BOOKS.

MERIVALE'S HISTORY OF THE ROMANS UNDER THE EMPIRE—VOLUME VI.• WE gather from the advertisement prefixed to this volume, that in the mind of the author it concludes that portion of his work, which he regards with interest and affection' or on which he would be disposed to rest his fame. The distinction which he makes is to some extent a new one. Instead of the several pe- riods, of the Republic, the Empire, &c., into which ancient Ro- man, like modern French history, seems so naturally to divide it- self, Mr. Merivale's notion seems to be, that for ancient history, the only just division is into the period for which you have adequate materials and that for which you have not. It was not, it would appear, the wish to trace the rise of the Empire, so much as the inviting nature of the materials, that led him to commence his history where he did ; and if he proposes to continue his la- bours beyond the point where sufficient materials fail, it is more from a sense of duty, than from any pleasure he expects to feel in the work. To quote his own words- " The period of Roman history between Ctesar and Vespasian has present- ed us with an ample gallery of whole-length portraits. Of the warriors and statesmen the princes, poets, and philosophers, whose true and living effigies glow before us, we can form a complete and just idea from the breadth and yet the finish with which they are delineated. But beyond these limits no such portraiture exists. We can arrive at no full and consistent conception even of Marius and Sulla on the one side, or of Trajan and Hadrian on the other. These are but mogul ?modals umber; their vivi coitus have irrecoverably perished. So narrow are the limits of what may be designated as the Biographical History of Bow, which I have executed from its commencement to its close."

We will not say this distinction is not a just one ; but it sug- gests a doubt whether it really, would not have been better so to entitle the work, and limit it to the volumes which have now appeared. Scholars would miss the aid of Mr. Merivale's learn- ing and acumen in the study of the later periods of the empire. But the popularity of the work, and thus its general usefulness, would be very much increased. A Biographical History of Rome would be a most taking title. We don't know but even yet the publishers would do well to adopt it. It would at the same time hit the public taste, and indicate the merits which are thought to have made Mr. Merivale's reputation.

That the sixth volume contains matter peculiarly adapted to at- tract English readers, will be understood when we state that it opens with the revolt of Caractacus, and terminates with the de- struction of Jerusalem. How startling is the contrast between the profligacy of the times, the meanness and wickedness of so many of the principal actors and the glorious issues which were then and thereby once for all decided! Reading the early history of the Empire is like being present by torchlight at the laying of the foundation-stones of the fabric of modern society.

The failure of the revolt of Caractacus is not an event whieh at this day many natives of Great Britain will be disposed to lament. But this ought not to hinder us from doing justice to the great qualities which seem to have distinguished our British ancestors from their continental neighbours. Perhaps the cause of the general indifference towards them, is to be found in the fact, that we do not regard them as our ancestors. Yet if the truth were or could be known, possibly as large a proportion of what is peculiar to the national character might be found to be due to the British, as to the Anglo-Saxon, or any other admixture. The continental Teuton in any of his developments is so little of the Englishman, that sometimes one cannot help suspecting that the best ingre- dients of the latter were found in this island, or at all events not brought to it within times historically known to us.

Apart from our national interest in them, there are few more interesting episodes in the history of the Empire, than the inva- sions of Britain, and the wars which the Romans had to wage, to establish their supremacy. It so happens too, that though our materials be scanty, yet so far as they go, they are unsurpassed, as regard the genius and authority of the writers. Seldom is such light thrown on the incunabula of a great people as is re- flected on ours from the pages of Ctesar and Tacitus. The former perhaps rather exaggerated the savagery of the barbarians who completed the series of his conquests in the North. At least, Mr. Merivale shrewdly remarks that the principal traits in the earlier picture, disappear in the accounts of Tacitus and Dion. i Yet it s still through Cmsar's eyes that we behold our predecessors, not impossibly our progenitors. And doubtless the painted bodies, scythed chariots, human sacrifices and unbridled lusts, which Clews speaks of, go a great way to destroy our sympathies with as brave a people as ever resisted Roman aggression. A century later, we hear no more of this unkempt savagery. But of other ferocity there was plenty ; and it is startling to read in one of Mr. Merivale's foot-notes, a passage from Dion, describing the perpetration of identically the same atrocities by the Britons at the capture of Camalodunum, as the Sepoys committed at Pawn- pore. The whole of this chapter is very well executed, within a moderate compass. Though English readers have no special sym- pathies with the Britons, the interest excited by the wrongs of Boadicea and the fate of Caractacus, rather tends to throw into the shade the general features of the contest. Its grandest event was the extermination of the Druids in the island of Anglesea ; from which time they may be said to disappear from history. Not the

