MR. FINLAY'S GREECE UNDER THE ROMANS.
THE object of this volume is less to narrate the historical events with which the Greeks might happen to be connected, or in which they bore a part, than to convey some idea of the state of Greece and the condition of its inhabitants from the time of the Roman Con- quest, B.C. 146, to the reign of LEO the Isaurian, A.D. 717; at which time Mr. FINLAY conceives the Roman Empire may be held to have terminated, and the Byzantine to commence. This plan, how- ever, the author has not always been able to adhere to. The temp- tation afforded by the peculiar characteristics of JUSTINIAN'S reign, and the exploits of BELISAR1IIS and Nelms, induce him to give a general account of the conduct of the Emperor, and the enterprises of' his lieutenants. The character of Manomzr, and the rise and progress of the IVIahometan conquests, almost of necessity occasion the state of Greece to be left for a general review of the world known to the Romans. Other persons, or other events — as the accession of Haitectsus, his restoration of the empire, and foundation of a new dynasty—give rise to other digressions, in which the general policy of a reign, and sometimes its
particular exploits or expeditions, supersede the principal design. Hence it follows, that the main object of the work is often lost sight of by the reader; and it is probable that, after travelling through
the volume, the decline of the Eastern Empire, and the misgovern- ment which aggravated if it did not produce it, will be as strongly
impressed upon the mind as the condition of Greece and the Greeks. Indeed, the notices of the country by authors are often so scanty, or such an absolute silence, for Mr. FINLAY'S purposes, is preserved respecting it, that his views must rather be considered as inferences from incidental notices than deductions from authority. It strikes us, too, that Mr. Frpirxr, though not unacquainted with the original authors, has relied too much upon modern interpretations
or conjectures. An injudicious if not an unsafe plan. An original may be ignorant, or prejudiced, or weak, or credulous ; a modern critic may come to the perusal of his pages with acumen and learning, so as to strike out information and truths from the chronicler of which he had no conception. But no mind can serve as a medium without colouring the thing transmitted. The con- temporary, or the nearest author, must have a pervading spirit in his very folly, which cannot be presented even were it desired, and renders his study essential by the historian. It is a sound rule of law which requires the best evidence to be produced—the original deed, and not a copy, if the original is in existence.
The want of entire oneness in the subject, and of that flavour which results from saturating the mind with original authorities, renders the book less compact, less complete, and less animated than it might have been made. Greece Under the Romans, however, is a valuable and useful work. It calls attention to a peculiar but neglected branch of social history, and to the condition of a re- markable people. For although, after Roman devastations, the inroads of the Goths, and the settlement of the Sclavonians and other barbarians, it may be too much to assert that the present Greeks are the pure descendants of the ancient Hellenes, there is no doubt that they have preserved their nationality better than any other ancient people, the Jews and Arabs excepted : indeed, every other ancient European people, the Romans included, has been utterly destroyed. In the course of his narrative, or per- haps his disquisition, so far as Greece is concerned, Mr. FINLAY advances some other propositions suggesting new thoughts, if not throwing new lights upon ancient history. He maintains, against the received opinion, that Christianity, far from hastening the decline of the Empire, (he must mean the Eastern Empire,) was a means of retarding its downfal, by substituting the tie of religion for that nationality which it was the aim of the Roman government to destroy, and by forming in the lay character of the clergy a species of Democratic representatives, that opposed some sort of check to the power of the Emperors. The execution of the work is not condensed, but its style is solid and clear, and the arrangement distinct. It is no charge against Mr. FINLAY to say that his manner smacks of GIBBON. The truth is, that the History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire has not only presented the leading points of that vast subject, but marked with such accuracy the characteristic merits and values of the different authorities, that it must always be a guide to any portion of the period which may be treated by other authors at greater length or from another point of view. It is probable that the Decline and Fall will be something more than a guide ; and hence we have observed that all writers treating of that epoch re- flect more or less of the manner of Ginnox.
One opinion of Mr. FINLAY'S is, that the residents in Greece preserved a quiet respectability of character for a very long period after their subjugation by Rome, and that the traits of Grecian character which the Romans have transmitted to us were only truly applied to the adventurers who thronged to the capital. This may be true, but we desire more authority for an opinion applied to so long a period, than one isolated author stating a fact which is true of any provincial city compared with a metropolis. The passage, however, may be taken as a fair sample of Mr. FINLAY'S book, especially the quality already spoken of—the difficulty of supporting his views by any direct authority.
UNJUST CENSURE OF THE GREEKS BY THE ROMANS.
