 It is not my intention to detain the reader by expatiating on the variety or the importance of the subject, which I have undertaken to treat, since the merit of the choice would serve to render the weakness of the execution still more apparent and still less excusable. But as I have presumed to lay before the public a first volume only of the history of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire, it will perhaps be expected that I should explain, in a few words, the nature and limits of my general plan. The memorable series of revolutions, which in the course of about thirteen centuries gradually undermined and at length destroyed the solid fabric of human greatness, may with some propriety be divided into the three following periods. The first of these periods may be traced from the age of Trajan and the Antonines, when the Roman monarchy, having attained its full strength and maturity, began to verge toward its decline, and will extend to the subversion of the Western Empire by the barbarians of Germany and Cyphea, the rude ancestors of the most polished nations of modern Europe. This extraordinary revolution, which subjected Rome to the power of a gothic conqueror, was completed about the beginning of the sixth century. The second period of the decline and fall of Rome may be supposed to commence with the reign of Justinian, who by his laws as well as by his victories restored a transient splendor to the Eastern Empire. It will comprehend the invasion of Italy by the Lombards, the conquest of the Asiatic and African provinces by the Arabs, who embraced the religion of Muhammad, the revolt of the Roman people against the feeble princes of Constantinople, and the elevation of Charlemagne, who in the year eight hundred established the second or German Empire of the West. The last and longest of these periods includes about six centuries and a half from the revival of the Western Empire till the taking of Constantinople by the Turks, and the extinction of a degenerate race of princes who continued to assume the titles of Caesar and Augustus after their dominions were contracted to the limits of a single city, in which the language as well as manners of the ancient Romans had been long since forgotten. The writer who should undertake to relate the events of this period would find himself obliged to enter into the general history of the Crusades as far as they contributed to the ruin of the Greek Empire, and he would scarcely be able to restrain his curiosity for making some inquiry into the state of the city of Rome during the darkness and confusion of the Middle Ages. As I have ventured perhaps too hastily to commit to the press a work which in every sense of the word deserves the epithet of imperfect. I consider myself as contracting an engagement to finish, most probably in a second volume the first of these memorable periods, and to deliver to the public the complete history of the decline and fall of Rome, from the age of the Antonines to the subversion of the Western Empire. With regard to the subsequent periods, though I may entertain some hopes I dare not presume to give any assurances. The execution of the extensive plan which I have described would connect the ancient and modern history of the world, but it would require many years of health, of leisure, and of perseverance. BENTONIC STREET FEBRUARY 1, 1776 ADDITION The entire history, which is now published, of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire in the West, abundantly discharges my engagements with the public. Perhaps their favourable opinion may encourage me to prosecute a work which, however laborious it may seem, is the most agreeable occupation of my leisure hours. BENTONIC STREET MARCH 1, 1781 An author easily persuades himself that the public opinion is still favourable to his labours, and I have now embraced the serious resolution of proceeding to the last period of my original design and of the Roman Empire, the taking of Constantinople by the Turks, in the year 1453. The most patient reader, who computes that three ponderous volumes have already been employed on the events of four centuries, may perhaps be alarmed at the long prospect of nine hundred years. But it is not my intention to expatiate with the same minuteness on the whole series of the Byzantine history. At our entrance into this period, the reign of Justinian, and the conquest of the Muhammadans will deserve and detain our attention, and the last age of Constantinople, the Crusades and Turks, is connected with the revolutions of modern Europe. From the seventh to the eleventh century, the obscure interval will be supplied by a concise narrative of such facts, as may still appear either interesting or important. Betnik Street, March 1, 1782 Preface to the first volume. Diligence and accuracy are the only merits to which an historical writer may ascribe to himself. If any merit indeed can be assumed from the performance of an indispensable duty. I may therefore be allowed to say that I have carefully examined all the original materials that could illustrate the subject which I had undertaken to treat. Should I ever complete the extensive design which has been sketched out in the preface, I might perhaps conclude it with a critical account of the authors consulted during the progress of the whole work, and however such an attempt might incur the censure of ostentation. I am persuaded that it would be susceptible of entertainment, as well as information. At present I shall content myself with a single observation. The biographers who, under the reigns of Diocletian and Constantine, composed, or rather compiled, the lives of the emperors, from Hadrian to the sons of Caeris, are usually mentioned under the names of Aelius Spartianus, Julius Capitolanus, Aelius Limpridius, Volcataeus Galicanus, Trebulius Polio, and Flavius Vopiscus. But there is so much perplexity in the titles of the manuscripts, and so many disputes that have arisen among the critics concerning their number, their names, and their respective property, that for the most part I have quoted them without distinction under the general and well-known title of the Augustan history. Preface to the fourth volume of the original quarto edition. I now discharge my promise and complete my design of writing the history of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire, both in the West and in the East. The whole period extends from the Age of Trajan and the Antonites to the taking of Constantinople by Mohammed II, and includes a review of the Crusades and the State of Rome during the Middle Ages. Since the publication of my first volume, twelve years have elapsed—twelve years, according to my wish, of health, of leisure, and of perseverance. I may now congratulate my deliverance from a long and laborious service, and my satisfaction will be pure and perfect if the public favour should be extended to the conclusion of my work. It was my first intention to have collected, under one view the numerous authors of every age and language from whom I have derived the materials of this history, and I am still convinced that the apparent ostentation would be more than compensated by real use. If I have renounced this idea, if I have declined an undertaking which had obtained the approbation of a master artist, my excuse may be found in the extreme difficulty of assigning a proper measure to such a catalogue. A naked list of names and editions would not be satisfactory either to myself or my readers. The characters of the principal authors of the Roman and Byzantine history have been occasionally connected with the events which they describe. A more copious and critical enquiry might indeed deserve, but it would demand, an elaborate volume, which might swell by degrees into a general library of historical writers. For the present, I shall content myself with renewing my serious protestation that I have always endeavored to draw from my fountain-head, that my curiosity, as well as a sense of duty, has always urged me to study the originals, and that if they have sometimes eluded my search, I have carefully marked the secondary evidence on whose faith a passage or fact were reduced to depend. I shall soon revisit the banks of the Lake of Lausanne, a country which I have known and loved from my early youth, under a mild government, amidst a beautyous landscape, in a life of leisure and independence, and among a people of easy and elegant manners I have enjoyed, and may again hope to enjoy, the varied pleasures of retirement and society. But I shall ever glory in the name and character of an Englishman. I am proud of my birth in a free and enlightened country, and the approbation of that country is the best and most honourable reward of my labours. Where I am vicious of any other patron than the public, I would inscribe this work to a statesman, who in a long, a stormy, and at length an unfortunate administration had many political opponents, almost without a personal enemy, who has retained in his fall from power many faithful and disinterested friends, and who under the pressure of severe infirmity enjoys the lively vigor of his mind and the felicity of his incomparable temper. Lord North will permit me to express the feelings of friendship in the language of truth, but even truth and friendship should be silent if he is still dispensed to the favours of the crown. In a remote solitude vanity may still whisper in my ear that my readers, perhaps, may inquire whether, in the conclusion of the present work, I am now taking an everlasting farewell. They shall hear all that I know myself, and all that I could reveal to the most intimate friend. The motives of action or silence are now equally balanced, nor can I pronounce in my most secret thoughts on which side the scale will preponderate. I cannot dissemble that six quartos must have tried, and may have exhausted, the indulgence of the public, that in the repetition of similar attempts a successful author has much more to lose than he can hope to gain, that I am now descending into the veil of years, and that the most respectable of my countrymen, the men whom I aspire to imitate, have resigned the pen of history about the same period of their lives. But I consider that the annals of ancient and modern times may afford many rich and interesting subjects, that I am still possessed of health and leisure, that by the practice of writing some skill and facility must be acquired, and that in the ardent pursuit of truth and knowledge I am not conscious of decay. To an active mind, indolence is more painful than labour, and the first months of my liberty will be occupied and amused in the excursions of curiosity and taste. By such temptations I have been sometimes seduced from the rigid duty even of a pleasing and voluntary task, but my time will now be my own, and in the use or abuse of independence I shall no longer fear my own reproaches or those of my friends. I am fairly entitled to a year of jubilee, next summer and the following winter will rapidly pass away, and experience only can determine whether I shall still prefer the freedom and variety of study to the design and composition of a regular work, which animates while it confines the daily application of the author. Caprice and accident may influence my choice, but the dexterity of self-love will contrive to applaud either active industry or philosophic repose. Downing Street, May 1, 1788. I shall embrace this opportunity of introducing two verbal remarks which have not conveniently offered themselves to my notice. 1. As often as I use the definitions of beyond the Alps, the Rhine, the Danube, etc., and generally suppose myself at Rome and afterwards at Constantinople, without observing whether this relative geography may agree with the local but variable situation of the reader or the historian. 