210
EEVOLT OF CLAUDIUS CIVILIS
there followed, a period of more than a century, during which
the country enjoyed profound peace, and recovered from its
former devastations, though it was perhaps heavily taxed. The
population of a country like France, which is so much blessed
by nature, and enjoys such a mild climate, must have become
doubled or trebled during that time, and must have acquired
great wealth. The northern districts, though politically under
the dominion of Kome, did not, in reality, belong to Gaul, and
had very few towns. Our country here on the Rhine, which
was occupied by Germans at the time of Caesar, and probably
even much earlier, did not keep pace with the civilisation of
Gaul, and was certainly not as wealthy. It very much resem-
bled the rest of Germany: it had a numerous population, and
many villages ; but scarcely any towns. Its population has
Veryunjustlybeen considered as Gallic. It has been entirely Ger-
man ever since the time of Caesar, and probably even earlier. It
never belonged to Gaul, and was connected with it only poli-
tically under the Romans. A frontier had there been formed
between the Romans and Germans, either by a treaty or tacitly.
The country of the Batavi between the Meuse and the Waal,
the insula Batavorum, was under the dominion of Rome. It had
Roman garrisons, but still had not yet adopted Roman civilisa-
tion; it was there that the insurrection of Claudius Civilis
broke out. It spread all over the German provinces of the
Roman empire and over Gaul, where the Lingones placed
themselves at the head of it. This revolt was a very dangerous
one ; and the Germans on the eastern bank of the Rhine declared
for it. But the success of the insurgents was checked by their
want of unity, arising from their natural divisions ; while some
of them were zealous and others indolent, and all of them were
more or less under the influence of petty jealousy, they had to
fight against Roman generals who acted with great resolution.
The Germans and Gauls, moreover, were not natural allies.
Their objects were now the same indeed; but otherwise they
were as foreign to each other as the Romans were to both of
them : nay, it may be said, that the Romans were more akin to
the Gauls than the Germans; for the noble Gauls had adopted
the Latin language, and Roman manners were generally estab-
lished among them. In what manner the insurrection ended
we know not, for the “ Historiae” of Tacitus breaks off before
the close of the war, and at a moment when we can only see
CHARACTER AND REIGN OF VESPASIAN.
211
that it is taking a different turn, and that the insurgents will
probably be obliged to yield. The fact of their being actually
subdued is seen from Xiphilinus' abridgment of Dion Cassius.4
Before Vespasian’s arrival at Rome, Domitian had marched
against the insurgents, and had assumed the supreme command
of the Roman armies in those countries; but he had no share
in the conquest of the enemy, which was the merit of his
father’s generals.
Vespasian reigned upwards of nine years, and his govern-
ment was thoroughly beneficial to the Roman world. As we
arc without the guidance of Tacitus, it is not easy to come to a
definite conclusion as to Vespasian’s personal character; for the
pictures of character which Suetonius draws are very obscure,
and are made with as little judgment as those we meet with in
the “ Scriptores Historiae Augustae.” Suetonius was a man of
great learning, and did not write badly, but he had no
survey of his subjects, nor any historical talent. His de-
scription of the time in which he himself lived is even worse
than those of previous periods, in which he had the works
of others whom he could follow; and this circumstance is
the best evidence that he had no vocation to write history.3
Tf we compare the praise which he bestows upon Vespasian
with what he relates of him, we are at a loss to see how he
can have reconciled the two things in his own mind; but
it seems that many of the circumstances which he relates
ought to have been omitted, as they were nothing but unfounded
reports. There are only a few points in Vespasian’s character
which we may take for certain : in regard to all the others we
are left in the dark. It is a fact beyond all doubt that, consi-
dering the time in which he lived, Vespasian was an excellent,
straight-forward, and just man, in a negative sense, for he did
not make himself guilty of tyranny; and in his reign there
4 lχvi. 3.
51 am inclined to think that Suetonius wrote his biographical history at a
time when he wa⅞ still very young, and before he obtained the office of private
secretary to Hadrian (Spartian. Hadrian, 11); I have no doubt at all that his
lives of the emperors were written previously to the publication of Tacitus’
“ Historiae,” for otherwise the account of the anarchy after Nero’s death, and
the beginning of the reign of Vcspasian could scarcely have been as bad as it is.
Wherever we are confined to Suetonius as our source of information we are
very badly off ; and throughout the history of the emperors our materials are bad.
If we had Dion Cassius, we should not have much reason for complaining, but
unfortunately a great part of his work is lost, and we possess only the miserable
abridgment which Xiphiliiius made of it.—N.
P 2