Philip, having made himself emperor, celebrated, upon his arrival in
Rome, the secular games, in the year 247 of the Christian era--that
being the completion of a thousand years from the foundation of Rome.
But Nemesis was already on his steps. An insurrection had broken out
amongst the legions stationed in Msia; and they had raised to the
purple some officer of low rank. Philip, having occasion to notice this
affair in the senate, received for answer from Decius, that probably the
pseudo-imperator would prove a mere evanescent phantom. This conjecture
was confirmed; and Philip in consequence conceived a high opinion of
Decius, whom (as the insurrection still continued) he judged to be the
fittest man for appeasing it. Decius accordingly went, armed with the
proper authority. But on his arrival, he found himself compelled by the
insurgent army to choose between empire and death. Thus constrained, he
yielded to the wishes of the troops; and then hastening with a veteran
army into Italy, he fought the battle of Verona, where Philip was
defeated and killed, whilst the son of Philip was murdered at Rome by
the prætorian guards.
With Philip ends, according to our distribution, the second series of
the Cæsars, comprehending Commodus, Pertinax, Didius Julianus, Septimius
Severus, Caracalla, and Geta, Macrinus, Heliogabalus, Alexander Severus,
Maximin, the two Gordians, Pupienus and Balbinus, the third Gordian, and
Philip the Arab.
In looking back at this series of Cæsars, we are horror-struck at the
blood-stained picture. Well might a foreign writer, in reviewing the
same succession, declare, that it is like passing into a new world when
the transition is made from this chapter of the human history to that of
modern Europe. From Commodus to Decius are sixteen names, which, spread
through a space of 59 years, assign to each Cæsar a reign of less than
four years. And Casaubon remarks, that, in one period of 160 years,
there were 70 persons who assumed the Roman purple; which gives to
each not much more than two years. On the other hand, in the history of
France, we find that, through a period of 1200 years, there have been
no more than 64 kings: upon an average, therefore, each king appears to
have enjoyed a reign of nearly nineteen years. This vast difference
in security is due to two great principles,--that of primogeniture as
between son and son, and of hereditary succession as between a son and
every other pretender. Well may we hail the principle of hereditary
right as realizing the praise of Burke applied to chivalry, viz., that
it is "the cheap defence of nations;" for the security which is thus
obtained, be it recollected, does not regard a small succession of
princes, but the whole rights and interests of social man: since the
contests for the rights of belligerent rivals do not respect themselves
only, but very often spread ruin and proscription amongst all orders
of men. The principle of hereditary succession, says one writer, had it
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account