Valentinian was less attentive to the religion of his son, since he entrusted [c. ad 364] the education of Gratian to Ausonius, a professed Pagan (Mém. de l’Académie des Inscriptions, tom. xv. p. 125-138). [But in his poem the Ephemeris (before 367 ad ; Schenkl, Pref. to his ed. of Ausonius in M.H.G.) he poses not only as a Christian, but as an orthodox Christian.] The poetical fame of Ausonius condemns the taste of his age.
[Decimus Magnus] Ausonius was successively promoted to the Prætorian prefecture of Italy ( ad 377) and of Gaul ( ad 378), cp. Aus. ii. 2, 42, præfectus Gallis et Libyæ et Latio, and was at length invested with the consulship ( ad 379). He expressed his gratitude in a servile and insipid piece of flattery (Actio Gratiarum, p. 699-736) which has survived more worthy productions. [This statement as to the prefectures of Ausonius is not quite accurate; cp. vol. iv. Appendix 5.]
Disputare de principali judicio non oportet. Sacrilegii enim instar est dubitare, an is dignus sit, quem elegerit imperator. Codex Justinian. l. ix. tit. xxix. leg. 3 [2, ed. Krüger]. This convenient law was revived and promulgated after the death of Gratian by the feeble court of Milan.
Ambrose composed, for his instruction, a theological treatise on the faith of the Trinity; and Tillemont (Hist. des Empereurs, tom. v. p. 158, 169) ascribes to the archbishop the merit of Gratian’s intolerant laws.
Qui divinæ legis sanctitatem [aut] nesciendo omittunt [ leg. confundunt] aut negligendo violant et offendunt, sacrilegium committunt. Codex Justinian. l. ix. tit. xxix. leg. 1. Theodosius indeed may claim his share in the merit of this comprehensive law.
Ammianus (xxxi. 10) and the younger Victor [Epit. 47] acknowledge the virtues of Gratian, and accuse, or rather lament, his degenerate taste. The odious parallel of Commodus is saved by “licet incruentus”; and perhaps Philostorgius (l. x. c. 10, and Godefroy, p. 412) had guarded with some similar reserve the comparison of Nero.
Zosimus (l. iv. p. 247 [c. 35]) and the younger Victor [ ib. ] ascribe the revolution to the favour of the Alani and the discontent of the Roman troops. Dum exercitum negligeret, et paucos ex Alanis, quos ingenti auro ad se transtulerat, anteferret veteri ac Romano militi.
Britannia fertilis provincia tyrannorum, is a memorable expression used by Jerom in the Pelagian controversy, and variously tortured in the disputes of our national antiquaries. The revolutions of the last age appeared to justify the image of the sublime Bossuet, “cette isle, plus orageuse que les mers qui l’environnent.”
Zosimus says of the British soldiers, τω̂ν ἄλλων ἁπάντων πλέον αὐθαδείᾳ καὶ θυμῷ νικωμένους [ ib. Ausonius describes Maximus as armigeri sub nomine lixa, Ord. urb. nob. l. 70].
Helena, the daughter of Eudda. Her chapel may still be seen at Caersegont, now Caer-narvon (Carte’s Hist. of England, vol. i. p. 168, from Rowland’s Mona Antiqua). The prudent reader may not perhaps be satisfied with such Welsh evidence.
Cambden (vol. i. introduct. p. ci.) appoints him governor of Britain; and the father of our antiquities is followed, as usual, by his blind progeny. Pacatus and Zosimus had taken some pains to prevent this error, or fable; and I shall protect myself by their decisive testimonies. Regali habitu exulem suum illi exules orbes induerunt (in Panegyr. Vet. xii. 23), and the Greek historian, still less equivocally, αὐτὸς (Maximus) δὲ οὐδὲ εἰς ἀρχὴν ἔντιμον ἔτυχε προελθών (l. iv. p. 248 [c. 35]).
Sulpicius Severus, Dialog. ii. 7, Orosius, l. vii. c. 34, p. 556. They both acknowledge (Sulpicius had been his subject) his innocence and merit. It is singular enough that Maximus should be less favourably treated by Zosimus, the partial adversary of his rival.
Archbishop Usher (Antiquitat. Britan. Eccles. p. 107, 108) has diligently collected the legends of the island and the continent. The whole emigration consisted of 30,000 soldiers, and 100,000 plebeians, who settled in Bretagne. Their destined brides, St. Ursula with 11,000 noble, and 60,000 plebeian, virgins, mistook their way; landed at Cologne, and were all most cruelly murdered by the Huns. But the plebeian sister have been defrauded of their equal honours; and, what is still harder, John Trithemius presumes to mention the children of these British virgins.
Zosimus (l. iv. p. 248, 249 [c. 35]) has transported the death of Gratian from Lugdunum in Gaul (Lyons) to Singidunum in Mæsia. Some hints may be extracted from the Chronicles; some lies may be detected in Sozomen (l. vii. c. 13) and Socrates (l. v. c. 11). Ambrose is our most authentic evidence (tom. i. Enarrat. in Psalm lxi. p. 961 [ed. Migne, i. p. 1173], tom. ii. epist. xxiv. p. 888 [ ib. ii. 1035], c., and de Obitu Valentinian. Consolat. No. 28, p. 1182 [ ib. ii. 1368]).
Pacatus (xii. 28) celebrates his fidelity; while his treachery is marked in Prosper’s Chronicle, as the cause of the ruin of Gratian. Ambrose, who has occasion to exculpate himself, only condemns the death of Vallio, a faithful servant of Gratian (tom. ii. epist. xxiv. p. 891, edit. Benedict [Migne, ii. p. 1039]).
He protested, nullum ex adversariis nisi in acie occubuisse. Sulp. Severus, in Vit. B. Martin. c. 23. The orator of Theodosius bestows reluctant, and therefore weighty, praise on his clemency. Si cui ille, pro ceteris sceleribus suis, minus crudelis fuisse videtur (Panegyr. Vet. xii. 28).
Ambrose mentions the laws of Gratian, quas non abrogavit hostis (tom. ii. epist. xvii. p. 827).
Zosimus, l. iv. p. 251, 252 [c. 37]. We may disclaim his odious suspicions; but we cannot reject the treaty of peace which the friends of Theodosius have absolutely forgotten, or slightly mentioned. [His name, afterwards erased, can be discovered along with Valent. ii. and Theodosius on an inscription, C.I.L. 8, 27.]
Their oracle, the archbishop of Milan, assigns to his pupil Gratian an high and respectable place in heaven (tom. ii. de Obit. Val. Consol. p. 1193).
For the baptism of Theodosius, see Sozomen (l. vii. c. 4), Socrates (l. v. c. 6) and Tillemont (Hist. des Empereurs, tom. v. p. 728).
Ascolius, or Acholius [so Ambrose; Ascholius in Socr. and Sozomen], was honoured by the friendship and the praises of Ambrose; who styles him, murus fidei atque sanctitatis (tom. ii. epist. xv. p. 820), and afterwards celebrates his speed and diligence in running to Constantinople, Italy, c. (epist. xvi. p. 822); a virtue which does not appertain either to a wall, or a bishop.
Codex Theodos. l. xvi. tit. i. leg. 2, with Godefroy’s Commentary, tom. vi. p. 5-9. Such an edict deserved the warmest praises of Baronius, auream sanctionem edictum pium et salutare. — Sic itur ad astra.
[See above, vol. iv. p. 187, n. 37.]
Sozomen, l. vii. c. 6. Theodoret, l. v. c. 16. Tillemont is displeased (Mém. Ecclés. tom. vi. p. 627, 628) with the terms of “rustic bishop,” “obscure city.” Yet I must take leave to think that both Amphilochius and Iconium were objects of inconsiderable magnitude in the Roman empire.
Sozomen, l. vii. c. 5. Socrates, l. v. c. 7. Marcellin. in Chron. The account of forty years must be dated from the election or intrusion of Eusebius, who wisely exchanged the bishopric of Nicomedia for the throne of Constantinople.
See Jortin’s Remarks on Ecclesiastical History, vol. iv. p. 71. The thirty-third [27th ap. Migne] Oration of Gregory Nazianzen affords indeed some similar ideas, even some still more ridiculous; but I have not yet found the words of this remarkable passage, which I allege on the faith of a correct and liberal scholar. [But see Appendix 1.]
See the thirty-second [42nd ap. Migne] Oration of Gregory Nazianzen, and the account of his own life, which he has composed in 1800 iambics. Yet every physician is prone to exaggerate the inveterate nature of the disease which he has cured.
I confess myself deeply indebted to the two lives of Gregory Nazianzen, composed, with very different views, by Tillemont (Mém. Ecclés. tom. ix. p. 305-560, 692-731) and Le Clerc (Bibliothèque Universelle, tom. xviii. p. 1-128). [Ullmann, Gregor von Nazianz, 1825; Bénoit, S. Grégoire de Nazianze, 1884.]
Unless Gregory Nazianzen mistook thirty years in his own age; he was born, as well as his friend Basil, about the year 329. The preposterous chronology of Suidas has been graciously received; because it removes the scandal of Gregory’s father, a saint likewise, begetting children, after he became a bishop (Tillem. Mém. Ecclés. tom. ix. p. 693-697).
Gregory’s Poem on his own Life contains some beautiful lines (tom. ii. p. 8), which burst from the heart, and speak the pangs of injured and lost friendship: —
In the Midsummer Night’s Dream, Helena addresses the same pathetic complaint to her friend Hermia: —
Shakespeare had never read the poems of Gregory Nazianzen, he was ignorant of the Greek language; but his mother-tongue, the language of Nature, is the same in Cappadocia and in Britain.
This unfavourable portrait of Sasima is drawn by Gregory Nazianzen (tom. ii. de Vitâ suâ, p. 7, 8 [Migne, 3, p. 1059]). Its precise situation, forty-nine miles from Archelais [Ak Serai], and thirty-two from Tyana, is fixed in the Itinerary of Antoninus (p. 144, edit. Wesseling).
The name of Nazianzus has been immortalised by Gregory; but his native town, under the Greek or Roman title of Diocæsarea (Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. ix. p. 692), is mentioned by Pliny (vi. 3), Ptolemy, and Hierocles (Itinerar. Wesseling, p. 709). It appears to have been situate on the edge of Isauria. [ὴ Διοκαισαρέων ὀλίγη πόλις, as Gregory calls Nazianzus, is more northerly than Gibbon supposed, lying on the road from Iconium to Tyana; about six hours due east of Archelais; Ramsay, Asia Minor, 285.]
See Ducange, Constant. Christiana, l. iv. p. 141, 142. The θεία δύναμις of Sozomer. (l. vii. c. 5) is interpreted to mean the Virgin Mary. [The site of the Church of Anastasia, S.W. of the Hippodrome, is marked now by the mosque of Mehmed Pasha Djemi; see Paspatês, Βυζάντιναι Μελέται, 369.]
Tillemont (Mém. Ecclés. tom. ix. p. 432, c.) diligently collects, enlarges, and explains the oratorical and poetical hints of Gregory himself.
He pronounced an oration (tom. i. Orat. xxiii. p. 409 [= xxv. Migne, p. 1197 sqq. ]) in his praise; but after their quarrel the name of Maximus was changed into that of Heron (see Jerom, tom. i. in Catalog. Script. Eccles. p. 301). I touch slightly on these obscure and personal squabbles. [For an account of Maximus, see Hodgkin, i. 346 sqq. Cp. also J. Dräseke, Z. f. Wiss. Theologie, 36 (1893), p. 290 sqq. ]
Under the modest emblem of a dream, Gregory (tom. ii. carmen ix. p. 78 [ed. Migne, 3, p. 1254]) describes his own success with some human complacency. Yet it should seem, from his familiar conversation with his auditor St. Jerom (tom. i. Epist. ad Nepotian, p. 14 [ep. 52; Migne, i. p. 534]), that the preacher understood the true value of popular applause.
Lachrymæ auditorum, laudes tuæ sint, is the lively and judicious advice of St. Jerom [ ib. ].
Socrates (l. v. c. 7) and Sozomen (l. vii. c. 5) relate the evangelical words and actions of Damophilus without a word of approbation. He considered, says Socrates, that it is difficult to resist the powerful; but it was easy, and would have been profitable, to submit. [Date of entry of Theodosius, 14th Nov., Idacius, Fast. C.; but 24th Nov., acc. to Pasch. Chron. and Socrates, v. 6, which Clinton accepts and Hodgkin supports.]
[Not St. Sophia, which was not yet the chief church, but the Church of the Twelve Apostles; see Plan in vol. iii. opposite p. 100.]
See Gregory Nazianzen, tom. ii. de Vitâ suâ, p. 21, 22 [l. 1331 sqq. ]. For the sake of posterity, the bishop of Constantinople records a stupendous prodigy. In the month of November, it was a cloudy morning, but the sun broke forth when the procession entered the church.
Of the three ecclesiastical historians, Theodoret alone (l. v. c. 2) has mentioned this important commission of Sapor, which Tillemont (Hist. des Empereurs, tom. v. p. 728) judiciously removes from the reign of Gratian to that of Theodosius.
I do not reckon Philostorgius, though he mentions (l. ix. c. 19) the explusion of Damophilus. The Eunomian historian has been carefully strained through an orthodox sieve.
Le Clerc has given a curious extract (Bibliothèque Universelle, tom. xviii. p. 91-105) of the theological sermons which Gregory Nazianzen pronounced at Constantinople against the Arians, Eunomians, Macedonians, c. He tells the Macedonians, who deified the Father and the Son, without the Holy Ghost, that they might as well be styled Tritheists as Ditheists. Gregory himself was almost a Tritheist; and his monarchy of heaven resembles a well-regulated aristocracy.
The first general council of Constantinople now triumphs in the Vatican: but the popes had long hesitated, and their hesitation perplexes, and almost staggers, the humble Tillemont (Mém. Ecclés. tom. ix. p. 499, 500). [It had no good claim to be ecumenical, for the 150 bishops present were entirely from the eastern provinces of the Empire. It put forward no new doctrines, but simply reasserted the Nicene Creed. See Gwatkin, Studies of Arianism, p. 262.]
Before the death of Meletius, six or eight of his most popular ecclesiastics, among whom was Flavian, had abjured, for the sake of peace, the bishopric of Antioch (Sozomen, l. vii. c. 3, 11. Socrates, l. v. c. 5). Tillemont thinks it his duty to disbelieve the story; but he owns that there are many circumstances in the life of Flavian which seem inconsistent with the praises of Chrysostom and the character of a saint (Mém. Ecclés. tom. x. p. 541). [Gregory of Nyssa pronounced the funeral oration on Meletius.]
