two essential imperfections, which might, perhaps, have abated his
recent love of despotism. The virtuous mind of Theodosius was often
relaxed by indolence, and it was sometimes inflamed by passion. In the
pursuit of an important object, his active courage was capable of the
most vigorous exertions; but, as soon as the design was accomplished, or
the danger was surmounted, the hero sunk into inglorious repose; and,
forgetful that the time of a prince is the property of his people,
resigned himself to the enjoyment of the innocent but trifling pleasures
of a luxurious court. The natural disposition of Theodosius was hasty
and choleric; and, in a station where none could resist and few would
dissuade the fatal consequence of his resentment, the humane monarch was
justly alarmed by the consciousness of his infirmity and of his power.
It was the constant study of his life to suppress or regulate the
intemperate sallies of passion; and the success of his efforts enhanced
the merit of his clemency. But the painful virtue which claims the merit
of victory is exposed to the danger of defeat; and the reign of a wise
and merciful prince was polluted by an act of cruelty which would stain
the annals of Nero or Domitian. Within the space of three years, the
inconsistent historian of Theodosius must relate the generous pardon of
the citizens of Antioch and the inhuman massacre of the people of
Thessalonica.[17]
ATTILA, THE SCOURGE OF GOD.
BY EDWARD GIBBON.
[King of the Huns, the Etzel of German epic and legend, one of the
greatest conquerors known to history. Date of birth unknown, that
of death about 454 A.D. The dominion to which he succeeded included
the Northern tribes from the Rhine to the Volga. At different times
he ravaged the whole of Europe, and more than once threatened to
extirpate Western civilization. The defeat which he suffered at the
hands of the Roman general Ætius on the plains of Châlons-sur-Marne
checked his power, and was probably the most murderous battle ever
fought in Europe. Attila died from the bursting of an artery after
a night of debauch, the occasion of the last espousal that swelled
the army of his countless wives. By some of the chroniclers he is
supposed to have been the victim of the newly married wife’s
treachery. He was buried in triple coffins of iron, silver, and
gold.]
Attila, the son of Mundzuk, deduced his noble, perhaps his regal descent
from the ancient Huns, who had formerly contended with the monarchs of
China. His features, according to the observation of a Gothic historian,
bore the stamp of his national origin; and the portrait of Attila
exhibits the genuine deformity of a modern Calmuck; a large head, a
swarthy complexion, small, deep-seated eyes, a flat nose, a few hairs in
the place of a beard, broad shoulders, and a short, square body, of
nervous strength, though of a disproportioned form. The haughty step and
demeanor of the king of the Huns expressed the consciousness of his
superiority above the rest of mankind; and he had a custom of fiercely
rolling his eyes, as if he wished to enjoy the terror which he inspired.
Yet this savage hero was not inaccessible to pity; his suppliant enemies
might confide in the assurance of peace or pardon; and Attila was
considered by his subjects as a just and indulgent master. He delighted
in war; but, after he had ascended the throne in a mature age, his head
rather than his hand achieved the conquest of the North; and the fame
of an adventurous soldier was usefully exchanged for that of a prudent
and successful general. The effects of personal valor are so
inconsiderable, except in poetry or romance, that victory, even among
barbarians, must depend upon the degree of skill with which the passions
of the multitude are combined and guided for the service of a single
man. The Scythian conquerors, Attila and Zingis, surpassed their rude
countrymen in art rather than in courage; and it may be observed that
the monarchies, both of the Huns and of the Moguls, were erected by
their founders on the basis of popular superstition. The miraculous
conception which fraud and credulity ascribed to the virgin mother of
Zingis raised him above the level of human nature; and the naked prophet
who, in the name of the Deity, invested him with the empire of the
earth, pointed the valor of the Moguls with irresistible enthusiasm. The
religious arts of Attila were not less skillfully adapted to the
character of his age and country. It was natural enough that the
Scythians should adore with peculiar devotion the god of war; but as
they were incapable of forming either an abstract idea or a corporeal
representation, they worshiped their tutelar deity under the symbol of
an iron cimeter. One of the shepherds of the Huns perceived that a
heifer who was grazing had wounded herself in the foot, and curiously
followed the track of the blood till he discovered among the long grass
the point of an ancient sword, which he dug out of the ground and
presented to Attila.
