The West was now won by Theodosius, and he became emperor of the whole of the empire. In his last years, he had the weakness to let himself be entirely guided by Rufinus his favourite, who was his _præfectus prætorio_. Rufinus was insatiably avaricious and bloodthirsty; so that even before the death of Theodosius, he caused weeping and wailing throughout the whole of the empire: here was seen a really noble-hearted prince under whom the empire was very badly ruled. Antioch once roused the wrath of the emperor; but Libanius and St. Chrysostom still succeeded in appeasing him: on another occasion, however, he gave loose to his rage, and was obliged to do penance. The division of the empire had under existing circumstances already become so natural, that Theodosius likewise decided upon it: yet he was inexcusable in dividing it between his two incapable sons, especially as Honorius was not more than eleven years old, on which account he gave him Stilicho for guardian. But the hereditary principle had now so firmly rooted itself, that Theodosius took it for granted that Stilicho would keep up the empire for his son, just as in our times a minister or general might do. LITERATURE AND FINE ARTS. In Rome, from the time of Diocletian down to Theodosius, there was the greatest poverty of literature. Of poets, we have in the whole of this period only Ausonius, who is bad beyond belief: it was but the veneration of the French philologists of the sixteenth century which raised him to some consideration; he is quite as bad as the most wretched poets of the middle ages. In prose also there is a grievous dearth. About the middle of the fourth century, arose the writers of epitomes, such as Eutropius and Victor; nor is it unlikely that the epitome of Livy likewise dates from that time: these men have not a spark of genius. On the other hand, the Latin grammar has its beginning in that form in which we know it. Its real father is Donatus, the master of St. Jerome: Charisius does not belong to his school, but is independent; he is an encyclopedist who gives one a general view of the older works. Diomedes also is a writer of the fourth century. To the latter end of it likewise belongs Servius, who bears the stamp of his age, which was the condensing of everything into summaries. The only part of his commentary which we have in a genuine form, is that on the two first books of the Æneid: the rest we have in an abridgment only, which very likely was made in the seventh or eighth century. Another writer of the same kind is Festus, who has arranged the work of Verrius Flaccus in alphabetical order: he is very useful to us, although he does not everywhere understand Verrius. Nonius Marcellus is very likely somewhat later; yet he belongs to the same school of grammarians, to which the impulse had now been given. Lastly, at the end of the fourth century, Macrobius also flourished.