2. In proper names of foreign and especially of oriental origin, it should always be our aim to express in our English version a faithful copy of the original. But this rule, which is founded on a just regard to uniformity and truth, must often be relaxed, and the exceptions will be limited or enlarged by the custom of the language and the taste of the interpreter. Our alphabets may often be defective, a harsh sound, an uncouth spelling might offend the ear or eye of our countrymen. In some words, notoriously corrupt, are fixed, as it were, naturalized in the vulgar tongue. The Prophet Mohammed can no longer be stripped of the famous, though improper, appellation of Mahomet. The well-known cities of Aleppo, Damascus, and Cairo would be almost lost in the strange descriptions of Halab, Dimash, and Al-Kahira. The titles and offices of the Ottoman Empire are fashioned by the practice of three hundred years, and we are pleased to blend the three Chinese monosyllables Confuci, in the respectable name of Confucius, or even to adopt the Persian corruption of Mandarin. But I would vary the use of Zoroaster and Sertusht, as I drew my information from Greece or Persia, since our connection with India, the genuine Timur, is restored to the throne of Tamerlane. Our most correct writers have retrenched the all, the superfluous article from the Quran, and we escape an ambiguous termination by adopting Muslim instead of Muslim in the plural number. In these, and in a thousand examples, the shades of distinction are often minute, and I can feel where I cannot explain the motives of my choice. End of the prefaces. Chapter 1, Part 1 of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Volume 1 This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Recording by Chris Chapman. The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Edward Gibbon. Chapter 1, The Extent of the Empire in the Age of the Antonines. Chapter 1, Introduction, The Extent and Military Force of the Empire in the Age of the Antonines. In the second century of the Christian era, the Empire of Rome comprehended the fairest part of the earth and the most civilized portion of mankind. The frontiers of that extensive monarchy were guarded by ancient renown and disciplined valor. The gentle but powerful influence of laws and manners had gradually cemented the union of the provinces. Their peaceful inhabitants enjoyed and abused the advantages of wealth and luxury. The image of a free constitution was preserved with decent reverence. The Roman Senate appeared to possess the sovereign authority and devolved on the emperors all the executive powers of government. During a happy period of more than four score years, the public administration was conducted by the virtue and abilities of Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian and the two Antonines. It is the design of this and of the two succeeding chapters to describe the prosperous condition of their empire and afterwards from the death of Marcus Antoninus to deduce the most important circumstances of its decline and fall, a revolution which will ever be remembered and is still felt by the nations of the earth. The principal conquests of the Romans were achieved under the Republic and the emperors for the most part were satisfied with preserving those dominions which had been acquired by the policy of the Senate, the active emulations of the consuls and the martial enthusiasm of the people. The seven first centuries were filled with a rapid succession of triumphs, but it was reserved for Augustus to relinquish the ambitious design of subduing the whole earth and to introduce a spirit of moderation into the public councils. Inclined to peace by his temper and situation, it was easy for him to discover that Rome in her present exalted situation had much less to hope than to fear from the chance of arms and that in the prosecution of remote wars the undertaking became every day more difficult, the event more doubtful and the possession more precarious and less beneficial. The experience of Augustus added weight to these salutary reflections and eventually convinced him that by the prudent vigor of his councils it would be easy to secure every concession which the safety or the dignity of Rome might require from the most formidable barbarians. Instead of exposing his person and his legions to the arrows of the Parthians, he obtained by an honourable treaty the restitution of the standards and prisoners which had been taken in the defeat of Crassus. His generals in the early part of his reign attempted the reduction of Ethiopia and Arabia Felix. They marched near a thousand miles to the south of the tropic but the heat of the climate soon repelled the invaders and protected the unwarlike natives of those sequestered regions. The northern countries of Europe scarcely deserved the expense and labour of conquest. The forests and morasses of Germany were filled with a hardy race of barbarians who despised life when it was separated from freedom and though on the first attack they seemed to yield to the weight of the Roman power, they soon by a signal act of despair regained their independence and reminded Augustus of the vicissitude of fortune. On the death of that emperor his testament was publicly read in the Senate. He bequeathed as a valuable legacy to his successors, the advice of confining the empire within those limits which nature seemed to have placed as its permanent bulwarks and boundaries. On the west the Atlantic Ocean, the Rhine and Danube on the north, the Euphrates on the east and towards the south the sandy deserts of Arabia and Africa. Only for the repose of mankind the moderate system recommended by the wisdom of Augustus was adopted by the fears and vices of his immediate successors. Engaged in the pursuit of pleasure or in the exercise of tyranny, the first Caesar seldom showed themselves to the armies or to the provinces nor were they disposed to suffer that those triumphs which their indolence neglected should be usurped by the conduct and valour of their lieutenants. The military fame of a subject was considered as an insolent invasion of the imperial prerogative and it became the duty as well as interest of every Roman general to guard the frontiers entrusted to his care without aspiring to conquests which might have proved no less fatal to himself than to the vanquished barbarians. The only accession which the Roman Empire received during the first century of the Christian era was the province of Britain. In this single instance the successors of Caesar and Augustus were persuaded to follow the example of the former rather than the precept of the latter. The proximity of its situation to the coast of Gaul seemed to invite their arms. The pleasing though doubtful intelligence of a pearl fishery attracted their avarice and as Britain was viewed in the light of a distinct and insulated world the conquests scarcely formed any exception to the general system of continental measures. After a war of about forty years undertaken by the most stupid, maintained by the most dissolute and terminated by the most timid of all the emperors the far greater part of the island submitted to the Roman yoke. The various tribes of Britain possessed valour without conduct and the love of freedom without the spirit of union. They took up arms with savage fierceness. They laid them down or turned them against each other with wild inconsistency and while they fought singly they were successively subdued. Neither the fortitude of Caractacus nor the despair of Bodicea nor the fanaticism of the druids could avert the slavery of their country or resist the steady progress of the imperial generals who maintained the national glory when the throne was disgraced by the weakest or the most vicious of mankind. At the very time when Domitian confined to his palace felt the terrors which he inspired his legions under the command of the virtuous agricula defeated the collected force of the Caledonians at the foot of the Grampian Hills and his fleets venturing to explore an unknown and dangerous navigation displayed the Roman arms round every part of the island. The conquest of Britain was considered as already achieved and it was the design of agricula to complete and ensure his success by the easy reduction of Ireland for which in his opinion one legion and a few auxiliaries were sufficient. The western isle might be improved into a valuable possession and the Britons would wear their chains with the less reluctance if the prospect and example of freedom were on every side removed from before their eyes. But the superior merit of agricula soon occasioned his removal from the government of Britain and forever disappointed this rational though extensive scheme of conquest. Before his departure the prudent general had provided for security as well as for Domitian. He had observed that the island is almost divided into two unequal parts by the opposite gulfs or as they are now called the Firths of Scotland. Across the narrow interval of about 40 miles he had drawn a line of military stations which was afterwards fortified in the reign of Antoninus Pius by a turf rampart erected on foundations of stone. This wall of Antoninus at a small distance beyond the modern cities of Edinburgh and Glasgow was fixed as the limit of the Roman province. The native Caledonians preserved in the northern extremity of the island their wild independence for which they were not less indebted to their poverty than to their valor. Their incursions were frequently repelled and chastised but their country was never subdued. The masters of the fairest and most wealthy climates of the globe turned with contempt from gloomy hills assailed by the winter tempest, from lakes concealed in a blue mist and from cold and lonely heaths over which the deer of the forest were chased by a troop of naked barbarians. Such was the state of the Roman frontiers and such the maxims of imperial policy from the death of Augustus to the accession of Trajan. That virtuous and active prince had received the education of a soldier and possessed the talents of a general. The peaceful system of his predecessors was interrupted by scenes of war and conquest and the legions after a long interval beheld a military emperor at their head. The first exploits of Trajan were against the Dacians, the most warlike of men, who dwelt beyond the Danube and who, during the reign of Domitian, had insulted with impunity the majesty of Rome. To the strength and fierceness of barbarians they added a contempt for life which was derived from a warm persuasion of the immortality and transmigration of the soul. Decebelus the Dacian king approved himself a rival not unworthy of Trajan, nor did he despair of his own and the public fortune till by the confession of his enemies he had exhausted every resource both of valor and policy. This memorable war with a very short suspension of hostilities lasted five years and as the emperor could exert without control the whole force of the state it was terminated by an absolute submission of the barbarians. The new province of Decia which formed a second exception to the precept of Augustus was about 1300 miles in circumference. Its natural boundaries were the Niesta, the Tace or Tabiscus, the Lower Danube and the Uxine Sea. The vestiges of a military road may still be traced from the banks of the Danube to the neighbourhood of Bender, a place famous in modern history and the actual frontier of the Turkish and Russian empires. Trajan was ambitious of fame and as long as mankind shall continue to bestow more liberal applause on their destroyers than on their benefactors the first of military glory will ever be the vice of the most exalted characters. The praises of Alexander transmitted by a succession of poets and historians had kindled a dangerous emulation in the mind of Trajan. Like him the Roman emperor undertook an expedition against the nations of the east but he lamented with a sigh that his advanced age scarcely left him any hopes of equaling the renown of the son of Philip. Yet the success of Trajan, however transient, was rapid and specious. The degenerate Parthians, broken by intestine discord, fled before his arms. He descended the River Tigris in triumph from the mountains of Armenia to the Persian Gulf. He enjoyed the honour of being the first, as he was the last, of the Roman generals who ever navigated that remote sea. His fleets ravaged the coast of Arabia and Trajan vainly flattered himself that he was approaching towards the confines of India. Every day the astonished senate received the intelligence of new names and new nations that acknowledged his sway. They were informed that the kings of Bosphorus, Colchos, Iberia, Albania, Osrowine and even the Parthian monarch himself had accepted their diadems from the hands of the emperor that the independent tribes of the Median and Cardocian hills had implored his protection and that the rich countries of Armenia, Mesopotamia and Assyria were reduced into the state of provinces. But the death of Trajan soon clouded the splendid prospect and it was justly to be dreaded that so many distant nations would throw off the unaccustomed yoke when they were no longer restrained by the powerful hand which had imposed it. End of Chapter 1, Part 1 Chapter 1, Part 2 of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Volume 1. