Half-length Portraits

Front matter

Google to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

Contents

PAGE

Light in Darnkess . . . . . . . i

Chapters I. and II.

Preface

Crossing the border, a friend who is, what I do not pretend to be, a man of letters and no tyro, remarked that in these brief studies I had not inserted any "brither Scots," of whom he opined that from a small nation there were many to be cited who were both great and good. My long absence from the " land of the mountain and the flood " certainly has not tamed nor daunted my love for her, nor my belief in the virtues of her sons and daughters. But of these I dare say little, lest I should say too much t this Imay add, that I yield to none in my love and admiration of her. And I may add my reason for the omission which my friend noted. Burns has a well-known verse, so well known that it were an insult to quote it, anent the "Trentice hand of Nature." That which she loved best, and most fondly endowed she essayed last. And — the inference is palpable-^my 'prentice hand having been tried herein, I may, if I succeed, yet say something more worthily of my countrymen.

HALF-LENGTH PORTRAITS.

Chapter I. LIGHT IN DARKNESS

T is somewhat difficult for an ordinary

Englishman to picture to himself what a

Roman Emperor was in the age when

the power of the Caesars was at its best

-when it had reached its height and not given a sign of decadence. A few middle-class workmen in a country town had, the other day, the bad taste and impertinence to style themselves " Republicans," and — ^here lay the gravamen of their folly — to give notice that on the Queen's death they should " contest the succession of the Prince of Wales to the throne." No sensible person takes any serious notice of the rudeness and inswlt thus offered to the excellent lady who is our Qtieen, of the singular bad taste of the Republicans, of the mixture of braggardism and folly of a number of apprentices giving themselves airs — Simon Tappertits turned into the " three tailors " of Tooley Street, who signed themselves " we, the people of England" — nor of the ridiculous fomi of their assertion that they " would contest the succession." How ? If by law, then by law the Prince is heir \ if not by law, then by force of arms — and where is their army ? We cite this, not to blame Republicanism — ideally we lean strongly to that form of government, and the British Constitution affords perhaps the nearest possible approach to it — but to contrast the behaviour of these not very wise or highly educated young men with the conduct of a great Roman Senator, a Stoic philosopher, a highly-placed nobleman and very rich and educated man, in the days of Marcus Aurelius. Overcome with ill-health, age, and disease, he humbly petitioned the Emperor to be allowed to kill himself !

Now let us contrast these two immense variations of thought, and realize, if we can, the flood of liberty which has caused the difference. Aurelius, Emperor of the East and West, that is, of the known world — Greece, the provinces of the Danube, Asia Minor, Judaea, Persia, the farthest India, Egypt, the north of Africa, and all our present kingdoms of Europe, of all for which Napoleon fought, or Gustavus or Frederick struggled, and of which England is but a small comer — ^grants to one of his great men the right to die. A few mechanics, who, under Aurelius would have been slaves, give a long and thoroughly unasked for and most traitorous notice to a Queen of more subjects than even Aurelius reigned over, that they will con-, test her son's succession. What has wrought this difference? What has raised these mechanics to the level of an Emperor ? By what happy process — for the result is an expansion of spirit which must do good — have succeeding ages so lifted up the serf that, if a British or an American citizen, he is ready to

** Shake hands with a king upon his throne, And think it honour to his majesty ! "

Simply that Faith which the great Aurelius, one of the wisest and best human kings that ever lived, tried with all his power to crush out ; for be it noted that China, existing in a parallel state to Rome, and at that period quite as enlightened and just as subservient — indeed through all centuries since that time China has presented just the same slavery of the wise and good — has until lately suffered no material revolution and no interruption of religious thought. Her philosophy — that of Confucius — is at its best just about as good as that of Marcus Aurelius ; and there, to this day, a great mandarin, who must be educated and wise, and have passed through many examinations, petitions like the Roman Senator for the right to die, holds his soul but at the Emperor's nod; whereas the Christian mechanic exercises the right to live just as he pleases, with or without his king. Is not this a proof of the leaven which leaveneth the whole mass ? The Heathen remains through nearly eighteen centuries without growth — the Christian is raised, as the Gospel promises, in more senses than one, to the level of priests and kings. There is no other cause but Faith.

