c. Zosimus, l. iv. p. 224 [c. 20; after Eunapius], Sozomen, l. vi. c. 37, Procopius [ leg. Paulus], Hist. Miscell. c. 5 [ leg. Bk. 12 (p. 933, ap. Migne, vol. 95)], Jornandes, c. 24, Grandeur et Décadence, c., des Romains, c. 17.

Prodigiosæ formæ, et pandi; ut bipedes existimes bestias; vel quales in commarginandis pontibus, effigiati stipites dolantur incompti. Ammian. xxxi. 1. Jornandes (c. 24) draws a strong caricature of a Calmuck face. Species pavendâ nigredine . . . quædam deformis offa, non facies; habensque magis puncta quam lumina. See Buffon, Hist. Naturelle, tom. iii. p. 380.

This execrable origin, which Jornandes (c. 24) describes with the rancour of a Goth, might be originally derived from a more pleasing fable of the Greeks (Herodot. l. iv. c. 9, c.).

The Roxolani may be the fathers of the Ῥω̂ς, the Russians (d’Anville, Empire de Russie, p. 1-10), whose residence ( AD 862) about Novgorod Veliki cannot be very remote from that which the Geographer of Ravenna (i. 12, iv. 4, 46. v. 28, 30) assigns to the Roxolani ( AD 886). [Rosomoni is the name in Jordanes, Get. 24. A connection with Ῥω̂ς is utterly wild.]

The text of Ammianus seems to be imperfect or corrupt; but the nature of the ground explains, and almost defines, the Gothic rampart. Mémoires de l’Académie, c., tom. xxviii. p. 444-462. [The fortification, according to Wietersheim and Hodgkin, was “between the mountains of Transylvania and the river Sereth.”]

M. de Buat (Hist. des Peuples de l’Europe, t. vi. p. 407) has conceived a strange idea that Alavivus was the same person as Ulphilas the Gothic bishop: and that Ulphilas, the grandson of a Cappadocian captive, became a temporal prince of the Goths.

Ammianus (xxxi. 3) and Jornandes (de Rebus Geticis, c. 24) describe the subversion of the Gothic empire by the Huns. [For Caucaland see below, p. 331.]

The chronology of Ammianus is obscure and imperfect. Tillemont has laboured to clear and settle the Annals of Valens. [See Reiche, op. cit. p. 29 sqq. ]

Zosimus, l. iv. p. 223 [c. 20]. Sozomen, l. vi. c. 38. The Isaurians, each winter, infested the roads of Asia Minor, as far as the neighbourhood of Constantinople. Basil, Epist. ccl. apud Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, tom. v. p. 106.

The passage of the Danube is exposed by Ammianus (xxxi. 3, 4), Zosimus (l. iv. p. 223, 224), Eunapius (in Excerpt. Legat. p. 19, 20), and Jornandes (c. 25, 26). Ammianus declares (c. 5) that he means only ipsas rerum digerere summitates. But he often takes a false measure of their importance; and his superfluous prolixity is disagreeably balanced by his unseasonable brevity.

Chishull, a curious traveller, has remarked the breadth of the Danube, which he passed to the south of Bucharest, near the conflux of the Argish [Agrèche] (p. 77). He admires the beauty and spontaneous plenty of Mæsia, or Bulgaria.

Quem si [ leg. qui] scire velit, Libyci velit æquoris idem. Scire [ leg. discere] quam multæ Zephyro truduntur [ leg. turbentur] harenæ.

Ammianus has inserted, in his prose, these lines of Virgil (Georgic. l. ii. [105-106]), originally designed by the poet to express the impossibility of numbering the different sorts of vines. See Plin. Hist. Natur. l. xiv.

Eunapius and Zosimus curiously specify these articles of Gothic wealth and luxury. Yet it must be presumed that they were the manufactures of the provinces; which the Barbarians had acquired as the spoils of war, or as the gifts or merchandise of peace. [Another frag. of Eunapius (55) describes a later crossing of Goths, in reign of Theodosius, c. 382 AD ]

Decem libras; the word silver must be understood. Jornandes betrays the passions and prejudices of a Goth. The servile Greeks, Eunapius and Zosimus, disguise the Roman oppression and execrate the perfidy of the Barbarians. Ammianus, a patriot historian, slightly, and reluctantly, touches on the odious subject. Jerom, who wrote almost on the spot, is fair, though concise. Per avaritiam Maximi ducis ad rebellionem fame coacti sunt (in Chron.).