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Recording by Chris Chapman The History of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Volume 1 by Edward Gibbon. Chapter 1, The Extent of the Empire in the Age of the Antonines Part 2 It was an ancient tradition that when the capital was founded by one of the Roman kings, the god Terminus, who presided over boundaries and was represented according to the fashion of that age by a large stone alone among all the inferior deities, refused to yield his place to Jupiter himself. A favourable inference was drawn from his obstinacy, which was interpreted by the augurs as a sure presage that the boundaries of the Roman power would never recede. During many ages, the prediction, as it is usual, contributed to its own accomplishment. But though Terminus had resisted the majesty of Jupiter, he submitted to the authority of the Emperor Hadrian. The resignation of all the eastern conquests of Trajan was the first measure of his reign. He restored to the Parthians the election of an independent sovereign, withdrew the Roman garrisons from the provinces of Armenia, Mesopotamia and Assyria, and in compliance with the precept of Augustus once more established the Euphrates as the frontier of the empire. Sensia, which arraigns the public actions and the private motives of princes, has ascribed to Envy a conduct which might be attributed to the prudence and moderation of Hadrian. The various character of that emperor, capable by turns of the meanest and most generous sentiments, may afford some colour to the suspicion. It was, however, scarcely in his power to place the superiority of his predecessor in a more conspicuous light than by thus confessing himself unequal to the task of defending the conquests of Trajan. The martial and ambitious of spirit Trajan formed a very singular contrast with the moderation of his successor. The restless activity of Hadrian was not less remarkable when compared with the gentle repose of Antoninus Pius. The life of the former was almost a perpetual journey, and as he possessed the various talents of the soldier, the statesman and the scholar, he gratified his curiosity in the discharge of his duty. Careless of the difference of seasons and of climates, he marched on foot and bare-headed over the snows of Caledonia and the sultry plains of the upper Egypt. Nor was there a province of the empire which, in the course of his reign, was not honoured with the presence of the monarch. But the tranquil life of Antoninus Pius was spent in the bosom of Italy, and during the 23 years that he directed the public administration, the longest journeys of that amiable prince extended no farther than from his palace in Rome to the retirement of his Lannuvian villa. Notwithstanding this difference in their personal conduct, the general system of Augustus was equally adopted and uniformly pursued by Hadrian and by the two Antonines. They persisted in the design of maintaining the dignity of the empire without attempting to enlarge its limits. By every honourable expedient, they invited the friendship of the barbarians and endeavoured to convince mankind that the Roman power raised above the temptation of conquest was actuated only by the love of order and justice. During a long period of 43 years, their virtuous labours were crowned with success, and if we accept a few slight hostilities that serve to exercise the legions of the frontier, the reigns of Hadrian and Antoninus Pius offer the fair prospect of universal peace. The Roman name was revered among the most remote nations of the earth. The fiercest barbarians frequently submitted their differences to the arbitration of the emperor, and we are informed by a contemporary historian that he had seen ambassadors who were refused the honour which they came to solicit of being admitted into the rank of subjects. The terror of the Roman arms added weight and dignity to the moderation of the emperors. They preserved peace by a constant preparation for war, and while justice regulated their conduct, they announced to the nations on their confines that they were as little disposed to endure as to offer an injury. The military strength, which it had been sufficient for Hadrian and the elder Antoninus to display, was exerted against the Parthians and the Germans by the Emperor Marcus. The hostilities of the barbarians provoked the resentment of that philosophic monarch, and in the prosecution of a just defense, Marcus and his generals obtained many signal victories, both on the Euphrates and on the Danube. The military establishment of the Roman Empire, which thus assured either its tranquility or success, will now become the proper and important object of our attention. In the purer ages of the Commonwealth, the use of arms was reserved for those ranks of citizens who had a country to love, a property to defend, and some share in enacting those laws, which it was their interest as well as duty to maintain, but in proportion as the public freedom was lost in extent of conquest, war was gradually improved into an art and degraded into a trade. The legions themselves, even at the time when they were recruited in the most distant provinces, were supposed to consist of Roman citizens. That distinction was generally considered either as a legal qualification or as a proper recompense for the soldier, but a more serious regard was paid to the essential merit of age, strength, and military stature. In all levies, a just preference was given to the climates of the north over those of the south. The race of men born to the exercise of arms was sought for in the country, rather than in cities, and it was very reasonably presumed that the hardy occupations of smiths, carpenters, and huntsmen would supply more vigor and resolution than the sedentary trades which are employed in the service of luxury. After every qualification of property had been laid aside, the armies of the Roman emperors were still commanded, for the most part, by officers of liberal birth and education, but the common soldiers, like the mercenary troops of modern Europe, were drawn from the menest and very frequently from the most profligate of mankind. That public virtue, which among the ancients was denominated patriotism, is derived from a strong sense of our own interest in the preservation and prosperity of the free government of which we are members. Such a sentiment, which had rendered the legions of the Republic almost invincible, could make but a very feeble impression on the mercenary servants of a despotic prince, and it became necessary to supply that defect by other motives, of a different but not less forcible nature, honour, and religion. The peasant or mechanic imbibed the useful prejudice that he was advanced to the more dignified profession of arms, in which his rank and reputation would depend on his own valor, and that although the prowess of a private soldier must often escape the notice of fame, his own behaviour might sometimes confer glory or disgrace on the company, the legion, or even the army to whose honours he was associated. On his first entrance into the service, an oath was administered to him with every circumstance of solemnity. He promised never to desert his standard, to submit his own will to the commands of his leaders, and to sacrifice his life for the safety of the Emperor and the Empire. The attachment of the Roman troops to their standards was inspired by the united influence of religion and of honour. The golden eagle, which glittered in the front of the legion, was the object of their fondest devotion, nor was it esteemed less impious than it was ignominious to abandon that sacred ensign in the hour of danger. These motives, which derived their strength from the imagination, were enforced by fears and hopes of a more substantial kind. Regular pay, occasional donatives, and a stated recompense after the appointed time of service alleviated the hardships of the military life, whilst on the other hand it was impossible for cowardice or disobedience to escape the severest punishment. The centurions were authorised to chastise with blows. The generals had a right to punish with death, and it was an inflexible maxim of Roman discipline, that a good soldier should dread his officers, far more than the enemy. From such laudable arts did the valour of the Imperial troops receive a degree of firmness and docility, unattainable by the impetuous and irregular passions of barbarians. And yet so sensible were the Romans of the imperfection of valour without skill and practice, that in their language the name of an army was borrowed from the word which signified exercise. Military exercises were the important and unremitted object of their discipline. The recruits and young soldiers were constantly trained, both in the morning and in the evening, nor was age or knowledge allowed to excuse the veterans from the daily repetition of what they had completely learnt. Large sheds were erected in the winter quarters of the troops, that their useful labours might not receive any interruption from the most tempestuous weather, and it was carefully observed that the arms destined to this imitation of war should be of double the weight which was required in real action. It is not the purpose of this work to enter into any minute description of the Roman exercises. We shall only remark that they comprehended whatever could add strength to the body, activity to the limbs, or grace to the motions. The soldiers were diligently instructed to march, to run, to leap, to swim, to carry heavy burdens, to handle every species of arms that was used either for a fence or for defence, either in distant engagement or in a closer onset, to form a variety of evolutions, and to move to the sound of flutes in the pyrrhic or marshal dance. In the midst of peace the Roman troops familiarised themselves with the practice of war, and it is prettily remarked by an ancient historian who had fought against them that the effusion of blood was the only circumstance which distinguished a field of battle from a field of exercise. It was the policy of the ablest generals and even of the emperors themselves to encourage these military studies by their presence and example, and we are informed that Hadrian as well as Trajan frequently condescended to instruct the unexperienced soldiers to reward the diligent and sometimes to dispute with them the prize of superior strength or dexterity. Under the reigns of those princes the science of tactics was cultivated with success, and as long as the empire retained any vigor their military instructions were respected as the most perfect model of Roman discipline. Nine centuries of war had gradually introduced into the service many alterations and improvements. The legions as they are described by Polybius in the time of the Punic wars differed very materially from those which achieved the victories of Caesar or defended the monarchy of Hadrian and the Antonines. The constitution of the imperial legion may be described in a few words. The heavily armed infantry, which composed its principal strength, was divided into ten cohorts and fifty-five companies