of the pronaos of a large temple. These are of Cipoline marble, and at
the middle of their height, are full of holes eaten in them by the
file-fish[46].
In the neighbourhood of Puteoli are many relics of ancient grandeur, of
which none deserves more attention than the Campanian Way, paved with
lava, and lined on each side with venerable tombs, the repositories of
the dead, which are richly adorned with stucco in the inside. This road
was made in the most solid, expensive manner, by order of Domitian, and
is frequently the subject of encomium in the poems of Statius.
One of the most striking monuments of the city is the remains of the
mole that formed the ancient part. Several of its piers still stand
unbroken; they are sunk in the water, and once supported arches (to the
number of twenty-five,) part of which remain above the water.
At the end of this mole began the bridge of Caligula, which extended
across part of the bay to Baiæ, no less than half a mile in length in a
straight line. This structure has long since been swept away.
On the hill behind the town are the remains of an amphitheatre, called,
after that at Rome, the Coliseum. It was of considerable magnitude. The
gates, and a large portion of the vault and under apartments, remain.
One of these apartments, or rather dungeons, in which St. Januarius, the
patron saint of Naples, was confined, is now turned into a damp and
gloomy chapel; the arena is a garden; vines, fig-trees, and
pomegranates, have gradually crept up the circumference, and now cover
the slope, and run over the ruin[47].
It is easy to guess what the animation and splendour of Puteoli must
have been, at the time when the riches of the East were poured into its
bosom; and when its climate, wit, and beauty, allured the most opulent
Romans to its vicinity.
Cicero had a marine villa here, called Puteolanum. Pliny relates that it
was on the shore, and adorned with a portico, which seems to have been
remarkable for its beauty. He adds that Cicero erected here a monument,
and that, shortly after his death, a fountain of warm water, very
wholesome for the eyes, burst forth, and gave occasion to an epigram,
which the philosopher quotes with applause[48]. The portico is fallen,
the groves are withered, the fountain dried up, and not a vestige of the
retreat left behind to mark its situation. The verses remain, and
perpetuate the glory of the orator, the fame of the fountain, the beauty
of the villa, and what is more honourable than all united, the gratitude
of Cicero’s freedman, Tullius.
St. Paul landed here in his way from Rhegium to Rome; and found
Christians even in that early age. In the museum of Portici is a picture
presenting a view of ancient Puteoli, supposed to have been painted
before St. Paul landed there. “The picture,” says Mr. Williams, “is of
course very different from the present state of the city; but still a
likeness may be traced, if we keep in view the site of the various
temples, and other objects, the foundations of which are still visible.”
On the sea shore, near Puzzuoli, are also found seals, coins,
cornelians, and agates; bearing impressions of corn, grapes, and
vine-branches, ants, eagles, and other animals. These are thrown up by
the waves, after violent storms; and commemorate the magnificence of a
city, now forming part of the Mediterranean bed[49].
NO. X.—PALMYRA. (TADMOR.)
“As patience is the greatest of friends to the unfortunate, so is
time the greatest of friends to the lovers of landscape. It resolves
the noblest works of art into the most affecting ornaments of created
things. The fall of empires, with which the death of great characters
is so immediately associated, possesses a prescriptive title, as it
were, to all our sympathy; forming at once a magnificent, yet
melancholy spectacle; and awakening in the mind all the grandeur of
solitude. Who would not be delighted to make a pilgrimage to the East
to see the columns of Persepolis, and the still more magnificent
ruins of Palmyra? Where awe springs, as it were, personified from the
fragments, and proclaims instructive lessons from the vicissitudes of
fortune. Palmyra, once a paradise in the centre of inhospitable
deserts, the pride of Solomon, the capital of Zenobia, and the wonder
and admiration of all the East, now lies ‘majestic though in ruins!’
Its glory withered, time has cast over it a sacred grandeur, softened
into grace. History, by its silence, mourns its melancholy destiny;
while immense masses and stupendous columns denote the spot, where
once the splendid city of the desert reared her proud and matchless
towers. Ruins are the only legacy the destroyer left to
posterity.”—HARMONIES OF NATURE.