Ammian. xxxi. 4, 5.

Vexillis de more sublatis, auditisque triste sonantibus classicis. Ammian. xxxi. 5. These are the rauca cornua of Claudian (in Rufin. ii. 57), the large horns of the Uri, or wild bull; such as have been more recently used by the Swiss Cantons of Uri and Underwald (Simler de Republicâ Helvet. l. ii. p. 201, edit. Fuselin. Tigur. 1734). The military horn is finely, though perhaps casually, introduced in an original narrative of the battle of Nancy ( AD 1477). “Attendant le combat le dit cor fut corné par trois fois, tant que le vent du souffleur pouvoit durer: ce qui esbahit fort Monsieur de Bourgoigne; car déjà à Morat l’avoit ouy. ” (See the Pièces Justificatives, in the 4to edition of Philippe de Comines, tom. iii. p. 493.)

Jornandes de Rebus Geticis, c. 26, p. 648, edit. Grot. These splendidi panni (they are comparatively such) are undoubtedly transcribed from the larger histories of Priscus, Ablavius, or Cassiodorius.

Cum populis suis longe ante suscepti. We are ignorant of the precise date and circumstances of their transmigration.

An Imperial manufacture of shields, c., was established at Hadrianople; and the populace were headed by the Fabricenses, or workmen (Vales. ad Ammian. xxxi. 6).

Pacem sibi esse cum parietibus memorans. Amm. xxxi. 7.

These mines were in the country of the Bessi, in the ridge of mountains, the Rhodope, that runs between Philippi and Philippopolis; two Macedonian cities, which derived their name and origin from the father of Alexander. From the mines of Thrace he annually received the value, not the weight, of a thousand talents (200,000 l. ); a revenue which paid the phalanx, and corrupted the orators of Greece. See Diodor. Siculus, tom. ii. l. xvi. p. 88, edit. Wesseling. Godefroy’s Commentary on the Theodosian Code, tom. iii. p. 496. Cellarius, Geograph. Antiq. tom. i. p. 676, 857. D’Anville, Géographie Ancienne, tom. i. p. 336.

As those unhappy workmen often ran away, Valens had enacted severe laws to drag them from their hiding-places. Cod. Theodosian. l. x. tit. xix. leg. 5, 7.

See Ammianus, xxxi. 5, 6. The historian of the Gothic war loses time and space by an unseasonable recapitulation of the ancient inroads of the Barbarians.

The Itinerary of Antoninus (p. 226, 227, edit. Wesseling) marks the situation of this place about sixty miles north of Tomi, Ovid’s exile: and the name of Salices (the willows) expresses the nature of the soil. [The Romans “succeeded in clearing first the Rhodope country, and then the line of the Balkans, of the Gothic army” (Hodgkin, i. 261).]

This circle of waggons, the Carrago, was the usual fortification of the Barbarians (Vegetius de Re Militari, l. iii. c. 10. Valesius ad Ammian. xxxi. 7). The practice and the name were preserved by their descendants, as late as the fifteenth century. The Charroy, which surrounded the Ost, is a word familiar to the readers of Froissard or Comines.

Statim ut accensi malleoli [ ib ]. I have used the literal sense of real torches or beacons: but I almost suspect that it is only one of those turgid metaphors, those false ornaments, that perpetually disfigure the style of Ammianus.

Indicant nunc usque albentes ossibus campi. Ammian. xxxi. 7. The historian might have viewed these plains either as a soldier or as a traveller. But his modesty has suppressed the adventures of his own life subsequent to the Persian wars of Constantius and Julian. We are ignorant of the time when he quitted the service and retired to Rome, where he appears to have composed his History of his own Times.

Ammianus, xxxi. 8.