That magnanimous or rather that artful prince accepted with pious
gratitude this celestial favor, and, as the rightful possessor of the
_sword of Mars_, asserted his divine and indefeasible claim to the
dominion of the earth. If the rites of Scythia were practiced on this
solemn occasion, a lofty altar, or rather a pile of faggots, three
hundred yards in length and in breadth, was raised in a spacious plain,
and the sword of Mars was placed erect on the summit of this rustic
altar, which was annually consecrated by the blood of sheep, horses,
and of the one hundredth captive. Whether human sacrifices formed any
part of the worship of Attila, or whether he propitiated the god of war
with the victims which he continually offered in the field of battle,
the favorite of Mars soon acquired a sacred character, which rendered
his conquests more easy and more permanent; and the barbarian princes
confessed, in the language of devotion or flattery, that they could not
presume to gaze with a steady eye on the divine majesty of the king of
the Huns. His brother, Bleda, who reigned over a considerable part of
the nation, was compelled to resign his scepter and his life. Yet even
this cruel act was attributed to a supernatural impulse; and the vigor
with which Attila wielded the sword of Mars convinced the world that it
had been reserved alone for his invincible arm. But the extent of his
empire affords the only remaining evidence of the number and importance
of his victories; and the Scythian monarch, however ignorant of the
value of science and philosophy, might perhaps lament that his
illiterate subjects were destitute of the art which could perpetuate the
memory of his exploits.
If a line of separation were drawn between the civilized and the savage
climates of the globe, between the inhabitants of cities who cultivated
the earth and the hunters and shepherds who dwelt in tents, Attila might
aspire to the title of supreme and sole monarch of the barbarians. He
alone among the conquerors of ancient and modern times united the two
mighty kingdoms of Germany and Scythia; and those vague appellations,
when they are applied to his reign, may be understood with an ample
latitude. Thuringia, which stretched beyond its actual limits as far as
the Danube, was in the number of his provinces; he interposed, with the
weight of a powerful neighbor, in the domestic affairs of the Franks;
and one of his lieutenants chastised and almost exterminated the
Burgundians of the Rhine. He subdued the islands of the ocean, the
kingdoms of Scandinavia, encompassed and divided by the waters of the
Baltic; and the Huns might derive a tribute of furs from that northern
region which has been protected from all other conquerors by the
severity of the climate and the courage of the natives. Toward the East,
it is difficult to circumscribe the dominion of Attila over the Scythian
deserts; yet we may be assured that he reigned on the banks of the
Volga; that the king of the Huns was dreaded, not only as a warrior but
as a magician; that he insulted and vanquished the Khan of the
formidable Geougen; and that he sent ambassadors to negotiate an equal
alliance with the Empire of China.
In the proud review of the nations who acknowledged the sovereignty of
Attila, and who never entertained during his lifetime the thought of a
revolt, the Gepidæ and the Ostrogoths were distinguished by their
numbers, their bravery, and the personal merit of their chiefs. The
renowned Ardaric, king of the Gepidæ, was the faithful and sagacious
counselor of the monarch, who esteemed his intrepid genius, while he
loved the mild and discreet virtues of the noble Walamir, king of the
Ostrogoths. The crowd of vulgar kings, the leaders of so many martial
tribes who served under the standard of Attila, were ranged in the
submissive order of guards and domestics round the person of their
master. They watched his nod, they trembled at his frown, and at the
first signal of his will they executed, without murmur or hesitation,
his stern and absolute commands. In time of peace, the dependent
princes, with their national troops, attended the royal camp in regular
succession; but when Attila collected his military force he was able to
bring into the field an army of five, or, according to another account,
of seven hundred thousand barbarians.