But, beyond this contrast — which an Englishman, to realize his own happy position, should work out — there are other considerations. Marcus Aurelius was, as we have stated, although at the most giddy elevation, one of the simplest, wisest, and best of men. He stands on the same level with Socrates. Although an

B 2

Emperor, he saw through the splendour of his situation and the glamour of life. He was a Heathen saint. He is one of those who, although he persecuted Christians, was so wise and good that Christians hope to meet him in heaven, when his sight will be purged, and he will know how he has wandeired. It will be good, therefore, to speak of such a man; first endeavouring to realize and understand his times and surroundings.

The Roman Republic — ^perhaps the most splendid specimen of a vigorous and aggressive state which ever existed — must not be mistaken by demagogues, who are too apt to talk about that which they do not imderstand, for a modern Republic such as America or Great Britain, where the governing power really rests with the great body of the people. The governing power of Rome was held by the great families — which, firom their having furnished the Consuls, we are accustomed to call Consular families; all the working and trading classes were looked upon as base mechanics ; many of the chief industries, even to that of the physician, the schoolmaster, the painter, and the author, were carried on by slaves, or mere fireedmen, who were to be flattered, coerced, or amused with the circus and a dole, if at all discontented, but who otherwise were governed without any reference to their wishes. These great Consular families had, in little more than 700 years — b.c. 753 to b.c. 31 — worn themselves out, and, corrupted by continual conquests, and by having no further antagonists, the Roman State fell before the ambition of Caesar, who was declared perpetual dictator in the year B.C. 48, and assassinated in the last flickering effort of liberty.

B.C. 44. Octavianus received the new title of Augustus and Imperator — literally commander-in-chief, whence our word "emperor" — b.c. 27; and from him until the assassination of Domitian, for one hundred and twenty-three years, the ruling power was held by the Twelve Caesars, who, with very few exceptions, exhibited, especially in such men as Tiberius — in whose reign Christ was crucified — Caligula, Claudius, Nero, and Domitian, a depth of corruption, cruelty, and wickedness almost impossible to parallel. The Roman Empire — then, indeed, synonymous with the world — represented a very close original to its picture in the Revelation of St John, when the rider on the blood-red horse dashes forward, slaying and to slay.

From the year 96 to that of 180, if we omit a few persecutions of the Christians, whose young Church had been made to grow fertilely by the blood of its martyrs, there was a period of peace, lasting through the reigns of Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus Titus, sumamed Pius^ and Marcus Aurelius, the philosophic Emperor, of whom we write. The storms of cruelty which shook the Empire had ceased ; but the worm was at the foot of the huge tree — the rot was in root, stem, and branch — and corruption, mining all within, afflicted unseen. Sir Walter Raleigh, in his " History of the World," describes, with an eloquence not to be surpassed, the fate of this mighty State. He describes it as a " great tree flourishing in the middle of a field, having rooted up or cut down all that kept her from the admiration of the world. But, after some continuance, it shall begin to lose the beauty it had ; the storms of ambition shall beat her great boughs and branches one against another ; her leaves shall fall off, her limbs wither, and a rabble of barbarous nations enter the field and cut her down." " Oh, eloquent, just, and mighty Death ! " cries Raleigh, as he surveys all the cruelty, tyranny, and bloodshed of this forceful and mighty Republic — all the wars and tears of blood and cries of widows and orphans that Rome had caused — "whom none could advise, thou hast persuaded ; what none hath dared, thou hast done ; and whom all the world hath flattered, thou only hast cast out of the world and despised; thou hast drawn together all the far-stretched greatness, all the pride, cruelty, and ambition of man, and covered all over with these two narrow words — Hicjacet.^^

