opulent nobles of Rome gratified every vice that could be collected from the mighty conflux of nations and manners. Secure of impunity, careless of censure, they lived without restraint in the patient and humble society of their slaves and parasites. The emperor, in his turn, viewing every rank of his subjects with the same contemptuous indifference, asserted without control his sovereign privilege of lust and luxury. The most worthless of mankind are not afraid to condemn in others the same disorders which they allow in themselves; and can readily discover some nice difference of age, character, or station, to justify the partial distinction. The licentious soldiers, who had raised to the throne the dissolute son of Caracalla, blushed at their ignominious choice, and turned with disgust from that monster, to contemplate with pleasure the opening virtues of his cousin Alexander, the son of Mamæa. The crafty Mæsa, sensible that her grandson Elagabalus must inevitably destroy himself by his own vices, had provided another and surer support of her family. Embracing a favourable moment of fondness and devotion, she had persuaded the young emperor to adopt Alexander, and to invest him with the title of Cæsar, that his own divine occupations might be no longer interrupted by the care of the earth. In the second rank that amiable prince soon acquired the affections of the public, and excited the tyrant's Christian religion that has wrought this wonderful change, not in courts alone, but throughout all the countries where it prevailed, for in other parts of the world, according to situation and circumstances, everything remains on the old footing. Were not "the sentiments of honour" (in their usual and here understood acceptation) and the "refinement of pleasure," as well known to the Romans as to moderns? Did they improve the morals of the Neros, Domitians, Commodus, Elagabalus, or of the people themselves, at any period, either anterior or subsequent to those monsters? Or, during the whole history of Christian states, can there be found a shadow of similar licentiousness, in the rudest times and most corrupt courts?-WENCK.] [M. Guizot, in the preface to his translation of this work, proclaims it to be one of Gibbon's greatest merits, to have shown, "that man is ever the same, whether arrayed in the toga or in the dress of to-day, whether deliberating in the senate of old or at the modern council-board, and that the course of events, eighteen centuries ago, was the same as at present." This is an admission that the object of religion has not been fully accomplished. Whilst, then, we mourn over the records of heathen vices, let us beware of thinking ourselves better than we really are, and of being unfaithful to the trust committed to us-ED. 188 DEATH CF ELAGABALUS. [CH. VI. jealousy, who resolved to terminate the dangerous competi tion, either by corrupting the manners, or by taking away the life, of his rival. His arts proved unsuccessful; his vain designs were constantly discovered by his own loquacious folly, and disappointed by those virtuous and faithful servants whom the prudence of Mamaa had placed about the person of her son. In a hasty sally of passion, Elagabalus resolved to execute by force what he had been unable to compass by fraud, and by a despotic sentence degraded his cousin from the rank and honours of Cæsar. The message was received in the senate with silence, and in the camp with fury. The prætorian guards swore to protect Alexander, and to revenge the dishonoured majesty of the throne. The tears and promises of the trembling Elagabalus, who only begged them to spare his life, and to leave him in the possession of his beloved Hierocles, diverted their just indig. nation; and they contented themselves with empowering their prefects to watch over the safety of Alexander, and the conduct of the emperor.* It was impossible that such a reconciliation should last, that even the mean soul of Elagabalus could hold an empire on such humiliating terms of dependence. He soon attempted, by a dangerous experiment, to try the temper of the soldiers. The report of the death of Alexander, and the natural suspicion that he had been murdered, inflamed their passions into fury, and the tempest of the camp could only be appeased by the presence and authority of the popular youth. Provoked at this new instance of their affection for his cousin, and their contempt for his person, the emperor ventured to punish some of the leaders of the mutiny. His unseasonable severity proved instantly fatal to his minions, his mother, and himself. Elagabalus was massacred by the indignant prætorians, his mutilated corpse dragged through the streets of the city, and thrown into the Tiber. His memory was branded with eternal infamy by the senate; the justice of whose decree has been ratified by posterity.† * Dion, 1. 79, p. 1365. Herodian, 1. 5, p. 195–201. Hist. August. p. 105. The last of the three historians seems to have followed the best authors in his account of the revolution. + The era of the death of Elagabalus, and of the accession of Alexander, has employed the learning and ingenuity of Pagi, Tillemont, Valsecchi, In the room of Elagabalus, his cousin Alexander was raised to the throne by the prætorian guards. His relation to the family of Severus, whose name he assumed, was the same as that of his predecessor; his virtue and his danger had already endeared him to the Romans, and the eager liberality of the senate conferred upon him, in one day, the various titles and powers of the imperial dignity.+ But as Alexander was a modest and dutiful youth, of only seventeen years of age, the reins of government were in Vignoli, and Torre, bishop of Adria. The question is most assuredly intricate; but I still adhere to the authority of Dion, the truth of whose calculations is undeniable, and the purity of whose text is justified by the agreement of Xiphilin, Zonaras, and Cedrenus. Elagabalus reigned three years, nine months, and four days, from his victory over Macrinus, and was killed March 10, 222. But what shall we reply to the medals, undoubtedly genuine, which reckon the fifth year of his tribunitian power? We shall reply, with the learned Valsecchi, that the usurpation of Macrinus was annihilated, and that the son of Caracalla dated his reign from his father's death. After resolving this great difficulty, the smaller knots of this question may be easily untied, or cut asunder. [This note is taken from that of Reimarus, on Dion, p. 1352, where the authorities are more clearly cited. The Canon Paschalis S. Hippolyti would have supplied Gibbon with conclusive proof of Dion's correctness, in fixing the death of Elagabalus and accession of Alexander, on the 1st, not the 10th, of March. A marble statue of S. Hippolytus was discovered, in the year 1551, near Rome. It represents him seated in a chair, on each side of which an Eastern Calendar is engraven. The festival is there found on the 13th April, in the first year of Alexander's reign. Elagabalus, therefore, was dead at that time, and cannot have been murdered in September, as was generally said. Fabricius, in his edition of the works of Hippolytus (Hamburg, 1716, tom. ii, f. 9. T. I.), has collected all the arguments on this question. Compare with them Heyne's Notes on Guthrie's Universal History, part 4, p. 1075.