This city was the capital of Palmyrene, a country on the eastern
boundaries of Syria. Its origin is uncertain; but a portion of its
history is exceedingly interesting; and its vast assemblage of ruins are
beheld with astonishment and rapture by the curious, the learned, and
the elegant.
[Illustration: PALMYRA.]
It was situated in the midst of a large plain, surrounded on three sides
by a long chain of mountains. It stands in a desert, in the pachalic of
Damascus, about forty-eight leagues from Aleppo, and about the same
distance from Damascus, eighty-five miles west from the Euphrates, and
about one hundred and seventeen from the shores of the Mediterranean.
History is, for the most part, silent in regard to the early history of
this city. It is said to have been built by Solomon, after he had
conquered the king of Hamathzoba, within whose dominion the country lay,
in which the city was afterwards erected. He called it Tadmor[50], which
some have construed as the place of Palms[51]; and sometimes “Tadmor in
the Wilderness.”
We are assured by Josephus, that this was the city which the Greeks and
Romans afterwards called Palmyra. His words are:—“Now, Solomon went in
the desert above Syria, and possessed himself of it; and built there a
very great city, which was distant two days’ journey from the upper
Syria, and one day’s journey from the Euphrates, and six long days’
journey from Babylon the great. Now the reason why this city lay so
remote from those parts of Syria, that are inhabited, is this: that
below there is no water to be had; and that it is in that place only
that there are springs and pits of water. When, therefore, he had built
that city, and encompassed it with very strong walls, he gave it the
name of Tadmor; and that is the name it is still called by at this day
among the Syrians[52]: but the Greeks name it Palmyra.”
That the city was built by Solomon is most probable; but that the
present ruins have any relation to buildings of his erection is very
improbable: indeed we must assume it as certain that they are not; they
being entirely those of the Greek orders. With the exception of four
Ionic half-columns in the Temple of the Sun, and two in one of the
mausoleums, the whole architecture of Palmyra is Corinthian. Neither
history nor even tradition, moreover, speaks of any other architect than
Solomon.
Some have been disposed to give it an earlier existence[53]. The Arabic
translator of Chronicles makes Palmyra older than Solomon; John of
Antioch, surnamed Melala, says, that he built it on the spot where David
slew Goliah, in memory of that action; and Abul-Farai mentions in what
year, with the particulars. These and other accounts of the early state
of Palmyra, which might be collected from the Arabic authors, bear such
evident marks of fable and wild conjecture, that we shall pass them
over.
Notwithstanding this, we assume the city to have been founded by the
celebrated king to whom the honour is given: who built the temples is
totally unknown.
The motives which tempted Solomon to build a city in a plain, now
altogether a desert, we copy from Mr. Addison’s Travels to
Damascus:—“The astonishment that takes hold of the mind at the strange
position of this magnificent city, at one time the capital of the East,
on the edge of the great desert, and surrounded for several days’
journey on all sides by naked solitary wilds, is removed by marking well
the peculiarity of its geographical position. The great caravans coming
to Europe, laden with the rich merchandise of India, would naturally
come along the Persian gulf, through the south of Persia, to the
Euphrates, the direct line; their object then would be to strike across
the great Syrian desert as early as possible, to reach the large markets
and ports of Syria. With more than 600 miles of desert without water,
between the mouth of the Euphrates and Syria, they would naturally be
obliged to keep along the banks of that river, until the extent of
desert country became diminished. They would then find the copious
springs of Tadmor the nearest and most convenient to make for; and in
their direct route from the north of India along the Euphrates. These
springs would then immediately become most important, and would
naturally attract the attention of a wise prince like Solomon, who would
‘fence them with strong walls.’ Here the caravans would rest and take in
water; here would congregate the merchants from adjacent countries and
Europe; and from hence the great caravan would be divided into numerous
branches, to the north, south, and west[54]. A large mart for the
exchange of commodities would be established, and an important city
would quickly arise. The choice of this spot by Solomon, we may
naturally consider founded on a policy of enriching himself by drawing
the commerce of India through his dominions, from which commerce,
probably, he derived the wealth for which he is so celebrated. In the
chapter, succeeding that in which Solomon is mentioned to have built
Tadmor in the wilderness, we read that ‘the weight of gold that came to
Solomon in one year, was six hundred three score and six talents of
gold[55]; besides that he had of the merchantmen, and of the traffic of
the spice-merchants, and of all the kings of Arabia, and of the
governors of the country.’”