But this end was not yet to come. Before the disruption of great and cruel States there is a breathing space, a last rally of the vital forces, and, instead of tyrants, good men often hold the throne and try to administer justice and to live in peace. Thus it happened with Rome in her decline. The Empire was not necessarily hereditary. If the Republic differed from the modem Republic, not less so did the autocracy of Rome from a modem empire. The Emperor, who was, if powerful; sure to be followed by his obedient Senate, selected some favourite to follow him, wanting a son ; and the wise Hadrian, having fixed upon Marcus Aurelius, adopted, as the child was too young, Antoninus Pius, on the condition that he in his tum should adopt Aurelius. This was done; and hence Rome breathed freely, and lived, or rather gently continued to die in peace, during the age of the Antonines.

Aurelius himself, even without the imperial purple, was remarkable alike as boy and man. At the age of twelve he assumed the mantle of the Stoic philosopher.

and, brought up by his grandfather, Amicus Verus, was educated in every accomplishment and branch of learning, and seems to have been formed by Providence to give peace to Rome, and to shed a lustre on the soiled imperial purple and the dying or dead Pagan philosophy. If we count St. Peter, who probably never was at Rome, there had been, up to the reign of Aurelius, eleven Papas or Bishops of Rome, of whom eight had been martyred. In 139 a.d. Hyginus the Bishop was the first to assume the title of Pope, though it was not confined to the Bishop of Rome till the homicide Emperor Phocas, in the year 606, conceded that privilege to Boniface III. ; and Marcus Aurelius was himself to add a ninth martyr to the list of bishops in the person of Soterus, executed in 168 a.d. Christianity must therefore have been very well known, and was regarded, as can be seen from the satires then written, as the religion of a number of low, common, obstinate, and termagant people, who would not sacrifice to the gods, and who, by their superior virtues, poverty, self-sacrifice, and pure life, must have been a severe sore and trouble in the side of Roman pride, luxury, and love of life. Marcus Aurelius could have been no stranger to the pretensions and existence of such people in his chief city, and seems to have determined to present from his great elevation a proof that Paganism could also furnish something admirable and virtuous.

There is a cold and haughty pride in his very confessions of gratitude. In the " Meditations" which he has left us, and upon which his fame chiefly rests, he says : — " From my grandfather I learned good morals and the government of my temper ; from the remembrance of my father, modesty and a manly character ; from my mother piety, beneficence, and abstinence, not only from evil deeds, but even from evil tlioughts — simplicity in living far removed from the luxury of the rich; from my governor [tutor], endurance of labour to work with my own hands, to want little, not to meddle with other people's affairs, and not to be ready to listen to slander." The great Emperor gives every one his due, but with a proud air, as if he demanded admiration for himself. " From Diognetus I learned not to be busy with trifles, not to credit miracle-mongers, jugglers about incantations, and the drivers away of daemons and such things." This is evidently a side-blow at the despised sect of Christians ; and he adds, as on a par with this hardness of belief, "not to breed fighting-cocks [quails which both the Atheniahs and the Romans made to fight], to endure freedom of speech, to love philosophy, to write dialogues in my youth, and to desire a plank bed and a skin such as belongs to the Grecian discipline." He had educated himself and held himself proudly above the follies of the world. " From Rusticus," he continues, mentioning another Stoic, "I learned to own that my character required improvement and discipline ; not to emulate sophistically \ not to show myself off as a man who practises much discipline, or who does benevolent acts for the sake of display ; to abstain from rhetoric, poetry, and fine ' writing, and not to walk about the house in my fine out-door dress. From him also I learned and received the idea of the polity in which there is the same law for all, to be administered with regard to equal rights and equal freedom of speech, and the idea of a kingly government which respects most of all the freedom of the governed." ^