under the orders of a correspondent number of tribunes and centurions. The first cohort, which always claimed the post of honor and the custody of the eagle, was formed of eleven hundred and five soldiers, the most approved for valor and fidelity. The remaining nine cohorts consisted each of five hundred and fifty-five and the whole body of legionary infantry amounted to six thousand one hundred men. Their arms were uniform and admirably adapted to the nature of their service. An open helmet with a lofty crest, a breastplate or coat of mail, greaves on their legs and an ample buckler on their left arm. The buckler was of an oblong and concave figure, four feet in length and two and a half in breadth, framed of a light wood, covered with a ball's hide, and strongly guarded with plates of brass. Besides a lighter spear, the legionary soldier grasped in his right hand the formidable pylum, a ponderous javelin whose utmost length was about six feet, and which was terminated by a massy triangular point of steel of eighteen inches. This instrument was indeed much inferior to our modern firearms, since it was exhausted by a single discharge at the distance of only ten or twelve paces. Yet, when it was launched by a firm and skillful hand, there was not any cavalry that durced venture within its reach, nor any shield or coarselet that could sustain the impetuosity of its weight. As soon as the Roman had darted his pylum, he drew his sword and rushed forwards to close with the enemy. His sword was a short, well-tempered Spanish blade that carried a double edge and was alike suited to the purpose of striking or of pushing. But the soldier was always instructed to prefer the latter use of his weapon, as his own body remained less exposed, while he inflicted a more dangerous wound on his adversary. The legion was usually drawn up eight deep, and the regular distance of three feet was left between the files as well as ranks. A body of troops, habituated to preserve this open order in a long front and a rapid charge, found themselves prepared to execute every disposition which the circumstances of war or the skill of their leader might suggest. The soldier possessed a free space for his arms and motions, and sufficient intervals were allowed, through which seasonable reinforcements might be introduced, to the relief of the exhausted combatants. The tactics of the Greeks and Macedonians were formed on very different principles. The strength of the phalanx depended on 16 ranks of long pikes wedged together in the closest array, but it was soon discovered by reflection, as well as by the event that the strength of the phalanx was unable to contend with the activity of the legion. The cavalry, without which the force of the legion would have remained imperfect, was divided into ten troops or squadrons. The first, as the companion of the first cohort, consisted of 132 men, whilst each of the other nine amounted only to 66. The entire establishment formed a regiment, if we may use the modern expression, of 726 horse, naturally connected with its respective legion, but occasionally separated to act in the line and to compose a part of the wings of the army. The cavalry of the emperors was no longer composed, like that of the ancient republic, of the noblest youths of Rome and Italy, who by performing their military service on horseback prepared themselves for the officers of senator and consul, and solicited by deeds of valor the future suffragers of their countrymen. Since the alteration of manners and government, the most wealthy of the equestrian order were engaged in the administration of justice and of the revenue, and whenever they embraced the profession of arms, they were immediately entrusted with a troop of horse or a cohort of foot. Trajan and Hadrian formed their cavalry from the same provinces and the same class of their subjects, which recruited the ranks of the legion. The horses were bred for the most part in Spain or Cappadocia. The Roman troopers despised the complete armour with which the cavalry of the east was encumbered. Their more useful arms consisted in a helmet, an oblong shield, light boots, and a coat of mail. A javelin and a long broadsword were their principal weapons of offence. The use of lancers and of iron maces, they seemed to have borrowed from the barbarians. The safety and honour of the empire was principally entrusted to the legions, but the policy of Rome condescended to adopt every useful instrument of war. Considerable levies were regularly made among the provincials, who had not yet deserved the honourable distinction of Romans. Many dependent princes and communities dispersed round the frontiers were permitted for a while to hold their freedom and security by the tenure of military service. Even select troops of hostile barbarians were frequently compelled or persuaded to consume their dangerous valor in remote climates and for the benefit of the state. All these were included under the general name of auxiliaris, and howsoever they might vary according to the difference of times and circumstances, their numbers were seldom much inferior to those of the legions themselves. Among the auxiliaris the bravest and most faithful bands were placed under the command of prefects and centurions and severely trained in the arts of Roman discipline, but the far greater part retained those arms to which the nature of their country or their early habits of life more peculiarly adapted them. By this institution each legion to whom a certain proportion of auxiliaris was allotted contained within itself every species of lighter troops and of missile weapons, and was capable of encountering every nation with the advantages of its respective arms and discipline. Nor was the legion destitute of what, in modern language, would be styled a train of artillery. It consisted in ten military engines of the largest and fifty-five of a smaller size, but all of which, either in an oblique or horizontal manner, discharged stones and darts with irresistible violence. The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Edward Gibbon, Volume 1, Chapter 1, The Extent of the Empire in the Age of the Antonines, Part 3. The camp of a Roman legion presented the appearance of a fortified city, as soon as the space was marked out, the pioneers carefully levelled the ground and removed every impediment that might interrupt its perfect regularity. Its form was an exact quadrangle, and we may calculate that a square of about seven hundred yards was sufficient for the encampment of twenty thousand Romans, though a similar number of our own troops would expose to the enemy a front of more than treble that extent. In the midst of the camp, the praetorium, or general's quarters, rose above the others. The cavalry, the infantry, and the auxiliaries occupied their respective stations. The streets were broad and perfectly straight, and a vacant space of two hundred feet was left on all sides between the tents and the rampart. The rampart itself was usually twelve feet high, armed with a line of strong and intricate palisades, and defended by a ditch of twelve feet in depth, as well as in breadth. This important labour was performed by the hands of the legionaries themselves, to whom the use of the spade and the pickaxe was no less familiar than that of the sword or pylon. Active valour may often be the present of nature, but such patient diligence can be the fruit only of habit and discipline. Whenever the trumpet gave the signal of departure, the camp was almost instantly broke up, and the troops fell into their ranks without delay or confusion. Besides their arms, which the legionaries scarcely considered as an encumbrance, they were laden with their kitchen furniture, the instruments of fortification, and the provision of many days. Under this weight, which would oppress the delicacy of a modern soldier, they were trained by a regular step to advance in about six hours near twenty miles. On the appearance of an enemy, they threw aside their baggage, and by easy and rapid evolutions converted the column of march into an order of battle. The slingers and archers skirmished in the front. The auxiliaries formed the first line, and were seconded or sustained by the strength of the legions. The cavalry covered the flanks, and the military engines were placed in the rear. Such were the arts of war by which the Roman emperors defended their extensive conquests, and preserved a military spirit at a time when every other virtue was oppressed by luxury and despotism. If, in the consideration of their armies, we pass from their discipline to their numbers, we shall not find it easy to define them with any tolerable accuracy. We may compute, however, that the legion, which was itself a body of 6,831 Romans, might, with its attendant auxiliaries, amount to about 12,500 men. The peace establishment of Hadrian and his successors was composed of no less than 30 of these formidable brigades, and most probably formed a standing force of 375,000 men. Instead of being confined within the walls of fortified cities, which the Romans considered as the refuge of weakness or pusillanimity, the legions were encamped on the banks of the Great Rivers and along the frontiers of the barbarians. As their stations for the most part remained fixed and permanent, we may venture to describe the distribution of the troops. Three legions were sufficient for Britain. The principal strength lay upon the Rhine and Danube and consisted of 16 legions in the following proportions, two in the lower and three in the upper Germany, one in Ricia, one in Noricum, four in Pannonia, three in Misia and two in Dacia. The defence of the Euphrates was entrusted to eight legions, six of whom were planted in Syria and the other two in Cappadocia. With regard to Egypt, Africa and Spain, as they were far removed from any important scene of war, a single legion maintained the domestic tranquility of each of these great provinces. Even Italy was not left destitute of a military force. Above 20,000 chosen soldiers, distinguished by the titles of city cohorts and Praetorian guards, watched over the safety of the monarch and the capital. As the authors of almost every revolution that distracted the empire, the Praetorians will, very soon and very loudly, demand our attention, but in their arms and institutions we cannot find any circumstance which discriminated them from the legions, unless it were a more splendid appearance and a less rigid discipline. The navy maintained by the emperors might seem inadequate to their greatness, but it was fully sufficient for every useful purpose of government. The ambition of the Romans was confined to the land, nor was that war-like people ever actuated by the enterprising spirit which had prompted the navigators of Tyre, of Carthage and even of Marseilles to enlarge the bounds of the world and to explore the most remote coasts of the ocean. To the Romans, the ocean remained an object of terror rather than of curiosity. The whole extent of the Mediterranean, after the destruction of Carthage and the extirpation of the pirates, was included within their provinces. The policy of the emperors was directed only to preserve the peaceful dominion of that sea and to protect the commerce of their subjects. With these moderate views, Augustus stationed two permanent fleets in the most convenient ports of Italy, the one at Ravenna on the Adriatic, the other at Mesennum in the Bay of Naples. Experienced seams at length to have convinced the ancients that as soon as their galleys exceeded two or at the most three ranks of oars, they were suited rather for vain pomp than for real service. Augustus himself, in the victory of Actium, had seen the superiority of his own light frigates, they were called Liburnians, over the lofty but unwieldy castles of his rival. Of these Liburnians he composed the two fleets of Ravenna and Mesennum, destined to command the one the eastern and the other the western division of the Mediterranean, and to each of the squadrons he attached a body of several thousand marines. Besides these two ports, which may be considered