History of the Romans under the Empire. By Charles Merivale B D., late Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge. Volume VI. Published by Longman and Co. least significant characteristic of the volume before us is that it in.. eludesthe three catastrophes which broke the strength of the older creeds that scowled upon Christianity in the cradle. Withix, the space of ten years, Druidism received its deathblow in An- glesea ; the fire at Rome consumed the earlier temples and shrines with the safety of which the national existence was identified. and Jerusalem was destroyed. And contemporaneous with the' fall of the temples which Evander, Romulus, Numa, and Serving Tullius were supposed to have consecrated, was the first persecu- tion of the Christians, inaugurating that career of martyrdom, which was destined to play so mighty a part in testing the sin- cerity, exalting the enthusiasm, and multiplying the numbers of the adherents of the new religion. How strange that the Romans, so tolerant of the vilest Asiatic superstitions as to allow them to supersede their national rites, should suddenly become intolerant of so retiring and inoffensive a sect as the early Christians ! Druidism was crushed in Gaul, and exterminated in Britain, be- cause of its alliance with the struggle for independence. The ex- clusiveness of the Jews combined with their desperate nationality to make their overthrow a matter of policy. But the bulk of the early Christians worshipped in secresy and in silence, and shunned the notice of the government in every way they could. Yet they had not been many years in Rome, when they were brought to the stake. And thelest informed, most upright, and cultivated of the Roman writers vie with each other in the contempt and horror with which they speak of the "fatal superstition," the sincerity of whose votaries they saw put to such frightful tests. The principal part of the present volume is of course occupied with the life of that Emperor whose name has become almost as typical of tyranny, as that of the founder of his dynasty is of sovereignty. On more than one occasion we have borne testimony to the justness of Mr. Merivale's conceptions of the leading charac- ters in his history. But we must confess, his account of Nero does not satisfy us so well as those of some of the preceding Emperors. Perhaps it is the very significance of the influences which Nero set in motion, that has necessitated the breaking up of the narra- tive into a series of episodes, thus giving an air of vagueness to the whole recital. Or perhaps one is led to compare Air. Mai- vale's portraiture with the originals of Tacitus and Suetonius more narrowly than in previous examples. And that, it must be admitted, is a rivalry such as even so competent a narrator as Mr. Merivale need not blush for being unable to sustain. Not only is the diffuseness natural to moderns aggravated by the constant necessity for critical or explanatory, digressions, but the very licence of speech which was conceded to Pagan writers combines with the antique brevity to maintain their superiority over the modern, even in cases where the latter have the advantage in cri- tical judgment and political insight. Mr. Merivale,, as a clergy- man, is naturally even more unwilling than a lay modern would be to paint Imperial enormities as they ought tobe painted, if that primary function of history is to be fulfilled, from which it derives its name. We have not the least desire that ordinary readers of either sex should be shocked by too obtrusive a verisimilitude in the descriptions in the text. But a more frequent quotation of the original authorities in the notes, would add much to the value of the work. The ability with which Mr. Merivale's history has been written—his great research, his freedom from partisanship, his vigorous narrative, his genial sense of character, are likely for a good while to keep English competitors out of the field which he has traversed. And therefore it is the more to be regretted, that his history is neither so picturesque nor so complete a digest of all that is known, as with his abilities, we should think he could easily have made. For it is a very important question whether characteristic de- lineation is not more instructive than historical disquisition ; and that, by the double stress of its immensely greater attractiveness, causing it to be more widely read, and of the superior significance of facts, in appropriate sequence and collocation, to the most in- genious comment on a selection from them. Even after the pat- terns which Mr. Merivale may have adopted, or the examples which may have stimulated him, his history so far as it goes can hardly claim to be so complete a digest of the facts of Roman history, as Mr. Grote's, or Bishop Thirlwall's, is with regard to the wider and more diversified area of Grecian history. Though in neither of the latter is there the same necessity for minute re- productions of the " form and pressure of the time," as in the case of the corrupt and highly artificial state of society, which it ought to have been one-of Mr. Merivale's main objects to make his readers familiar with. Accepting with due thankfulness all that Grote, Thirlwall, and Menvale have done to place before uf