The Roman writers, from prejudice and jealousy, of which they were them- selves perhaps unconscious, have transmitted to us a very incorrect picture of the state of the Greeks during the first centuries of the Empire. They did not observe with attention the marked distinction between the Asiatic and Alexandrine Greeks and the natives of liellas. The European population, pursuing the quiet life of landed proprietors, or engaged in the pursuits of commerce and agriculture, was considered by Roman prejudice as unworthy of notice. Lucian, himself a Greek, indeed contrasts the tranquil and respect- able manner of life at Athens with the fully and luxury of Rome ; but the Romans looked on provincials as little better than serfs, (coloni,) and merchants were, in their eyes, only tolerated cheats. The Greek character was estimated from the conduct of the adventurers who thronged from the wealthy and cor- rupted cities of the East in order to seek their fortunes at Rome, and who from motives a fashion and taste were unduly favoured by the wealthy aris- tocracy. The most distinguished of these Greeks were literary men, professors of philosophy, rhetoric, grammar, mathematics, and music. Great numbers were engaged as private teachers; and this class was regarded with some respect by the Roman nobility, from its intimate connexion with their families. The great mass of the Greeks residing at Rome were, however, employed in con- nexion with the public and private amusements of the capital, and were found engaged in every profession, from the directors of the theatres and opera. houses down to the swindlers who frequented the haunts of vice. The testi- mony of the' Latin authors may be received as sufficiently accurate concerning the light in which the Greeks were regarded at Rome, and as a not incorrect portraiture of the Greek population of the capital.
The expressions of the Romans, when speaking of the Greeks, often display nothing more than the manner in which the proud aristocracy of the Empire regarded all foreigners, those even whom they admitted to their personal in- timacy. The Greeks were confounded with the great body of strangers from
the Eastern nations in one general sentence of condemnation : and not un- naturally, for the Greek language served as the ordinary means of communlea_ tion with all foreigners from the East. The magicians, conjurors, and astr,,. logers of Syria, Egypt, and Chaldrea, were naturally mixed up, both in society and public opinion, with the adventurers of Greece, and contributed to form the despicable type which was unjustly enough transferred from the fortune- hunters at Rome to the whole Greek nation. It is hardly necessary to ob- serve, that Greek literature, as cultivated at Rome during this period, had im connexion with the national feelings of the Greek people. As far as the Greeks themselves were concerned, learning was an honourable and lucrative occupation to its successful professors; but in the estimation of the higher classes at Rome, Greek literature was merely an ornamental exercise of the mind—a fashion of the wealthy. This ignorance of Greece and the Greeks induced Juvenal to draw his conclusive proof of the utter falsity of the Greek character, and of the fabulous nature of all Greek history, from his own downs concerning a fact which is avouched by the testimony of Herodotus and Thu- cydides : but, as a retort to the Gracia nsendar of the Roman satirist, the apter observation of Lucian may be cited—that the Romans spoke truth only once in their lives, and that was when they made their wills.
Some resemblance to the following sketch of the administrative class of the Roman Empire may be observed in Austria and Prussia, and will probably grow up in France. So far as the comfort of individuals is concerned, the system no doubt works well : it intro- duces law into despotism, and prevents individual will from work- ing out its caprices upon the people. But, by tempting all the practical ability of a nation into the service of government, and suppressing all promulgation of theoretical opinions, it turns the people into a servile et ignobile peens; not only preventing the prospect of improvement, but rendering it undesirable to the per- sons themselves. Modern Germany can indeed be stimulated by examples from without, but under the Roman Empire this was im- possible.
IMPERIAL BUREAUCRACY.
The Eastern Empire was an absolute monarchy, of a regular and systematic form. The Emperor was the head of the government, and the master of all those engaged in the public service; but the administration was an immense esta- blishment, artfully and scientifically constructed in its details. The numerous individuals employed in each ministerial department of the state consisted of a body of men appropriated to that special service, which they were compelled to study attentively, to which they devoted their lives, and in which they were sure to rise by talents and industry. Each department of the state formed a separate profession, as completely distinct and as perfectly organized in its in- ternal arrangements as the legal profession is in modern Europe. A Roman Emperor would no more have thought of suddenly creating a financier, or an administrator, than a modern sovereign would think of making a lawyer. This circumstance explains at once how education and official knowledge were so well preserved in the Roman administration, where, as in the law and the church, they flourished long after the extinction of literary acquirements in any other classes of the people ; and it affords also an explanation of the singu- lar duration of the Roman government, and of its inherent principle of vitality. Hit wanted the energy necessary for its own regeneration, which could only have proceeded from the influence of a free people on the sovereign power, it at least escaped the evils of official anarchy and vacillating government. No- thing but this systematic composition of the multifarious branches of the Ro- man administration could have preserved the E.npire from dissolution during the period in which it was a prey to internal wars and foreign invasions ; and this supremacy of the system over the will of individuals gave a character of immutability to administrative procedure, which warranted the boast of the subjects of Constantine and Justinian, that they lived under the protection of the Roman constitution. The greatest imperfection of the government arose from the total want of any popular control over the moral conduct of the pub- lic servants. Political morality, like pure taste, cannot live without the atmo- sphere of public opinion.
Previous page