as the principal seats of the Roman Navy, a very considerable force was stationed at Freidjus, on the coast of Provence, and the uke sign was guarded by forty ships and three thousand soldiers. To all these we had the fleet which preserved the communication between Gaul and Britain, and a great number of vessels constantly maintained on the Rhine and Danube to harass the country, or to intercept the passage of the barbarians. If we review this general state of the imperial forces, of the cavalry as well as infantry, of the legions, the auxiliaries, the guards, and the navy, the most liberal computation will not allow us to fix the entire establishment by sea and by land at more than four hundred and fifty thousand men. A military power which, however formidable it may seem, was equaled by a monarch of the last century, whose kingdom was confined within a single province of the Roman Empire. We have attempted to explain the spirit which moderated and the strength which supported the power of Hadrian and the Antonines. We shall now endeavour, with clearness and precision, to describe the provinces once united under their sway, but at present divided into so many independent and hostile states. Spain, the western extremity of the empire of Europe and of the ancient world, has in every age invariably preserved the same natural limits, the Pyrenean mountains, the Mediterranean, and the Atlantic Ocean. That great peninsula, at present so unequally divided between two sovereigns, was distributed by Augustus into three provinces, Lusitania, Baetica, and Taracanensis. The kingdom of Portugal now fills the place of the warlike country of the Lusitanians, and the loss sustained by the former on the side of the east is compensated by an accession of territory towards the north. The confines of Grenada and Andalusia correspond with those of ancient Baetica. The remainder of Spain, Galicia and the Astorias, Biscay and Navar, Leon and the two Castiles, Mercia, Valencia, Catalonia and Aragon, all contributed to form the third and most considerable of the Roman governments, which from the name of its capital was styled the province of Tarragona. Of the native barbarians, the Celtiberians were the most powerful, as the Cantabrians and Asturians proved the most obstinate. Confident in the strength of their mountains, they were the last who submitted to the arms of Rome, and the first who threw off the yoke of the Arabs. Ancient Gaul, as it contained the whole country between the Pyrenees, the Alps, the Rhine and the Ocean, was of greater extent than modern France. To the dominions of that powerful monarchy, with its recent acquisitions of Alsace and Lorraine, we must add the Duchy of Savoy, the Cantons of Switzerland, the four electorates of the Rhine and the territories of Lige, Luxembourg, Haino, Flanders and Brabant. When Augustus gave laws to the conquests of his father, he introduced a division of Gaul, equally adapted to the progress of the legions to the course of the rivers and to the principal national distinctions, which had comprehended above a hundred independent states. The sea coast of the Mediterranean, Longdoke, Provence and Dauphiné received their provincial appellation from the colony of Narbonne. The government of Aquitaine was extended from the Pyrenees to the Loire. The country between the Loire and the Seine was styled the Celtic Gaul, and soon borrowed a new denomination from the celebrated colony of Lugdunum, or Leon. The Belgique lay beyond the Seine, and in more ancient times had been bounded only by the Rhine, but a little before the age of Caesar, the Germans, abusing their superiority of Valar, had occupied a considerable portion of the Belgique territory. The Roman conquerors very eagerly embraced so flattering a circumstance, and the Gallic frontier of the Rhine, from Basel to Leiden, received the pompous names of the Upper and the Lower Germany, such under the reign of the Antonines were the six provinces of Gaul, the Narbonnese, Aquitaine, the Celtic, or Leonese, the Belgique, and the two Germanes. We have already had occasion to mention the conquest of Britain, and to fix the boundary of the Roman province in this island. It comprehended all England, Wales, and the Lowlands of Scotland, as far as the friths of Dumbarton and Edinburgh. Before Britain lost her freedom, the country was irregularly divided between thirty tribes of barbarians, of whom the most considerable were the Belgique in the west, the Brigantes in the north, the Siluris in south Wales, and the Isenai in Norfolk and Suffolk. As far as we can either trace or credit the resemblance of manners and language, Spain, Gaul, and Britain were peopled by the same hardy race of savages. Before they yielded to the Roman arms, they often disputed the field, and often renewed the contest. After their submission, they constituted the western division of the European provinces, which extended from the columns of Hercules to the wall of Antoninus, and from the mouth of the Tagus to the sources of the Rhine and Danube. Before the Roman conquest, the country which is now called Lombardy was not considered as a part of Italy. It had been occupied by a powerful colony of Gauls, who, settling themselves along the banks of the Po, from Piedmont to Romania, carried their arms and diffused their name from the Alps to the Apennine. The Ligurians dwelt on the rocky coast, which now forms the Republic of Genoa. Venice was yet unborn, but the territories of that state, which lie to the east of the Adige, were inhabited by the Venetians. The middle part of the peninsula, that now composes the Duchy of Tuscany and the Ecclesiastical State, was the ancient seat of the Etruscans and Umbrians, to the former of whom Italy was indebted for the first rudiments of civilised life. The Tiber rolled at the foot of the Seven Hills of Rome, and the country of the Sabines, the Latins, and the Volci, from that river to the frontiers of Naples, was the theatre of her infant victories. On that celebrated ground the first consuls deserved triumphs, their successors adorned villas, and their posterity have erected convents. Capua and Campania possessed the immediate territory of Naples, the rest of the kingdom was inhabited by many warlike nations, the Marci, the Samnites, the Apuleans, and the Lucanians, and the sea coasts had been covered by the flourishing colonies of the Greeks. We may remark that when Augustus divided Italy into eleven regions, the little province of Istria was annexed to that seat of Roman sovereignty. The European provinces of Rome were protected by the course of the Rhine and the Danube. The latter of those mighty streams, which rises at the distance of only 30 miles from the former, flows above 1300 miles, for the most part to the southeast, collects the tribute of 60 navigable rivers, and is at length, through six mouths, received into the Uxine, which appears scarcely equal to such an accession of waters. The provinces of the Danube soon acquired the general appellation of Illyricum, or the Illyrian Frontier, and were esteemed the most warlike of the Empire, but they deserved to be more particularly considered under the names of Ricia, Noricum, Pannonia, Dalmatia, Dacia, Mesia, Thrace, Macedonia, and Greece. The province of Ricia, which soon extinguished the name of the Vindalicians, extended from the summit of the Alps to the banks of the Danube, from its source, as far as its conflicts with the Inn, the greatest part of the flat country is subject to the Elector of Bavaria, the city of Augsburg is protected by the constitution of the German Empire, the Griesons are safe in their mountains, and the country of Tyrol is ranked among the numerous provinces of the House of Austria. The wide extent of territory which is included between the Inn, the Danube, and the Sarve, Austria, Styria, Carinthia, Carniola, the Lower Hungary, and Sklavonia was known to the ancients under the names of Noricum and Pannonia. In their original state of independence, their fierce inhabitants were intimately connected. Under the Roman government they were frequently united, and they still remain the patrimony of a single family. They now contain the residence of a German Prince, who styles himself Emperor of the Romans, and form the centre, as well as strength, of the Austrian power. It may not be improper to observe that if we accept Bohemia, Moravia, the northern scuts of Austria, and a part of Hungary between the Tase and the Danube, all the other dominions of the House of Austria were comprised within the limits of the Roman Empire. Dalmatia, to which the name of Illyricum more properly belonged, was a long but narrow tract between the Sarve and the Adriatic. The best part of the sea coast, which still retains its ancient appellation, is a province of the Venetian state, and the seat of the Little Republic of Ragoosa. The inland parts have assumed the Sklavonian names of Croatia and Bosnia. The former obeys an Austrian governor, the latter a Turkish Pasha, but the whole country is still infested by tribes of barbarians, whose savage independence irregularly marks the doubtful limit of the Christian and Mohammedan power. After the Danube had received the waters of the Tase and the Sarve, it acquired, at least among the Greeks, the name of Istha. It formally divided Misia and Dacia, the latter of which, as we have already seen, was a conquest of Trajan, and the only province beyond the river. If we inquire into the present state of those countries, we shall find that, on the left hand of the Danube, Temesvar and Transylvania have been annexed, after many revolutions, to the crown of Hungary, whilst the principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia acknowledged the supremacy of the Ottoman port. On the right hand of the Danube, Misia, which during the Middle Ages was broken into the barbarian kingdoms of Serbia and Bulgaria, is again united in Turkish slavery. The Appalachian of Rumelia, which is still bestowed by the Turks on the extensive countries of Thrace, Macedonia and Greece, preserves the memory of their ancient state under the Roman Empire. In the time of the Antonines, the martial regions of Thrace, from the mountains of Hemus and Rodopy, to the Bosphorus and the Helispont, had assumed the form of a province. Notwithstanding the change of masters and of religion, the new city of Rome, founded by Constantine on the banks of the Bosphorus, has ever since remained the capital of a great monarchy. The Kingdom of Macedonia, which under the reign of Alexander gave laws to Asia, derived more solid advantages from the policy of the two Philips, and with its dependencies of Epirus and Thessaly, extended from the Aegean to the Ionian Sea. When we reflect on the fame of Thebes and Argos of Sparta and Athens, we can scarcely persuade ourselves that so many immortal republics of ancient Greece were lost in a single province of the Roman Empire, which, from the superior influence of the Achaean League, was usually denominated the province of Achaea. Such was the state of Europe under the Roman emperors. The provinces of Asia, without accepting the transient conquests of Trajan, are all comprehended within the limits of the Turkish power. But instead of following the arbitrary divisions of despotism and ignorance, it will be safer for us, as well as more agreeable, to observe the indelible characters of nature. The name of Asia Minor is attributed with some propriety to the peninsula, which can find betwixt the yoke sign in the Mediterranean, advances from the Euphrates towards Europe. The most extensive and flourishing district, westward of Mount Taurus and the River Hallis, was dignified by the Romans with the exclusive title of Asia. The jurisdiction of that province extended over the ancient monarchies of Troy, Lydia and Phrygia, the maritime countries of the Pamphylians, Lycians and Kerians, and the Grecian colonies of Ionia, which equaled in arts, though not in arms, the glory of their parent. The kingdoms of Bithnia and Pontus possessed the northern side of the peninsula, from Constantinople to Trebizond. On the opposite side, the province