Books: The Old Roman World

J >> John Lord >> The Old Roman World

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47

[Sidenote: Cultivation of geometry by the Greeks.]

Other famous geometers could also be mentioned, but such men as Euclid,
Archimedes, and Apollonius are enough to show that geometry was
cultivated to a great extent by the philosophers of antiquity. It
progressively advanced, like philosophy itself, from the time of Thales,
until it had reached the perfection of which it was capable, when it
became merged into astronomical science. It was cultivated more
particularly by the disciples of Plato, who placed over his school this
inscription, "Let no one ignorant of geometry enter here." He believed
that the laws by which the universe is governed are in accordance with
the doctrines of mathematics. The same opinion was shared by Pythagoras,
the great founder of the science, whose great formula was, that number
is the essence or first principle of all things. No thinkers ever
surpassed the Greeks in originality and profundity, and mathematics,
being highly prized by them, were carried to the greatest perfection
their method would allow. They did not understand algebra, by the
application of which to geometry modern mathematicians have climbed to
greater heights than the ancients. But then it is all the more
remarkable that, without the aid of algebraic analysis, they were able
to solve such difficult problems as occupied the minds of Archimedes and
Apollonius. No positive science can boast of such rapid development as
geometry for two or three hundred years before Christ, and never was the
intellect of man more severely tasked than by the ancient
mathematicians.

[Sidenote: Empirical sciences.]

No empirical science can be carried to perfection by any one nation or
in any particular epoch. It can only expand with the progressive
developments of the human race itself. Nevertheless, in that science
which for three thousand years has been held in the greatest honor, and
which is one of the three great liberal professions of our modern times,
the ancients, especially the Greeks, made considerable advance. The
science of medicine, having in view the amelioration of human misery,
and the prolongation of life itself, was very early cultivated. It was,
indeed, in old times, another word for _physics_,--the science of
nature,--and the _physician_ was the observer and expounder of
physics. The physician was supposed to be acquainted with the secrets of
nature--that is, the knowledge of drugs, of poisons, of antidotes to
them, and the way to administer them. He was also supposed to know the
process of preserving the body after death. Thus Joseph commanded his
physician to embalm the body of his father seventeen hundred years
before the birth of Christ, and the process of embalming was probably
known to the Egyptians beyond the period when history begins. Helen, of
Trojan fame, put into wine a drug that "frees man from grief and anger
and causes oblivion of all ills." [Footnote: _Odyssey_, b. iv.]
Solomon was a great botanist, with which the science of medicine is
indissolubly connected. The "Ayur Veda," written nine hundred years
before Hippocrates was born, sums up the knowledge of previous periods
relating to obstetric surgery, to general pathology, to the treatment of
insanity, to infantile diseases, to toxicology, to personal hygiene, and
to diseases of the generative functions. [Footnote: Wise, _On the
Hindu System of Medicine_, p. 12.] The origin of Hindu medicine is
lost in remote antiquity.

[Sidenote: Hippocrates.]

Thus Hippocrates, the father of European medicine, must have derived his
knowledge, not merely from his own observations, but from the writings
of men unknown to us, and systems practiced for an indefinite period.
The real founders of Greek medicine are fabled characters, like Hercules
and Aesculapius--that is, benefactors whose names have not descended to
us. They are mythical personages, like Hermes and Chiron. One thousand
two hundred years before Christ temples were erected to Aesculapius in
Greece, the priests of which were really physicians, and the temples
themselves were hospitals. In them were practiced rites apparently
mysterious, but which modern science calls by the names of mesmerism,
hydropathy, mineral springs, and other essential elements of empirical
science. And these temples were also medical schools. That of Cos gave
birth to Hippocrates, and it was there that his writings were commenced.
Pythagoras--for those old Grecian philosophers were the fathers of all
wisdom and knowledge, in mathematics and empirical sciences, as well as
philosophy itself--studied medicine in the schools of Egypt, Phoenicia,
Chaldea, and India, and came in conflict with sacerdotal power, which
has ever been antagonistic to new ideas in science. He traveled from
town to town as a teacher or lecturer, establishing communities in which
medicine as well as numbers was taught.

