cials, it was a subject of flattering exultation, that the barbarian, so lately an object of terror, now cultivated their lands, drove their cattle to the neighbouring fair, and contributed by his labour to the public plenty. They congratulated their masters on the powerful accession of subjects and soldiers; but they forgot to observe, that multitudes of secret enemies, insolent from favour, or desperate from oppression, were introduced into the heart of the empire.*

While the Cæsars exercised their valour on the banks of the Rhine and Danube, the presence of the emperors was required on the southern confines of the Roman world. From the Nile to mount Atlas, Africa was in arms. A confederacy of five Moorish nations issued from their deserts to invade the peaceful provinces.† Julian had assumed the purple at Carthage. Achilleus at Alexandria, and even the Blemmyes, renewed, or rather continued, their incursions into the Upper Egypt. Scarcely any circumstances have been preserved of the exploits of Maximian in the western parts of Africa; but it appears by the event, that the progress of his arms was rapid and decisive, that he vanquished the fiercest barbarians of Mauritania, and that he removed them from the mountains, whose inaccessible strength had inspired their inhabitants with a lawless confidence, and habituated them to a life of rapine and violence.§ Diocletian, on his side, opened the campaign in Egypt by the siege of Alexandria; cut off the aqueducts which conveyed the waters of the Nile into every quarter of that immense city; and rendering his camp impregnable to the sallies of the besieged multitude, he pushed his reiterated attacks with caution and vigour. After a siege of eight months, Alexandria, wasted by the sword and by fire, far westward. The term is applied so vaguely, even by historians, and by poets often only for the sake of the rhythm, as by Ovid (Tristia, 5, 7, 56), that their incidental use of it affords no authority, especially for an otherwise improbable fact.-ED.] See the rhetorical exultation of Eumenius. Panegyr. 7, 9. Scaliger (Animadvers. ad Euseb. p. 243), decides, in his usual manner, that the quinque gentiani, or five African nations, were the five great cities, the Pentapolis, of the inoffensive province of Cyrene. After his defeat, Julian stabbed himself with a dagger, and immediately leaped into the flames. Victor in Epitome. § Tu ferocissimos Mauritania populos, inaccessis montium jugis et naturali munitione fidentes, expugnasti, recepisti, transtulisti. Panegyr. Vet. 6, 8. description of Alexandria, in Hirtius de Bel. Alexandrin. c. 5.

See the

436

VICTORIES OF DIOCLETIAN

[CH. XIII. implored the clemency of the conqueror; but it experienced the full extent of his severity. Many thousands of the citizens perished in a promiscuous slaughter; and there were few obnoxious persons in Egypt who escaped a sentence either of death, or at least of exile.* The fate of Busiris and of Coptos was still more melancholy than that of Alexandria: those proud cities, the former distinguished by its antiquity, the latter enriched by the passage of the Indian trade, were utterly destroyed by the arms and by the severe order of Diocletian.† The character of the Egyptian nation, insensible to kindness, but extremely susceptible of fear, could alone justify this excessive rigour. The seditions of Alexandria had often affected the tranquillity and subsistence of Rome itself. Since the usurpation of Firmus, the province of Upper Egypt, incessantly relapsing into rebellion, had embraced the alliance of the savages of Ethiopia. The number of the Blemmyes, scattered between the island of Meroe and the Red Sea, was very inconsiderable, their disposition was unwarlike, their weapons rude and inoffensive. Yet in the public disorders, these barbarians, whom antiquity, shocked with the deformity of their figure, had almost excluded from the human species, presumed to rank themselves among the enemies of Rome.§ Such had been the unworthy allies of the Egyptians; and while the attention of the state was engaged in more serious wars, their vexatious inroads might again hazard the repose of the province. With a view of opposing to the Blemmyes a suitable adversary, Diocletian persuaded the Nobatæ, or people of Nubia, to remove from their ancient habitations in the deserts of Lybia, and resigned to them an extensive but unprofitable territory above Syene and the cataracts of the Nile, with the stipulation that they should ever respect and guard the frontier of the empire. The treaty long subsisted; and till the establishment of Christianity introduced

* Eutrop. 9, 24. Orosius, 7, 25. John Malala in Chron. Antioch. p. 409, 410. Yet Eumenius assures us, that Egypt was pacified by the clemency of Diocletian. Eusebius (in Chron.) places their destruction several years sooner, and at a time when Egypt itself was in a state of rebellion against the Romans. Strabo, 1. 17, p. 1, 172. Pomponius Mela, 1. 1, c. 4. His words are curious: "Intra, si credere libet, vix homines, magisque semiferi; Egipanes, et Blemmyes, et Satyri." § Ausos sese inserere fortunæ et provocare arma Romana,

stricter notions of religious worship, it was annually ratified by a solemn sacrifice in the Isle of Elephantine, in which the Romans, as well as the barbarians, adored the same visible or invisible powers of the universe.*