of Cilicia was terminated by the mountains of Syria, the inland country, separated from the Roman Asia by the River Hallis, and from Armenia by the Euphrates, had once formed the independent kingdom of Cappadocia. In this place we may observe that the northern shores of the yoke sign, beyond Trebizond in Asia and beyond the Danube in Europe, acknowledged the sovereignty of the emperors, and received at their hands either tributary princes or Roman garrisons. Budzak, Krim Tartary, Circassia and Mingrelia are the modern appellations of those savage countries. Under the successors of Alexander, Syria was the seat of the Celusidae, who reigned over Upper Asia till the successful revolt of the Parthians confined their dominions between the Euphrates and the Mediterranean. When Syria became subject to the Romans, it formed the eastern frontier of their empire, nor did that province, in its utmost latitude, know any other bounds than the mountains of Cappadocia to the north, and towards the south, the confines of Egypt and the Red Sea. Phoenicia and Palestine were sometimes annexed to, and sometimes separated from, the jurisdiction of Syria. The former of these was a narrow and rocky coast, the latter was a territory scarcely superior to Wales, either in fertility or extent. Yet Phoenicia and Palestine will forever live in the memory of mankind, since America as well as Europe has received letters from the one, and religion from the other. A sandy desert, a like destitute of wood and water, skirts along the doubtful confine of Syria from the Euphrates to the Red Sea. The wandering life of the Arabs was inseparably connected with their independence, and wherever, on some spots less barren than the rest, they ventured to for many settled habitations, they soon became subject to the Roman Empire. The geographers of antiquity have frequently hesitated to what portion of the globe they should ascribe Egypt. By its situation, that celebrated kingdom is included within the immense peninsula of Africa, but it is accessible only on the side of Asia, whose revolutions in almost every period of history Egypt has humbly obeyed. A Roman prefect was seated on the splendid throne of the Ptolemies, and the iron scepter of the Mamalukes is now in the hands of a Turkish Pasha. The Nile flows down the country, above 500 miles from the Tropic of Cancer to the Mediterranean, and marks on either side of the extent of fertility by the measure of its inundations. Cyrene, situated towards the west and along the sea coast, was first a Greek colony, afterwards a province of Egypt, and is now lost in the desert of Barca. From Cyrene to the ocean, the coast of Africa extends above 1500 miles, yet so closely as it pressed between the Mediterranean and the Sahara, or sandy desert, that its breadth seldom exceeds four score or a hundred miles. The eastern division was considered by the Romans as the more peculiar and proper province of Africa. Till the arrival of the Phoenician colonies, that fertile country was inhabited by the Libyans, the most savage of mankind. Under the immediate jurisdiction of Carthage, it became the centre of commerce and empire, but the Republic of Carthage is now degenerated into the feeble and disorderly states of Tripoli and Tunis. The military government of Algiers oppresses the wide extent of Numidia, as it was once united under Massenissa and Jugurtha, but in the time of Augustus, the limits of Numidia were contracted, and at least two-thirds of the country acquiesced in the name of Mauritania, with the epithet of Caesareansis. The genuine Mauritania, or country of the Moors, which from the ancient city of Tingi, or Tangier, was distinguished by the appellation of Tingitana, is represented by the modern kingdom of Bez. Sal, on the ocean, so infamous at present for its piratical depredations, was noticed by the Romans as the extreme object of their power and almost of their geography. The city of their foundation may still be discovered near Mechnes, the residence of the barbarian whom we condescend to style the Emperor of Morocco, but it does not appear that his more southern dominions, Morocco itself, and Sigilmesa, were ever comprehended within the Roman province. The western parts of Africa are intersected by the branches of Mount Atlas, a name so idly celebrated by the fancy of poets, but which is now diffused over the immense ocean that rolls between the ancient and the new continent. Having now finished the circuit of the Roman Empire, we may observe that Africa is divided from Spain by a narrow strait of about 12 miles, through which the Atlantic flows into the Mediterranean. The columns of Hercules, so famous among the ancients, were two mountains which seem to have been torn asunder by some convulsion of the elements, and at the foot of the European mountain the fortress of Gibraltar is now seated. The whole extent of the Mediterranean Sea, its coasts and its islands were comprised within the Roman Dominion. Of the larger islands, the two Baleares, which derive their name of Mallorca and Minorca from their respective size, are subject at present to the former to Spain, the latter to Great Britain. It is easier to deplore the fate than to describe the actual condition of Corsica. Two Italian sovereigns assume a regal title from Sardinia and Sicily. Crete or Candia, with Cyprus, and most of the smaller islands of Greece and Asia, have been subdued by the Turkish arms, whilst the little rock of Malta defies their power, and has emerged under the government of its military order into fame and opulence. This long enumeration of provinces, whose broken fragments have formed so many powerful kingdoms, might almost induce us to forgive the vanity or ignorance of the ancients. Dazzled with the extensive sway, the irresistible strength, and the real or affected moderation of the emperors, they permitted themselves to despise, and sometimes to forget, the outlying countries which had been left in the enjoyment of a barbarous independence, and they gradually usurped the license of confounding the Roman monarchy with the globe of the earth. But the temper, as well as knowledge of a modern historian, require a more sober and accurate language. He may impress a juster image of the greatness of Rome, by observing that the empire was above 2000 miles in breadth, from the wall of Antoninus and the northern limits of Dacia, to Mount Atlas and the Tropic of Cancer, that it extended in length more than 3000 miles from the western ocean to the Euphrates, that it was situated in the finest part of the temperate zone between the 24th and 56th degrees of northern latitude, and that it was supposed to contain above 1600,000 square miles for the most part of fertile and well-cultivated land. End of chapter one, part three. Chapter two, part one of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire, volume one. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Edward Gibbon. Chapter two, The Internal Prosperity in the Age of the Antonines. Part one, of the union and internal prosperity of the Roman Empire in the Age of the Antonines. It is not alone by the rapidity or extent of conquest that we should estimate the greatness of Rome. The sovereign of the Russian deserts commands a larger portion of the globe. In the seventh summer after his passage of the Hell's Pond, Alexander erected the Macedonian trophies on the banks of the Hephaeces. Within less than a century, the irresistible Genghis and the mogul princes of his race spread their cruel devastations and transient empire from the Sea of China to the confines of Egypt and Germany. But the firm edifice of Roman power was raised and preserved by the wisdom of ages. The obedient provinces of Trajan and the Antonines were united by laws and adorned by arts. They might occasionally suffer from the partial abuse of delegated authority, but the general principle of government was wise, simple, and beneficent. They enjoyed the religion of their ancestors, whilst in civil honors and advantages they were exalted by just degrees to inequality with their conquerors. The policy of the emperors and the senate as far as it concerned religion was happily seconded by the reflections of the enlightened and by the habits of the superstitious part of their subjects. The various modes of worship which prevailed in the Roman world were all considered by the people as equally true, by the philosopher as equally false, and by the magistrate as equally useful, and thus toleration produced not only mutual indulgence, but even religious concord. The superstition of the people was not embittered by any mixture of theological ranker, nor was it confined by the chains of any speculative system. The devout polytheist, though fondly attached to his national rights, admitted with implicit faith the different religions of the earth. Fear, gratitude, and curiosity, a dream or an omen, a singular disorder or a distant journey, perpetually disposed him to multiply the articles of his belief and to enlarge the list of his protectors. The thin texture of the pagan mythology was interwoven with various but not discordant materials. As soon as it was allowed that sages and heroes who had lived or who had died for the benefit of their country were exalted to a state of power and immortality, it was universally confessed that they deserved, if not the adoration, at least the reverence of all mankind. The deities of a thousand groves and a thousand streams possessed in peace their local and respective influence, nor could the Romans who deprecated the wrath of the Tiber deride the Egyptian who presented his offering to the beneficent genius of the Nile. The visible powers of nature, the planets, and the elements were the same throughout the universe. The invisible governors of the moral world were inevitably cast in a similar mold of fiction and allegory. Every virtue and even vice acquired its divine representative, every art and profession its patron, whose attributes in the most distant ages and countries were uniformly derived from the character of their peculiar rotaries. A republic of gods of such opposite tempers and interests required in every system, the moderating hand of a supreme magistrate who, by the progress of knowledge and flattery, was gradually invested with the sublime perfections of an eternal parent and an omnipotent monarch. Such was the mild spirit of antiquity that the nations were less attentive to the differences than to the resemblance of their religious worship. The Greek, the Roman, and the barbarian, as they met before their respective altars easily persuaded themselves that under various names and with various ceremonies they adored the same deities. The elegant mythology of Homer gave a beautiful and almost regular form to the polytheism of the ancient world. The philosophers of Greece deduced their morals from the nature of man rather than from that of God. They meditated, however, on the divine nature as a very curious and important speculation, and in the profound inquiry they displayed the strength and weakness of the human understanding. Of the four most celebrated schools, the Stoics and the Platonists endeavored to reconcile the jarring interests of reason and piety. They have left us the most sublime proofs of the existence and perfections of the first cause, but, as it was impossible for them to conceive the creation of matter, the workmen in the Stoic philosophy was not sufficiently distinguished from the work, whilst on the contrary the spiritual God of Plato and his disciples resembled an idea rather than a substance. The opinions of the academics and epicurians were of a less religious caste, but whilst the modest science of the former induced them to doubt, the positive ignorance of the latter urged them to deny the providence of a supreme ruler. The spirit of inquiry prompted by emulation and supported by freedom had divided the public teachers of philosophy into a variety of contending sects, but the ingenious youth who, from every part, resorted to Athens, and the other seats of learning in the Roman Empire, were alike instructed in every school to