Consult Gregory Nazianzen, de Vitâ suâ, tom. ii. p. 25-28 [1509 sqq. ]. His general and particular opinion of the clergy and their assemblies may be seen in verse and prose (tom. i. orat. i. p. 33 [= or. ii. Migne], epist. lv. [= ep. cxxx. Migne, iii. p. 225] p. 814, tom. ii. carmen x. [ leg. xi.] p. 81 [Migne, ib. p. 1227]). Such passages are faintly marked by Tillemont, and fairly produced by Le Clerc.
See Gregory, tom. ii. de Vitâ suâ, p. 28-31 [1680 sqq. ]. The fourteenth [22nd], twenty-seventh [36th], and thirty-second [42nd] orations were pronounced in the several stages of this business. The peroration of the last (tom. i. p. 528), in which he takes a solemn leave of men and angels, the city and the emperor, the East and the West, c., is pathetic, and almost sublime.
The whimsical ordination of Nectarius is attested by Sozomen (l. vii. c. 8); but Tillemont observes (Mém. Ecclés. tom. ix. p. 719), Après tout, ce narré de Sozomène est si honteux pour tous ceux qu’il y mêle, et surtout pour Théodose, qu’il vaut mieux travailler à le détruire, qu’à le soutenir; an admirable canon of criticism.
I can only be understood to mean that such was his natural temper; when it was not hardened, or inflamed, by religious zeal. From his retirement [at Arianzus, a farm close to the village of Karbala (now Καλβαρή, Turk. Gelvere), 2½ hours south of Nazianzus, containing “a church full of relics of S. Gregory.” Ramsay, Asia Minor, 285], he exhorts Nectarius to prosecute the heretics of Constantinople.
See the Theodosian Code, l. xvi. tit. v. leg. 6-23, with Godefroy’s commentary on each law, and his general summary, or Paratitlon, tom. vi. p. 104-110.
They always kept their Easter, like the Jewish Passover, on the fourteenth day of the first moon after the vernal equinox; and thus pertinaciously opposed to the Roman church and Nicene synod, which had fixed Easter to a Sunday. Bingham’s Antiquities, l. xx. c. 5, vol. ii. p. 309, fol. edit.
Sozomen, l. vii. c. 12.
See the Sacred History of Sulpicius Severus (l. ii. p. 437-452, edit. Ludg. Bat. 1647 [c. 46-51]), a correct and original writer. Dr. Lardner (Credibility, c., part ii. vol. ix. p. 256-350) has laboured this article, with pure learning, good sense, and moderation. Tillemont (Mém. Ecclés. tom. viii. p. 491-527) has raked together all the dirt of the fathers; an useful scavenger! [It has been debated how far Priscillian is to be regarded as a heretic. J. H. Lübkert, De haeresi Priscillianistarum, 1840, followed by Bernays, held that he was condemned, not as a heretic, but as a lawbreaker. Since then some remains of his own writings (eleven Tractates) were discovered (1885) in a Würzburg MS. of ⅚ cent., and edited (1889) by G. Schepss. His religious position has been investigated by F. Paret, Priscillianus ein Reformator des vierten Jahrhunderts, 1891. It seems clear that Priscillian’s point of view was undogmatic; and he was certainly heretical in so far as he made use of apocryphal books. See too Schepss, Priscillian, 1886. Cp. Jerome’s notice, de vir. ill. c. 21, and Orosius, Commonitorium de errore Priscillianistarum et Origenistarum, published by Schepss at end of his ed. of Priscillian.]
Sulpicius Severus mentions the arch-heretic with esteem and pity. Felix profecto, si non pravo studio corrupisset optimum ingenium; prorsus multa in eo animi et corporis bona cerneres (Hist. Sacra, l. ii. p. 439 [c. 46]). Even Jerom (tom. i. in Script. Eccles. p. 302) speaks with temper of Priscillian and Latronian. [They suffered in 385, Prosper, Epit. Chron.; but Idatius gives 387.]
The bishopric (in Old Castile) is now worth 20,000 ducats a year (Busching’s Geography, vol. ii. p. 308) and is therefore much less likely to produce the author of a new heresy.
Exprobabatur mulieri viduæ nimia religio, et diligentius culta divinitas (Pacat. in Panegyr. Vet. xii. 29). Such was the idea of a humane, though ignorant, polytheist.
One of them was sent in Syllinam insulam quæ ultra Britanniam est. What must have been the ancient condition of the rocks of Scilly (Cambden’s Britannia, vol. ii. p. 1519)?
The scandalous calumnies of Augustin, Pope Leo, c., which Tillemont swallows like a child, and Lardner refutes like a man, may suggest some candid suspicions in favour of the older Gnostics.
Ambros. tom. ii. epist. xxiv. p. 891.
In the Sacred History, and the Life of St. Martin, Sulpicius Severus uses some caution; but he declares himself more freely in the Dialogues (iii. 15). Martin was reproved, however, by his own conscience, and by an angel; nor could he afterwards perform miracles with so much ease.
The Catholic Presbyter (Sulp. Sever. l. ii. p. 448 [c. 50]) and the Pagan Orator (Pacat. in Panegyr. Vet. xii. 29) reprobate, with equal indignation, the character and conduct of Ithacius.
The life of St. Martin, and the Dialogues concerning his miracles, contain facts adapted to the grossest barbarism, in a style not unworthy of the Augustan age. So natural is the alliance between good taste and good sense that I am always astonished by this contrast.
The short and superficial life of St. Ambrose by his deacon Paulinus (Appendix ad edit. Benedict. p. i.-xv.) has the merit of original evidence. Tillemont (Mém. Ecclés. tom. x. p. 78-306) and the Benedictine editors (p. xxxi.-lxiii.) have laboured with their usual diligence.
Ambrose himself (tom. ii. epist. xxiv. p. 888-891) gives the emperor a very spirited account of his own embassy.
His own representation of his principles and conduct (tom. ii. epist. xx. xxi. xxii. p. 852-880) is one of the curious monuments of ecclesiastical antiquity. It contains two letters to his sister Marcellina, with a petition of Valentinian, and the sermon de Basilicis non tradendis.
Retz had a similar message from the queen, to request that he would appease the tumult of Paris. It was no longer in his power, c. A quoi j’ajoutai tout ce que vous pouvez vous imaginer de respect, de douleur, de regret, et de soumission, c. (Mémoires, tom. i. p. 140). Certainly I do not compare either the causes or the men; yet the coadjutor himself had some idea (p. 84) of imitating St. Ambrose.
Sozomen alone (l. vii. c. 13) throws this luminous fact into a dark and perplexed narrative.
Excubabat pia plebs in ecclesiâ mori parata cum episcopo suo. . . . Nos adhuc frigidi excitabamur tamen civitate attonitâ atque turbatâ. Augustin. Confession l. ix. c. 7.
Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. ii. p. 78, 498. Many churches in Italy, Gaul, c., were dedicated to these unknown martyrs, of whom St. Gervase seems to have been more fortunate than his companion.
Invenimus miræ magnitudinis viros duos, ut prisca ætas ferebat. Tom. ii. epist. xxii. p. 875. [Mr. Hodgkin, who discusses the discovery, seems disposed to entertain the idea that Ambrose may have practised a pious fraud; i. 440.] The size of these skeletons was fortunately, or skilfully, suited to the popular prejudice of the gradual increase of the human stature; which has prevailed in every age since the time of Homer.
Grandiaque effossis mirabitur ossa sepulchris.
Ambros. tom. ii. epist. xxii. p. 875. Augustin. Confes. l. ix. c. 7, de Civitat. Dei, l. xxii. c. 8. Paulin. in Vitâ St. Ambros., c. 14, in Append. Benedict. p. 4. The blind man’s name was Severus; he touched the holy garment, recovered his sight, and devoted the rest of his life (at least twenty-five years) to the service of the church. I should recommend this miracle to our divines if it did not prove the worship of relics, as well as the Nicene creed.
Paulin. in Vit. St. Ambros. c. 5 [15], in Append. Benedict. p. 5.
Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. x. p. 190, 750. He partially allows the mediation of Theodosius; and capriciously rejects that of Maximus, though it is attested by Prosper [not the true Prosper; but Chron. Gall. ap. Mommsen, Chron. Min. i. p. 648; cp. Rufin, 11. 16], Sozomen, and Theodoret.
The modest censure of Sulpicius (Dialog. iii. 15) inflicts a much deeper wound than the feeble declamation of Pacatus (xii. 25, 26).
Esto tutior adversus hominem, pacis involucro tegentem, was the wise caution of Ambrose (tom. ii. p. 891) after his return from his second embassy [ ad 386-7].
Baronius ( ad 387, No. 63) applies to this season of public distress some of the penitential sermons of the archbishop.
The flight of Valentinian and the love of Theodosius for his sister are related by Zosimus (l. iv. p. 263, 264 [c. 43]). Tillemont produces some weak and ambiguous evidence to antedate the second marriage of Theodosius (Hist. des Empereurs, tom. v. p. 740), and consequently to refute ces contes de Zosime, qui seroient trop contraires à la piété de Théodose.
See Godefroy’s Chronology of the Laws, Cod. Theodos. tom. i. p. 119.
Besides the hints which may be gathered from chronicles and ecclesiastical history, Zos. (l. iv. p. 259-267 [c. 44-47]), Oros. (l. vii. c. 35) and Pacatus (in Pan. Vet. xii. 30-47) supply the loose and scanty materials of this civil war. Ambrose (tom. ii. epist. xl. p. 952, 953) darkly alludes to the well-known events of a magazine surprised, an action at Pœtovio, a Sicilian, perhaps a naval, victory, c. Ausonius (p. 256, edit. Toll. [Ord. Urb. Nob. 66 sqq. ]) applauds the peculiar merit, and good fortune, of Aquileia. [For the son of Maximus, Flavius Victor, see C.I.L. 5, 8032 and Eckhel, 8, 66. The victory in Sicilia must have been on sea, over the fleet of Andragathius; cp. Oros. loc. cit. ]
Quam promptum laudare principem, tam tutum siluisse de principe (Pacat. in Pan. Vet. xii. 2). Latinus Pacatus Drepanius, a native of Gaul, pronounced this oration at Rome ( ad 388). He was afterwards proconsul of Africa; and his friend Ausonius praises him as a poet, second only to Virgil. See Tillemont, Hist. des Emper. tom. v. p. 303.
See the fair portrait of Theodosius by the younger Victor; the strokes are distinct, and the colours are mixed. The praise of Pacatus is too vague: and Claudian always seems afraid of exalting the father above the son.
Ambros. tom. ii. epist. xl. p. 955. [The interpretation of this passage is not certain. The daughters of an inimicus and the mother of a hostis are mentioned. Are the hostis and inimicus the same, viz., Maximus?] Pacatus. from the want of skill, or of courage, omits this glorious circumstance.
Pacat. in Panegyr. Vet. xii. 20.
Zosimus, l. iv. p. 271, 272 [c. 50]. His partial evidence is marked by an air of candour and truth. He observes these vicissitudes of sloth and activity, not as a vice, but as a singularity, in the character of Theodosius.
This choleric temper is acknowledged, and excused, by Victor [Epit. 48] Sed habes (says Ambrose, in decent and manly language, to his sovereign) naturæ impetum, quem si quis lenire velit, cito vertes ad misericordiam: si quis stimulet, in magis exsuscitas, ut eum revocare vix possis (tom. ii. epist. ii. p. 998). Theod. (Claud. in iv. Cons. Hon. 266, c.) exhorts his son to moderate his anger.
The Christians and Pagans agreed in believing that the sedition of Antioch was excited by the demons. A gigantic woman (says Sozomen, l. vii. c. 23) paraded the streets with a scourge in her hand. An old man (says Libanius, Orat. xii. p. 396 [or. xix. in Reiske’s ed., vol. 7, p. 626 seq. ]) transformed himself into a youth, then a boy, c.
Zosimus, in his short and disingenuous account (l. iv. p. 258, 259 [c. 41]), is certainly mistaken in sending Libanius himself to Constantinople. His own orations fix him at Antioch.
Libanius (Orat. i. p. 6, edit. Venet.) declares that, under such a reign, the fear of a massacre was groundless and absurd, especially in the emperor’s absence; for his presence, according to the eloquent slave, might have given a sanction to the most bloody acts.
Laodicea, on the sea-coast, sixty-five miles from Antioch (see Noris, Epoch. Syro-Maced. Dissert. iii. p. 230). The Antiochians were offended that the dependent city of Seleucia should presume to intercede for them.
As the days of the tumult depend on the movable festival of Easter, they can only be determined by the previous determination of the year. The year 387 has been preferred, after a laborious inquiry, by Tillemont (Hist. des Emper. tom. v. p. 741-744) and Montfaucon (Chrysostom, tom. xiii. p. 105-110). [So Güldenpenning and Ifland; but Baronius and Clinton give 388. Cp. Arnold Hug, Studien aus dem classischen Alterthum, p. 54.]
Chrysostom opposes their courage, which was not attended with much risk, to the cowardly flight of the Cynics.
The sedition of Antioch is represented in a lively, and almost dramatic, manner by two orators, who had their respective shares of interest and merit. See Libanius (Orat. xiv. xv. [ leg. xii. xiii.] p. 389-420, edit. Morel., Orat. i. p. 1-14, Venet. 1754 and the twenty orations of St. Chrysostom, de Statuis (tom. ii. p. 1-225, edit. Montfaucon). I do not pretend to much personal acquaintance with Chrysostom; but Tillem. (Hist. des Emper. tom. v. p. 263-283) and Hermant (Vie de St. Chrysostome, tom. i. p. 137-224) had read him with pious curiosity and diligence. [The dates which A. Hug (Antiochia und der Aufstand des Jahres 387 n. Chr.) has endeavoured to establish are not inserted in the present edition.]
[“Cause” in sense of occasion. But the true cause was discontent at the practice of quartering barbarian soldiers in Antioch. Cp. John Malalas, p. 347.]
[Theodoret, v. 17; on the authority of Philostorgius?]
The original evidence of Ambrose (tom. ii. epist. li. p. 998), Augustin (de Civitat. Dei, v. 26), and Paulinus (in Vit. Ambros. c. 24) is delivered in vague expressions of horror and pity. It is illustrated by the subsequent and unequal testimonies of Sozomen (l. vii. c. 25), Theodoret (l. v. c. 17), Theophanes (Chronograph. p. 62), Cedrenus (p. 317 [p. 556, ed. Bonn]), and Zonaras (tom. ii. l. xiii. p. 34 [c. 18]). Zosimus alone, the partial enemy of Theodosius, most unaccountably passes over in silence the worst of his actions. [Further, Rufinus, ii. 18; Moses Choren. iii. 37; and Malalas, p. 347.]