. in a consecutive series of review articles,—for that is what their books are,—the results of modern criticism as applied to the blurred and fragmentary materials of ancient history, the ques- tion still recurs whether this nineteenth century does not require something quite different and in some respects far superior to the best which they have provided ? Whether, in fact, modern writers of ancient history are not in solemn duty bound to be narrators, pourtrayers, vivifiers, and not to cofitent themselves with being agile theorists or consummate critics? Has Mr. Grote or Mr. Merivale, or any man, a right in virtue of his learning, industry, and skill in exposition, to monopolize, as by his success he does, the chair in his department for say half a century, and for that period keep the popular knowledge of the times which, he has treated of, at a low level, when it ought to be at a high level ? We hope we shall not be supposed to depart from fir sobriety which has always characterized the criticisms in this

journal, when we answer in the negative. We are as sensible as any one can be of the defects, in some instances the absolute vices, which accompany the pictorial power manifested in such 'ous forms by Baronte, Thierry, Michelet, Carlyle, and Mac- aulay. But we do say, that no history satisfactorily meets the requisitions of the age, or worthily fulfils its noble mission that does not aim at presenting in a concentrated form and picturesque arrangement a digest of the minute as well as the great facts which have been handed down to us, and the combination of which can alone make up a true and instructive picture. There is less excuse in histories of ancient times than in any others, both because the materials to be digested are so scanty, and be- cause our imperfect knowledge of and sympathy with their ways of life, and modes of thinking, require to be supplemented by as complete a reproduction as practicable of what is known about them. Nor can we recognize in Mr. Grote or Mr. Merivale, or others whom we might mention, any intellectual deficiency which need have prevented their succeeding each in his own manner, in adding picturesque and suggestive delineations to the other merits which have obtained for them a high rank among modern his- torians. And if there be one instance beyond another, in which such a deficiency is to be lamented, it is surely in a history of that corrupt and self-conscious state of society of which Taeitus, Suetonius, Martial, and Juvenal have left us such delineations, unequalled for their force and brevity.

We do not at all offer these observations, as failing to re- cognize a great deal of the same kind of merit in the present volume, to which we have given our hearty commendation when noticing the previous volumes. Did our space permit, we would gladly take up chapter after chapter, and show what new light the author has thrown upon disputed and how ably he has placed in their due relation, events and influences which prece- ding writers have neglected or misconceived. It is in proportion to our confirmed opinion of his conscientiousness and ability in those functions of the historian which he has exercised, that we regret that he has not condescended to add to them that vivacity of artistic reproduction, which is the crown of all historical ex- cellence; without which, in fact, the most careful and learned history is little better than a church service read in a language which the people do not understand. Above all we are surprised at this deficiency when we find Mr. Merivale frankly designating his work a "Biographical History " ! His regret at parting from the authorities which have thus far guided him, is natural. But will he pardon us for suggesting that his sorrow would be more justifiable, if he had made a more genial use of them, while they were at his command.

To cite many examples of the deficiency of which we complain, would not only exceed our space, but seems unnecessary when on the one hand, it does not seem to have come within Mr. Merivale's plan to make any such attempt, and, on the other hand, when every page, we might almost say every line, of Tacitus, Sueton- ius, and Dion supplies hints which it seems astonishing that any man with a true historical instinct could have neglected. And the wonder is increased when we reflect that it would in many cases have taken less trouble to copy the fact or allusion in all its pictu- resqueness, than to squeeze the life and colour out of it, and re- produce it in the dim allusions or vague generalities which Mr. Merivale seems to think a matter of decorum. One example of what we mean, we select at random. One of the best written parts of the present volume, is the opening of a chapter in which he passes in review that race of Ahenobarbi or Brass-beards,- Italy was ever the land of nicknames—whose humours culminated in that ferocious fop, the Emperor Nero. Both retrospects are capital in their way ; and we don't at all mean to say, that Mr. Merivale is not picturesque and pithy in comparison with some of his predecessors. And yet what striking traits, nationally as well as personally characteristic, does he lose in the process of generalization ! He says of the seventh Domitius, the tyrant's father, he " was infamous for crimes of every kind; for murder and treason for adultery and incest. He was mean as well as cruel and even stooped to enrich himself by petty pilfering " ; and so on. Bad enough in all conscience but as bad, might be said in exactly the same words of? per- sonages notorious enough in other ages and countries. Now, what does Suetonius tell us in as nearly as possible the same space ? He tells us first that Nero's father was in his young day

