II.]

Its divided state.

47

It was "strong as iron; forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these," did it "break in pieces and bruise 5."

66

66

But, as the prophet went on to declare, the kingdom was to be "divided." He is not here speaking, it would appear, of the division into the separate kingdoms, which are commonly supposed to be represented by the toes on the feet of the image; but of the division of the component materials of the feet, part of iron and part of clay"-describing a kingdom partly strong and partly broken," or rather, as it is in the margin, "brittle"." "Whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters' clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay. And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly broken. And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not

6

5 Davison well observes, "We must take notice that one especial object in the prediction is the superior strength, the paramount solidity and force of their empire, as compared with the others which had preceded it. Theirs was to be the iron power, breaking down, and bruising all things." So it was foretold; so it was. The solid and well-cemented fabric of its military despotism, the overwhelming force, and the continued impression, of its reiterated wars and victories, held the world in stronger chains, and subdued it to a more hum

48

Amalgamation its policy.

[LECT. cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay." We have seen St. Jerome's illustration of this description, drawn from the actual state of the empire, as he saw it in his own days; and the modern historian of its decline and fall traces very clearly the element of weakness mingling with its greatest strength. In a passage which has been expressly cited to prove Rome's moderation, and that "not the extermination of the conquered, but their civilization and incorporation into the Roman name, was the ultimate end of Roman government ""-he tells us, "The republic gloried in her generous policy, and was frequently rewarded by the merit and services of her adopted sons'." "The same salutary maxims of government, which had secured the peace and obedience of Italy, were extended to the most distant conquests. A nation of Romans was gradually formed in the provinces, by the double expedient of introducing colonies, and of admitting the most faithful of the provincials to the freedom of Rome?." And this undoubtedly seemed to be a principle of permanency and strength. "The narrow policy," says the historian, "of preserving, without any foreign admixture, the pure blood of the ancient citizens, had checked the fortune, and hastened the ruin, of Athens and Sparta. The aspiring genius of Rome sacrificed vanity to ambition, and deemed it

II.]

Its apparent strength.

49

themselves with the Italy first was asso"From the foot of

more prudent, as well as honourable, to adopt virtue and merit for her own wheresoever they were found, among slaves or strangers, enemies or barbarians "." And thus then did the proud Romans, the iron conquerors of the world, "mingle seed of men," the potter's clay. ciated and adopted into Rome. the Alps to the extremity of Calabria, all the natives of Italy," says the historian, "were born citizens of Rome. Their partial distinctions were obliterated, and they insensibly coalesced into one great nation, united by language, manners, and civil institutions, and equal to the weight of a powerful empire." It might almost have been thought that the historian, when he wrote this, had before his eyes the image in Nebuchadnezzar's vision;-the feet of iron, as men might have deemed, fully equal to the weight they bore of the colossal image of earthly dominion. And the union of internal elements in the fabric of the Roman empire seemed to be perfect. The colonies, we are told, "were soon endeared to the natives by the ties of friendship and alliance; they effectually diffused a reverence for the Roman name, and a desire, which was seldom disappointed, of sharing, in due time, its honours and advantages." "The grandsons of the Gauls, who had besieged Julius Cæsar in Alesia, commanded legions, governed provinces, and were admitted into the senate of Rome". Their ambition, instead of disturbing the tranquillity of the state, was intimately connected with its safety and

3 Decline and Fall, chap. 2. vol. i. p. 40. Gibbon refers, in a note, to Tacit. Annal. xi. 24, and adds, "The Orbis Romanus of the learned Spanheim, is a complete history of

the progressive admission of Latium, Italy, and the provinces, to the freedom of Rome."

4 Ibid. p. 42.

5 Tacit. Annal. xi. 23, 24. Hist. iv. 74.

E

50

Ultimate weakness.

[LECT.

greatness"." 'Domestic peace and union were the natural consequences of the moderate and comprehensive policy embraced by the Romans." "The vanquished nations," says the historian, contrasting Rome with the "monarchies of Asia," where we "behold despotism in the centre, and weakness in the extremities;"-"the vanquished nations, blended into one great people, resigned the hope, nay even the wish, of resuming their independence, and scarcely considered their own existence as distinct from the existence of Rome"." "The empire of Rome," he tells us, "was firmly established by the singular and perfect coalition of its members." So, indeed, it seemed to outward appearance. "But this union was purchased," the historian goes on to say, "by the loss of national freedom and military spirit; and the servile provinces, destitute of life and motion, expected their safety from the mercenary troops and governors, who were directed by the orders of a distant court." Here then was disunion beginning. They could "not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay." And a stroke was ready to fall upon the feet of iron and clay. "The deepest wounds," says the historian, "were inflicted on the empire during the minorities of the sons and grandsons of Theodosius; and, after those incapable princes seemed to attain the age of manhood, they abandoned the Church to the bishops, the state to the eunuchs, and the provinces to the barbarians "."

"They abandoned the Church to the bishops

for in "the days of those kings" of the fourth and last

6

Gibbon, vol. i. pp. 44, 45. &c., subjoined to chap. 38. ' Ibid. p. 52. vol. iii. pp. 635, 636.

8" General Observations,"

II.]

Fall of the Roman Empire.

51

empire had "the God of heaven set up" His "kingdom" under its Divinely appointed rulers ;-and the very next sentence of the historian bears witness that Rome was indeed thus the last of the universal

monarchies of old time. For he goes on to show how Europe, unlike the ancient Roman world, is now divided into numerous kingdoms, commonwealths, and states; how thereby "the abuses of tyranny," such as imperial Rome could exercise without control," are restrained;" how "republics have acquired order and stability; monarchies have imbibed the principles of freedom, or, at least, of moderation; and some sense of honour and justice is introduced into the most defective constitutions by the general manners of the times"." And how much of this, it may well be asked, do we not owe to the silent influence, upon the world, of the kingdom of Christ? And if it be inquired in what sense it can be said that Christianity was an instrument in the overthrow of the Roman empire', we may appeal again to the testimony of the historian, whose language at every page painfully reminds us, all the while, of his own unbelief. He will tell us, in his sarcastic manner, that "as the happiness of a future life is the great object of religion,"-yes, indeed; for the kingdom of "the God of heaven" is spiritual and eternal, a kingdom "not of this world," "the kingdom of heaven,"-" we may hear, without surprise or scandal," I am quoting the historian's own words"that the introduction, or at least the abuse, of Christianity, had some influence on the decline and fall of the Roman empire." He scoffingly tells us of the preaching of its "doctrines of patience and,"

supr. p. 42.