See the whole transaction in Ambrose (tom. ii. epist. xl. xli. p. 946-956) and his biographer Paulinus (c. 23). Bayle and Barbeyrac (Morales des Pères, c. xvii. p. 325, c.) have justly condemned the archbishop. [The sentence was that the bishop should rebuild the synagogue and pay the value of the destroyed treasures.]
His sermon is a strange allegory of Jeremiah’s rod, of an almond-tree, of the woman who washed and anointed the feet of Christ. But the peroration is direct and personal.
Hodie, Episcope, de me proposuisti. Ambrose modestly confessed it: but he sternly reprimanded Timasius, general of the horse and foot, who had presumed to say that the monks of Callinicum deserved punishment.
Yet, five years afterwards, when Theodosius was absent from his spiritual guide, he tolerated the Jews and condemned the destruction of their synagogue. Cod. Theodos. l. xvi. tit. viii. leg. 9, with Godefroy’s commentary, tom. vi. p. 225.
[A letter from the Bishop of Thessalonica, informing Ambrose, was published (from a Bodl. cod.) by Gaisford in Theodoret, v. 18; genuineness uncertain.]
Ambros. tom. ii. epist. li. p. 997-1001. His Epistle is a miserable rhapsody on a noble subject. Ambrose could act better than he could write. His compositions are destitute of taste, or genius; without the spirit of Tertullian, the copious elegance of Lactantius, the lively wit of Jerom, or the grave energy of Augustin.
According to the discipline of St. Basil (Canon lvi.) the voluntary homicide was four years a mourner; five an hearer; seven in a prostrate state; and four in a standing posture. I have the original (Beveridge, Pandect. tom. ii. p. 47-151) and a translation (Chardon, Hist. des Sacremens, tom. iv. p. 219-277) of the Canonical Epistles of St. Basil.
The penance of Theodosius is authenticated by Ambrose (tom. vi. de Obit. Theodos. c. 34, p. 1207), Augustin (de Civitat. Dei, v. 26), and Paulinus (in Vit. Ambros. c. 24). Socrates is ignorant; Sozomen (l. vii. c. 25) concise [but places it after revolt of Eugenius]; and the copious narrative of Theodoret (l. v. c. 18) must be used with precaution.
Codex Theodos. l. ix. tit. xl. leg. 13. The date and circumstances of this law are perplexed with difficulties; but I feel myself inclined to favour the honest efforts of Tillemont (Hist. des Emp. tom. v. p. 721) and Pagi (Critica, tom. i. p. 578).
Un prince qui aime la religion, et qui la craint, est un lion qui cède à la main qui le flatte, ou à la voix qui l’appaise. Esprit des Lois, l. xxiv. c. 2.
Τον̂το περὶ τοὺς εὐεργέτας καθη̂κον ἔδοξεν ε[Editor: illegible character]ναι, is the niggard praise of Zosimus himself (l. iv. p. 267 [c. 48]). Augustin says, with some happiness of expression, Valentinianum . . . misericordissima veneratione restituit.
Sozomen, l. vii. c. 14. His chronology is very irregular. [She seems to have died just before the defeat of Maximus, Rufinus, Hist. Ecc. ii. 17. Cp. Chron. Gall. (Pseudo-Prosper) 452, ap. Mommsen, Chr. Min. i. p. 648. Otherwise Zosimus, iv. 47.]
See Ambrose (tom. ii. de Obit. Valentinian. c. 15, c. p. 1178; c. 36, c. p. 1184). When the young emperor gave an entertainment, he fasted himself; he refused to see an handsome actress, c. Since he ordered his wild beasts to be killed, it is ungenerous in Philostorgius (l. xi. c. 1) to reproach him with the love of that amusement.
Zosimus (l. iv. p. 275 [c. 53]) praises the enemy of Theodosius. But he is detested by Socrates (l. v. c. 25) and Orosius (l. vii. c. 35). [Acc. to John of Antioch (Müller, F.H.G. iv. fr. 187), Arbogast was son of Bauto, and nephew of Richomer.]
Gregory of Tours (l. ii. c. 9, p. 165, in the second volume of the Historians of France) has preserved a curious fragment of Sulpicius Alexander, an historian far more valuable than himself.
[He tore it in bits with his nails, according to John of Antioch, loc. cit. ]
Godefroy (Dissertat. ad Philostorg. p. 429-434) has diligently collected all the circumstances of the death of Valentinian II. The variations and the ignorance of contemporary writers prove that it was secret. [Mr. Hodgkin discusses the evidence (Italy and her Invaders, i. p. 590, note F), which he thinks does not exclude the hypothesis of suicide, though he agrees that there was probably foul play. The passage in Epiphanius, De Mens. 20 (which gives the date), is the most important: εὑρεθεὶς ἄϕνω ἐ ντῷ παλατίῳ πεπνιγημένος, ὡς λόγος.]
De Obitu Valentinian. tom. ii. p. 1173-1196. He is forced to speak a discreet and obscure language; yet he is much bolder than any layman, or perhaps any other ecclesiastic, would have dared to be.
See c. 51, p. 1188; c. 75, p. 1193. Dom. Chardon (Hist. des Sacremens, tom. i. p. 86), who owns that St. Ambrose most strenuously maintains the indispensable necessity of baptism, labours to reconcile the contradiction.
Quem [ leg. hunc] sibi Germanus famulum delegerat exul, is the contemptuous expression of Claudian (iv. Cons. Hon. 74). Eugenius professed Christianity; but his secret attachment to Paganism (Sozomen, l. vii. c. 22. Philostorg. l. xi. c. 2) is probable in a grammarian, and would secure the friendship of Zosimus (l. iv. p. 276, 277 [c. 54]). [Gibbon has not sufficiently insisted on the paganism as part of the political programme of Eugenius (cp. chap. xxviii. n. 60).]
[This inference from Philostorgius (xi. 2, μάγιστρος) is not certain.]
Zosimus (l. iv. p. 278 [c. 55]) mentions this embassy; but he is diverted by another story from relating the event. [But see c. 57 ad init.]
Συνετάραξεν ἡ τούτου γαμετὴ Γάλλα τὰ βασίλεια τὸν ἀδελϕὸν ὀλοϕυρομένη. Zosim. l. iv. p. 277 [ ib. ]. He afterwards says (p. 280 [c. 57]) that Galla died in childbed; and intimates that the affliction of her husband was extreme, but short.
Lycopolis is the modern Siut, or Osiot, a town of Said, about the size of St. Denys, which drives a profitable trade with the kingdom of Sennaar, and has a very convenient fountain, “cujus potu signa virginitatis eripiuntur.” See D’Anville, Description de l’Egypte, p. 181. Abulfeda, Descript. Ægypt. p. 14, and the curious annotations, p. 25, 92, of his editor Michaelis.
The life of John of Lycopolis is described by his two friends, Rufinus (l. ii. c. i. p. 449) and Palladius (Hist. Lausiac. c. 43, p. 738), in Rosweyde’s great Collection of the Vitæ Patrum. [See Acta Sctorum, 27 Mart. iii. 693 sqq. ] Tillemont (Mém. Ecclés. tom. x. p. 718, 720) has settled the Chronology.
Sozomen, l. vii. c. 22. Claudian (in Eutrop. l. i. 312) mentions the eunuch’s journey: but he most contemptuously derides the Egyptian dreams and the oracles of the Nile.
Zosimus, l. iv. p. 280 [c. 57]. Socrates, l. vii. 10. Alaric himself (de Bell. Getico, 524) dwells with more complacency on his early exploits against the Romans.
. . . Tot Augustos Hebro qui teste fugavi.
Yet his vanity could scarcely have proved this plurality of flying emperors.
Claudian (in iv. Cons. Honor. 77, c.) contrasts the military plans of the two usurpers: —
The Frigidus, a small though memorable stream in the country of Goretz, now called the Vipao [Wipbach], falls into the Sontius, or Lisonzo, above Aquileia, some miles from the Hadriatic. See D’Anville’s Ancient and Modern Maps, and the Italia Antiqua of Cluverius (tom. i. p. 188). [Mr. Hodgkin thinks the battle was fought near Heidenschafft, i. p. 578.]
Claudian’s wit is intolerable: the snow was dyed red; the cold river smoked; and the channel must have been choked with carcases, if the current had not been swelled with blood.
Theodoret affirms that St. John and St. Philip appeared to the waking, or sleeping, emperor, on horseback, c. This is the first instance of apostolic chivalry, which afterwards became so popular in Spain and in the Crusades.
These famous lines of Claudian (in iii. Cons. Honor. 93, c. ad 396) are alleged by his contemporaries, Augustin and Orosius; who suppress the Pagan deity of Æolus; and add some circumstances from the information of eye-witnesses. Within four months after the victory, it was compared by Ambrose to the miraculous victories of Moses and Joshua.
The events of this civil war are gathered from Ambrose (tom. ii. epist. lxii. p. 1022 [cp. Ep. 57]), Paulinus (in Vit. Ambros. c. 26-34), Augustin (de Civitat. Dei, v. 26), Orosius (l. vii. c. 35), Sozomen (l. vii. c. 24), Theodoret (l. v. c. 24), Zosimus (l. iv. p. 281, 282 [c. 58]), Claudian (in iii. Cons. Hon. 63-105, in iv. Cons. Hon. 70-117), and the Chronicles published by Scaliger. [See also Philostorg. xi. 2; Socrates, v. 25; Victor, Epit.; and cp. Sievers, Studien, p. 326 sqq. Cp. Appendix 2.]
This disease, ascribed by Socrates (l. v. c. 26) to the fatigues of war, is represented by Philostorgius (l. xi. c. 2) as the effect of sloth and intemperance: for which Photius calls him an impudent liar (Godefroy, Dissert. p. 438).
Zosimus supposes that the boy Honorius accompanied his father (l. iv. p. 280 [c. 58]). Yet the quanto flagrabant pectora voto, is all that flattery would allow to a contemporary poet; who clearly describes the emperor’s refusal and the journey of Honorius, after the victory (Claudian in iii. Cons. 78-125).
Zosimus, l. iv. p. 244 [c. 33].
Vegetius, de Re Militari, l. i. c. 10. The series of calamities which he marks compel us to believe that the Hero to whom he dedicates his book is the last and most inglorious of the Valentinians. [This view is maintained by O. Seeck (Hermes, 11, 61 sqq. ), who contests the usual identification with Theodosius i. Theodosius ii. has also been conjectured. The minor limit for the date of the Epitome rei Militaris is ad 450 (determined by the entry in some MSS.: Fl. Eutropius emendavi sine exemplario Constantinopolim Valentiniano Aug. vii. et Abieni). The work is by no means critical or trustworthy. Cp. Förster, de fide Vegetii, 1879.]
[Beugnot, Histoire de la déstruction du paganisme, 1835; Chastel, Hist. de la déstr. du pag. dans l’empire d’orient, 1850; Lasaulx, Der Untergang des Hellenismus, 1854; G. Boissier, La fin du paganisme (2 vols.), 1891.]
St. Ambrose (tom. ii. de Obit. Theodos. p. 1208) expressly praises and recommends the zeal of Josiah in the destruction of idolatry. The language of Julius Firmicus Maternus on the same subject (de Errore Profan. Relig. p. 467, edit. Gronov.) is piously inhuman. Nec filio jubet (the Mosaic Law) parci, nec fratri, et per amatam conjugem gladium vindicem ducit, c.
Bayle (tom. ii. p. 406, in his Commentaire Philosophique) justifies and limits these intolerant laws by the temporal reign of Jehovah over the Jews. The attempt is laudable.
See the outlines of the Roman hierarchy in Cicero (de Legibus, ii. 7, 8), Livy (i. 20), Dionysius Halicarnassensis (l. ii. p. 119-129, edit. Hudson), Beaufort (République Romaine, tom. i. p. 1-90), and Moyle (vol. i. p. 10-55). The last is the work of an English Whig, as well as of a Roman antiquary. [The number of Pontiffs and Augurs first reached fifteen in the time of Sulla. A sixteenth Augur was added by Julius Cæsar. The emperor (after ad 29) had power to create additional Augurs.]
These mystic and perhaps imaginary symbols have given birth to various fables and conjectures. It seems probable that the Palladium was a small statue (three cubits and a half high) of Minerva, with a lance and distaff; that it was usually enclosed in a seria, or barrel; and that a similar barrel was placed by its side to disconcert curiosity or sacrilege. See Mezeriac (Comment. sur les Epitres d’Ovide, tom. i. p. 60-66) and Lipsius (tom. iii. p. 610, de Vestâ, c. c. 10).
[Cp. Lucan, i. 602. The Epulo was called Septemvir epulonum.]
[In the later Republic there were also a number of minor Flamens; in all fifteen. For some of the names, see Varro, L.L. vii. 44.]
Cicero frankly (ad Atticum, l. ii. epist. 5) or indirectly (ad Familiar. l. xv. epist. 4) confesses, that the Augurate is the supreme object of his wishes. Pliny is proud to tread in the footsteps of Cicero (l. iv. epist. 8), and the chain of tradition might be continued from history and marbles.
Zosimus, l. iv. p. 249, 250 [c. 36]. I have suppressed the foolish pun about Pontifex and Maximus. [Cp. Hodgkin, i. 400. For probable date (375 ad ) see Mommsen, Staatsrecht, ii. 2 p. 1108. In an inscr. of 370 ad Gratian is Pont. Max.; C.I.L. vi. 1175.]
[Compare C.I.L. 6, 749: antra facit sumptusque tuos nec Roma requirit.]
This statue was transported from Tarentum to Rome, placed in the Curia Julia by Cæsar, and decorated by Augustus with the spoils of Egypt.
Prudentius ([in Symm.] l. ii. in initio) has drawn a very awkward portrait of Victory; but the curious reader will obtain more satisfaction from Montfaucon’s Antiquities (tom. i. p. 341).
See Suetonius (in August. c. 35) and the Exordium of Pliny’s Panegyric.
These facts are mutually allowed by the two advocates, Symmachus and Ambrose.
The Notitia Urbis, more recent than Constantine, does not find one Christian church worthy to be named among the edifices of the city. Ambrose (tom. ii. epist. xvii. p. 825) deplores the public scandals of Rome, which continually offended the eyes, the ears, and the nostrils of the faithful.
Ambrose repeatedly affirms, in contradiction to common sense (Moyle’s Works, vol. ii. p. 147), that the Christians had a majority in the senate.
