The Though Constantine, from a very obvious prejudice, affects to mention the palace of Diocletian with contempt,* yet one of their successors, who could only see it in a neglected and mutilated state, celebrates its magnificence in terms of the highest admiration.† It covered an extent of ground consisting of between nine and ten English acres. form was quadrangular, flanked with sixteen towers. Two of the sides were near six hundred, and the other two near seven hundred, feet in length. The whole was constructed of a beautiful freestone, extracted from the neighbouring quarries of Trau or Tragutium, and very little inferior to marble itself. Four streets, intersecting each other at right angles, divided the several parts of this great edifice; and the approach to the principal apartment was from a very stately entrance, which is still denominated the Golden Gate. The approach was terminated by a peristylium of granite columns, on one side of which we discover the square temple of Esculapius, on the other the octagon temple of Jupiter. The latter of those deities Diocletian revered as the patron of his fortunes, the former as the protector of his health. By comparing the present remains with the precepts of Vitruvius, the several parts of the building, the baths, bedchamber, the atrium, the basilica, and the Cyzicene, Corinthian, and Egyptian halls, have been described with some degree of precision, or at least of probability. Their forms were various, their proportions just; but they were all attended with two imperfections, very repugnant to our modern notions of taste and conveniency. These stately rooms had neither windows nor chimneys. They were lighted from the top (for the building seems to have consisted of no more than one story), and they received their heat by the help of pipes that were conveyed along the walls. The range of principal apartments was protected towards the south-west by a portico five hundred and sevenmost excellent trout, which a sagacious writer, perhaps a monk, supposes to have been one of the principal reasons that determined Diocletian in the choice of his retirement. (Fortis, p. 45.) The same author (p. 38) observes, that a taste for agriculture is reviving at Spalatro; and that an experimental farm has lately been established near the city by a society of gentlemen. * Constantin. Orat. ad Cœtum Sanct. c. 25. In this sermon, the emperor, or the bishop who composed it for him, affects to relate the miserable end of all the persecutors of the church. + Constantin. Porphyr. de Statu 2 п VOL. I. 466 RUINS OF THE PALACE. [CH. XIII. teen feet long, which must have formed a very noble and delightful walk, when the beauties of painting and sculpture were added to those of the prospect. Had this magnificent edifice remained in a solitary country, it would have been exposed to the ravages of time; but it might, perhaps, have escaped the rapacious industry of man. The village of Aspalathus,* and, long afterwards, the provincial town of Spalatro, had grown out of its ruins. The Golden Gate now opens into the market-place. St. John the Baptist has usurped the honours of Esculapius; and the temple of Jupiter, under the protection of the Virgin, is converted into the cathedral church. For this account of Diocletian's palace, we are principally indebted to an ingenious artist of our own time and country, whom a very liberal curiosity carried into the heart of Dalmatia.† But there is room to suspect, that the elegance of his designs and engraving has somewhat flattered the objects which it was their purpose to represent. We are informed by a more recent and very judicious traveller, that the awful ruins of Spalatro are not less expressive of the decline of the arts, than of the greatness of the Roman empire in the time of Diocletian.‡ If such was indeed the state of architecture, we must naturally believe that painting and sculpture had experienced a still more sensible decay. The practice of architecture is directed by a few general and even mechanical rules. But sculpture, and, above all, painting, propose to themselves the imitation not only of the forms of nature, but of the characters and passions of the human soul. In those sublime arts, the dexterity of the hand is of little avail, unless it is animated by fancy, and guided by the most correct taste and observation. It is almost unnecessary to remark, that the civil distractions of the empire, the licence of the soldiers, the inroads Imper. p. 86. * D'Anville, Géographie Ancienne, tom. i. p. 162. Messieurs Adams and Clarisseau, attended by two draughtsmen, visited Spalatro in the month of July, 1757. The magnificent work which their journey produced, was published in London seven years afterwards. I shall quote the words of the abate Fortis. "E bastevolmente nota agli amatori dell' Architettura, e dell' Antichità, l'opera del signor Adams, che ha donato molto a que' superbi vestigi coll' abituale eleganza del suo toccalapis e del bulino. In generale la rozzezza del scalpello, e'l cattivo gusto del secolo vi gareggiano colla magnificenza del fabricato." See Viaggio in Dalmazia, p. 40. of the barbarians, and the progress of despotism, had proved very unfavourable to genius, and even to learning. The succession of Illyrian princes restored the empire without restoring the sciences. Their military education was not calculated to inspire them with a love of letters; and even the mind of Diocletian, however active and capacious in business, was totally uninformed by study or speculation. The professions of law and physic are of such common use and certain profit, that they will always secure a sufficient number of practitioners, endowed with a reasonable degree of abilities and knowledge; but it does not appear that the students in those two faculties appeal to any celebrated masters who have flourished within that period. The voice of poetry was silent. History was reduced to dry and confused abridgments, alike destitute of amusement and instruction. A languid and affected eloquence was still retained in the pay and service of the emperors, who encouraged not any arts except those which contributed to the gratification of their pride, or defence of their power.