Hanc Taifalorum gentem turpem, et obscenæ vitæ flagitiis ita accipimus mersam; ut apud eos nefandi concubitus fœdere copulentur mares puberes, ætatis viriditatem in eorum pollutis usibus consumpturi. Porro, si qui jam adultus aprum exceperit solus, vel interemit ursum immanem, colluvione liberatur incesti. Ammian. xxxi. 9. Among the Greeks likewise, more especially among the Cretans, the holy bands of friendship were confirmed, and sullied, by unnatural love.

Ammian. xxxi. 8, 9. Jerom (tom. i. p. 26) enumerates the nations, and marks a calamitous period of twenty years. This epistle to Heliodorus was composed in the year 397 (Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. xii. p. 645). [Ep. 60, ap. Migne, i. p. 600.]

The field of battle, Argentaria or Argentovaria, is accurately fixed by M. d’Anville (Notice de l’Ancienne Gaul, p. 96-99) at twenty-three Gallic leagues, or thirty-four and a half Roman miles, to the south of Strasburg. From its ruins the adjacent town of Colmar has arisen.

The full and impartial narrative of Ammianus (xxxi. 10) may derive some additional light from the Epitome of Victor, the Chronicle of Jerom, and the History of Orosius (l. vii. c. 33, p. 552, edit. Havercamp).

Moratus paucissimos dies, seditione popularium levium pulsus. Ammian. xxxi. 11. Socrates (l. iv. c. 38) supplies the dates and some circumstances. [And cp. Eunapius, p. 46, ed. Müller.]

Vivosque omnes circa Mutinam, Regiumque, et Parmam, Italica oppida, rura culturos exterminavit. Ammianus, xxxi. 9. Those cities and districts, about ten years after the colony of the Taifalæ [Taifali], appear in a very desolate state. See Muratori, Dissertazioni sopra le Antichità Italiana, tom. i. Dissertat. xxi. p. 354. [Frigeridus fortified the pass of Succi (between Sofia and Philippopolis), but his incompetent successor Maurus sustained a defeat there, Amm. xx. 4, 18, Hodgkin, i. 266; see below, p. 318.]

Ammian. xxxi. 11. Zosimus, l. iv. p. 228-230 [23]. The latter expatiates on the desultory exploits of Sebastian, and despatches, in a few lines, the important battle of Hadrianople. According to the ecclesiastical critics, who hate Sebastian, the praise of Zosimus is disgrace (Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, tom. v. p. 121). His prejudice and ignorance undoubtedly render him a very questionable judge of merit.

Ammianus (xxxi. 12, 13) almost alone describes the councils and actions which were terminated by the fatal battle of Hadrianople. We might censure the vices of his style, the disorder and perplexity of his narrative; but we must now take leave of this impartial historian, and reproach is silenced by our regret for such an irreparable loss. [The most recent investigation of the Battle of Hadrianople is by Judeich, in the Deutsche Ztsch. f. Geschichtswissenschaft, 1891, p. 1 sqq. ]

The difference of the eight miles of Ammianus, and the twelve of Idatius, can only embarrass those critics (Valesius ad loc.) who suppose a great army to be a mathematical point, without space or dimensions. [The Goths had come from N.E. corner of the province of Haemimontus; cp. Hodgkin, i. 269.]

94n

[See Claudian, B. G., 61, absumptique igne Valentis.]

Nec ulla, annalibus, præter Cannensem pugnam ita ad internecionem res legitur gesta. Ammian. xxxi. 13. According to the grave Polybius, no more than 370 horse and 3000 foot escaped from the field of Cannæ: 10,000 were made prisoners; and the number of the slain amounted to 5630 horse and 70,000 foot (Polyb. l. iii. p. 371, edit. Casaubon, in 8vo [c. 117]). Livy (xxii. 49) is somewhat less bloody: he slaughters only 2700 horse and 40,000 foot. The Roman army was supposed to consist of 87,200 effective men (xxii. 36).

We have gained some faint light from Jerom (t. i. p. 26 [Ep. 60, 16] and in Chron. p. 188 [ad ann. 2393]), Victor (in Epitome [47]), Orosius (l. vii. c. 33, p. 554), Jornandes (c. 27), Zosimus (l. iv. p. 230 [24]), Socrates (l. iv. c. 38), Sozomen (l. vi. c. 40), Idatius (in Chron.). But their united evidence, if weighed against Ammianus alone, is light and unsubstantial.