The first ( ad 382) to Gratian, who refused them audience. The second ( ad 384) to Valentinian, when the field was disputed by Symmachus and Ambrose. The third ( ad 388 [so Güldenpenning, p. 172 ( ad 388-9); but Seeck puts it in 391, Chronol. Symmach. in M.G.H. Auct. Ant. vi. p. lviii. See Prosper, de Prom. Dei, iii. 38]) to Theodosius; and the fourth ( ad 392 [Ambrose, ep. 57]) to Valentinian. Lardner (Heathen Testimonies, vol. iv. p. 372-399) fairly represents the whole transaction.
Symmachus, who was invested with all the civil and sacerdotal honours, represented the emperor under the two characters of Pontifex Maximus and Princeps Senatus. See the proud description at the head of his works.
As if any one, says Prudentius (in Symmach. i. 639), should dig in the mud with an instrument of gold and ivory. Even saints, and polemic saints, treat this adversary with respect and civility. [One of the chief pagan Senators was Flavianus, Præt. Præf. of Italy. There is extant a virulent attack on him of unknown authorship printed in the Revue Archéologique, 1868, June. Cp. Mommsen, in Hermes, vol. 4, 1870, p. 350 sqq. ]
[ Videro. ]
See the fifty-fourth epistle of the tenth book of Symmachus [ = x. iii. ed. Seeck]. In the form and disposition of his ten books of epistles, he imitated the younger Pliny; whose rich and florid style he was supposed, by his friends, to equal or excel (Macrob. Saturnal. l. v. c. 1). But the luxuriancy of Symmachus consists of barren leaves, without fruits, and even without flowers. Few facts, and few sentiments, can be extracted from his verbose correspondence.
See Ambrose (tom. ii. epist. xvii. xviii. p. 825-833). The former of these epistles is a short caution; the latter is a formal reply to the petition or libel of Symmachus. The same ideas are more copiously expressed in the poetry, if it may deserve that name, of Prudentius; who composed his two books against Symmachus ( ad 404) while that Senator was still alive. It is whimsical enough that Montesquieu (Considérations, c. c. xix. tom. iii. p. 487) should overlook the two professed antagonists of Symmachus; and amuse himself with descanting on the more remote and indirect confutations of Orosius, St. Augustin, and Salvian.
See Prudentius (in Symmach. l. i. 545, c.). The Christian agrees with the Pagan Zosimus (l. iv. p. 283 [c. 59]) in placing this visit of Theodosius after the second civil war, gemini bis victor cæde Tyranni (l. i. 410). But the time and circumstances are better suited to his first triumph.
[This can hardly be inferred from the lines of Prudentius.]
Prudentius, after proving that the sense of the senate is declared by a legal majority, proceeds to say (609, c.):—
Zosimus ascribes to the conscript fathers an heathenish courage, which few of them are found to possess.
Jerom specifies the pontiff Albinus, who was surrounded with such a believing family of children and grand-children as would have been sufficient to convert even Jupiter himself; an extraordinary proselyte! (tom. i. ad Lætam, p. 54 [ iuvenem is the reading of the MSS.; and the correction Iovem is unwarranted. Ep. 107, Migne, Hieron. i. p. 868]).
The fancy of Prudentius is warmed and elevated by victory.
Prudentius, after he has described the conversion of the senate and people, asks, with some truth and confidence,
Jerom exults in the desolation of the capitol, and the other temples of Rome (tom. i. p. 54 [ep. 107], tom. ii. p. 95).
Libanius (Orat. pro Templis, p. 10, Genev. 1634, published by James Godefroy, and now extremely scarce) accuses Valentinian and Valens of prohibiting sacrifices. Some partial order may have been issued by the Eastern emperor; but the idea of any general law is contradicted by the silence of the Code and the evidence of ecclesiastical history.
See his laws in the Theodosian Code, l. xvi. tit. x. leg. 7-11.
Homer’s sacrifices are not accompanied with any inquisition of entrails (see Feithius, Antiquitat. Homer. l. i. c. 10, 16). The Tuscans, who produced the first Haruspices, subdued both the Greeks and the Romans (Cicero de Divinatione, ii. 23).
Zosimus, l. iv. p. 245, 249 [c. 37]. Theodoret, l. v. c. 21. Idatius in Chron. Prosper Aquitan. [De promissionibus et prædictionibus Dei] l. iii. c. 38, apud Baronium, Annal. Eccles. ad 389, No. 52. Libanius (pro Templis, p. 10) labours to prove that the commands of Theodosius were not direct and positive.
Cod. Theodos. l. xvi. tit. x. leg. 8, 18. There is room to believe that this temple of Edessa, which Theodosius wished to save for civil uses, was soon afterwards a heap of ruins (Libanius pro Templis, p. 26, 27, and Godefroy’s notes, p. 59).
See this curious oration of Libanius pro Templis, pronounced, or rather composed, about the year 390. I have consulted, with advantage, Dr. Lardner’s version and remarks (Heathen Testimonies, vol. iv. p. 135-163). [περὶ τω̂ν ἱερω̂ν, or. xxviii., Reiske, ii. 155 sqq., composed between 385 (Cod. Th. xvi. 10, 9, cp. Lib. 163, c.) and 391 (Cod. Th. xvi. 10, 10, cp. Lib. 180, 182). But 388 may be the prior limit, cp. Sievers, Das Leben des Libanius, p. 192.]
See the life of Martin, by Sulpicius Severus, c. 9-14. The saint once mistook (as Don Quixote might have done) an harmless funeral for an idolatrous procession, and imprudently committed a miracle.
Compare Sozomen (l. vii. c. 15) with Theodoret (l. v. c. 21). Between them, they relate the crusade and death of Marcellus.
Libanius pro Templis, p. 10-13. He rails at these black-garbed men, the Christian monks, who eat more than elephants. Poor elephants! they are temperate animals.
Prosper Aquitan. l. iii. c. 38, apud Baronium; Annal. Eccles. ad 389, No. 58, c. The temple had been shut some time, and the access to it was overgrown with brambles.
Donatus, Roma Antiqua et Nova, l. iv. c. 4, p. 468. This consecration was performed by Pope Boniface IV. I am ignorant of the favourable circumstances which had preserved the Pantheon above two hundred years after the reign of Theodosius.
Sophronius composed a recent and separate history (Jerom, in Script. Eccles. tom. i. p. 303), which had furnished materials to Socrates (l. v. c. 16), Theodoret (l. v. c. 22), and Rufinus (l. ii. c. 22). Yet the last, who had been at Alexandria before and after the event, may deserve the credit of an original witness.
Gerard Vossius (Opera, tom. v. p. 80, and de Idololatriâ, l. i. c. 29) strives to support the strange notion of the Fathers; that the patriarch Joseph was adored in Egypt as the bull Apis and the god Serapis.
Origo dei nondum nostris celebrata. Ægyptiorum antistites sic memorant, c. Tacit. Hist. iv. 83. The Greeks, who had travelled into Egypt, were alike ignorant of this new deity. [Cp. Mahaffy, Empire of the Ptolemies, p. 72-74.]
Macrobius, Saturnal. l. i. c. 7. Such a living fact decisively proves his foreign extraction.
At Rome Isis and Serapis were united in the same temple. The precedency which the queen assumed may seem to betray her unequal alliance with the stranger of Pontus. But the superiority of the female sex was established in Egypt as a civil and religious institution (Diodor. Sicul. tom. i. l. 1, p. 31, edit. Wesseling), and the same order is observed in Plutarch’s Treatise of Isis and Osiris; whom he identifies with Serapis.
Ammianus (xxii. 16). The Expositio totius Mundi (p. 8, in Hudson’s Geograph. Minor. tom. iii.) and Rufinus (l. ii. c. 22) celebrate the Serapeum, as one of the wonders of the world.
See Mémoires de l’Acad. des Inscriptions, tom. ix. p. 397-416. The old library of the Ptolemies was totally consumed in Cæsar’s Alexandrian war. Marc Antony gave the whole collection of Pergamus (200,000 volumes) to Cleopatra, as the foundation of the new library of Alexandria. [See Appendix 3.]
Libanius (pro Templis, p. 21) indiscreetly provokes his Christian masters by this insulting remark.
We may choose between the date of Marcellinus ( ad 389) or that of Prosper ( ad 391). Tillemont (Hist. des Emp. tom. v. p. 310, 756) prefers the former, and Pagi the latter [which is probably right; so Gothofredus, ad Cod. Th. xvi. 10, 11; Güldenpenning, p. 189. Clinton decides for end of 390 ad ].
Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. xi. p. 441-500. The ambiguous situation of Theophilus, — a saint, as the friend of Jerom; a devil, as the enemy of Chrysostom — produces a sort of impartiality; yet, upon the whole, the balance is justly inclined against him.
[A Mithreum: cp. Socrates, l. c.]
Lardner (Heathen Testimonies, vol. iv. p. 411) has alleged a beautiful passage from Suidas, or rather from Damascius, which shews the devout and virtuous Olympius, not in the light of a warrior, but of a prophet.
[Unde quamlibet hodieque in templis extent, quae et] nos vidimus, armaria librorum, quibus direptis exinanita ea a nostris hominibus nostris temporibus memorant [memorent]. Orosius, l. vi. c. 15, p. 421, edit. Havercamp [p. 216, ed. Zangemeister]. Though a bigot, and a controversial writer, Orosius seems to blush. [See Appendix 3.]
Eunapius, in the lives of Antonius [ leg. Antoninus] and Ædesius, execrates the sacrilegious rapine of Theophilus. Tillemont (Mém. Ecclés. tom. xiii. p. 453) quotes an epistle of Isidore of Pelusium, which reproaches the primate with the idolatrous worship of gold, the auri sacra fames.
Rufinus names the priest of Saturn, who, in the character of the god, familiarly conversed with many pious ladies of quality; till he betrayed himself, in a moment of transport, when he could not disguise the tone of his voice. The authentic and impartial narrative of Æschines (see Bayle, Dictionnaire Critique, Scamandre ) and the adventure of Mundus (Joseph. Antiquitat. Judaic. l. xviii. c. 3, p. 877, edit. Havercamp) may prove that such amorous frauds have been practised with success.
See the images of Serapis, in Montfaucon (tom. ii. p. 297), but the description of Macrobius (Saturnal. l. i. c. 20) is much more picturesque and satisfactory.
(Lucan. iii. 429.) “Is it true (said Augustus to a veteran of Italy, at whose house he supped) that the man who gave the first blow to the golden statue of Anaitis was instantly deprived of his eyes, and of his life?” “ I was that man (replied the clear-sighted veteran), and you now sup on one of the legs of the goddess.” (Plin. Hist. Natur. xxxiii. 24.)
The history of the Reformation affords frequent examples of the sudden change from superstition to contempt.
Sozomen, l. vii. c. 20. I have supplied the measure. The same standard of the inundation, and consequently of the cubit, has uniformly subsisted since the time of Herodotus. See Fréret, in the Mém. de l’Académie des Inscriptions, tom. xvi. p. 344-353. Greaves’s Miscellaneous Works, vol. i. p. 233. The Egyptian cubit is about twenty-two inches of the English measure.
Libanius (pro Templis, p. 15, 16, 17) pleads their cause with gentle and insinuating rhetoric. From the earliest age, such feasts had enlivened the country; and those of Bacchus (Georgic ii. 380) had produced the theatre of Athens. See Godefroy, ad loc. Liban. and Codex Theodos. tom. vi. p. 284.
Honorius tolerated these rustic festivals ( ad 399). “Absque ullo sacrificio, atque ullâ superstitione damnabili.” But nine years afterwards he found it necessary to reiterate and enforce the same proviso (Codex Theodos. l. xvi. tit. x. leg. 17, 19). [The ordinance of certain heathen feasts in Campania, published by Imperial sanction in 387 ad , is very instructive, proving that Paganism of a kind was tolerated by Theodosius. See Schiller, ii. p. 435.]
Cod. Theodos. l. xvi. tit. x. leg. 12. Jortin (Remarks on Eccles. History, vol. iv. p. 134) censures, with becoming asperity, the style and sentiments of this intolerant law.
Such a charge should not be lightly made; but it may surely be justified by the authority of St. Augustin, who thus addresses the Donatists: “Quis nostrûm, quis vestrûm non laudat leges ab Imperatoribus datas adversus sacrificia Paganorum? Et certe longe ibi pœna severior constituta est; illius quippe impietatis capitale supplicium est.” Epist. xciii. No. 10, quoted by Le Clerc (Bibliothèque Choisie, tom. viii. p. 277), who adds some judicious reflections on the intolerance of the victorious Christians.
Orosius, l. vii. c. 28, p. 537. Augustin (Enarrat. in Psal. cxl. apud Lardner, Heathen Testimonies, vol. iv. p. 458) insults their cowardice. “Quis eorum comprehensus est in sacrificio (cum his legibus ista prohiberentur) et non negavit?”
Libanius (pro Templis, p. 17, 18) mentions, without censure, the occasional conformity, and as it were theatrical play, of these hypocrites.
Libanius concludes his apology (p. 32) by declaring to the emperor that, unless he expressly warrants the destruction of the temples, ἴσθι τοὺς τω̂ν ἀγρω̂ν δεσπότας, καὶ αὑτοɩ̂ς, καὶ τῷ νόμῳ βοηθήσοντας, the proprietors will defend themselves and the laws.
Paulinus, in Vit. Ambros. c. 26. Augustin de Civitat. Dei, l. v. c. 26. Theodoret, l. v. c. 24.
Libanius suggests the form of a persecuting edict, which Theodosius might enact (pro Templis, p. 32): a rash joke, and a dangerous experiment. Some princes would have taken his advice.
Libanius (pro Templis, p. 32) is proud that Theodosius should thus distinguish a man, who even in his presence would swear by Jupiter. Yet this presence seems to be no more than a figure of rhetoric.
Zosimus, who styles himself Count and Ex-advocate of the Treasury, reviles, with partial and indecent bigotry, the Christian princes, and even the father of his sovereign. His work must have been privately circulated, since it escaped the invectives of the ecclesiastical historians prior to Evagrius (l. iii. c. 40-42), who lived towards the end of the sixth century. [For date of Zosimus, see above, vol. ii. Appendix 10, p. 365.]
Yet the Pagans of Africa complained that the times would not allow them to answer with freedom the City of God; nor does St. Augustin (v. 26) deny the charge.
The Moors of Spain, who secretly preserved the Mahometan religion above a century, under the tyranny of the Inquisition, possessed the Koran, with the peculiar use of the Arabic tongue. See the curious and honest story of their expulsion in Geddes (Miscellanies, vol. i. p. 1-198).