In all their invasions of the civilized empires of the South, the
Scythian shepherds have been uniformly actuated by a savage and
destructive spirit. The laws of war, that restrain the exercise of
national rapine and murder, are founded on two principles of substantial
interest; the knowledge of the permanent benefits which may be obtained
by a moderate use of conquest, and a just apprehension lest the
desolation which we inflict on the enemy’s country may be retaliated on
our own. But these considerations of hope and fear are almost unknown in
the pastoral state of nations. The Huns of Attila may, without
injustice, be compared to the Moguls and Tartars before their primitive
manners were changed by religion and luxury; and the evidence of
Oriental history may reflect some light on the short and imperfect
annals of Rome. After the Moguls had subdued the northern provinces of
China, it was seriously proposed, not in the hour of victory and
passion, but in calm, deliberate council, to exterminate all the
inhabitants of that populous country, that the vacant land might be
converted to the pasture of cattle. The firmness of a Chinese mandarin,
who insinuated some principles of rational policy into the mind of
Zingis, diverted him from the execution of this horrid design. But in
the cities of Asia, which yielded to the Moguls, the inhuman abuse of
the rights of war was exercised with a regular form of discipline which
may with equal reason, though not with equal authority, be imputed to
the victorious Huns. The inhabitants, who had submitted to their
discretion, were ordered to evacuate their houses, and to assemble in
some plain adjacent to the city, where a division was made of the
vanquished into three parts. The first class consisted of the soldiers
of the garrison and of the young men capable of bearing arms, and their
fate was instantly decided; they were either enlisted among the Moguls,
or they were massacred on the spot by the troops, who, with pointed
spears and bended bows, had formed a circle round the captive multitude.
The second class, composed of the young and beautiful women, of the
artificers of every rank and profession, and of the more wealthy or
honorable citizens, from whom a private ransom might be expected, was
distributed in equal or proportionable lots. The remainder, whose life
or death was alike useless to the conquerors, were permitted to return
to the city--which, in the mean while, had been stripped of its valuable
furniture--and a tax was imposed on those wretched inhabitants for the
indulgence of breathing their native air. Such was the behavior of the
Moguls when they were not conscious of any extraordinary rigor. But the
most casual provocation, the slightest motive, of caprice or
convenience, often provoked them to involve a whole people in an
indiscriminate massacre; and the ruin of some flourishing cities was
executed with such unrelenting perseverance that, according to their own
expression, horses might run without stumbling over the ground where
they had once stood. The three great capitals of Khorasan, Maru,
Neisabour, and Herat were destroyed by the armies of Zingis; and the
exact account which was taken of the slain amounted to 4,347,000
persons. Timur, or Tamerlane, was educated in a less barbarous age, and
in the profession of the Mohammedan religion; yet if Attila equaled the
hostile ravages of Tamerlane, either the Tartar or the Hun might deserve
the title of “the Scourge of God.”
BELISARIUS.
BY LORD MAHON.
[Born about 505 A.D., of Slavonic descent, died 565. He rose from a
soldier in the imperial guard to the supreme command of the
Byzantine armies. For thirty years the glory and bulwark of the
Greek empire, his genius for war has been rarely surpassed, and the
field of his triumphs extended from Persia to Italy and Northern
Africa. In spite of his priceless services to his sovereign, the
envious and treacherous Justinian was careful to deprive him of
power and place, when the empire could spare his genius at the head
of its armies. His name has become a synonym for loyalty that no
ingratitude could shake. He died in poverty and obscurity, though
it was in his power any time during a score of years to snatch the
purple from his unworthy master.]
In person Belisarius was tall and commanding, and presented a remarkable
contrast to the dwarfish and ungainly aspect of his rival Narses. His
features were regular and noble, and his appearance in the streets of
Constantinople after the Vandal and Gothic victories never failed to
attract the admiration of the people. His character may not unaptly be
compared to that of Marlborough, whom he equaled in talents and closely
resembled in his uxoriousness and love of money. As a military leader he
was enterprising, firm, and fearless; his conception was clear, and his
judgment rapid and decisive. His conquests were achieved with smaller
means than any other of like extent recorded in history. He frequently
experienced reverses in the field, but in no case did he fail without
some strong and sufficient reason for his failure, such as the mutiny of
his soldiers, the overwhelming number of his antagonists, or his total
want of necessary supplies; and it may be observed of him, as of
Arminius, that sometimes beaten in battle he was never overcome in war.
His superior tactics covered his defeats, retrieved his losses, and
prevented his enemies from reaping the fruits of victory; and it is
particularly mentioned that even in the most dangerous emergencies he
never lost his presence of mind.