dismissed from his regiment, or from the staff,—he was aide-de- camp to one of the Augustan Fin ces--for killing one of his freed- men, who refused to get intoxicated for his amusement. Murder

No. 2 was purposely running over a boy on the Appian Road. And ruffianism No. 3 was gouging a Roman knight in the open

Forum. And his meanness was shown in his defrauding his silversmiths apparently by an interpleaders action, and by what must have Veen far worse in the eyes of a Roman fast man, cheat- ing the jockies of their perquisites at what we may call the Ro- man Derby ; he the said Domitius being as Prwtor manager of the games. Now without absolutely saying that Mr. Merivale was bound to reproduce all these particulars, we still say that a selec- tion of them would not only have given a far more vivid idea of the progenitor of Nero, but would have added several charac- teristic traits to the reader's knowledge of Roman manners. Who, that was not told it, would have supposed that gouging was aPparently as much in fashion in ancient Rome as in modern

America ? And to sax the truth, we are constantly reminded Of transatlantic ruffianism when we turn over the pages d Ta- eitus or Suetonius. Extremes meet, we suppose. We " cut" into the Suetonius again, and we light upon another trait, which if Mr. Merivale has adopted, we can only say that it has escaped us on a careful perusal. In describing Nero's theatrical exhibitions he seems to miss the astounding trait, that Nero had a band of claqueurs, composed of the stoutest lads that could be got, to the number of above 5000. These claqueurs were headed by young men of the equestrian order, and divided into parties, denoted by most expressive but not very translateable names, according to the kind of applause that they were skilled in bestowing. Most of these were drawn from Alexandria, be- cause the people of that city, like the men of Kent, had a special talent for noise of this description. Buzzers, and showerers, and bringers-of-the-roof-down are as good approximations as we can make to the titles of the several battalions of this army of claqueurs. Curly-haired lads they were, dressed in the height of the fashion but not allowed to wear rings, lest it should interfere with the sonorousness of their clapping. How characteristic is all this, both of the despot and the time ; and what a pity that either in the text, or in the notes, a place could not be found for it. But if Mr. Merivale's narrative be deficient in respect of those minute touches to which some of his contemporaries have accus- tomed us, it is only just to him to state that the general views and summary statements, most important in a work of so wide a scope, are executed in a masterly manner, which few historians of any age or nation have equalled. The following description of the Roman commonalty is not only admirable in itself, but a key to what would otherwise be inexplicable in the existence of such a tyrant as Nero.