reject and despise the religion of the multitude. How, indeed, was it possible that a philosopher should accept as divine truce the idle tales of the poets and the incoherent traditions of antiquity, or that he should adore as gods those imperfect beings whom he must have despised as men? Against such unworthy adversaries, Cicero condescended to employ the arms of reason and eloquence, but the satire of Lucian was a much more adequate, as well as more efficacious, weapon. We may be well assured that a writer, conversant with the world, would never have ventured to expose the gods of his country to public ridicule had they not already been the objects of secret contempt among the polished and enlightened orders of society. Notwithstanding the fashionable irreligion which prevailed in the age of the Antonines, both the interests of the priests and the credulity of the people were sufficiently respected. In their writings and conversation the philosophers of antiquity asserted the independent dignity of reason, but they resigned their actions to the commands of law and custom. Viewing with a smile of pity and indulgence the various errors of the vulgar, they diligently practiced the ceremonies of their fathers, devoutly frequented the temples of the gods, and sometimes condescending to act apart on the theater of superstition, they concealed the sentiments of an atheist under the sacerdotal robes. Reasoners of such a temper were scarcely inclined to wrangle about their respective modes of faith or of worship. It was indifferent to them what shape the folly of the multitude might choose to assume, and they approached with the same inward contempt and the same external reverence, the altars of the Libyan, the Olympian, or the Capitoline Jupiter. It is not easy to conceive from what motives a spirit of persecution could introduce itself into the Roman councils. The magistrates could not be actuated by a blind, though honest, bigotry, since the magistrates were themselves philosophers, and the schools of Athens had given laws to the Senate. They could not be impelled by ambition or avarice, as the temporal and ecclesiastical powers were united in the same hands. The Pontiffs were chosen among the most illustrious of the Senators, and the office of Supreme Pontiff was constantly exercised by the emperors themselves. They knew and valued the advantages of religion as it is connected with civil government. They encouraged the public festivals which humanized the manners of the people. They managed the arts of divination as a convenient instrument of policy, and they respected as the firmest bond of society the useful persuasion that, either in this or in a future life, the crime of perjury is most assuredly punished by the avenging gods. But whilst they acknowledged the general advantages of religion, they were convinced that the various modes of worship contributed alike to the same salutary purposes, and that, in every country, the form of superstition, which had received the sanction of time and experience, was the best adapted to the climate and to its inhabitants. Avarice and taste very frequently dispoiled the vanquished nations of the elegant statues of their gods and the rich ornaments of their temples. But in the exercise of the religion which they derived from their ancestors, they uniformly experienced the indulgence and even protection of the Roman conquerors. The province of Gaul seems, and indeed only seems, an exception to this universal toleration. Under the specious pretext of abolishing human sacrifices, the emperors Tiberius and Claudius suppressed the dangerous power of the Druids, but the priests themselves, their gods and their altars subsisted in peaceful obscurity till the final destruction of paganism. Rome, the capital of a great monarchy, was incessantly filled with subjects and strangers from every part of the world, who all introduced and enjoyed the favored superstitions of their native country. Every city in the empire was justified in maintaining the purity of its ancient ceremonies and the Roman senate, using the common privilege, sometimes interposed to check this inundation of foreign rights. The Egyptian superstition, of all the most contemptible and abject, was frequently prohibited. The temples of Serapis and Isis demolished and their worshipers banished from Rome and Italy. But the zeal of fanaticism prevailed over the cold and feeble efforts of policy. The exiles returned, the proselytites multiplied, the temples were restored with increasing splendor, and Isis and Serapis at length assumed their place among the Roman deities. Nor was this indulgence a departure from the old maxims of government. In the purest ages of the Commonwealth, Sybil and Ascalapius had been invited by solemn embassies, and it was customary to tempt the protectors of besieged cities by the promise of more distinguished honors than they possessed in their native country. Rome gradually became the common temple of her subjects, and freedom of the city was bestowed on all the gods of mankind. The narrow policy of preserving without any foreign mixture the pure blood of the ancient citizens had checked the fortune and hastened the ruin of Athens and Sparta. The aspiring genius of Rome sacrificed vanity to ambition and deemed it more prudent as well as honorable to adopt virtue and merit for her own wheresoever they were found among slaves or strangers, enemies, or barbarians. During the most flourishing era of the Athenian Commonwealth, the number of citizens gradually decreased from about thirty to twenty-one thousand. If, on the contrary, we study the growth of the Roman Republic, we may discover that, notwithstanding the incessant demands of wars and colonies, the citizens who, in the first census of Servius Tullius, amounted to no more than eighty-three thousand were multiplied before the commencement of the social war to the number of four hundred and sixty-three thousand men able to bear arms in the service of their country. When the allies of Rome claimed an equal share of honors and privileges, the Senate indeed preferred the chance of arms to an ignominious concession. The Samnites and the Lucanians paid the severe penalty of their rashness, but the rest of the Italian states, as they successively returned to their duty, were admitted into the bosom of the Republic and soon contributed to the ruin of public freedom. Under a democratic government, the citizens exercised the powers of sovereignty, and those powers will be first abused and afterwards lost if they are committed to an unwieldy multitude. But when the popular assemblies had been suppressed by the administration of the emperors, the conquerors were distinguished from the various nations, only as the first and most honorable order of subjects, and their increase, however rapid, was no longer exposed to the same dangers. Yet the wisest princes, who adopted the maxims of Augustus, guarded with the strictest care the dignity of the Roman name, and diffused the freedom of the city with a prudent liberality. End of Chapter 2 Part 1 Chapter 2 Part 2 of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Edward Gibbon Chapter 2 The Internal Prosperity in the Age of the Antonines Part 2 To the privileges of Romans had been progressively extended to all inhabitants of the empire, an important distinction was preserved between Italy and the provinces. The former was esteemed the center of public unity and the firm basis of the Constitution. Italy claimed the birth, or at least the residence, of the emperors and the senate. The estates of the Italians were exempt from taxes, their persons from arbitrary jurisdiction of governors. Their municipal corporations formed after the perfect model of the capital were entrusted under the immediate eyes of the supreme power with the execution of the laws. From the foot of the Alps to the extremity of Calabria, all the natives of Italy were born citizens of Rome. Their partial distinctions were obliterated, and they insensibly coalesced into one great nation, united by language, manners, and civil institutions, and equal to the weight of a powerful empire. The Republic gloried in her generous policy and was frequently rewarded by the merit and services of her adopted sons. Had she always confined the distinction of Romans to the ancient families within the walls of the city, that immortal name would have been deprived of some of its most noble ornaments. Virgil was a native of Mantua. Horus was inclined to doubt whether he should call himself an Apulian or a Lucanian. It was in Padua that an historian was found worthy to record the majestic series of Roman victories. The Patriot family of the Cados emerged from Tusculum. The little town of Arpinum claimed the double honor of producing Marius and Cicero, the former of whom deserved after Romulus and Camulus, to be styled the third founder of Rome, and the latter after saving his country from the designs of Catelyn, enabled her to contend with Athens for the palm of eloquence. The provinces of the empire, as they have been described in the preceding chapter, were destitute of any public force or constitutional freedom. And in Etruria, in Greece, and in Gaul, it was the first care of the Senate to dissolve those dangerous confederacies which taught mankind that, as the Roman arms prevailed by division, they might be resisted by union. Those princes, whom the ostentation of gratitude or generosity permitted for a while to hold a precarious scepter, were dismissed from their thrones as soon as they had performed their appointed task of fashioning to the yoke the vanquished nations. The free states and cities which had embraced the cause of Rome were rewarded with a nominal alliance, and insensibly sunk into real servitude. The public authority was everywhere exercised by the ministers of the Senate and the emperors, and that authority was absolute and without control. But the same salutary maxims of government which had secured the peace and obedience of Italy were extended to the most distant conquests. A nation of Romans was gradually formed in the provinces by the double expedient of introducing colonies and of admitting the most faithful and deserving of the provincials to the freedom of Rome. Wheresoever the Roman conquers, he inhabits, is a very just observation of Seneca, confirmed by history and experience. The natives of Italy, allured by pleasure or by interest, hasten to enjoy the advantages of victory, and we may remark that about 40 years after the reduction of Asia, 80,000 Romans were massacred in one day by the cruel orders of Mithridates. These voluntary exiles were engaged for the most part in the occupations of commerce, agriculture, and the farm of the revenue. But after the legions were rendered permanent by the emperors, the provinces were peopled by a race of soldiers, and the veterans, whether they received the reward of their service in land or in money, usually settled with their families in the country where they had honorably spent their youth. Throughout the empire, but more particularly in the western parts, the most fertile districts and the most convenient stations were reserved for the establishment of colonies, some of which were of a civil and others of a military nature. In their manners and internal policy, the colonies formed a perfect representation of their great parent, and they were soon endeared to the natives by the ties of friendship and alliance. They effectually diffused irreverence for the Roman name and a desire which was seldom disappointed of sharing in due time its honors and advantages. The municipal cities insensibly equaled the rank and splendor of the colonies, and in the reign of Hadrian it was disputed which was the preferable condition of those societies which it issued from or those which had been received into the bosom of Rome. The rite of Latium, as it was called, conferred on the cities to which it had been granted a more partial favor. The magistrates only, at the expiration of their office, assumed the quality of Roman citizens, but as these offices were annual, in a few years they circulated