Among the circumstances which contributed most strongly to his success
were the kindness which his adversaries met with at his hands, and the
strict discipline which he maintained among his soldiers. The moderation
of Belisarius appears the more entitled to praise from the fierceness
and disorder usual in his age. It was his first care after every victory
to extend mercy and protection to the vanquished, and to shield their
persons and, if possible, their property from injury. During a march the
trampling of the corn-fields by the cavalry was carefully avoided, and
the troops, as Procopius tells us, seldom ventured even to gather an
apple from the trees, while a ready payment to the villagers for any
provisions that they bought made them bless the name of Belisarius and
secured to the Roman camp a plentiful supply. To the soldiers who
transgressed these rules the general was stern and unforgiving; no rank
could defy, no obscurity could elude his justice; and, because he
punished severely, he had to punish but seldom. But while the licentious
and turbulent were repressed by the strong arm of Belisarius, his
liberality cheered and animated the deserving. The gift of a gold
bracelet or collar rewarded any achievement in battle; the loss of a
horse or weapon was immediately supplied out of his private funds, and
the wounded found in him a father and a friend. His private virtues
promoted and confirmed the discipline of his men; none ever saw him
overcome with wine, and the charms of the fairest captives from the
Goths or Vandals could not overcome his conjugal fidelity.
But the most striking and peculiar feature in the character of
Belisarius, as compared with that of other illustrious generals, was his
enduring and unconquerable loyalty. He was doubtless bound to Justinian
by many ties of gratitude, and the suspicion entertained of him in
Africa may be considered as fully counterbalanced by the triumph and
other honors which awaited his return. But from the siege of Ravenna
till his final departure from Italy he was, almost without intermission,
exposed to the most galling and unworthy treatment; he was insulted,
degraded, and despised; he was even attacked in his fame, when restored
to an important station, without any means for discharging its duties
and for sustaining his former reputation. It would be difficult to
repeat another instance of such signal and repeated ingratitude unless
in republics, where from the very nature of the government no crime is
so dangerous or so well punished as serving the state too well. When we
consider the frequency and therefore the ease of revolutions in this
age, the want of hereditary right in the imperial family, the strong
attachment of the soldiers to their victorious general, while the person
of Justinian was hateful even to his own domestic guards, it will, I
think, be admitted that a rebellion by Belisarius must have proved
successful and secure. On no occasion was he roused into the slightest
mark of disobedience or resentment; he bore every injury with unchanged
submission; he resisted the feelings of indignation, of revenge, of
self-interest, and even the thirst for glory, which, according to
Tacitus, is of all frailties the longest retained by the wise. Besides
him, no more than six generals have been named by one of our most
judicious critics as having deserved, without having worn a crown;[18]
and the smallness of this number should display the difficulty of
withstanding this brilliant temptation and enhance the reputation of
those who have withstood it.
The chief fault of Belisarius seems to have been his unbounded deference
and submission to his wife, which rendered him strangely blind and
afterward weakly forgiving to her infidelity. But its mischievous
effects were not confined to private life, and nearly all the errors
which can be charged upon his public career are imputed to this cause.
It was Antonina who assumed the principal part in the deposition of the
Pope, who urged the death of Constantine, who promoted the prosecution
of Photius; and in his whole conduct with regard to that worthless woman
Belisarius appears alternately the object of censure or ridicule. His
confidence in her must have tended to lower his official character, to
fetter and mislead his judgment, and to prevent his justice and
impartiality whenever her passions were concerned. The second reproach
to which the character of Belisarius appears liable is that of rapacity
in the latter part of his career. How highly would his fame have been
exalted by an honorable poverty, and how much would the animosity of his
enemies at court have abated, had they seen no spoils to gather from his
fall!