Paganos qui supersunt, quanquam jam nullos esse credamus, c. Cod. Theodos. l. xvi. tit. x. leg. 22, ad 423. The younger Theodosius was afterwards satisfied that his judgment had been somewhat premature.
See Eunapius, in the life of the sophist Ædesius [p. 65, ed. Commelin]; in that of Eustathius he foretells the ruin of Paganism, καί τι μυθω̂δες, καὶ ἀειδὲς σκότος τυραννήσει τὰ ἐπὶ γη̂ς κάλλιστα.
Caius (apud Euseb. Hist. Eccles. l. ii. c. 25), a Roman presbyter, who lived in the time of Zephyrinus ( ad 202-219), is an early witness of this superstitious practice.
Chrysostom. Quod Christus sit Deus. Tom. i. nov. edit. No. 9. I am indebted for this quotation to Benedict the XIV.th’s pastoral letter on the jubilee of the year 1750. See the curious and entertaining letters of M. Chais, tom. iii.
Male facit ergo Romanus episcopus? qui, super mortuorum hominum, Petri et Pauli, secundum nos, ossa veneranda . . . offert Domino sacrificia, et tumulos eorum Christi arbitratur altaria. Jerom. tom. ii. advers. Vigilant. p. 153 [c. 8, ed. Migne, ii. p. 346].
Jerom (tom. ii. p. 122 [c. Vigil. c. 5]) bears witness to these translations, which are neglected by the ecclesiastical historians. The passion of St. Andrew at Patræ is described in an epistle from the clergy of Achaia, which Baronius (Annal. Eccles. ad 60, No. 35) wishes to believe and Tillemont is forced to reject. St. Andrew was adopted as the spiritual founder of Constantinople (Mém. Ecclés. tom. i. p. 317-323, 588-594).
Jerom (tom. ii. p. 122) pompously describes the translation of Samuel, which is noticed in the chronicles of the times.
The presbyter Vigilantius, the protestant of his age, firmly, though ineffectually, withstood the superstition of monks, relics, saints, fasts, c., for which Jerom compares him to the Hydra, Cerberus, the Centaurs, c., and considers him only as the organ of the demon (tom. ii. p. 120-126). Whoever will peruse the controversy of St. Jerom and Vigilantius, and St. Augustin’s account of the miracles of St. Stephen, may speedily gain some idea of the spirit of the Fathers. [Cp. Appendix 4.]
M. de Beausobre (Hist. du Manichéisme, tom. ii. p. 648) has applied a worldly sense to the pious observation of the clergy of Smyrna who carefully preserved the relics of St. Polycarp the martyr.
Martin of Tours (see his Life, c. 8, by Sulpicius Severus) extorted this confession from the mouth of the dead man. The error is allowed to be natural; the discovery is supposed to be miraculous. Which of the two was likely to happen most frequently?
Lucian composed in Greek his original narrative, which has been translated by Avitus, and published by Baronius (Annal. Eccles. ad 415, No. 7-16). The Benedictine editors of St. Augustin have given (at the end of the work de Civitate Dei) two several copies, with many various readings. It is the character of falsehood to be loose and inconsistent. The most incredible parts of the legend are smoothed and softened by Tillemont (Mém. Ecclés. tom. ii. p. 9, c.).
A phial of St. Stephen’s blood was annually liquefied at Naples, till he was superseded by St. Januarius (Ruinart. Hist. Persecut. Vandal. p. 529).
Augustin composed the two and twenty books de Civitate Dei in the space of thirteen years, ad 413-426 (Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. xiv. p. 608, c.). His learning is too often borrowed, and his arguments are too often his own; but the whole work claims the merit of a magnificent design, vigorously, and not unskilfully, executed.
See Augustin, de Civitat. Dei, l. xxii. c. 22, and the Appendix, which contains two books of St. Stephen’s miracles, by Evodius, bishop of Uzalis. Freculphus (apud Basnage, Hist. des Juifs, tom. viii. p. 249) has preserved a Gallic or Spanish proverb, “Whoever pretends to have read all the miracles of St. Stephen, he lies.”
Burnet (de Statu Mortuorum, p. 56-84) collects the opinions of the fathers, as far as they assert the sleep, or repose, of human souls till the day of judgment. He afterwards exposes (p. 91, c.) the inconveniencies which must arise, if they possessed a more active and sensible existence.
Vigilantius placed the souls of the prophets and martyrs either in the bosom of Abraham (in loco refrigerii) or else under the altar of God. Nec posse suis tumulis et ubi voluerunt adesse præsentes. But Jerom (tom. ii. p. 122) sternly refutes this blasphemy. Tu Deo leges pones? Tu apostolis vincula injicies, ut usque ad diem judicii teneantur custodiâ, nec sint cum Domino suo; de quibus scriptum est, Sequntur Agnum quocunque vadit. Si Agnus ubique, ergo, et hi, qui cum Agno sunt, ubique esse credendi sunt. Et cum diabolus et dæmones toto vagentur in orbe, c.
Fleury, Discours sur l’Hist. Ecclésiastique, iii. p. 80.
At Minorca, the relics of St. Stephen converted, in eight days, 540 Jews, with the help, indeed, of some severities, such as burning the synagogue, driving the obstinate infidels to starve among the rocks, c. See the original letter of Severus, bishop of Minorca (ad calcem St. Augustin. de Civ. Dei), and the judicious remarks of Basnage (tom. viii. p. 245-251).
Mr. Hume (Essays, vol. ii. p. 434) observes, like a philosopher, the natural flux and reflux of polytheism and theism.
D’Aubigné (see his own Mémoires, p. 156-160) frankly offered, with the consent of the Huguenot ministers, to allow the first 400 years as the rule of faith. The Cardinal du Perron haggled for forty years more, which were indiscreetly given. Yet neither party would have found their account in this foolish bargain.
The worship practised and inculcated by Tertullian, Lactantius, Arnobius, c., is so extremely pure and spiritual that their declamations against the Pagan, sometimes glance against the Jewish, ceremonies.
Faustus the Manichæan accuses the Catholics of idolatry. Vertitis idola in martyres . . . quos votis similibus colitis. M. de Beausobre (Hist. Critique du Manichéisme, tom. ii. p. 629-700), a protestant, but a philosopher, has represented, with candour and learning, the introduction of Christian idolatry in the fourth and fifth centuries.
The resemblance of superstition, which could not be imitated, might be traced from Japan to Mexico. Warburton had seized this idea, which he distorts, by rendering it too general and absolute (Divine Legation, vol. iv. p. 126, c.).
The imitation of Paganism is the subject of Dr. Middleton’s agreeable letter from Rome. Warburton’s animadversions obliged him to connect (vol. iii. p. 120-132) the history of the two religions, and to prove the antiquity of the Christian copy. [Compare transformation of birthday of Mithra into that of Christ: Momsen, C.I.L. i. p. 409.]
Alecto, envious of the public felicity, convenes an infernal synod. Megæra recommends her pupil Rufinus, and excites him to deeds of mischief, c. But there is as much difference between Claudian’s fury and that of Virgil, as between the characters of Turnus and Rufinus.
It is evident (Tillemont, Hist. des Emp. tom. v. p. 770), though de Marca is ashamed of his countryman, that Rufinus was born at Elusa, the metropolis of Novempopulania, now a small village of Gascony (d’Anville, Notice de l’Ancienne Gaule, p. 219).
Philostorgius, l. xi. c. 3, with Godefroy’s Dissert. p. 440.
A passage of Suidas is expressive of his profound dissimulation: βαθυγνώμων ἄνθρωπος καὶ κρυψίνους. [F.H.G. iv. p. 42.]
Zosimus, l. iv. p. 272, 273 [c. 51].
Zosimus, who describes the fall of Tatian and his son (l. iv. p. 273, 274 [c. 52]), asserts their innocence; and even his testimony may outweigh the charges of their enemies (Cod. Theodos. tom. iv. p. 489), who accuse them of oppressing the Curiæ. The connection of Tatian with the Arians, while he was prefect of Egypt ( ad 373), inclines Tillemont to believe that he was guilty of every crime (Hist. des Emp. tom. v. p. 360. Mém. Ecclés. tom. vi. p. 589). [Rufinus was probably not guilty of the death of Promotus. The silence of Claudian outweighs the charge of Zosimus.]
The facts of Zosimus explain the allusions of Claudian; but his classic interpreters were ignorant of the fourth century. The fatal cord I found, with the help of Tillemont, in a sermon of St. Asterius of Amasea.
This odious law is recited, and repealed, by Arcadius ( ad 396), in the Theodosian Code, l. ix. tit. xxxviii. leg. 9. The sense, as it is explained by Claudian (in Rufin. i. 234 [232]) and Godefroy (tom. iii. p. 279), is perfectly clear.
The scruples of Pagi and Tillemont can arise only from their zeal for the glory of Theodosius.
Ammonius . . . Rufinum propriis manibus suscepit sacro fonte mundatum. See Rosweyde’s Vitæ Patrum, p. 947 [ed. 2, ad 1628]. Sozomen (l. viii. c. 17) mentions the church and monastery; and Tillemont (Mém. Ecclés. tom. ix. p. 593) records this synod, in which St. Gregory of Nyssa performed a conspicuous part.
Montesquieu (Esprit des Loix, l. xii. c. 12) praises one of the laws of Theodosius, addressed to the prefect Rufinus (l. ix. tit. iv. leg. unic.), to discourage the prosecution of treasonable, or sacrilegious, words. A tyrannical statute always proves the existence of tyranny; but a laudable edict may only contain the specious professions, or ineffectual wishes, of the prince, or his ministers. This, I am afraid, is a just though mortifying canon of criticism.
This character (Claudian in Rufin. i. 184 [183]-220) is confirmed by Jerom, a disinterested witness (dedecus insatiabilis avaritiæ, tom. i. ad Heliodor. p. 26 [Ep. 60]), by Zosimus (l. v. p. 286 [c. 1]), and by Suidas, who copied the history of Eunapius [fr. 63, F.H.G. iv. p. 42].
This allusion of Claudian (in Rufin. i. [239-]241) is again explained by the circumstantial narrative of Zosimus (l. v. p. 288, 289 [c. 2]).
Zosimus (l. iv. p. 243 [c. 33]) praises the valour, prudence and integrity of Bauto the Frank. See Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, tom. v. p. 771.
Arsenius escaped from the palace of Constantinople, and passed fifty-five years in rigid penance in the monasteries of Egypt. See Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. xiv. p. 676-702; and Fleury, Hist. Ecclés. tom. v. p. 1, c., but the latter, for want of authentic materials, has given too much credit to the legend of Metaphrastes.
This story (Zosimus, l. v. p. 290 [c. 3]) proves that the hymeneal rites of antiquity were still practised, without idolatry, by the Christians of the East; and the bride was forcibly conducted from the house of her parents to that of her husband. Our form of marriage requires, with less delicacy, the express and public consent of a virgin.
Zosimus (l. v. p. 290 [c. 4]), Orosius (l. vii. c. 37), and the Chronicle of Marcellinus. [Marcellinus used Orosius; but adds the words in Græciam, and missis clam pecuniis, from some other source.] Claudian (in Rufin. ii. 7-100) paints, in lively colours, the distress and guilt of the prefect.
Stilicho, directly or indirectly, is the perpetual theme of Claudian. The youth and private life of the hero are vaguely expressed in the poem on his first consulship, 35-140.
Vandalorum, imbellis, avaræ, perfidæ, et dolosæ, gentis, genere editus. Orosius, l. vii. c. 38. Jerom (tom. i. ad Gerontiam, p. 93) calls him a Semi-Barbarian.
Claudian, in an imperfect poem, has drawn a fair, perhaps a flattering, portrait of Serena. That favourite niece of Theodosius was born, as well as her sister Thermantia, in Spain; from whence, in their earliest youth, they were honourably conducted to the palace of Constantinople.
Some doubt may be entertained whether this adoption was legal or only metaphorical (see Ducange, Fam. Byzant. p. 75). An old inscription gives Stilicho the singular title of Pro-gener Divi Theodosii. [See Appendix 5.]
Claudian (Laus Serenæ, 190, 193) expresses, in poetic language, the “dilectus equorum,” and the “gemino mox idem culmine [inde e germine] duxit agmina.” The inscription adds, “count of the domestics,” an important command, which Stilicho, in the height of his grandeur, might prudently retain.
The beautiful lines of Claudian (in i. Cons. Stilich. ii. 113) display his genius; but the integrity of Stilicho (in the military administration) is much more firmly established by the unwilling evidence of Zosimus (l. v. p. 345 [c. 34]).
A modern general would deem their submission either heroic patriotism or abject servility.
Compare the poem on the first consulship (i. 95 [94]-115) with the Laus Serenæ (227-237 [236], where it unfortunately breaks off). We may perceive the deep inveterate malice of Rufinus.
Yet the nomination (iv. Cons. Hon. 443) was private (iii. Cons. Hon. 142), cunctos discedere . . . jubet; and may therefore be suspected. Zosimus and Suidas apply to Stilicho and Rufinus the same equal title of Ἐπίτροποι, guardians, or procurators.
The Roman law distinguishes two sorts of minority, which expired at the age of fourteen and of twenty-five. The one was subject to the tutor, or guardian, of the person; the other to the curator, or trustee, of the estate (Heineccius, Antiquitat. Rom. ad Jurisprudent. pertinent. l. i. tit. xxii. xxiii. p. 218-232). But these legal ideas were never accurately transferred into the constitution of an elective monarchy.
See Claudian (i. Cons. Stilich. i. 188-242), but he must allow more than fifteen days for the journey and return between Milan and Leyden.
I. Cons. Stilich. ii. 88-94. Not only the robes and diadems of the deceased emperor, but even the helmets, sword-hilts, belts, cuirasses, c., were enriched with pearls, emeralds, and diamonds.
This high commendation (i. Cons. Stilich. i. 149) may be justified by the fears of the dying emperor (de Bell. Gildon. 292-301), and the peace and good order which were enjoyed after his death (i. Cons. Stilich. i. 150-168).
Stilicho’s march, and the death of Rufinus, are described by Claudian (in Rufin. l. ii. 101-453), Zosimus (l. v. p. 296, 297 [c. 7]), Sozomen (l. viii. c. 1), Socrates (l. vi. c. 1), Philostorgius (l. xi. c. 3, with Godefroy, p. 441), and the Chronicle of Marcellinus. [See Appendix 6.]
[See above, vol. iv. p. 184, n. 28, and vol. iii. Appendix 4.]
