But we must be careful not to push too far any argument based upon this lampoon of Julian or upon the obvious bias of Zosimus. They disclose to us, undoubtedly, the least worthy side of Constantine’s character, viz., a tendency to effeminacy and luxury, and it is morally certain that no one who had given way to his worst passions, as Constantine had done in Rome in the year 326, could ever be quite the same man again. He had on his conscience the assassination of his son and wife. These were but two out of a terribly long list of victims, which included his father-in-law, Maximian; his brother-in-law, Licinius, and Licinius’s young son, Licinianus; another brother-in-law, the Cæsar Bassus; and many more besides. Some fell for reasons of State—“it is only the winner,” as Marcus Antonius had said three centuries before, “who sees length of days”—but there was also the memory, even in the case of some of these, of broken promises and ill-kept faith. Constantine’s Christianity was not of the kind which permeates a man’s every action and influences his entire life; or, if that be claimed for him, it must at least be admitted that there were periods in his career when he suffered most desperate lapses from grace. On the whole perhaps the general statement of Eutropius, which we have already quoted, that Constantine degenerated somewhat (_aliquantum mutavit_) as he grew older, fairly meets the case. It is worth while, indeed, to quote the reasoned estimate which this excellent epitomist gives of the Emperor’s character. He says[132]: “At the opening of his reign Constantine was a man who challenged comparison with the best of Princes; at its close he merited comparison with those of average merit and demerit. Both mentally and physically his good points were beyond computation and conspicuous to all. He was passionately set on winning military glory; and in his campaigns good fortune attended him, though not more than his zealous industry deserved.... He was devoted to the arts of peace and to the humanities, and he sought to win from all men their sincere affection by his generosity and his tractability, never losing an opportunity of enriching his friends and adding to their dignity.” ----- Footnote 132: Eutropius, x., 7. ----- This estimate agrees in its main particulars with that of Aurelius Victor, who, after speaking of his wonderful good luck in war (_mira bellorum felicitate_) and his avidity for praise, eulogises his exceptional versatility (_commodissimus rebus multis_), his zeal for literature and the arts, and the patient ear which he was always ready to lend to any provincial deputation or complaint.