-WENCK.] [Eckhel has shown most clearly, that Valsecchi's solution of the difficulty cannot be made to agree with the coins of Elagabalus, and he has given a much more satisfactory explanation of the five tribuneships. The first commenced on the 16th May, A.U.C. 971, when that emperor ascended the throne. On the first of January in the followng year he entered on his second, according to the custom established by all his predecessors. The third and fourth were during the years 973 and 974, and the fifth began in 975, in which year he was killed, on the 11th March. Eckhel de Doct. Num. Vet., tom. iii, p. 430, and following.-GUIZOT.] *Lampridius says that the soldiers gave it to him afterwards, en account of his severe discipline. Lamprid. in Alex. Sev., c. 12 and 25.-WENCK. + Hist. August. p. 114. By this unusual precipitation, the senate meant to confound the hopes of 190 МАМЖА: [CH. VI. the hands of two women, of his mother Mama, and of Mæsa, his grandmother. After the death of the latter, who survived but a short time the elevation of Alexander, Mamæa remained the sole regent of her son and the empire. In every age and country, the wiser, or at least the stronger, of the two sexes, has usurped the of the powers state, and confined the other to the cares and pleasures of domestic life. In hereditary monarchies, however, and especially in those of modern Europe, the gallant spirit of chivalry, and the law of succession, have accustomed us to allow a singular exception; and a woman is often acknowledged the absolute sovereign of a great kingdom, in which she would be deemed incapable of exercising the smallest employment, civil or military. But as the Roman emperors were still considered the generals and magistrates of the republic, their wives and mothers, although distinguished by the name of Augusta, were never associated to their personal honours; and a female reign would have appeared an inexpiable prodigy in the eyes of those primitive Romans, who married without love, or loved without delicacy and respect.* The haughty Agrippina aspired, indeed, to share the honours of the empire, which she had conferred on her son; but her mad ambition, detested by every citizen who felt for the dignity of Rome, was disappointed by the artful firmness of Seneca and Burrhus.t The good sense, or the indifference, of succeeding princes, restrained them from offending the prejudices of their subjects; and it was reserved for the profligate Elagabalus, to discharge the acts of the senate with the name of his mother Soæmias, who was placed by the side of the consuls, • Metellus pretenders, and prevent the factions of the armies. Numidicus, the censor, acknowledged to the Roman people, in a public oration, that had kind nature allowed us to exist without the help of women, we should be delivered from a very troublesome companion; and he could recommend matrimony only as the sacrifice of private pleasure to public duty. Aulus Gellius, 1, 6.[This reproach, though mainly just, particularly in reference to earlier times, is oxpressed in terms too harsh, and ought not to have excluded respect. M. Thomas, in his Essai sur les Femmes (Euvres, tom. iv, p. 321) has made ample amends to the matrons of Rome. There the rough heroes of the Republic, returning from battle, lay their trophies at the feet of their chaste wives as respectfully as any Duc et Pair could bow before a Clairon.-WENCK.] + Tacit. Annal. 13, 5. and subscribed, as a regular member, the decrees of the legislative assembly. Her more prudent sister, Mamæa, declined the useless and odious prerogative, and a solemn law was enacted, excluding women for ever from the senate, and devoting to the infernal gods the head of the wretch by whom this sanction should be violated.* The substance, not the pageantry, of power was the object of Mamma's manly ambition. She maintained an absolute and lasting empire over the mind of her son, and in his affection the mother could not brook a rival. Alexander, with her consent, married the daughter of a patrician; but his respect for his father-in-law, and love for the empress, were inconsistent with the tenderness or interest of Mamaa. The patrician was executed on the ready accusation of treason, and the wife of Alexander driven with ignominy from the palace, and banished into Africa.† Notwithstanding this act of jealous cruelty, as well as some instances of avarice, with which Mamaa is charged, the general tenor of her administration was equally for the benefit of her son and of the empire. With the approba tion of the senate, she chose sixteen of the wisest and most virtuous senators, as a perpetual council of state, before whom every public business of moment was debated and determined. The celebrated Ulpian, equally distinguished by his knowledge of, and his respect for, the laws of Rome, was at their head; and the prudent firmness of this aristocracy restored order and authority to the government. As soon as they had purged the city from foreign superstition and luxury, the remains of the capricious tyranny of Elagabalus, they applied to remove his worthless creatures from every department of public administration, and to supply their places with men of virtue and ability. Learning, and the love of justice, became the only recommendations for civil offices: valour, and the love of discipline, the only qualifications for military employments. ‡ *Hist. August. p. 102, 107. + Dion, 1. 80, p. 1369. Herodian, 1. 6, p. 206. Hist. August. p. 131. Herodian represents the patrician a innocent. The Augustan History, on the authority of Dexippus, condemns him, as guilty of a conspiracy against the life of Alexander. It is impossible to pronounce between them; but Dion is an irreproachable witness of the jealousy and cruelty of Mamaa towards the young empress, whose hard fate Alexander lamented, but durst not Сррове. Herodian, 1 6, p. 203. Hist. August. p. 119. The latter |