96a

[ Legendum generals; the original is τω̂ν στρατηγω̂ν.]

Libanius de ulciscend. Julian. Nece, c. 3. in Fabricius, Bibliot. Græc. tom. vii. p. 146-148.

Valens had gained, or rather purchased, the friendship of the Saracens, whose vexatious inroads were felt on the borders of Phœnicia, Palestine, and Egypt. The Christian faith had been lately introduced among a people, reserved, in a future age, to propagate another religion (Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, t. v. p. 104, 106, 141. Mém. Eccl. t. vii. p. 593).

Crinitus quidam, nudus omnia præter pubem, subraucum et lugubre strepens. Ammian. xxxi. 16, and Vales, ad loc. The Arabs often fought naked; a custom which may be ascribed to their sultry climate and ostentatious bravery. The description of this unknown savage is the lively portrait of Derar, a name so dreadful to the Christians of Syria. See Ockley’s Hist. of the Saracens, vol. i. p. 72, 84, 87.

100

The series of events may still be traced in the last pages of Ammianus (xxxi. 15, 16). Zosimus (l. iv. p. 227, 231 [22, 24]), whom we are now reduced to cherish, misplaces the sally of the Arabs before the death of Valens. Eunapius (in Excerpt. Legat. p. 20 [fr. 42, F.H.G. iv. p. 32]) praises the fertility of Thrace, Macedonia, c.

101

Observe with how much indifference Cæsar relates, in the Commentaries of the Gallic war: that he put to death the whole senate of the Veneti, who had yielded to his mercy (iii. 16); that he laboured to extirpate the whole nation of the Eburones (vi. 31 sqq. ); that forty thousand persons were massacred at Bourges by the just revenge of his soldiers, who spared neither age nor sex (vii. 27), c.

102

Such are the accounts of the sack of Magdeburg, by the ecclesiastic and the fisherman, which Mr. Harte has transcribed (Hist. of Gustavus Adolphus, vol. i. p. 313-320), with some apprehension of violating the dignity of history.

103

Et vastatis urbibus, hominibusque interfectis, solitudinem et raritatem bestiarum quoque fieri, et volatilium, pisciumque: testis Illyricum est, testis Thracia, testis in quo ortus sum solum (Pannonia); ubi præter cælum et terram, et crescentes vepres, et condensa sylvarum cuncta perierunt. Tom. vii. p. 250 ad 1. Cap. Sophonias; and tom. i. p. 26. [Ep. 60, 16.]

104

Eunapius (in Excerpt. Legat. p. 20 [F.H.G. iv. p. 32]) foolishly supposes a preternatural growth of the young Goths; that he may introduce Cadmus’s armed men, who sprung from the dragon’s teeth, c. Such was the Greek eloquence of the times.

105

Ammianus evidently approves this execution, efficacia velox et salutaris, which concludes his work (xxxi. 16). Zosimus, who is curious and copious (l. iv. p. 233-236 [26]), mistakes the date, and labours to find the reason why Julius did not consult the emperor Theodosius, who had not yet ascended the throne of the East.

106

A life of Theodosius the Great was composed in the last century (Paris, 1679, in 4to; 1680, in 12mo), to inflame the mind of the young Dauphin with Catholic zeal. The author, Fléchier, afterwards bishop of Nismes, was a celebrated preacher; and his history is adorned, or tainted, with pulpiteloquence; but he takes his learning from Baronius, and his principles from St. Ambrose and St. Augustin. [For recent works cp. Appendix 5.]

107

The birth, character, and elevation of Theodosius are marked in Picatus (in Panegyr. Vet. xii. 10, 11, 12), Themistius (Orat. xiv. p. 182), Zosimus (l. iv. p. 231 [24]), Augustin (de Civitat. Dei, v. 25), Orosius (l. vii. c. 34), Sozomen (l. vii. c. 2), Socrates (l. v. c. 2), Theodoret (l. v. c. 5), Philostorgius (l. ix. c. 17, with Godefroy, p. 393), the Epitome of Victor [48], and the Chronicles of Prosper, Idatius, and Marcellinus, in the Thesaurus Temporum of Scaliger. [Eunap. fr. 48.]