round the principal families. Those of the provincials who were permitted to bear arms in the legions, those who exercised any civil employment, all in a word who performed any public service or displayed any personal talents, were rewarded with a present whose value was continually diminished by the increasing liberality of the emperors. Yet even in the age of the Antonines, when the freedom of the city had been bestowed on the greater number of their subjects, it was still accompanied with very solid advantages. The bulk of the people acquired with that title the benefit of the Roman laws, particularly in the interesting articles of marriage, testaments, and inheritance, and the road of fortune was open to those whose pretensions were seconded by favor or merit. The grandsons of the Gauls who had besieged Julius Caesar in Alcia, commanded legions, governed provinces, and were admitted into the Senate of Rome. Their ambition, instead of disturbing the tranquility of the state, was intimately connected with its safety and greatness. So sensible were the Romans of the influence of language over national manners that it was their most serious care to extend, with the progress of their arms, the use of the Latin tongue. The ancient dialects of Italy, the Sabine, the Etruscan, and the Venetian, sunk into oblivion, but in the provinces the east was less docile than the west to the voice of its victorious preceptors. This obvious difference marked the two portions of the empire with a distinction of colors which, though it was in some degree concealed during the meridian splendor of prosperity, became gradually more visible as the shades of night descended upon the Roman world. The western countries were civilized by the same hands which subdued them. As soon as the barbarians were reconciled to obedience, their minds were open to any new impressions of knowledge and politeness. The language of Virgil and Cicero, though with some inevitable mixture of corruption, was so universally adopted in Africa, Spain, Gaul, Britain, and Pannonia that the faint traces of the Punic or Celtic idioms were preserved only in the mountains or among the peasants. Education and study insensibly inspired the natives of those countries with the sentiments of Rome, and Italy gave fashions as well as laws to her Latin provincials. They solicited with more ardor and obtained with more faculty the freedom and honors of the state, supported the national dignity in letters and in arms, and at length in the person of Trajan produced an emperor whom the Scipios would not have disowned for their countrymen. The situation of the Greeks was very different from that of the barbarians. The former had been long civilized and corrupted, they had too much taste to relinquish their language, and too much vanity to adopt any foreign institutions. Still preserving the prejudices after they had lost the virtues of their ancestors, they affected to despise the unpolished manners of the Roman conquerors whilst they were compelled to respect their superior wisdom and power. Nor was the influence of the Grecian language and sentiments confined to the narrow limits of that once celebrated country. Their empire, by the progress of colonies and conquests, had been diffused from the Adriatic to the Euphrates and the Nile. Asia was covered with Greek cities, and the long reign of the Macedonian kings had introduced a silent revolution into Syria and Egypt. In their pompous courts, those princes united the elegance of Athens with the luxury of the east, and the example of the court was imitated at an humble distance by the higher ranks of their subjects. Such was the general division of the Roman Empire into the Latin and Greek languages. To these we may add a third distinction for the body of the natives in Syria and especially in Egypt. The use of their ancient dialects by secluding them from the commerce of mankind checked the improvements of those barbarians. The slothful effeminacy of the former exposed them to the contempt, the sullen ferociousness of the latter excited the aversion of the conquerors. Those nations had submitted to the Roman power, but they seldom desired or deserved the freedom of the city, and it was remarked that more than two hundred and thirty years elapsed after the ruin of the Ptolemies before an Egyptian was admitted into the Senate of Rome. It is a just, though trite, observation that victorious Rome was herself subdued by the arts of Greece. Those immortal writers, who still command the admiration of modern Europe, soon became the favorite object of study and imitation in Italy and the western provinces. But the elegant amusements of the Romans were not suffered to intervene with their sound maxims of policy. Whilst they acknowledged the charms of the Greek, they asserted the dignity of the Latin tongue, and the exclusive use of the latter was inflexibly maintained in the administration of civil as well as military government. But two languages exercised at the same time their separate jurisdiction throughout the empire, the former as the natural idiom of science, the latter as the legal dialect of public transactions. Those who united letters with business were equally conversant with both, and it was almost impossible in any province to find a Roman subject of a liberal education who was at once a stranger to the Greek and to the Latin language. It was by such institutions that the nations of the empire insensibly melted away into the Roman name and people. But there still remained in the center of every province and of every family an unhappy condition of men who endured the weight without sharing the benefits of society. In the free states of antiquity the domestic slaves were exposed to the wanton rigor of despotism. The perfect settlement of the Roman empire was preceded by ages of violence and rapine. The slaves consisted for the most part of barbarian captives taken in thousands by the chance of war purchased at a vile price, accustomed to a life of independence and impatient to break and to revenge their fetters. Against such internal enemies whose desperate insurrections had more than once reduced the republic to the brink of destruction the most severe regulations and the most cruel treatment seemed almost justified by the great law of self-preservation. But when the principal nations of Europe, Asia, and Africa were united under the laws of one sovereign the source of foreign supplies flowed with much less abundance and the Romans were reduced to the milder but more tedious method of propagation. In their numerous families and particularly in their country estates they encouraged the marriage of their slaves. The sentiments of nature the habits of education and the possession of a dependent species of property contributed to alleviate the hardships of servitude. The existence of a slave became an object of greater value and though his happiness still depended on the temper and circumstances of the master the humanity of the latter instead of being restrained by fear was encouraged by the sense of his own interest. The progress of manners was accelerated by the virtue or policy of the emperors and by the edicts of Hadrian and the Antonines the protection of the laws was extended to the abject part of mankind. The jurisdiction of life and death over the slaves a power long exercised and often abused was taken out of private hands and reserved to the magistrates alone. The subterraneous prisons were abolished and upon a just complaint of intolerable treatment the injured slave obtained either his deliverance or a less cool master. Hope the best comfort of our imperfect condition was not denied to the Roman slave and if he had any opportunity of rendering himself either useful or agreeable he might very naturally expect that the diligence and fidelity of a few years would be rewarded with the inestimable gift of freedom. The benevolence of the master was so frequently prompted by the meaner suggestions of vanity and avarice that the laws found it more necessary to restrain than encourage a profuse and undistinguishing liberty which might degenerate into a very dangerous abuse. It was a maxim of ancient jurisprudence that a slave had not any country of his own. He acquired with his liberty an admission into the political society of which his patron was a member. The consequences of this maxim would have prostituted the privileges of the Roman city to a mean and promiscuous multitude. Some seasonable exceptions were therefore provided and the honorable distinction was confined to such slaves only as for just causes and with the approbation of the magistrate should receive a solemn and legal manumission. Even these chosen freedmen obtained no more than the private rights of citizens and were rigorously excluded from civil or military honors. Whatever might be the merit or fortune of their sons they likewise were esteemed unworthy of a seat in the senate, nor were the traces of a servile origin allowed to be completely obliterated till the third or fourth generation. Without destroying the distinction of ranks, a distant prospect of freedom and honors was presented even to those whom pride and prejudice almost disdained to number among the human species. It was once proposed to discriminate the slaves by a peculiar habit, but it was justly apprehended that there might be some danger in acquainting them with their own numbers. Without interpreting in their utmost strictness the liberal appellations of legions and myriads, we may venture to pronounce that the proportion of slaves who were valued as property was more considerable than that of servants who can be computed only as an expense. The youths of a promising genius were instructed in the arts and sciences and their price was ascertained by the degree of their skill and talents. Almost every profession, either liberal or mechanical, might be found in the household of an opulent senator. The ministers of pomp and sensuality were multiplied beyond the conception of modern luxury. It was more for the interest of the merchant or manufacturer to purchase than to hire his workmen, and in the country slaves were employed as the cheapest and most laborious instruments of agriculture. To confirm the general observation and to display the multitude of slaves, we might allege a variety of peculiar instances. It was discovered on a very melancholy occasion that four hundred slaves were maintained in a single palace of Rome. The same number of four hundred belonged to an estate which an African widow of a very private condition resigned to her son, whilst she reserved for herself a much larger share of her property. A freedman under the name of Augustus, though his fortune had suffered great losses in the civil wars, left behind him three thousand six hundred yoke of oxen, two hundred and fifty thousand head of smaller cattle, and what was almost included in the description of cattle, four thousand one hundred and sixteen slaves. The number of subjects who acknowledged the laws of Rome of citizens of provincials and slaves cannot now be fixed with such a degree of accuracy as the importance of the object would deserve. We are informed that when the Emperor Claudius exercised the office of censor, he took an account of six million nine hundred and forty five thousand Roman citizens, who, with the proportion of women and children, must have amounted to about twenty millions of souls. The multitude of objects of an inferior rank was uncertain and fluctuating, but after weighing with attention every circumstance which could influence the balance, it seems probable that there existed in the time of Claudius about twice as many provincials as there were citizens of either sex and of every age, and that the slaves were at least equal in number to the free inhabitants of the Roman world. The total amount of this imperfect calculation would rise to about one hundred and twenty millions of persons, a degree of population which possibly exceeds that of modern Europe, and forms the most numerous society that has ever been united under the same system of government. End of Part Two