These indeed are imperial qualities ; but is it not curious that they were not promulgated by any Emperor till one hundred and sixty-nine years after the preaching of Christianity ? From the same philosopher Aurelius tells us he learnt to be consistent in his love for philosophy, to cherish a disposition to do good, to give to others readily and easily, to cherish good hopes, and — here is indeed a deeply philosophic touch — " to believe I am loved by my friends." And then with a noble humility the philosopher continues : " To the gods I am indebted for having good grandfathers, good parents, a good sister, good teachers, good associates, good kinsmen and friends — nearly everything good." With such views Antoninus admits that the universe is governed by the foreknowledge or providence of the gods (irpovoia), and therefore that

all things are wisely ordered.

We can but enter on the life of this great man, and

leave our readers to follow it out either under Mr.

Long's, or the guidance of tlie " learned Gattaker ;"

they must grasp the really unique character of the man

— a Stoic philosopher, on a throne ; despising man,

yet the first of living men \ hating riches, yet the richest ;

doubting the good of power, yet the most powerful ;

desiring to be alone, yet always surrounded by a court,

and frequently at war ; the last great upholder of the old

worldly philosophy, soon to be swept away before

that which gives us really a new heaven and a new

earth. No man was like him, perhaps no one so

profoundly melancholy, so lonely, and so great.

"The providence of the gods existed," he wrote, but it was of little use to man since he did not understand if. Man should boldly take his life and the world in his hand ; such were the dietetics of the soul as prescribed by him. He believed in advice, and so we do now ; " a word spoken in due season how good is it !" So the sorrowful Aurelius says, " Come, be thine own master, and be thine own helper, so that you are of good heart in good as well as in evil days" (i. 15). And again he gives us this consolation : " There is no real evil ; if one man is evilly entreated of another he can. easily escape." This of course hints at suicide. If a man is wronged, the wrong is the evil-doer's. In Book xi. 18 he gives some practical and excellent precepts as to bearing offences. We are to bear them, however, chiefly by throwing ourselves back on our pride. " Consider," he says, " what men are — what they are at bed, table, at home, how foolish they are and unthinking." If men do rightly, then we are not hurt ; if they do not right, it is plain that they are ignorant. And, if you are vexed, consider how short life is — it is but for a moment ; moreover your good disposition ought to be invincible and real, not an affected business, not acting a part. Life, however, is not much ; if you are tired of it, retire as you would get up from table when you have had enough. life is not even incomplete if fate overtakes a man, as one may say of an actor who leaves the stage before finishing his part. Death is no evil ; if it be so, then change is an evil, for it is but change. Living beings suffer pain, man suffers most of all, and yet after all the universe is so vast and we so little and ignorant that we do not even know if we suffer." There is to be no looking for reward. Man has, it may be, some chance of a future.

LIGH2 IN DARKNESS. n

though of this the Emperor seems by no means certain. His doctrine of the change of things and of necessity would seem to imply that man does not utterly perish ; " being a portion of "the Divinity, his soul cannot perish, and, if it does, the gods will do what is best." This is but cold comfort opposed to the warm life of true Faith — a proudly human and stoical indifference, but the best humanity can give. We must admire and love this Emperor, so good, so just, so tender, driving back the barbarians who invaded the territories of Rome, dying in arms for the good of his country, wearied, toil-worn, and yet spent when not' yet sixty, and, like a setting sun, casting a ray of glory upon the world from which he was soon to vanish.