The city which Solomon built was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar; but who
rebuilt it is entirely unknown. It is not mentioned by Xenophon, in his
history of the expedition of Cyrus the younger, though he gives a very
accurate account of the desert, and must have left this place not a
great way to the right in his march towards Babylon. Nor is it once
alluded to by Diodorus, nor Plutarch, nor Arrian, nor Quintus Curtius,
nor, indeed, by any of the biographers or historians of Alexander;
although he marched through this desert to Thapsacus.
Nor is it taken any notice of as being in existence even in the time of
Seleucus Nicator, he who built so many cities in Syria; nor is it once
mentioned in the history of his successor. It is not even mentioned so
lately as the time in which Pompey the Great conquered the country in
which it is situated. No notice is taken in Roman history of its being
in any way existing, till the time of Mark Antony; who, after the battle
at Philippi, marched against it, as we are told by Appian, with a view
of plundering it; but the inhabitants escaped with their effects over
the Euphrates. This very circumstance proves it to have been at that
time no very large place; added to which, it seems to be certain, that
none of these temples, &c., could have been in existence; for the Romans
had, for some time, been alive to the benefits of works of art;
especially paintings, sculpture, and architecture. His sole object, in
going thither, was to plunder the Palmyrene merchants, who were supposed
to have acquired considerable wealth, by selling the commodities of
India and Arabia.
Added to all this, Strabo, the best and most accurate geographer of
ancient times, does not once speak of its name. The first description of
this now celebrated place is by Pliny; and it runs thus:—“Palmyra is
remarkable for situation, a rich soil, and pleasant streams. It is
surrounded on all sides by a vast sandy desert, which totally separates
it from the rest of the world, and has preserved its independence
between the two great empires of Rome and Parthia, whose first care,
when at war, is to engage it in their interest. It is distant from
Seleucia three hundred and thirty-seven miles; from the Mediterranean
two hundred and three; and from Damascus one hundred and seventy-six.”
These distances are not quite accurate, being too great. Palmyra is also
mentioned by Ptolemy, who makes it the capital of sixteen cities in
Syria Palmyrena. Trajan and Hadrian made expeditions into the East, and
must have passed through this city, or near it. Nothing, however, is
said of it. Had the temples been there at that time, Hadrian, who was so
great a patron of the elegant arts, would, there can be no doubt, have
valued them. Some, indeed, insist that he repaired the city; and that it
was thence called Hadrianopolis.
The Palmyrenes submitted to that emperor about the year 130. Hadrian,
then, making a tour through Syria into Egypt, delighted with the
situation and native strength of the place, is said to have determined
on furnishing it with various splendid edifices and ornaments; and it is
probable, that he then conferred upon it the privileges of “Colonia
Juris Italici,” which, as we learn from Ulpian, it actually enjoyed, and
the inhabitants were thence induced by gratitude to call themselves
“Hadrianopolitæ.” It is supposed that many of its marble pillars,
particularly those of the long porticoes, were the gift of this emperor.
It must, nevertheless, be borne in mind, that all this is little better
than conjecture. Mr. Halifax, however, says, “that as the most ancient
inscription, he met with at Palmyra, was dated the three hundred and
fourteenth year from the death of Alexander, that is, ten years before
Christ, and another, dated between twenty and thirty years before
Hadrian, consequently before the Romans got footing there, he concluded,
that the sumptuous structures he saw there were not raised by the
Romans.”
From an inscription on the shaft of a column in the long portico, where
all the inscriptions seem to have been under statues, it appears that,
in the reign of Alexander Severus, they joined that emperor in his
expedition against the Persians.
From this time to the reign of Gallienus, no mention is made of this
city: but then it became so conspicuous, that its history will be a
subject of interest to all succeeding times.