The dissection of Rufinus, which Claudian performs with the savage coolness of an anatomist (in Rufin. ii. 405-415), is likewise specified by Zosimus [ ib. ] and Jerom (tom. i. p. 26).
The Pagan Zosimus mentions their sanctuary and pilgrimage. The sister of Rufinus, Sylvania, who passed her life at Jerusalem, is famous in monastic history. 1. The studious virgin had diligently, and even repeatedly, perused the commentators on the Bible, Origen, Gregory, Basil, c., to the amount of five millions of lines. 2. At the age of threescore, she could boast that she had never washed her hands, face, or any part of her whole body, except the tips of her fingers to receive communion. See the Vitæ Patrum, p. 779, 977. [For the confiscation of the property of Rufinus, cp. Symmachus, ep. vi. 14.]
See the beautiful exordium of his invective against Rufinus, which is curiously discussed by the sceptic Bayle, Dictionnaire Critique, Rufin. Not. E.
See the Theodosian Code, l. ix. tit. xlii. leg. 14, 15. The new ministers attempted, with inconsistent avarice, to seize the spoils of their predecessor and to provide for their own future security.
See Claudian (i. Cons. Stilich. l. i. 275, 292, 296, l. ii. 83) and Zosimus (l. v. p. 302 [c. 11]).
Claudian turns the consulship of the eunuch Eutropius into a national reflection (l. ii. 134 [135]):—
It is curious to observe the first symptoms of jealousy and schism between old and new Rome, between the Greeks and Latins.
Claudian may have exaggerated the vices of Gildo; but his Moorish extraction, his notorious actions, and the complaints of St. Augustin may justify the poet’s invectives. Baronius (Annal. Eccles. ad 398, No. 35-56) has treated the African rebellion with skill and learning.
Baronius condemns, still more severely, the licentiousness of Gildo; as his wife, his daughter, and his sister were examples of perfect chastity. The adulteries of the African soldiers are checked by one of the Imperial laws.
Inque tuam sortem numerosas transtulit urbes. Claudian (de Bell. Gildonico, 220-324) has touched, with political delicacy, the intrigues of the Byzantine court which are likewise mentioned by Zosimus (l. v. p. 302 [c. 11]).
Symmachus (l. iv. epist. 4 [5, Seeck]) expresses the judicial forms of the senate; and Claudian (i. Cons. Stilich. l. i. 325, c.) seems to feel the spirit of a Roman. [Cp. Seeck, in his ed. of Symmachus, p. lxvii. sqq. ]
Claudian finely displays these complaints of Symmachus in a speech of the goddess of Rome before the throne of Jupiter (de Bell. Gildon. 28-128).
See Claudian (in Eutrop. l. i. 401, c. i. Cons. Stilich. l. i. 306, c. ii. Cons. Stilich. 91, c.).
He was of a mature age; since he had formerly ( ad 373) served against his brother Firmus (Ammian. xxix. 5). Claudian, who understood the court of Milan, dwells on the injuries, rather than the merits, of Mascezel (de Bell. Gild. 389-414). The Moorish war was not worthy of Honorius or Stilicho, c.
Claudian, Bell. Gild. 415-423. The change of discipline allowed him to use indifferently the names of Legio, Cohors, Manipulus. See the Notitia Imperii, S. 38, 40.
Orosius (l. vii. c. 36, p. 565) qualifies this account with an expression of doubt (ut aiunt), and it scarcely coincides with the δυνάμεις ἁδράς of Zosimus (l. v. p. 303 [c. 11]). Yet Claudian, after some declamation about Cadmus’s soldiers, frankly owns that Stilicho sent a small army; lest the rebel should fly, ne timeare times (i. Cons. Stilich. l. i. 314, c.).
Claud. Rutil. Numatian. Itinerar. i. 439-448. He afterwards (515-526) mentions a religious madman on the Isle of Gorgona. For such profane remarks, Rutilius and his accomplices are styled by his commentator Barthius, rabiosi canes diaboli. Tillemont (mém. Ecclés. tom. xii. p. 471) more calmly observes that the unbelieving poet praises where he means to censure.
Orosius, l. vii. c. 36, p. 564. Augustin commends two of these savage saints of the Isle of Goats (epist. lxxxi. apud. Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. xiii. p. 317, and Baronius, Annal. Eccles. ad 398, No. 51).
Here the first book of the Gildonic war is terminated. The rest of Claudian’s poem has been lost; and we are ignorant how or where the army made good their landing in Africa.
Orosius must be responsible for the account. The presumption of Gildo and his various train of Barbarians is celebrated by Claudian (i. Cons. Stilich. i. 345-355).
St. Ambrose, who had been dead about a year, revealed, in a vision, the time and place of the victory. Mascezel afterwards related his dream to Paulinus, the original biographer of the saint, from whom it might easily pass to Orosius.
Zosimus (l. v. p. 303 [c. 11]) supposes an obstinate combat; but the narrative of Orosius appears to conceal a real fact, under the disguise of a miracle.
Tabraca lay between the two Hippos (Cellarius, tom. ii. p. ii. p. 112; d’Anville, tom. iii. p. 84). Orosius has distinctly named the field of battle, but our ignorance cannot define the precise situation.
The death of Gildo is expressed by Claudian (i. Cons. Stilich. l. 357) and his best interpreters, Zosimus and Orosius.
Claudian (ii. Cons. Stilich. 99-119) describes their trial (tremuit quos Africa nuper, cernunt rostra reos) and applauds the restoration of the ancient constitution. It is here that he introduces the famous sentence, so familiar to the friends of despotism: —
But the freedom which depends on royal piety scarcely deserves that appellation.
See the Theodosian Code, l. ix. tit. xxxix. leg. 3, tit. xl. leg. 19.
Stilicho, who claimed an equal share in all the victories of Theodosius and his son, particularly asserts that Africa was recovered by the wisdom of his counsels (see an inscription produced by Baronius). [Gruter, p. 412. See Appendix 5.]
I have softened the narrative of Zosimus, which, in its crude simplicity, is almost incredible (l. v. p. 303 [c. 11]). Orosius damns the victorious general (p. 538 [7, 33]) for violating the right of sanctuary.
Claudian, as the poet laureate, composed a serious and elaborate epithalamium of 340 lines: besides some gay Fescennines, which were sung in a more licentious tone on the wedding-night.
(de Nuptiis Honor. et Mariæ, 587) and more freely in the Fescennines (112-126 [iv. 14-29, ed. Koch]).
See Zosimus, l. v. p. 333 [c. 28].
Procopius de Bell. Gothico, l. i. c. 2. I have borrowed the general practice of Honorius, without adopting the singular and, indeed, improbable tale which is related by the Greek historian.
The lessons of Theodosius, or rather Claudian (iv. Cons. Honor. 214-418), might compose a fine institution for the future prince of a great and free nation. It was far above Honorius and his degenerate subjects.
The revolt of the Goths and the blockade of Constantinople are distinctly mentioned by Claudian (in Rufin. l. ii. 7-100), Zosimus (l. v. p. 292 [c. 5]), and Jornandes (de Rebus Geticis, c. 29). [Alaric approached Constantinople, but did not blockade it. Cp. Keller, Stilicho, p. 31.]
Claudian and Ovid often amuse their fancy by interchanging the metaphors and properties of liquid water and solid ice. Much false wit has been expended in this easy exercise.
Jerom, tom. i. p. 26 [ep. 60]. He endeavours to comfort his friend Heliodorus, bishop of Altinum, for the loss of his nephew Nepotian, by a curious recapitulation of all the public and private misfortunes of the times. See Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. xii. p. 200, c.
Baltha or bold: origo mirifica, says Jornandes (c. 29). [The meaning of the passage of Jordanes may be, as Köpke thinks, that owing to his bravery Alaric was described inter suos as a true Baltha (ὀρθώνυμος).] This illustrious race long continued to flourish in France, in the Gothic province of Septimania or Languedoc; under the corrupted appellation of Baux: and a branch of that family afterwards settled in the kingdom of Naples (Grotius in Prolegom. ad Hist. Gothic. p. 53). The lords of Baux, near Arles, and of seventy-nine subordinate places, were independent of the counts of Provence (Longuerue, Description de la France, tom. i. p. 357).
Zosimus (l. v. p. 293-295 [c. 5]) is our best guide for the conquest of Greece; but the hints and allusion of Claudian are so many rays of historic light.
Compare Herodotus (l. vii. c. 176) and Livy (xxxvi. 15). The narrow entrance of Greece was probably enlarged by each successive ravisher. [The sea has retreated far from the pass.]
He passed, says Eunapius (in Vit. Philosoph. p. 93, edit. Commelin, 1596), through the straits, διὰ τω̂ν πυλω̂ν (of Thermopylæ) παρη̂λθεν, ὥσπερ διὰ σταδίου καὶ ὶπποκρότου πεδίου τρέχων. [On Alaric in Greece, cp. App. 7.]
In obedience to Jerom and Claudian (in Rufin. l. ii. 191), I have mixed some darker colours in the mild representation of Zosimus, who wished to soften the calamities of Athens.
Nec fera Ceropias traxissent vincula matres.
Synesius (Epist. clvi. [ leg. 135], p. 272, edit. Petav.) observes that Athens, whose sufferings he imputes to the proconsul’s avarice, was at that time less famous for her schools of philosophy than for her trade of honey.
The Scironian rocks are described by Pausanias (l. i. c. 44, p. 107, edit. Kuhn [§10]), and our modern travellers, Wheeler (p. 436), and Chandler (p. 298). Hadrian made the road passable for two carriages.
Claudian (in Rufin. l. ii. 186, and de Bello Getico, 611, c.) vaguely, though forcibly, delineates the scene of rapine and destruction.
Τρὶς μάκαρες Δαναοὶ καὶ τετράκις, c. These generous lines of Homer (Odyss. l. v. 306) were transcribed by one of the captive youths of Corinth; and the tears of Mummius may prove that the rude conqueror, though he was ignorant of the value of an original picture, possessed the purest source of good taste, a benevolent heart (Plutarch, Symposiac. l. ix. tom. ii. p. 737, edit. Wechel).
Homer perpetually describes the exemplary patience of those female captives, who gave their charms, and even their hearts, to the murderers of their fathers, brothers, c. Such a passion (of Eriphile for Achilles) is touched with admirable delicacy by Racine.
Plutarch (in Pyrrho, tom. ii. p. 471, edit. Brian [c. 26, ad fin. ]) gives the genuine answer in the Laconic dialect. Pyrrhus attacked Sparta, with 25,000 foot, 2000 horse, and 24 elephants: and the defence of that open town is a fine comment on the laws of Lycurgus, even in the last stage of decay.
Such, perhaps, as Homer (Iliad, xx. 164) has so nobly painted him.
Eunapius (in Vit. Philosoph. p. 90-93) intimates that a troop of Monks betrayed Greece and followed the Gothic camp. [Cp. Appendix 7.]
For Stilicho’s Greek war, compare the honest narrative of Zosimus (l. v. p. 295, 296 [c. 7]) with the curious circumstantial flattery of Claudian (i. Cons. Stilich. l. 172-186; iv. Cons. Hon. 459-487). As the event was not glorious, it is artfully thrown into the shade. [See Appendix 6.]
The troops who marched through Elis delivered up their arms. This security enriched the Eleans, who were lovers of a rural life. Riches begat pride; they disdained their privilege, and they suffered. Polybius advises them to retire once more within their magic circle. See a learned and judicious discourse on the Olympic games, which Mr. West has prefixed to his translation of Pindar.
Claudian (in iv. Cons. Hon. 480) alludes to the fact, without naming the river: perhaps the Alpheus (i. Cons. Stilich. l. i. 185).
Yet I should prefer the Peneus, a shallow stream in a wide and deep bed, which runs through Elis, and falls into the sea below Cyllene. It had been joined with the Alpheus, to cleanse the Augean stable (Cellarius, tom. i. p. 760; Chandler’s Travels, p. 286).
Strabo, l. viii. p. 517; Plin. Hist. Natur. iv. 3; Wheeler, p. 308; Chandler, p. 275. They measured from different points the distance between the two lands.
Synesius passed three years ( ad 397-400) at Constantinople, as deputy from Cyrene to the emperor Arcadius. He presented him with a crown of gold, and pronounced before him the instructive oration de Regno (p. 1-32, edit. Petav. Paris, 1612) [ ad 399]. The philosopher was made bishop of Ptolemais, ad 410, and died about 430. See Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. xii. p. 499, 554, 683-685.
Synesius de Regno, p. 21-26.
Claudian in Eutrop. l. ii. 212. Alaric applauds his own policy (de Bell Getic. 533-543) in the use which he had made of this Illyrian jurisdiction. [The precise title is uncertain; but Master-General is probable. From de B. G. 534, ducem, Mr. Hodgkin suggests Dux Daciæ ripensis et Mœsiæ primæ.]
Jornandes, c. 29, p. 651. The Gothic historian adds, with unusual spirit, Cum suis deliberans suasit suo labore quærere regna, quam alienis per otium subjacere. [It is much more probable that he was proclaimed king ( thiudans ) in 395 ad , after the death of Theodosius; see Hodgkin, i. 653. Isidore gives the date 382, which Clinton accepts.]
Alpibus Italiæ ruptis penetrabis ad Urbem. This authentic prediction was announced by Alaric, or at least by Claudian (de Bell. Getico, 547), seven years before the event. But, as it was not accomplished within the term which has been rashly fixed, the interpreters escaped through an ambiguous meaning. [For Claudian’s acrostich in this passage, see Appendix 8.]
Our best materials are 970 verses of Claudian, in the poem on the Getic war, and the beginning of that which celebrates the sixth consulship of Honorius. Zosimus is totally silent; and we are reduced to such scraps, or rather crumbs, as we can pick from Orosius and the Chronicles.
Notwithstanding the gross errors of Jornandes, who confounds the Italian wars of Alaric (c. 29), his date of the consulship of Stilicho and Aurelian ( ad 400) is firm and respectable. It is certain from Claudian (Tillemont, Hist. des Emp. tom. v. p. 804) that the battle of Pollentia was fought ad 403; but we cannot easily fill the interval. [The right date is 402; see Appendix 9.]
Tantum Romanæ urbis judicium fugis, ut magis obsidionem barbaricam, quam pacatæ urbis judicium velis sustinere. Jerom, tom. ii. p. 239. Rufinus understood his danger: the peaceful city was inflamed by the beldam Marcella and the rest of Jerom’s faction. [Cp. vol. iv. Appendix 5.]
Jovinian, the enemy of fasts and celibacy, who was persecuted and insulted by the furious Jerom (Jortin’s Remarks, vol. iv. p. 104, c.). See the original edict of banishment in the Theodosian Code, l. xvi. tit. v. leg. 43.