At the same time that Diocletian chastised the past crimes of the Egyptians, he provided for their future safety and happiness by many wise regulations, which were confirmed and enforced under the succeeding reigns.† One very remarkable edict which he published, instead of being condemned as the effect of jealous tyranny, deserves to be applauded as an act of prudence and humanity. He caused a diligent inquiry to be made for all the ancient books which treated of the admirable art of making gold and silver, and without pity committed them to the flames; apprehensive, as we are assured, lest the opulence of the Egyptians should inspire them with confidence to rebel against the empire. But if Diocletian had been convinced of the reality of that valuable art, far from extinguishing the memory, he would have converted the operation of it to the benefit of the public revenue. It is much more likely that his good sense discovered to him the folly of such magnificent pretensions, and that he was desirous of preserving the reason and fortunes of his subjects from the mischievous pursuit. It may be remarked that these ancient books, so liberally ascribed to Pythagoras, to Solomon, or to Hermes, were the pious frauds of more recent adepts. The Greeks were inattentive either to the use or to the abuse of chemistry. In that immense register, where Pliny has deposited the discoveries, the arts, and the errors of mankind, there is not the least mention of the transmutation of metals; and the persecution of Diocletian is the first authentic event in the history of alchymy. The conquest of Egypt by the Arabs diffused that vain science over the globe. Congenial to the avarice of the human heart, it was studied in China, as in Europe, with equal eagerness and with equal success. The darkness of the middle age ensured a favourable reception to every tale of wonder, and the revival of learning gave new vigour to hope, and suggested more spe

He fixed the

* See Procopius de Bell. Persic. lib. 1. c. 19. public allowance of corn for the people of Alexandria, at two millions of medimni; about four hundred thousand quarters. Chron. Paschal. p. 276. Procop. Hist. Arcan. c. 26. John Antioch, in Excerp. Va

438

THE PERSIAN WAR.

[CH. XIII. cious acts of deception. Philosophy, with the aid of experience, has at length banished the study of alchymy; and the present age, however desirous of riches, is content to seek them by the humbler means of commerce and industry.*

The reduction of Egypt was immediately followed by the Persian war. It was reserved for the reign of Diocletian to vanquish that powerful nation, and to extort a confession from the successors of Artaxerxes, of the superior majesty of the Roman empire.

We have observed, under the reign of Valerian, that Armenia was subdued by the perfidy and the arms of the Persians, and that, after the assassination of Chosroes, his son Tiridates, the infant heir of the monarchy, was saved by the fidelity of his friends, and educated under the protection of the emperors. Tiridates derived from his exile such advantages as he could never have obtained on the throne of Armenia; the early knowledge of adversity, of mankind, and of the Roman discipline. He signalized his youth by deeds of valour, and displayed a matchless dexterity, as well as strength, in every martial exercise, and even in the less honourable contests of the Olympian games. Those qualities were more nobly exerted in the defence of his benefactor Licinius. That officer, in the sedition which occasioned the death of Probus, was exposed to the most imminent danger, and the enraged soldiers were forcing their way into his tent, when they were checked by the single arm of the Armenian prince. The gratitude of Tiridates contributed soon afterwards to his restoration. Licinius was in every station the friend and companion of Galerius; and the merit of Galerius, long before he was raised to the dignity of Caesar, had been

lesian, p. 834. Suidas in Diocletian. * See a short history and confutation of Alchymy, in the works of that philosophical compiler, La Mothe le Vayer, tom. 1, p. 327–353. See the education and strength of Tiridates in the Armenian history of Moses of Chorene, lib. 2, c. 76. He could seize two wild bulls by the horns, and break them off with his hands. If we give credit to the younger Victor, who supposes that in the year 323, Licinius was only sixty years of age, he could scarcely be the same person as the patron of Tiridates; but we know from much better authority (Euseb. Hist. Ecclesiast. lib. 10. c. 8), that Licinius was at that time in the last period of old age sixteen years before, he is represented with grey hairs, and as the

known and esteemed by Diocletian. In the third year of that emperor's reign, Tiridates was invested with the kingdom of Armenia. The justice of the measure was not less evident than its expediency. It was time to rescue from the usurpation of the Persian monarch, an important territory, which, since the reign of Nero, had been always granted, under the protection of the empire, to a younger branch of the house of Arsaces.*

When Tiridates appeared on the frontiers of Armenia, he was received with an unfeigned transport of joy and loyalty. During twenty-six years, the country had experienced the real and imaginary hardships of a foreign yoke. The Persian monarchs adorned their new conquest with magnificent buildings; but those monuments had been erected at the expense of the people, and were abhorred as badges of slavery. The apprehension of a revolt had inspired the most rigorous precautions: oppression had been aggravated by insult, and the consciousness of the public hatred had been productive of every measure that could render it still more implacable. We have already remarked the intolerant spirit of the Magian religion. The statues of the deified kings of Armenia, and the sacred images of the sun and moon, were broken in pieces by the zeal of the conqueror; and the perpetual fire of Ormuzd was kindled and preserved upon an altar erected on the summit of mount Bagavan. It was natural that a people exasperated by so many injuries, should arm with zeal in the cause of their independence, their religion, and their hereditary sovereign. The torrent bore down every obstacle, and the Persian garrisons retreated before its fury. The nobles of Armenia flew to the standard of Tiridates, all alleging their past merit, offering their future service, and soliciting from the new king those honours and rewards from which they had been excluded with disdain under the foreign government.‡ contemporary of Galerius. See Lactant. c. 32. Licinius was probably born about the year 250. * See the sixty-second and sixty-third books of Dion Cassius. Moses of Chorene, Hist. Armen. lib. 2, c. 74. The statues had been erected by Valarsaces, who reigned in Armenia about one hundred and thirty years before Christ, and was the first king of the family of Arsaces. (See Moses, Hist. Armen. lib. 2, 2, 3.) The deification of the Arsacides is mentioned by Justin (41, 5) and by Ammianus Marcellinus (23, 6). The Armenian nobility was numerous and powerful. Moses mentions many families