108

Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, tom. v. p. 716, c. [Soz. vii. 4.]

109

Italica, founded by Scipio Africanus for his wounded veterans of Italy. The ruins still appear, about a league above Seville, on the opposite bank of the river. See the Hispania Illustrata of Nonius, a short, though valuable treatise. C. xvii. p. 64-67.

110

I agree with Tillemont (Hist. des Empereurs, tom. v. p. 726) in suspecting the royal pedigree, which remained a secret till the promotion of Theodosius. Even after that event the silence of Pacatus outweighs the venal evidence of Themistius, Victor, and Claudian, who connect the family of Theodosius with the blood of Trajan and Hadrian.

111

Pacatus compares, and consequently prefers, the youth of Theodosius to the military education of Alexander, Hannibal, and the second Africanus, who, like him, had served under their fathers (xii. 8).

112

Ammianus (xxix. 6) mentions this victory of Theodosius Junior Dux Mæsiæ, primâ etiam tum lanugine juvenis, princeps postea perspectissimus. The same fact is attested by Themistius and Zosimus; but Theodoret (l. v. c. 5), who adds some curious circumstances, strangely applies it to the time of the interregnum. [Theodoret refers to another campaign in AD 378; see Appendix 11.]

113

Pacatus (in Panegyr. Vet. xii. 9) prefers the rustic life of Theodosius to that of Cincinnatus; the one was the effect of choice, the other of poverty.

114

M. d’Anville (Géographie Ancienne, tom. i. p. 25) has fixed the situation of Caucha, or Coca, in the old province of Gallicia, where Zosimus [iv. 24] and Idatius [in Cont. Chron. Hieron.] have placed the birth, or patrimony, of Theodosius.

115

[Recalled from exile some months before his investiture he won a victory over the Sarmatians; see above, c. xxv. note 157. Cp. Ifland, p. 59.]

116

Let us hear Ammianus himself. Hæc, ut miles quondam et Græcus, a principatu Cæsaris Nervæ exorsus, adusque Valentis interitum, pro virium explicavi mensurâ: nunquam, ut arbitror, sciens, silentio ausus corrumpere vel mendacio. Scribant reliqua potiores ætate doctrinisque florentes. Quos id, si libuerit, aggressuros, procudere linguas ad majores moneo stilos. Ammian. xxxi. 16. The first thirteen books, a superficial epitome of two hundred and fifty-seven years, are now lost; the last eighteen, which contain no more than twenty-five years, still preserve the copious and authentic history of his own times. [Cp. vol. ii. Appendix 10, p. 362-364.]

117

Ammianus was the last subject of Rome who composed a profane history in the Latin language. The East, in the next century, produced some rhetorical historians, Zosimus, Olympiodorus, Malchus, Candidus, c. See Vossius de Historicis Græcis, l. ii. c. 18, de Historicis Latinis, l. ii. c. 10, c.

118

Chrysostom, tom. i. p. 344, edit. Montfaucon. I have verified and examined this passage; but I should never, without the aid of Tillemont (Hist. des Emp. tom. v. p. 152), have detected an historical anecdote, in a strange medley of moral and mystic exhortations, addressed by the preacher of Antioch to a young widow.

119

Eunapius, in Excerpt. Legation. p. 21 [F.H.G. iv. p. 32].

120

See Godefroy’s Chronology of the Laws. Codex Theodos. tom. i. Prolegomen. p. xcix.-civ. [Cp. Cod. Theod. x. 1, 12.]

121

[They were assisted by a pestilence. Cp. Ambrose, Epist. 15, ap. Migne, 16, p. 955.]

122

Most writers insist on the illness and long repose of Theodosius at Thessalonica: Zosimus, to diminish his glory; Jornandes, to favour the Goths; and the ecclesiastical writers, to introduce his baptism.

123

Compare Themistius (Orat. xiv. p. 181) with Zosimus (l. iv. p. 232 [25]), Jornandes (c. xxvii. p. 649), and the prolix Commentary of M. de Buat (Hist. des Peuples, c., tom. vi. p. 477-552). The Chronicles of Idatius and Marcellinus allude, in general terms, to magna certamina, magna multaque prælia. The two epithets are not easily reconciled. [For chronology, cp. Appendix 12.]