This epigram (de Sene Veronensi qui suburbium nusquam egressus est) is one of the earliest and most pleasing compositions of Claudian. Cowley’s imitation (Hurd’s edition, vol. ii. p. 241) has some natural and happy strokes: but it is much inferior to the original portrait, which is evidently drawn from the life.
In this passage, Cowley is perhaps superior to his original; and the English poet, who was a good botanist, has concealed the oaks under a more general expression.
Claudian de Bell. Get. 192-266. He may seem prolix: but fear and superstition occupied as large a space in the minds of the Italians.
From the passages of Paulinus, which Baronius has produced (Annal. Eccles. ad 403, No. 51), it is manifest that the general alarm had pervaded all Italy, as far as Nola in Campania, where that famous penitent had fixed his abode.
Solus erat Stilicho, c., is the exclusive commendation which Claudian bestows (de Bell. Get. 267) without condescending to except the emperor. How insignificant must Honorius have appeared in his own court!
The face of the country, and the hardiness of Stilicho, are finely described (de Bell. Get. 340-363). [The danger which Stilicho had to meet in Rætia and Vindelicia was an attack of the Goth Radagaisus, who was in league with Alaric; see Prosper, sub anno 400, a notice which has been improperly confounded with that under 505, and cp. Appendix 9.]
Yet the most rapid march from Edinburgh, or Newcastle, to Milan must have required a longer space of time than Claudian seems willing to allow for the duration of the Gothic war.
Every traveller must recollect the face of Lombardy (see Fontenelle, tom. v. p. 279), which is often tormented by the capricious and irregular abundance of waters. The Austrians, before Genoa, were encamped in the dry bed of the Polcevera. “Ne sarebbe” (says Muratori) “mai passato per mente a que’ buoni Alemanni, che quel picciolo torrente potesse, per cosi dire, in un instante cangiarsi in un terribil gigante” (Annal. d’Italia, tom. xvi. p. 443. Milan, 1753, 8vo edit.).
Claudian does not clearly answer our question, Where was Honorius himself? Yet the flight is marked by the pursuit; and my idea of the Gothic war is justified by the Italian critics, Sigonius (tom. i. P. ii. p. 369, de Imp. Occident, l. x.) and Muratori (Annali d’Italia, tom. iv. p. 45).
One of the roads may be traced in the Itineraries (p. 98, 288, 294, with Wesseling’s notes). Asta lay some miles on the right hand.
Asta, or Asti, a Roman colony, is now the capital of a pleasant country, which, in the sixteenth century, devolved to the dukes of Savoy (Leandro Alberti, Descrizzione d’Italia, p. 382). [The town meant by Claudian is Milan; see Appendix 9.]
Nec me timor impulit ullus. He might hold this proud language the next year at Rome, five hundred miles from the scene of danger (vi. Cons. Hon. 449).
The speeches (de Bell. Get. 479-549) of the Gothic Nestor and Achilles are strong, characteristic, adapted to the circumstances, and possibly not less genuine than those of Livy.
Orosius (l. vii. c. 37) is shocked at the impiety of the Romans who attacked, on Easter Sunday, such pious Christians. Yet, at the same time, public prayers were offered at the shrine of St. Thomas of Edessa, for the destruction of the Arian robber. See Tillemont (Hist. des Emp. tom. v. p. 529), who quotes an homily, which has been erroneously ascribed to St. Chrysostom. [For date see Appendix 9.]
The vestiges of Pollentia are twenty-five miles to the south-east of Turin. Urbs [River Urbis= Borbo; see Tillemont, H. des Emp. v. 530], in the same neighbourhood, was a royal chace of the Kings of Lombardy, and a small river, which excused the prediction, “penetrabis ad urbem.” Cluver. Ital. Antiq. tom. i. p. 83-85.
Orosius wishes, in doubtful words, to insinuate the defeat of the Romans. “Pugnantes vicimus, victores victi sumus.” Prosper (in Chron.) makes it an equal and bloody battle; but the Gothic writers, Cassiodorius (in Chron.) and Jornandes (de Reb. Get. c. 29) claim a decisive victory. [The Goths may have been slightly victorious on the field of battle; but they clearly received a decisive strategic defeat.]
[The capture of Alaric’s wife is a totally unjustifiable inference from these lines. Cp. Von Wietersheim, Gesch. der Völkerwanderung (ed. Dahn), 2, 189.]
Claudian (de Bell. Get. 586-647) and Prudentius (in Symmach. l. ii. 694-719) celebrate, without ambiguity, the Roman victory of Pollentia. They are poetical and party writers; yet some credit is due to the most suspicious witnesses, who are checked by the recent notoriety of facts.
Claudian’s peroration is strong and elegant; but the identity of the Cimbric and Gothic fields must be understood (like Virgil’s Philippi, Georgic i. 490) according to the loose geography of a poet. Vercellæ and Pollentia are sixty miles from each other; and the latitude is still greater, if the Cimbri were defeated in the wide and barren plain of Verona (Maffei, Verona Illustrata, P. i. p. 54-62).
Claudian and Prudentius must be strictly examined, to reduce the figures, and extort the historic sense of those poets.
The practice of exposing in triumph the images of kings and provinces was familiar to the Romans. The bust of Mithridates himself was twelve feet high, of massy gold (Freinshem. Supplement. Livian. ciii. 47).
[Alaric was retreating and had no idea of advancing on Rome. He was obliged to retreat towards the Apennines (Claud. de vi. Cons. Hon. 183). Stilicho let him go once more (as before in the Peloponnesus). Cp. von Wietersheim, op. cit. 2, 230.]
[Claudian alone mentions this battle. See for date, Appendix 9.]
The Getic war and the sixth consulship of Honorius obscurely connect the events of Alaric’s retreat and losses.
Taceo de Alarico . . . sæpe victo, sæpe concluso, semperque dimisso. Orosius, l. vii. c. 37, p. 567. Claudian (vi. Cons. Hon. 320) drops the curtain with a fine image.
The remainder of Claudian’s poem on the sixth consulship of Honorius describes the journey, the triumph, and the games (330-660).
See the inscription in Mascou’s History of the Ancient Germans, viii. 12. The words are positive and indiscreet, Getarum nationem in omne ævum domitam [ leg. docuere extingui], c. [C.I.L. 6, 1196. It probably refers to the defeat of Radagaisus, ad 405. See Appendix 5.]
On the curious, though horrid, subject of the gladiators, consult the two books of the Saturnalia of Lipsius, who, as an antiquarian, is inclined to excuse the practice of antiquity (tom. iii. p. 483-545).
Cod. Theodos. l. xv. tit. xii. leg. 1. The commentary of Godefroy affords large materials (tom. v. p. 396) for the history of gladiators.
See the peroration of Prudentius (in Symmach. l. ii. 1121-1131), who had doubtless read the eloquent invective of Lactantius (Divin. Institut. l. vi. c. 20). The Christian apologists have not spared these bloody games, which were introduced in the religious festivals of Paganism.
Theodoret, l. v. c. 26. I wish to believe the story of St. Telemachus. Yet no church has been dedicated, no altar has been erected, to the holy monk who died a martyr in the cause of humanity. [There is evidence for gladiatorial spectacles some years later.]
Crudele gladiatorum spectaculum et inhumanum nonnullis videri solet, et haud scio an ita sit, ut nunc fit. Cic. Tusculan. ii. 17. He faintly censures the abuse and warmly defends the use of these sports; oculis nulla poterat esse fortior contra dolorem et mortem disciplina. Seneca (epist. vii.) shews the feelings of a man.
This account of Ravenna is drawn from Strabo (l. v. p. 327 [c. i. § 7]), Pliny (iii. 20), Stephen of Byzantium (sub voce Ῥάβεννα, p. 651, edit. Berkel), Claudian (in vi. Cons. Honor. 494, c.), Sidonius Apollinaris (l. i. epist. v. 8), Jornandes (de Reb. Get. c. 29), Procopius (de Bell. Gothic. l. i. c. 1, p. 309, edit. Louvre), and Cluverius (Ital. Antiq. tom. i. p. 301-307). Yet I still want a local antiquarian, and a good topographical map. [C. Ricci, Ravenna e i suoi dintorni.]
Martial (epigram iii. 56, 57) plays on the trick of the knave who had sold him wine instead of water; but he seriously declares that a cistern at Ravenna is more valuable than a vineyard. Sidonius complains that the town is destitute of fountains and aqueducts, and ranks the want of fresh water among the local evils, such as the croaking of frogs, the stinging of gnats, c.
The fable of Theodore and Honoria, which Dryden has so admirably transplanted from Boccaccio (Giornata, iii. novell. viii.), was acted in the wood of Chiassi, a corrupt word from Classis, the naval station, which, with the intermediate road or suburb, the Via Caesaris, constituted the triple city of Ravenna.
From the year 404, the dates of the Theodosian Code become sedentary at Constantinople and Ravenna. See Godefroy’s Chronology of the Laws, tom. i. p. cxlviii. c.
See M. de Guignes, Hist. des Huns, tom. i. p. 179-189, tom. ii. p. 295, 334-338. [His empire “extended east and west from Corea to Harashar and south as far as the country of the Tukuhun and the modern Kan Suh province.” “Northwest of Zarun’s empire were the remains of the Hiungnu, and they were all gradually annexed by him. This modest statement, which precedes the distinct limitation of his dominions in a westerly direction to the north of Harashar — at the utmost Tarbagatai or Kuldja — is evidently the ground for Gibbon’s mistaken statement that he ‘vanquished the Huns to the north of the Caspian.’ ” Mr. E. H. Parker, A Thousand Years of the Tartars, p. 161-2.]
Procopius (de Bell. Vandal. l. i. c. iii. p. 182) has observed an emigration from the Palus Mæotis to the north of Germany, which he ascribes to famine. But his views of ancient history are strangely darkened by ignorance and error.
Zosimus (l. v. p. 331 [c. 26]) uses the general description of the nations beyond the Danube and the Rhine. Their situation, and consequently their names, are manifestly shown, even in the various epithets which each ancient writer may have casually added.
The name of Rhadagast was that of a local deity of the Obotrites (in Mecklenburgh). A hero might naturally assume the appellation of his tutelar god; but it is not probable that the Barbarians should worship an unsuccessful hero. See Mascou, Hist. of the Germans, viii. 14. [His name suggested that Radagaisus was a Slav; but he is now generally supposed to be a Goth.]
Olympiodorus (apud Photium, p. 180 [F.H.G. iv. p. 59, fr. 9]) uses the Greek word Ὀπτιμάτοι; which does not convey any precise idea. I suspect that they were the princes and nobles, with their faithful companions; the knights with their squires, as they would have been styled some centuries afterwards.
Tacit. de Moribus Germanorum, c. 37.
is the modest language of Honorius, in speaking of the Gothic war, which he had seen somewhat nearer.
Zosimus (l. v. p. 331 [c. 26]) transports the war and the victory of Stilicho beyond the Danube. A strange error, which is awkwardly and imperfectly cured by reading Ἄρνον for Ἴστρον (Tillemont, Hist. des Emp. tom. v. p. 807). In good policy, we must use the service of Zosimus, without esteeming or trusting him. [But see Appendix 10.]
Codex Theodos. l. vii. tit. xiii. leg. 16. The date of this law ( ad 406, 18th May) satisfies me, as it had done Godefroy (tom. ii. p. 387), of the true year of the invasion of Radagaisus. Tillemont, Pagi, and Muratori prefer the preceding year; but they are bound, by certain obligations of civility and respect, to St. Paulinus of Nola. [ ad 405 is the true date, given by our best authority, Prosper.]
Soon after Rome had been taken by the Gauls, the senate, on a sudden emergency, armed ten legions, 3000 horse, and 42,000 foot; a force which the city could not have sent forth under Augustus (Livy, vii. 25). This declaration may puzzle an antiquary, but it is clearly explained by Montesquieu.
Machiavel has explained, at least as a philosopher, the origin of Florence, which insensibly descended, for the benefit of trade, from the rock of Fæsulæ to the banks of the Arno (Istoria Fiorentina, tom. i. l. ii. p. 36, Londra, 1747). The Triumvirs sent a colony to Florence, which, under Tiberius (Tacit. Annal. i. 79), deserved the reputation and name of a flourishing city. See Cluver. Ital. Antiq. tom. i. p. 507, c.
Yet the Jupiter of Radagaisus who worshipped Thor and Woden was very different from the Olympic or Capitoline Jove. The accommodating temper of Polytheism might unite those various and remote deities, but the genuine Romans abhorred the human sacrifices of Gaul and Germany.
Paulinus (in Vit. Ambros. c. 50) relates this story, which he received from the mouth of Pansophia herself, a religious matron of Florence. Yet the archbishop soon ceased to take an active part in the business of the world, and never became a popular saint.
Augustin de Civitat. Dei, v. 23. Orosius, l. vii. c. 37, p. 567-571. The two friends wrote in Africa, ten or twelve years after the victory; and their authority is implicitly followed by Isidore of Seville (in Chron. p. 713, edit. Grot). How many interesting facts might Orosius have inserted in the vacant space which is devoted to pious nonsense!
Yet the simplicity of truth (Cæsar, de Bell. Civ. iii. 44) is far greater than the amplifications of Lucan (Pharsal. l. vi. 29-63).
The rhetorical expressions of Orosius, “In arido et aspero montis jugo,” “in unum ac parvum verticem,” are not very suitable to the encampment of a great army. But Fæsulæ, only three miles from Florence, might afford space for the headquaters of Radagarisus, and would be comprehended within the circuit of the Roman lines.
See Zosimus, l. v. p. 331 [c. 26], and the Chronicles of Prosper and Marcellinus.
Olympiodorus (apud Photium, p. 180) uses an expression (προσηταιρίσατο) which would denote a strict and friendly alliance, and render Stilicho still more criminal [fr. 9, F.H.G. iv. p. 59. The expression refers to Gothic chiefs, not to Radagaisus.]. The paulisper detentus, deinde interfectus, of Orosius is sufficiently odious.
Orosius, piously inhuman, sacrifices the king and people, Agag and the Amalekites, without a symptom of compassion. The bloody actor is less detestable than the cool unfeeling historian.
And Claudian’s muse, was she asleep? had she been ill paid? Methinks the seventh consulship of Honorius ( ad 407) would have furnished the subject of a noble poem. [See below, p. 192, and cp. vol. ix. Appendix 5.] Before it was discovered that the state could no longer be saved, Stilicho (after Romulus, Camillus, and Marius) might have been worthily surnamed the fourth founder of Rome.