The following is an abstract of the history of this period, presented to
us in the pages of Gibbon, Mr. Wood, and other writers. A place
possessed of such singular advantages, and situated at a convenient
distance from the gulf of Persia, and the Mediterranean, was soon
frequented by the caravans, which conveyed to the nations of Europe a
considerable part of the rich commodities of India. Palmyra insensibly
increased into an opulent and independent city; and, connecting the
Roman and Parthian empire by the mutual benefits of commerce, was
suffered to observe an humble neutrality; till at length, after the
victories of Trajan, the little republic sank into the bosom of Rome,
and flourished more than one hundred and fifty years in the subordinate
yet honourable rank of a colony; and it is during this period of peace,
Mr. Gibbon is disposed to believe, that the wealthy Palmyrians
constructed those temples, palaces and porticoes of Grecian
architecture, the ruins of which in modern times have excited so much
admiration and wonder.
The Roman affairs in the East had been for some time in a very
deplorable condition, when Odenatus, a Palmyrene, but of what family or
rank originally in the state is not agreed[56], made so judicious a use
of his situation between the two rival powers of Rome and Persia, as to
succeed in getting the balance of power into his hands. It appears, that
he declared in favour of different interests, as alterations of affairs
rendered necessary. At length he joined the shattered remains of the
Roman army in Syria, routed Sapor, the Persian king, and advanced as far
as Ctesiphon, the capital of his empire. He returned from this
expedition in great glory; and hence Gallienus, emperor of Rome, was
induced to declare him Augustus and co-partner of his empire.
This elevation,—which he enjoyed jointly with his celebrated consort,
Zenobia,—appeared to reflect a new splendour on their country, and
Palmyra for a while stood upon an equality with Rome. The competition,
however, was fatal; and ages of prosperity were sacrificed to a moment
of glory.
The last public action of Odenatus was his relieving Asia from the
Goths, who had over-run several of its provinces, committing great
ravages; but retired upon his approach: in pursuing them, however,
Odenatus was assassinated by an officer of his own guard, named Mæonius,
who was also his kinsman; and who, having taken the son off also, became
for a short time sovereign. He, too, shared the fate of those he had
betrayed, and Zenobia became sovereign queen in his stead.
All that is known of Zenobia’s extraction is, that she claimed a descent
from the Ptolemies of Egypt[57]; and that she boasted of having
Cleopatra for an ancestress. She was a woman of very great beauty[58];
and of very extraordinary enterprise. We cannot enter into her history
so fully as we could wish. She conquered Syria and Mesopotamia; she
subdued Egypt; and added the greater part of Asia Minor to her
dominions. Thus a small territory in the desert, under the government of
a woman, made the great kingdoms of the Ptolemies and the Seleucidæ part
of the dominions of a single city, whose name we look in vain for in
their history; and Zenobia, lately confined to the barren plain of
Palmyra, ruled from the south of Egypt to the Bosphorus and the Black
Sea.
At length Aurelian, the Roman emperor, entered the field against her;
and the loss of two great battles, the former near Antioch, the latter
at Emesa, reduced her to the necessity of taking shelter within the
walls of her own capital. Aurelian besieged her there; but the
enterprise was exceedingly difficult. “The Roman people,” said Aurelian,
“speak with contempt of the war, which I am waging against a woman. They
are ignorant both of the character and power of Zenobia. It is
impossible to enumerate her warlike preparations, of stones, of arrows,
and of every species of missile weapons. Every part of the walls is
provided with two or three balistæ[59], and artificial fires are thrown
from her military engines. The fear of punishment has armed her with a
desperate courage. Yet I still trust to the protecting deities of Rome,
who have hitherto been favourable to all my undertakings.”
In another letter he writes to the senate in the following terms:—“I
hear, Conscript Fathers, that it hath been urged against me, that I have
not accomplished a manly task, in not triumphing over Zenobia. But my
very blamers themselves would not know how to praise me enough, if they
knew that woman; her firmness of purpose; the dignity she preserves
towards her army; her munificence when circumstances require it; her
severity, when to be severe is to be just. I may say, that the victory
of Odenatus over the Persians, and his putting Sapor to flight, and his
reaching Ctesiphon, were due to her. I can assert that such was the
dread entertained of this woman among the nations of the East and of
Egypt, that she kept in check the Arabians, the Saracens, and the
Armenians; nor would I have preserved her life, if I had not thought she
would much benefit the Roman state.” This was written after her defeat.