Chapter II. (Continued)

ARCUS AURELIUS has so many precepts not altogether unlike those of Christ that some antagonists to Christianity have not scrupled to prefer his teaching to that of the Gospel. But on a calm and unbiassed reflection the judicious reader will find no cause to do so. The book which the Roman Emperor has left us is essentially cold and dry. It is very hard reading ; it does not touch the heart ; it is inferior as a literary composition to the Gospels or the Epistles ; it is full of repetitions ; it has no light and shade, no pathos, no episodes, and no condemnation of sin, and therefore really no spiritual life. It gives perhaps the best counsel that this world can give, but it is of this world. In the picture of a Stoic which Shakspere has left us — a remarkable and truthful one — the poet pictures the cynical side of the character by far too boldly for us to imagine 'that the Cynic-Stoic Apemantus could resemble or have much in common with such a philosopher as Marcus Aurelius, but at the bottom there is a likeness. When Apemantus prays thus : —

** Immortal gods, I crave no pelf; I pray for no man but myself: Grant I may never prove so fond To trust man on his oath or bond : Or a harlot for her weeping, Or a dog that seems a-sleeping, &c. "

— there is the same kind of cold caution about him that there is about Marcus Aurelius. The Emperor, however, is on a much higher plane than the other, but it forms part of the same sterile mountain of hiiman pride. " Care not," says Aurelius, " for what others say ; remember it is but opinion. Mind how -you act; ask yourself when you employ your soul, Whose soul have I now — that of a child, a young man, or of a feeble woman? .... Live with the gods. Art angry with him who smells badly or whose breath is foul ? What good will this anger do ? He has such a mouth and such a breath : it is necessary that such an emanation must come from such things." But all he writes is not pitched in so high a chord of scorn.

At the beginning of this paragraph is a reference to the parallel between his teachings and those of our faith ; and here are some very beautiful maxims : — " A man cannot be really injured by his brethren, for no act of theirs can make him bad ; he must not be angry with them nor hate them. We are all made for co-operation, as feet, hands, eyelids, or the upper and lower rows of teeth. To act against another, then, is to act against nature." And again : — "Take pleasure in one thing and rest in it, passing from one act of companionship to another, thinking of God." " Love mankind. Follow God." "It is a part of the character of the reasonable soul in a man to love his companion " (neighbour). We do not quite find the Divine precept of " Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you," but Antoninus says, with excelling wisdom, " The best way of avenging yourself is not to become like the wrong-doer." With all deference to so able a scholar as Mr. George Long, whose treatise on the " Philosophy of Antoninus " is admirable, we cannot agtfee with him that he writes in the ** spirit of the sublime prayer. Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." Here are the Emperor's words : — "When a man has done thee any wrong, immediately consider with what opinion about good or evil he has done wrong. For, when thou hast seen this, thou wilt pity him, and wilt neither wonder nor be angry." This may be stoical philosophy, but to us it is neither sufficing nor convincing. If a man struck out one of our eyes, we should need something more than the reflection that he was a stupid fool, whose idea of right or wrong was not particularly clear. Aurelius is perhaps better when he thus tells us not to brood over a wrong : — " Wipe out the imagination. Stop the pulling of the wires. Confine your thoughts to the present. Understand well what happens to thee or to another. Think of thy last hour ; let the wrong which is done by a man stay there where the wrong was done."

On the whole, therefore, most people will be disposed to think that Marcus Aurelius has plagiarised from Christianity, or that what he says is equal to or superior to its precepts. During the reign of Antoninus Pius and Marcus Antoninus, there appeared several "Apologies" or expositions of Christianity, one by Justinus, another by Melito, Bishop of Sardis, arid one by Apollinarius. Indeed, the apology of Justinus was addressed to T. Antoninus Pius . and his two adopted sons, Marcus Antoninus and Lucius Verus ; but it was one thing for an obscure Christian, in , danger of being thrown. to the lions, to address an Imperial heir, and another thing for the Imperial personage to read the address. As the undergraduate said of St. Paul, it was " true he addressed an epistle to the Romans, but history did not tell us whether he got any answer." So we may as well confess at once that there is no proof that Marcus Antoninus read the apology, though there is evidence that Justinus, under the prsefecture of Rusticus, and during the joint empire of Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus, was whipped severely, and, after such fustigation, led with others — amongst them a woman, Charito — to the deathbecause he would not sacrifice to the gods. Being asked whether " he expected to ascend to heaven," he answered that he did not expect to go there eventually, but was quite certain of it ; and he and the other mart)TS went joyfully and knelt before the executioner and had their heads struck off. It was also under Marcus Antoninus that Polycarp suffered at Smyrna, and that many another mart)n* was added to that noble army which has died for the faith.