A luminous passage of Prosper’s Chronicle, “ In tres partes, per diversos principes, divisus exercitus, ” reduces the miracle of Florence, and connects the history of Italy, Gaul, and Germany.
Orosius and Jerom positively charge him with instigating the invasion. “Excitatæ a Stilichone gentes,” c. They must mean indirectly. He saved Italy at the expense of Gaul.
The Count de Buat is satisfied that the Germans who invaded Gaul were the two thirds that yet remained of the army of Radagaisus. See the Histoire Ancienne des Peuples de l’Europe (tom. vii. p. 87-121. Paris, 1772); an elaborate work, which I had not the advantage of perusing till the year 1777. As early as 1771, I find the same idea expressed in a rough draught of the present History. I have since observed a similar intimation in Mascou (viii. 15). Such agreement, without mutual communication, may add some weight to our common sentiment. [That the invaders of Gaul went forth from Noricum and Vindelicia seems probable.]
Claudian (i. Cons. Stil. i. 235 [236], c.) is clear and satisfactory. These kings of France are unknown to Gregory of Tours; but the author of the Gesta Francorum mentions both Sunno and Marcomir, and names the latter as the father of Pharamond (in tom. ii. p. 543). He seems to write from good materials, which he did not understand. [Mr. Hodgkin places this journey of Stilicho in the first half of ad 396 (i. 660). The source for it is Claudian, de iv. Cons. Hon. 439 sqq. ]
See Zosimus (l. vi. p. 373 [c. 3]). Orosius (l. vii. c. 40, p. 576), and the Chronicles. Gregory of Tours (l. ii. c. 9, p. 165, in the second volume of the Historians of France) has preserved a valuable fragment of Renatus Profuturus Frigeridus, whose three names denote a Christian, a Roman subject, and a Semi-barbarian.
Claudian (i. Cons. Stil. l. i. 221, c., l. ii. 186) describes the peace and prosperity of the Gallic frontier. The Abbé Dubos (Hist. Critique, c., tom. i. p. 174) would read Alba (a nameless rivulet of the Ardennes) instead of Albis, and expatiates on the danger of the Gallic cattle grazing beyond the Elbe. Foolish enough! In poetical geography, the Elbe, and the Hercynian, signify any river, or any wood in Germany. Claudian is not prepared for the strict examination of our antiquaries.
Jerom, tom. i. p. 93. See in the 1st vol. of the Historians of France, p. 777, 782, the proper extracts from the Carmen de Providentiâ Divinâ, and Salvian. The anonymous poet was himself a captive, with his bishop and fellow-citizens.
The Pelagian doctrine, which was first agitated ad 405, was condemned, in the space of ten years at Rome and Carthage. St. Augustin fought and conquered, but the Greek Church was favourable to his adversaries; and (what is singular enough) the people did not take any part in a dispute which they could not understand.
See Mémoires de Guillaume du Bellay, l. vi. In French the original reproof is less obvious and more pointed, from the double sense of the word journée, which signifies a day’s travel or a battle.
Claudian (i. Cons. Stil. l. ii. 250). It is supposed that the Scots of Ireland invaded, by sea, the whole western coast of Britain; and some slight credit may be given even to Nennius and the Irish traditions (Carte’s Hist. of England, vol. i. p. 169. Whitaker’s Genuine History of the Britons, p. 199). The sixty-six lives of St. Patrick, which were extant in the ninth century, must have contained as many thousand lies; yet we may believe that, in one of these Irish inroads, the future apostle was led away captive (Usher, Antiquit. Eccles. Britann. p. 431, and Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. xvi. p. 456, 782, c.).
The British usurpers are taken from Zosimus (l. vi. p. 371-375 [c. 2]), Orosius (l. vii. c. 40, p. 576, 577), Olympiodorus (apud Photium, p. 180, 181 [fr. 12]), the ecclesiastical historians, and the Chronicles. The Latins are ignorant of Marcus. [According to Zosimus, the invasion of Gaul by the Vandals caused the revolt in Britain. For the usurpers see Appendix 11 and 12.]
Cum in Constantino inconstantiam . . . execrarentur (Sidonius Apollinaris, l. v. epist. 9, p. 139, edit. secund. Sirmond.). Yet Sidonius might be tempted, by so fair a pun, to stigmatise a prince who had disgraced his grandfather.
Bagaudæ is the name which Zosimus applies to them [Βακαύδαις. vi. 2]; perhaps they deserved a less odious character (see Dubos, Hist. Critique, tom. i. p. 203, and this History, vol. iii. p. 64). We shall hear of them again. [Here they appear as a sort of national militia. Cp. Freeman, in Eng. Hist. Review, i. 63.]
Verinianus, Didymus, Theodosius, and Lagodius, who, in modern courts, would be styled princes of the blood, were not distinguished by any rank or privileges above the rest of their fellow-subjects.
These Honoriani, or Honoriaci, consisted of two bands of Scots, or Attacotti, two of Moors, two of Marcomanni, the Victores, the Ascarii, and the Gallicani (Notitia Imperii, sect. xxxviii. edit. Lab.). They were part of the sixty-five Auxilia Palatina, and are properly styled ἐν τῃ̑ αὐλῃ̑ τάξεις by Zosimus (l. vi. p. 374 [c. 4]). [Mr. Hodgkin rightly observes that it is a mistake to suppose that the troops of Aux. Pal., called Honoriani, formed a single division, or necessarily acted together. The Honoriani in Gaul had nothing to do with the Honoriani in Illyricum; and Constantine had only to do with the Honoriani in Gaul. Moreover the phrase of Zosimus does not refer to Auxilia Palatina.]
These dark transactions are investigated by the Count de Buat (Hist. des Peuples de l’Europe, tom. vii. c. iii.-viii. p. 69-206), whose laborious accuracy may sometimes fatigue a superficial reader.
See Zosimus, l. v. p. 334, 335 [c. 29]. He interrupts his scanty narrative, to relate the fable of Æmona, and of the ship Argo, which was drawn over from that place to the Hadriatic. Sozomen (l. viii. c. 25, l. ix. c. 4) and Socrates (l. vii. c. 10) cast a pale and doubtful light; and Orosius (l. vii. c. 38, p. 571) is abominably partial.
Zosimus, l. v. p. 338, 339 [c. 29]. He repeats the words of Lampadius as they were spoke in Latin, “Non est ista pax, sed pactio servitutis,” and then translates them into Greek for the benefit of his readers.
He came from the coast of the Euxine, and exercised a splendid office, λαμπ ρα̂ς δὲ στρατείας ἐν τοɩ̂ς βασιλείοις ἀξιούμενος. His actions justify his character, which Zosimus (l. v. p. 340 [c. 32]) exposes with visible satisfaction. Augustin revered the piety of Olympius, whom he styles a true son of the church (Baronius, Annal. Eccles. ad 408, No. 19, c. Tillemont, Mém. Ecclés. tom. xiii. p. 467, 468). But these praises, which the African saint so unworthily bestows, might proceed as well from ignorance as from adulation.
Zosimus, l. v. p. 338, 339 [c. 31]. Sozomen, l. ix. c. 4. Stilicho offered to undertake the journey to Constantinople, that he might divert Honorius from the vain attempt. The Eastern empire would not have obeyed, and could not have been conquered.
Zosimus (l. v. p. 336-345 [c. 30]) has copiously, though not clearly, related the disgrace and death of Stilicho. Olympiodorus (apud Phot. p. 177 [fr. 2]), Orosius (l. vii. c. 38, p. 571, 572), Sozomen (l. ix. c. 4), and Philostorgius (l. xi. c. 3, l. xii. c. 2) afford supplemental hints.
Zosimus, l. v. p. 333 [c. 28]. The marriage of a Christian with two sisters scandalises Tillemont (Hist. des Empereurs, tom. v. p. 557), who expects, in vain, that Pope Innocent I. should have done something in the way either of censure or of dispensation.
Two of his friends are honourably mentioned (Zosimus, l. v. p. 346 [c. 35]): Peter, chief of the school of notaries, and the great chamberlain Deuterius. Stilicho had secured the bedchamber, and it is surprising that, under a feeble prince, the bedchamber was not able to secure him.
Orosius (l. vii. c. 38, p. 571, 572) seems to copy the false and furious manifestoes which were dispersed through the provinces by the new administration.
See the Theodosian Code, l. vii. tit. xvi. leg. 1., l. ix. tit. xlii. leg. 22. Stilicho is branded with the name of praedo publicus, who employed his wealth ad omnem ditandam inquietandamque Barbariem. [Especially noteworthy is the measure of Stilicho, mentioned in C. Th. vii. 16, 1, which closed the ports of Italy to all comers from the realm of Arcadius.]
Augustin himself is satisfied with the effectual laws which Stilicho had enacted against heretics and idolaters, and which are still extant in the Code. He only applies to Olympius for their confirmation (Baronius, Annal. Eccles. ad 408, No. 19).
Zosimus, l. v. p. 351 [c. 38]. We may observe the bad taste of the age in dressing their statues with such awkward finery.
See Rutilius Numatianus (Itinerar. l. ii. 41-60), to whom religious enthusiasm has dictated some elegant and forcible lines. Stilicho likewise stripped the gold plates from the doors of the Capitol, and read a prophetic sentence which was engraven under them (Zosimus, l. v. p. 352 [ ib. ]). These are foolish stories: yet the charge of impiety adds weight and credit to the praise, which Zosimus reluctantly bestows, of his virtues.
At the nuptials of Orpheus (a modest comparison!) all the parts of animated nature contributed their various gifts, and the gods themselves enriched their favourite. Claudian had neither flocks, nor herds, nor vines, nor olives. His wealthy bride was heiress to them all. But he carried to Africa a recommendatory letter from Serena, his Juno, and was made happy (Epist. ii. ad Serenam).
Claudian feels the honour like a man who deserved it (in præfat. Bell. Get.). The original inscription, on marble, was found at Rome, in the fifteenth century, in the house of Pomponius Lætus. [See vol. iv. App. 5, p. 348 sqq., in notices of Claudian.] . The statue of a poet, far superior to Claudian, should have been erected during his lifetime by the men of letters, his countrymen, and contemporaries. It was a noble design! [See Appendix 13.]
See Epigram xxx.
Hadrian was a Pharian (of Alexandria). See his public life in Godefroy, Cod. Theodos. tom. vi. p. 364. [Hadrianus was Pr. Pr. in 405 ad ] Mallius did not always sleep. He composed some elegant dialogues on the Greek systems of natural philosophy (Claud. in Mall. Theodore. Cons. 61-112). [This Hadrian episode is very doubtful; see next note.]
See Claudian’s first Epistle. Yet, in some places, an air of irony and indignation betrays his secret reluctance. [“(1) The MSS. greatly vary as to the heading of this epistle some even calling it Deprecatio ad Stilichonem; (2) there is nothing to connect it with the latter rather than the earlier part of Claudian’s career; and (3) the whole piece sounds more like banter than earnest,” Hodgkin, i. 731.]
National vanity has made him a Florentine, or a Spaniard. But the first epistle of Claudian proves him a native of Alexandria (Fabricius, Bibliot. Latin. tom. iii. p. 191-202, edit. Ernest).
His first Latin verses were composed during the consulship of Probinus, ad 395.
Besides some Greek epigrams, which are still extant, the Latin poet had composed, in Greek, the antiquities of Tarsus, Anazarbus, Berytus, Nice, c. It is more easy to supply the loss of good poetry than of authentic history.
Strada (Prolusion v. vi.) allows him to contend with the five heroic poets, Lucretius, Virgil, Ovid, Lucan, and Statius. His patron is the accomplished courtier Balthazar Castiglione. His admirers are numerous and passionate. Yet the rigid critics reproach the exotic weeds, or flowers, which spring too luxuriantly in his Latian soil.
The series of events from the death of Stilicho to the arrival of Alaric before Rome can only be found in Zosimus, l. v. p. 347-350 [c. 35-37].
The expression of Zosimus is strong and lively: καταϕρόνησιν ἐμποιη̂σαι τοɩ̂ς πολεμίοις ἀρκον̂ντας, sufficient to excite the contempt of the enemy.
Eos qui catholicæ sectæ sunt inimici intra palatium militare prohibemus. Nullus nobis sit aliquâ ratione conjunctus, qui a nobis fide et religione discordat. Cod. Theodos. l. xvi. tit. v. leg. 42, and Godefroy’s Commentary, tom. vi. p. 164. This law was applied in the utmost latitude, and rigorously executed. Zosimus, l. v. p. 364 [c. 46].
[That he took and plundered these cities is not implied by the phrase of Zosimus (κατατρέχεν). Cp. von Wietersheim, Gesch. der Völkerwanderung, 2, 146.]
Addison (see his Works, vol. ii. p. 54, edit. Baskerville) has given a very picturesque description of the road through the Apennine. The Goths were not at leisure to observe the beauties of the prospect; but they were pleased to find that the Saxa Intercisa, a narrow passage which Vespasian had cut through the rock (Cluver. Italia Antiq. tom. i. p. 618), was totally neglected.
Besides Virgil, most of the Latin poets, Propertius, Lucan, Silius, Italicus, Claudian, c., whose passages may be found in Cluverius and Addison, have celebrated the triumphal victims of the Clitumnus.
Some ideas of the march of Alaric are borrowed from the journey of Honorius over the same ground (see Claudian in vi. Cons. Hon. 494-522). The measured distance between Ravenna and Rome was 254 Roman miles. Itinerar. Wesseling, p. 126.
The march and retreat of Hannibal are described by Livy, l. xxvi. c. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11; and the reader is made a spectator of the interesting scene.
These comparisons were used by Cineas, the counsellor of Pyrrhus, after his return from his embassy, in which he had diligently studied the discipline and manners of Rome. See Plutarch. in Pyrrho, tom. ii. p. 459 [c. 19].
In the three census, which were made of the Roman people, about the time of the second Punic war, the numbers stand as follows (see Livy, Epitom. l. xx. Hist. l. xxvii. 36, xxix. 37), 270, 213, 137, 108, 214,000. The fall of the second, and the rise of the third, appears so enormous that several critics, notwithstanding the unanimity of the MSS., have suspected some corruption of the text of Livy. (See Drakenborch ad xxvii. 36, and Beaufort, République Romaine, tom. i. p. 325.) They did not consider that the second census was taken only at Rome, and that the numbers were diminished, not only by the death, but likewise by the absence, of many soldiers. In the third census, Livy expressly affirms that the legions were mustered by the care of particular commissaries. From the numbers on the list we must always deduct one twelfth above three score and incapable of bearing arms. See Population de la France, p. 72.