The life of Belisarius produced most important effects on the political
and social revolutions of the world. I have already endeavored to show
that his reduction of Africa probably contributed to the rapid progress
of the Mussulmans, but this and his other victories probably saved his
country from impending ruin. During the fifth century more than half the
provinces of the ancient empire had been usurped by the barbarians, and
the rising tide of their conquests must soon have overwhelmed the
remainder. The decline of the Byzantine Romans was threatened by the
youthful vigor of the Vandal and Ostrogothic kingdoms. Although the
founders of these mighty monarchies had been wisely solicitous for
peace, they left their successors fully able to undertake any projects
of invasion; and an alliance of these states against the Romans must
have been fatal to the last. Had not Belisarius arisen at this
particular juncture the Vandals, Goths, and Persians would in all
likelihood have divided the imperial provinces among them. The Arian
doctrines, of which the two former were zealous partisans, would then
probably have prevailed in the Christian world, the whole balance of
power in Europe would have undergone incalculable changes, and the
treasures of Greek and Roman genius would never have enlightened modern
times.
MOHAMMED,[19] THE FOUNDER OF ISLAM.
BY EDWARD GIBBON.
[Born 570 or 571 A.D., died 632. Like all the upper classes of
Mecca, his birthplace, the future prophet devoted himself to
commercial pursuits, and in his twenty-fifth year he married the
rich widow whose business he supervised. It was not till his
fortieth year that he
[Illustration: MOHAMMED.]
announced to the world his heavenly mission, his first converts
being his wife and his uncle Abu Taleb. He was compelled to fly
from Mecca to Medina, and the year of the flight known as the
“Hegira,” 622 A.D., is the foundation of the Mohammedan era. Within
a decade Mohammed converted nearly the whole of Arabia to his new
religion, and the dominion of his successors was spread with a
rapidity which is among the marvels of history.]
The plebeian birth of Mahomet is an unskillful calumny of the
Christians, who exalt instead of degrading the merit of their adversary.
His descent from Ishmael was a national privilege or fable; but if the
first steps of the pedigree are dark and doubtful, he could produce many
generations of pure and genuine nobility; he sprung from the tribe of
Koreish and the family of Hashem, the most illustrious of the Arabs, the
princes of Mecca, and the hereditary guardians of the Caaba. The
grandfather of Mahomet was Abdol Motalleb, the son of Hashem, a wealthy
and generous citizen who relieved the distress of famine with the
supplies of commerce. Mecca, which had been fed by the liberality of the
father, was saved by the courage of the son. The kingdom of Yemen was
subject to the Christian princes of Abyssinia; their vassal Abrahah was
provoked by an insult to avenge the honor of the cross; and the holy
city was invested by a train of elephants and an army of Africans. A
treaty was proposed, and in the first audience the grandfather of
Mahomet demanded the restitution of his cattle. “And why,” said Abrahah,
“do you not rather implore my clemency in favor of your temple, which I
have threatened to destroy?” “Because,” replied the intrepid chief, “the
cattle is my own; the Caaba belongs to the gods, and _they_ will defend
their house from injury and sacrilege.” The want of provisions, or the
valor of the Koreish, compelled the Abyssinians to a disgraceful
retreat; their discomfiture has been adorned with a miraculous flight of
birds, who showered down stones on the heads of the infidels; and the
deliverance was long commemorated by the era of the elephant.
The glory of Abdol Motalleb was crowned with domestic happiness, his
life was prolonged to the age of one hundred and ten years, and he
became the father of six daughters and thirteen sons. His best beloved
Abdallah was the most beautiful and modest of the Arabian youth.
Mahomet, or more properly Mohammed, the only son of Abdallah and Amina,
of the noble race of the Zahrites, was born at Mecca, four years after
the death of Justinian. In his early infancy he was deprived of his
father, his mother, and his grandfather; his uncles were strong and
numerous; and in the division of the inheritance the orphan’s share was
reduced to five camels and an Ethiopian maid-servant. At home and
abroad, in peace and war, Abu Taleb, the most respectable of his uncles,
was the guide and guardian of his youth; in his twenty-fifth year he
entered into the service of Cadijah, a rich and noble widow of Mecca,
who soon rewarded his fidelity with the gift of her hand and fortune.
The marriage contract, in the simple style of antiquity, recites the
mutual love of Mahomet and Cadijah; describes him as the most
accomplished of the tribe of Koreish; and stipulates a dowry of twelve
ounces of gold and twenty camels, which was supplied by the liberality
of his uncle. By this alliance the son of Abdallah was restored to the
station of his ancestors, and the judicious matron was content with his
domestic virtues, till, in the fortieth year of his age, he assumed the
title of a prophet and proclaimed the religion of the Koran.