The result was (as we may judge from the complaints of the critics) that the product of the rhetorical system often found himself in the position of a fire-brigade without a fire. He had all the machinery, and had used it all in mock alarms, but had missed that contact with reality which makes for understanding. He had come to look on facility of speech (to which the Gauls were particularly prone)[1394] as an end in itself. He had been taught to think that everything was a matter of rule,[1395] and often found too late that life demanded a different and a deeper method. Why was it that the rhetorical system, with all its virtues, failed in this way? To put it quite shortly, we should say that it failed because it did not aim at the best. Ennodius indicates its aims in two brief sentences. ‘Nos vitae maculas tergimus artis ope’[1396]—polish, style, external refinement; ‘Qui nostris servit studiis, mox imperat orbi’—imperial service. These were the two main objects, both of them good and desirable in themselves, but not the highest. And it was because the abuse of these two aims led to a conflict between them and the highest aim, truth, because the rhetorical system was content with a second best[1397] which could not remain uncorrupted except in connexion with the best, it was for this reason that, ultimately, failure inevitably ensued. Other and more material causes may easily be argued, but this is the inherent and fundamental cause. How far did the Christian ideal prove a truer inspiration to education? It has been remarked that paganism had no idea of progress. The note of pessimism in Roman literature is typified in such passages as Horace’s: Aetas parentum peior avis tulit nos nequiores, mox daturos progeniem vitiosiorem. But with the Gospels, when the watchword of ‘Estote perfecti’ turned men’s backward glances forward to the light, the doctrine of progress began to establish itself more firmly.[1398] Now progress depends on the truth and the vividness of the ideal in view, and there can be no doubt that the Christians of our period felt their ideal as a much more living and constant inspiration than the pagans felt theirs. Paulinus of Pella illustrates this. His poem is alive with sincere devotion, and the usual dryness of the author draws a vigour and an inspiration from religious emotion which makes the work, in spite of its lack of literary formalities, compare favourably with the Panegyrists or the semi-Christian writers.[1399] His ardour and singleness of purpose[1400] are also seen in the _De Providentia_ and the _Ad Uxorem_. In spite of all the sufferings of the ten-years’ slaughter (_caedes decennis_), there is the clear-eyed calmness of one who sees an ideal whose brightness and steadiness are undimmed by the storm.