Tired of making unsuccessful attempts, Aurelian determined to try the
effects of negotiation, and accordingly wrote to Zenobia. The style he
adopted, however, rather commanded terms than proposed them:—
“_Aurelian, emperor of the Roman world, to Zenobia, and the others
united together in hostile alliance._
“You ought to do that of your own accord, which is commanded by my
letters. I charge you to surrender, on your lives being spared; and you,
Zenobia, may pass your life in some spot where I shall place you, in
pursuance of the distinguished sentence of the senate; your gems,
silver, gold, silk, horses, and camels, being given up to the Roman
treasury. The laws and institutions of the Palmyrenes shall be
respected.”
To this letter Zenobia returned the following answer:—
“_Zenobia, Queen of the East, to the Roman Emperor, Aurelian._
“Never was such an unreasonable demand proposed, or such rigorous terms
offered, by any but yourself! Remember, Aurelian, that in war, whatever
is done should be done by valour. You imperiously command me to
surrender: but can you forget, that Cleopatra chose rather to die with
the title of queen, than to live in any inferior dignity? We expect
succours from Persia; the Saracens are arming in our cause; even the
Syrian banditti have already defeated your army. Judge what you are to
expect from the junction of these forces. You shall be compelled to
abate that pride with which, as if you were absolute lord of the
universe, you command me to become your captive.”
When Aurelian read this letter, says Vopiscus, he blushed; not so much
with shame, as with indignation.
Her answer inflamed the emperor to the highest pitch. He pressed the
siege, therefore, with redoubled vigour; and the city was reduced to
such extremities, that her council advised her to send for succour to
the Persians. Thus counselled, she determined on going to the king of
Persia in person. She set out, therefore, on the fleetest of her
dromedaries, and had already reached the banks of the Euphrates (about
sixty miles from Palmyra), when she was overtaken by Aurelian’s light
horse, and brought back, captive, to the feet of Aurelian. We are told,
that the sight of the queen gave the Roman emperor infinite pleasure;
but that his ambition suffered some humiliation, when he considered that
posterity would always look upon this only as the conquest of a
woman[60]. The city surrendered soon after, and was treated with great
lenity.
Aurelian now went to Emesa; on arriving at which place, he questioned
the queen as to her motives, and the persons who had advised her to make
so obstinate a defence. He sternly asked her, how she had presumed to
rise in arms against the emperors of Rome? “Because,” answered Zenobia,
“I disdained to consider as Roman emperors an Aureolus or a Gallienus.
You alone I acknowledge as my conqueror and my sovereign; and this I do,
because you know how to conquer.”
When, however, the soldiers demanded her immediate execution, her
fortitude forsook her. She confessed by whose counsel she had been
guided. She purchased a dishonourable life at the expense of her
friends. They were immediately led to execution; herself was reserved to
grace the conqueror’s triumph.
Among those of her friends, whose names she had betrayed, was the
illustrious Longinus, author of that noble Treatise on the Sublime,
which is so well known and appreciated by every scholar. He it was, she
confessed, who had drawn up the letter. “Her councillors,” she said,
“were to be blamed, and not herself. What could a weak, short-sighted,
woman do? especially when beset by artful and ambitious men, who made
her subservient to all their schemes? She never had aimed at empire, had
they not placed it before her eyes in all its allurements. The letter
which affronted Aurelian was not her own—Longinus wrote it; the
insolence was his.”
When Aurelian heard this, he directed all his fury against the
unfortunate Longinus. That illustrious person was immediately led to
execution. Far from lamenting his fate, however, he condoled with his
friends, pitied Zenobia, and expressed his joy; looking upon death as a
blessing, since it would rescue his body from slavery, and give his soul
to that freedom he the most desired. “This world,” said he, with his
expiring breath, “is nothing but a prison; happy, therefore, is he who
gets soonest out of it, and gains his liberty.”
A modern poet has very finely alluded to this in his poem on Palmyra.