The greatest name in medical science, in ancient or in modern times,--
the man who did the most to advance it; the greatest medical genius of
whom we have record,--is Hippocrates, born on the island of Cos B.C.
460, of the great Aesculapian family, and was instructed by his father.
We know scarcely more of his life than we do of Homer himself, although
he lived in the period of the highest splendor of Athens. And his
writings, like those of Homer, are thought by some to be the work of
different men. They were translated into Arabic, and were no slight
means of giving an impulse to the Saracenic schools of the Middle Ages
in that science in which the Saracens especially excelled. The
Hippocratic collection consists of more than sixty works, which were
held in the highest estimation by the ancient physicians. Hippocrates
introduced a new era in medicine, which, before his time, had been
monopolized by the priests. He carried out a system of severe induction
from the observation of facts, and is as truly the creator of the
inductive method as Bacon himself. He abhorred theories which could not
be established by facts. He was always open to conviction, and candidly
confessed his mistakes. He was conscientious in the practice of his
profession, and valued the success of his art more than silver and gold.
The Athenians revered him for his benevolence as well as genius. The
great principle of his practice was trust in nature. Hence he was
accused of allowing his patients to die; but this principle has many
advocates among scientific men in our day, and some suppose the whole
philosophy of homeopathy rests on the primal principle which Hippocrates
advanced. He had great skill in diagnosis, by which medical genius is
most severely tested. His practice was cautious and timid in contrast
with that of his contemporaries. He is the author of the celebrated
maxim, "Life is short and art is long." He divides the causes of disease
into two principal classes,--the one comprehending the influence of
seasons, climates, and other external forces; the other from the effects
of food and exercise. To the influence of climate he attributes the
conformation of the body and the disposition of the mind. He also
attributes all sorts of disorders to a vicious system of diet. For more
than twenty centuries his pathology was the foundation of all the
medical sects. He was well acquainted with the medicinal properties of
drugs, and was the first to assign three periods to the course of a
malady. He knew, of course, but little of surgery, although he was in
the habit of bleeding, and often employed his knife. He was also
acquainted with cupping, and used violent purgatives. He was not aware
of the importance of the pulse, and confounded the veins with the
arteries. He wrote in the Ionic dialect, and some of his works have gone
through three hundred editions, so highly have they been valued. His
authority passed away, like that of Aristotle, on the revival of
European science. Yet who have been greater ornaments and lights than
these distinguished Greeks?

[Sidenote: Galen.]

The school of Alexandria produced eminent physicians, as well as
mathematicians, after the glory of Greece had departed. So highly was it
esteemed that Galen went there to study five hundred years after its
foundation. It was distinguished for inquiries into scientific anatomy
and physiology, for which Aristotle had prepared the way. He was the
Humboldt of his day, and gave great attention to physics. In eight books
he developed the general principles of natural science known to the
Greeks. On the basis of the Aristotelian researches, the Alexandrian
physicians carried out extensive inquiries in physiology. Herophilus
discovered the fundamental principles of neurology, and advanced the
anatomy of the brain and spinal cord.

[Sidenote: Medical science among the Romans.]

