The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire: Table of Contents with links in the HTML file to the two Project Gutenberg editions (12 volumes)Gibbon, Edward
History
The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire: Table of Contents with links in the HTML file to the two Project Gutenberg editions (12 volumes)
Gibbon, Edward
Byzantine Empire -- History -- To 527; Indexes; Rome -- History -- Empire, 30 B.C.-476 A.D.
Our suspicions are confirmed by the authority of a contemporary
historian, who mentions the virtues of Alexander with respect,
and his faults with candor. He describes the judicious plan which
had been formed for the conduct of the war. Three Roman armies
were destined to invade Persia at the same time, and by different
roads. But the operations of the campaign, though wisely
concerted, were not executed either with ability or success. The
first of these armies, as soon as it had entered the marshy
plains of Babylon, towards the artificial conflux of the
Euphrates and the Tigris, 51 was encompassed by the superior
numbers, and destroyed by the arrows of the enemy. The alliance
of Chosroes, king of Armenia, 52 and the long tract of
mountainous country, in which the Persian cavalry was of little
service, opened a secure entrance into the heart of Media, to the
second of the Roman armies. These brave troops laid waste the
adjacent provinces, and by several successful actions against
Artaxerxes, gave a faint color to the emperor’s vanity. But the
retreat of this victorious army was imprudent, or at least
unfortunate. In repassing the mountains, great numbers of
soldiers perished by the badness of the roads, and the severity
of the winter season. It had been resolved, that whilst these two
great detachments penetrated into the opposite extremes of the
Persian dominions, the main body, under the command of Alexander
himself, should support their attack, by invading the centre of
the kingdom. But the unexperienced youth, influenced by his
mother’s counsels, and perhaps by his own fears, deserted the
bravest troops, and the fairest prospect of victory; and after
consuming in Mesopotamia an inactive and inglorious summer, he
led back to Antioch an army diminished by sickness, and provoked
by disappointment. The behavior of Artaxerxes had been very
different. Flying with rapidity from the hills of Media to the
marshes of the Euphrates, he had everywhere opposed the invaders
in person; and in either fortune had united with the ablest
conduct the most undaunted resolution. But in several obstinate
engagements against the veteran legions of Rome, the Persian
monarch had lost the flower of his troops. Even his victories had
weakened his power. The favorable opportunities of the absence of
Alexander, and of the confusions that followed that emperor’s
death, presented themselves in vain to his ambition. Instead of
expelling the Romans, as he pretended, from the continent of
Asia, he found himself unable to wrest from their hands the
little province of Mesopotamia. 53
51 (return) [ M. de Tillemont has already observed, that
Herodian’s geography is somewhat confused.]
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