But Antoninus must not be wholly blamed for this. He was the slave of his time and of its prejudices, and as much bound to the " opinions " he condemned as any other. His very philosophy and stoical pride would continue to blind him. His method of dealing with objectionally obstinate Christians would be that of acivilized Roman gentleman, who sought to uphold the laws. He burnt some, crucified many, and threw others to the lions. That was the method of the time, and there is no proof that he was specially cruel. Like the learned Pliny in the time of Trajan, no doubt the philosophic Emperor found the Christians poor, and, in his opinion, very stupid. To the Greek what St. Paul preached was foolishness ; so was it to the educated Roman. Pliny simply wonders at it. He tells Trajan that they indulge in a religion which seems to him to be a depraved and extravagant superstition, but they might be given time to recant. If they were fools enough to persevere, they ought, he said, to be punished.* Trajan was more kind and willing to shut his eyes than Marcus Aurelius in his treatment of the Christians, and ordered that no search must be made after them, but that if a man would not sacrifice to the gods, he must be executed. This was the custom of the time and country ; even those who attempted to seduce the Jews to follow a new religion were punished with death, as Mr. Long does not forget to tell us in a note, although the case with Roman and Jew was not parallel.

It is, however, somewhat remarkable that one who

* Once only Antoninus condescends to mention the Christians (book xi. sec. 3), and then it is with a sneer. ** Be ready to die, either to be dismissed (i. e. to end for ever), or to continue to exist, but let this readiness come from a man's own judgment, and not from mere obstinacy as with the Christians^ but considerately and with dignity, and in a way to persuade another without tragic show." No doubt the exaltation and great eagerness of the early martyrs gave a certain theatrical method to their death. All these little touches are undesigned proofs of historical truth.

could write such beautiful precepts could permit himself so to act. " How much trouble he avoids," Aurelius says (iv. 18), "who does not look to see what his neighbour says, or does, or thinks, but only to what he does himself, that it maybe just and pure." This is wise and excellent. So also^ is this : " Look not round at the depraved morals of others, but run straight along the line without deviating from it." Again — these words should have some weight in this world of hurry and worry — " Do not be whirled about, but in every action have respect to justice, in every movement and every impression maintain the faculty of comprehension" (keep clear the understanding). Sometimes he writes in a strain which resembles that of Sir Thomas Browne. " Willingly give thyself up to Clotho " (the Fate who spun the thread of mortal existence), "allowing her to spin thy thread into whatever things she pleases. Thou wilt soon die, and art not yet simple and free from disquiet ; how is it so ? Make ready betimes. Think how many doctors are dead after puckering their brows over the pulses of the sick, how many soothsayers after predicting the deaths of others, how many philosophers after discoursing on immortality, how many heroes after killing thousands, how many kings and tyrants who used their power over life as if they were immortal ; how many cities are dead, not counting Helice, Pompeii, and Herculaneum, and others innumerable. Add to the reckoning all whom thou hast known one after the other. One man dies after putting another in the grave, and another as he weeps over him. To conclude, always observe how ephemeral and worthless human things are. What was yesterday a little mucus, to-morrow will be a mummy or ashes. Pass then through this space of time in a natural, honest way, and finish off thy journey in content, just as the finit drops when it is ripe, blessing nature which produced it, and being gratefiil to the tree on which it grew." The above is indeed a noble and eloquent passage, imperial and kingly in its stoicism; admirable also are these two mottoes, which we hope our readers will carry with them : " Live with the gods " — ^that is, with the best thoughts and people — and always " Run the short Way."