124

[Some bands made raids into Epirus (Nicopolis capitulated to them; Eunapius, fr. 50), and Greece (which was defended by one Theodore, C.I.A. iii. 636).]

125

Zosimus (l. iv. p. 232 [25]) styles him a Scythian, a name which the more recent Greeks seem to have appropriated to the Goths. [See Gregory Naz. Ep. 136; Ifland, Kaiser Theodosios der Grosse, p. 70. There is no authority for the statement that he was “of the royal blood of the Amali.”]

126

[Hauha-land (= Highland) acc. to Zeuss. Somewhere in Siebenbürgen?]

127

The reader will not be displeased to see the original words of Jornandes or the author whom he transcribed. Regiam urbem ingressus est, miransque, En, inquit, cerno quod sæpe incredulus audiebam, famam videlicet tantæ urbis. Et huc illuc oculos volvens, nunc situm urbis commeatumque navium, nunc mœnia clara prospectans, miratur; populosque diversarum gentium, quasi fonte in uno e diversis partibus scaturriente undâ, sic quoque militem ordinatum aspiciens. Deus, inquit, est sine dubio terrenus [ leg. sine dub. terr. est] imperator, et quisquis adversus eum manum moverit, ipse sui sanguinis reus existit. Jornandes (c. xxviii. p. 650) proceeds to mention his death and funeral.

128

Jornandes, c. xxviii. p. 650. Even Zosimus (l. iv. p. 246 [34]) is compelled to approve the generosity of Theodosius, so honourable to himself, and so beneficial to the public.

129

The short, but authentic, hints in the Fasti of Idatius (Chron. Scaliger, p. 52) are stained with contemporary passion. The fourteenth oration of Themistius is a compliment to Peace, and the consul Saturninus ( AD 383). [Cp. Seeck, Hermes, xi. p. 67.]

130

Ἔθνος τὸ [ leg. τι] Σκυθικὸν πα̂σιν ἄγνωστον. Zosimus, l. iv. p. 252 [38].

131

I am justified, by reason and example, in applying this Indian name to the μονόξυλα of the Barbarians, the single trees hollowed into the shape of a boat, πλήθει μονοξύλων ἐμβιβάσαντες. Zosimus, l. iv. p. 253 [38].

Ausi Danuvium quondam tranare Gruthungi In lintres fregere nemus: ter mille ruebant Per fluvium plenæ cuneis immanibus alni. — Claudian, in iv. Cons. Hon. 623.

132

Zosimus, l. iv. p. 252-255 [38]. He too frequently betrays his poverty of judgment by disgracing the most serious narratives with trifling and incredible circumstances. [He duplicates the invasion of Odothæus, cp. iv. 35 with 38.]

133

— Odothæi Regis opima Rettulit — — Ver. 632 [ ib. ].

The opima were the spoils which a Roman general could only win from the king, or general, of the enemy whom he had slain with his own hands; and no more than three such examples are celebrated in the victorious ages of Rome. [Had Odothæus been slain by Theodosius, Claudian would not have been content to insinuate it.]

134

See Themistius, Orat. xvi. p. 211. Claudian (in Eutrop. l. ii. 152) mentions the Phrygian colony: —

— Ostrogothis colitur mistisque Gruthungis Phryx ager —

and then proceeds to name the rivers of Lydia, the Pactolus and Hermus.

135

[So Mr. Hodgkin, who discusses the treaty at length; i. p. 312.]

136

Compare Jornandes (c. xx. 27), who marks the condition and number of the Gothic Fœderati, with Zosimus (l. iv. p. 258 [40]), who mentions their golden collars; and Pacatus (in Panegyr. Vet. xii. 37), who applauds, with false or foolish joy, their bravery and discipline. [The first extant text in which Fœderati is used of the Goths is Cod. Theod. vii. 13, 16 AD 406; cp. Hodgkin, i. 314.]