* The declining age of learning and of mankind is marked, however, by the rise and happy progress of the New Platonists. The school of Alexandria silenced those of Athens : and the ancient sects enrolled themselves under the banners of the more fashionable teachers, who recommended their system by the novelty of their method, and the austerity of their manners. Several of these masters, Ammonius, Plotinus, Amelius, and Porphyry,t were men of profound thought and intense application; but, by mistaking the true object of philosophy, their labours contributed much less to improve, than to corrupt, the human understanding. * The orator Eumenius was secretary to the emperors Maximian and Constantius, and professor of rhetoric in the college of Autun. His salary was six hundred thousand sesterces, which, according to the lowest computation of that age, must have exceeded 3000l. a year. He generously requested the permission of employing it in rebuilding the college. See his Oration de Restaurandis Scholis; which, though not exempt from vanity, may atone for his panegyrics. + Porphyry died about the time of Diocletian's abdication. The life of his master Plotinus, which he composed, will give us the most complete idea of the genius of the sect and the manners of its professors. This very curious piece is inserted in Fabricius, Bibliotheca Græca, tom. iv. p. 88-148. 468 THE NEW PLATONISTS. [CH. XIII. The knowledge that is suited to our situation and powers, the whole compass of moral, natural, and mathematical science, was neglected by the New Platonists; while they exhausted their strength in the verbal disputes of metaphysics, attempted to explore the secrets of the invisible world, and studied to reconcile Aristotle with Plato, on subjects of which both these philosophers were as ignorant as the rest of mankind. Consuming their reason in these deep but unsubstantial meditations, their minds were exposed to illusions of fancy. They flattered themselves that they possessed the secret of disengaging the soul from its corporeal prison; claimed a familiar intercourse with demons and spirits; and, by a very singular revolution, converted the study of philosophy into that of magic. The ancient sages had derided the popular superstition; after disguising its extravagance by the thin pretence of allegory, the disciples of Plotinus and Porphyry became its most zealous defenders. As they agreed with the Christians in a few mysterious points of faith, they attacked the remainder of their theological system with all the fury of civil war.* The *After the publication of Mosheim's treatise, De turbata per recentiores Platonicos Ecclesia, there was a prevailing notion, that the Christian religion was an object of hatred to the New Platonists. This opinion has here been followed by Gibbon. Many learned Germans have shown how one-sided and exaggerated it is; among these are Semmler and Schrökh, who have thrown so much light on ecclesiastical history. On this subject readers may also consult with advantage, Prof. Keil's treatise, De causis alieni Platonicorum a religione Christiana animi (Lips. 1785), in which penetration and impartiality are equally displayed. Further valuable observations on the New Platonic philosophy, to which our author has assigned a too degraded position, may be found in Prof. Meiners's Beytrag zur Geschichte der Denkart der ersten Jahrhunderte nach Christi Geburt. -SCHREITER. [Gibbon's error in this passage has been overlooked by his other translators and commentators. Like many men of vast erudition, he was too apt to infer general characteristics from individual examples. Warburton did the same. Platonism, under every form, was friendly to Christianity, as may be seen in such men as Justin Martyr, Clemens Alexandrinus, Athenagoras, &c., down to the times of Origen and Synesius. To counteract this, a corrupted New Platonism was afterwards used, and an attempt made to philosophize Paganism. In his twenty-first chapter, which was not written till some time after this part of his work had been published, Gibbon dwells largely on the connection betweeen Christianity and Platonism.-ED.] New Platonists would scarcely deserve a place in the history of science, but in that of the church the mention of them will very frequently occur. CHAPTER XIV.-TROUBLES AFTER THE ABDICATION OF DIOCLETIAN.DEATH OF CONSTANTIUS.-ELEVATION OF CONSTANTINE AND MAXENTIUS. SIX EMPERORS AT THE SAME TIME.-DEATH OF MAXIMIAN AND GALERIUS.-VICTORIES OF CONSTANTINE OVER MAXENTIUS AND LICINIUS. REUNION OF THE EMPIRE UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF CONSTANTINE. THE balance of power established by Diocletian subsisted no longer than while it was sustained by the firm and dexterous hand of the founder. It required such a fortunate mixture of different tempers and abilities, as could scarcely be found or even expected a second time; two emperors without jealousy, two Cæsars without ambition, and the same general interest invariably pursued by four independent princes. The abdication of Diocletian and Maximian was succeeded by eighteen years of discord and confusion: the empire was afflicted by five civil wars; and the remainder of the time was not so much a state of tranquillity as a suspension of arms between several hostile monarchs, who, viewing each other with an eye of fear and hatred, strove to increase their respective forces at the expense of their subjects. As soon as Diocletian and Maximian had resigned the purple, their station, according to the rules of the new constitution, was filled by the two Cæsars, Constantius and Galerius, who immediately assumed the title of Augustus.* The honours of seniority and precedence were allowed to the former of those princes, and he continued, under a new appellation, to administer his ancient department of Gaul, Spain, and Britain. The government of those ample provinces was sufficient to exercise his talents, and to satisfy his ambition. Clemency, temperance, and moderation, dis *M. de Montesquieu (Considérations sur la Grandeur et la Décadence des Romains, c. 17) supposes, on the authority of Orosius and Eusebius, that, on this occasion, the empire, for the first time, was really divided into two parts. It is difficult, however, to discover in what respect the plan of Galerius differed from that of Diocletian. |