Descending, however, from the high places of the Roman world, we find beneath them a commonalty suffering also a social revolution under- going' a rapid transition, and presenting the elements of two rival dosses, or evenhostile camps, in the bosom of the city. The clients and retainers of the old nobility, whether freed or free-born, still formed the pith and mar- row of the commonwealth- still leaning their humble tenements against the great lords' mansions, still respecting them as their patrons and ad- visers, still attending their levees, and waiting for the daily compliment of the sportida at their doors, they regarded them as the real chiefs of the state, and held them equals of Cmsar himself. The death or exile of their au- gust protector might strike them with surprise and indignation ; but when they looked around and counted their numbers, they felt their own insigni- ficance, and quailed beneath the blow in silence. They saw that there was growing up beside them a vast class of patronless proletaires, the scum of the streets and lanes, slaves, freedmen, foreigners, men of base trades and infamous employments, or of ruined fortunes, who, having none but Ccesar himself to depend on, threw the weight of their numbers in his scale, and earned his doles and entertainments by lavish caresses, and deeds corre- spondingto their promises. These have been called the lazzaroni of ancient Rome ; .idleness, indeed, and mendicancy. they deserve the title ; but they were the paupers of a world-wide empire, and the crumbs on which they fed, fell from the tables of kings and princes. The wealth of millions of subjects was lavished on these mendicant masters. For days together, on the eft-recurring occasion of an imperial festival, valuables of all kinds were thrown pell-mell among them, rare and costly birds were lavished upon them by thousands, provisions of every kind, costly robes gold and silver, pearls and jewels, pictures, slaves, and horses, and even robes, wild beasts; at last, in the progress of this wild profusion, ships, houses, and es- tates were bestowed by lottery on these waiters upon Cxsar's providence. This extravagance was retained without relaxation throughout Nero's reign ;. had he paused in it for a moment the days of his power would have been few. The rumour that he was about to quit Rome for the east caused murmurs of discontent, and forced him to consult the gods, and pretend to be deterred by signs of their displeasure from carrying his design into effect. When at last, as we shall see, he actually visited Greece, he left behind him a confidential minister, to keep the stream of his liberality flowing, at what- ever cost and by whatever measures of spoliation. Absent or present, he flung to these pampered supporters a portion of every confiscated fortune ; the Emperor and his people hunted together, and the division of the prey was made apparently to the satisfaction of both equally. Capricious as were the blows he dealt around him, this class alone he took care never to offend, and even the charge of firing the city fell lightly on the ears of the almost houseless multitude, whose losses at least had been fully compen- sated by plunder. The clients of the condemned nobles were kept effect- ually in check by this hungry crowd, yelling over every carcass with the prospect of a feast. Nero, in the height of his tyranny and alarm, had no need to increase the number of his pra3torians ; the lazzaroni of Rome were a body-guard surrounding him in every public place, and watching the entrances and exits at his palace-gates.'

The Provincials or subjects of Rome were in a far healthier and happier state. "Such were the chief distinctions of class at this period among the Ro- man people, the so-called lords of mankind, and beyond them lay the great

world of the provincials, their subjects. But if these were subjects in

name they were now become in fact the true Roman people ; they alone retained real freedom of action within the limits of the empire ; they were allowed to labour, and they enjoyed the bulk at least of the fruits of indus-

try; they rarely saw the hateful presence of the Emperor, and knew only by report the loathsome character of his courtiers and their orgies. And if sometimes the thunderbolt might fall among them, it struck only the high- est eminences ; the multitude was safe as it was innocent. The extortion of the proconsul in the province was not to be compared in wantonness or severity with the reckless pillage of the Emperor in the capital nearer home. The petulance of a proconsul's wife was hardly tolerated abroad, while at home the prince's worst atrocities were stimulated by female cupidity.

The taxation of the subject, if heavier in some respects than that.of the citizen, was at least tolerably regular ; the extraordinary demands which Nero made towards the rebuilding of Rome were an exception to the routine

of fiscal imposts. But, above all, the provincials had changed plebe with

their masters in being now the armed force of the empire. The citizen had almost ceased to wield the sword. Even the prietorians were recruited from Italy, not from Rome herself; and among them thousands were doubtless foreign-born, the offscourings of the provinces, who had thrown themselves on the shores of Italy to seek their fortunes in a sphere abandoned by the indolence of their masters."

The parts of the work which treat of the rising conflict between Paganism and Christianity, are able and highly interesting ; but we have not left ourselves room to quote from them. Those pagan Pharisees the Stoics are finely described, but the author is more indulgent to Seneca than we should have been. Are we to sup-

pose that those characteristics in Seneca, which made Carlyle

oall him the father of all shovel-hats, have Mr. Merivale's judgment in this particular ? For onr.partwwaerradve long thought that Seneca's pedantry, not less than his weakness, may have had something to do in training the Imperial tiger. We are not alto- gether in jest, when we say that on the principle of contraries we lfriow of no more potent exhortation to tyranny than Seneca's treatise de dementia. And it is easy to see how mere antagonism to the Stoic affectations, peculiarly revolting in a millionaire and Usurer like Seneca, may have tended to develop the contrary ex- cel/38C in a temperament at once so profoundly voluptuous and ex- cessively vain as Nero's.