137

Amator pacis generisque Gothorum, is the praise bestowed by the Gothic historian (c. xxix.), who represents his nation as innocent, peaceable men, slow to anger, and patient of injuries. According to Livy, the Romans conquered the world in their own defence.

138

Besides the partial invectives of Zosimus (always discontented with the Christian reigns), see the grave representations which Synesius addresses to the emperor Arcadius (de Regno, p. 25, 26, edit. Petav.). The philosophic bishop of Cyrene was near enough to judge; and he was sufficiently removed from the temptation of fear or flattery.

139

Themistius (Orat. xvi. p. 211, 212) composes an elaborate and rational apology [partly translated by Mr. Hodgkin, i. 316 sqq. ], which is not, however, exempt from the puerilities of Greek rhetoric. Orpheus could only charm the wild beasts of Thrace; but Theodosius enchanted the men and women whose predecessors in the same country had torn Orpheus in pieces, c.

140

Constantinople was deprived, half a day, of the public allowance of bread, to expiate the murder of a Gothic soldier: κινον̂ντες τὸ Σκυθικόν was the guilt of the people. Libanius, Orat. xii. p. 394, edit. Morel.

141

Zosimus, l. iv. p. 267-271 [48, 49]. He tells a long and ridiculous story of the adventurous prince who roved the country with only five horsemen, of a spy whom they detected, whipped, and killed in an old woman’s cottage, c. [Güldenpenning, p. 196.]

142

Compare Eunapius (in Excerpt. Legat. p. 21, 22 [fr. 60, F.H.G. iv. p. 41]) with Zosimus (l. iv. p. 279 [56]). The difference of circumstances and names must undoubtedly be applied to the same story. Fravitta, or Travitta, was afterwards consul ( AD 401), and still continued his faithful service to the eldest son of Theodosius (Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, tom. v. p. 467). [“Priulf” is called Eriulph by Eunapius. The conspiracy seems to have been formed by the Arian Goths. Fravitta was a leader of pagan Goths. The date seems to be during the preparation for the war with Eugenius. Cp. Gūldenpenning, p. 218.]

143

Les Goths ravagèrent tout depuis le Danube jusqu’au Bosphore; exterminèrent Valens et son armée; et ne repassèrent le Danube que pour abandonner l’affreuse solitude qu’ils avoient faite (Œuvres de Montesquieu, tom. iii. p. 479; Considérations sur les Causes de la Grandeur et de la Décadence des Romains, c. xvii.). The president Montesquieu seems ignorant that the Goths, after the defeat of Valens, never abandoned the Roman territory. It is now thirty years, says Claudian (de Bello Getico [Gothico; Birt and Koch], 166 [ leg. 169], c., AD 404 [rather 402]).

Ex quo jam patrios gens hæc oblita Triones, Atque Istrum transvecta semel, vestigia fixit Threicio funesta solo —

The error is inexcusable; since it disguises the principal and immediate cause of the fall of the Western empire of Rome.

Among them letters to Hypatia.

His father, L. Aurelius Avianius Symm. (consul 330), was prefect of Rome in AD 364-5. Statues were set up to him both in Rome and Constantinople, as is recorded in an inscription, where the public offices which he held are enumerated. He was princeps senatus. C.I.L., 6, 1698.

For the Panegyric ( AD 389) of Drepanius Latinus PACATUS, see vol. v. p. 43.

He attests it himself, Carm. Min., 41, 14, et Latiae accessit Graia Thalia togae.

There was another contemporary poet, Quintianus a Ligurian, who also sang the praises of Aetius. Sidonius, c. ix. 289 sqq.

Cp. Chron. Gall. ad 437 AD (Mommsen, Chron. Min. i. p. 660).

Also Pithoeanum, having been first published (at Paris in 1588) by Petrus Pithoeus. The best MS. is in the British Museum.

Preserved in a MS. at Madrid, under the name of Sulpicius Severus. It has been discussed by O. Holder-Egger, Ueber die Weltchronik des sogenannten Severus Sulpitius, c., 1875.

For the first fragment see vol. ii. Appendix 10, p. 360.

The new material contained in it was first edited by G. Hille (1866) under the title Prosperi Aquitani Chronici continuator Havniensis.

There is a Russian translation of the entire work.