Although the Romans had but little sympathy for science or philosophy,
being essentially political and warlike in their turn of mind, yet when
they had conquered the world, and had turned their attention to arts,
medicine received great attention. The first physicians were Greek
slaves. Of these was Asclepiades, who enjoyed the friendship of Cicero.
It is from him that the popular medical theories as to the "pores" have
descended. He was the inventor of the shower-bath. Celsus wrote a work
on medicine which takes almost equal rank with the Hippocratic writings.
Medical science at Rome culminated in Galen, as it did at Athens in
Hippocrates. He was patronized by Marcus Aurelius, and availed himself
of all the knowledge of preceding naturalists and physicians. He was
born at Pergamus about the year A.D. 165, where he learned, under able
masters, anatomy, pathology, and therapeutics. He finished his studies
at Alexandria, and came to Rome at the invitation of the emperor. Like
his patron, he was one of the brightest ornaments of the heathen world,
and one of the most learned and accomplished men of any age.
"_Medicorum dissertissimus atque doctissimus_." [Footnote: St.
Jerome, _Comment. in Aoms_, c. 5, vol. vi.] He left five hundred
treatises, most of them relating to some branch of medical science,
which give him the merit of being one of the most voluminous of authors.
His celebrity is founded chiefly on his anatomical and physiological
works. He was familiar with practical anatomy, deriving his knowledge
from dissection. His observations about health are practical and useful.
He lays great stress on gymnastic exercises, and recommends the
pleasures of the chase, the cold bath in hot weather, hot baths to old
people, the use of wine, three meals a day, and pork as the best of
animal food. The great principles of his practice were that disease is
to be overcome by that which is contrary to the disease itself, and that
nature is to be preserved by that which has relation with nature. As
disease cannot be overcome so long as its cause exists, that, if
possible, was first to be removed, and the strength of the patient is to
be considered before the treatment is proceeded with. His "Commentaries
on Hippocrates" served as a treasure of medical criticism, from which
succeeding annotators borrowed. No one ever set before the medical
profession a higher standard than Galen, and few have more nearly
approached it. He did not attach himself to any particular school, but
studied the doctrines of each--an eclectic in the fullest sense.
[Footnote: See Leclerc, _Hist. de la Medicine_; Hartt Shoengel,
_Geschichte der Arzneykunde_. W. A. Greenhill, M.D., of Oxford, has
a very learned article in Smith's _Dictionary_.] The works of Galen
constituted the last production of ancient Roman medicine, and from his
day the decline in medical science was rapid, until it was revived among
the Arabs.

The physical sciences, it must be confessed, were not carried by the
ancients to any such length as geometry and astronomy. In physical
geography they were particularly deficient. Yet even this branch of
knowledge can boast of some eminent names. When men sailed timidly on
the coasts, and dared not explore distant seas, the true position of
countries could not be ascertained with the definiteness that it is at
present. But geography was not utterly neglected, nor was natural
history.

[Sidenote: Physical geography.]

Herodotus gives us most valuable information respecting the manners and
customs of oriental and barbarous nations, and Pliny has written a
natural history, in thirty-seven books, which is compiled from upwards
of two thousand volumes, and refers to twenty thousand matters of
importance. He was born A.D. 23, and was fifty-three when the eruption
of Vesuvius took place which caused his death. Pliny cannot be called a
scientific genius, in the sense understood by modern savants; nor was he
an original observer. His materials are drawn up second hand, like a
modern encyclopedia. Nor did he evince great judgment in his selection.
He had a great love of the marvelous, and is often unintelligible. But
his work is a wonderful monument of human industry. It treats of every
thing in the natural world--of the heavenly bodies, of the elements, of
thunder and lightning, of the winds and seasons, of the changes and
phenomena of the earth, of countries and nations, seas and rivers, of
men, animals, birds, fishes, and plants, of minerals and medicines and
precious stones, of commerce and the fine arts. He is full of errors;
but his work is among the most valuable productions of antiquity. Buffon
pronounced his natural history to contain an infinity of knowledge in
every department of human occupation, conveyed in a dress ornate and
brilliant. It is a literary rather than a scientific monument, and as
such it is wonderful--a compilation from one hundred and sixty volumes
of notes. In strict scientific value, it is inferior to the works of
modern research; but there are few minds, even in these times, who have
directed inquiries to such a variety of subjects.

[Sidenote: Strabo.]

[Sidenote: Construction of maps.]

[Sidenote: Ptolemy.]

Geographical knowledge was advanced by Strabo, who lived in the Augustan
era; but researches were chiefly confined to the Roman empire. Strabo
was, like Herodotus, a great traveler, and much of his geographical
information is the result of his own observations. It is probable he is
much indebted to Eratosthenes, who preceded him by three centuries, and
who was the first systematic writer on geography. The authorities of
Strabo are chiefly Greek, but his work is defective, from the imperfect
notions which the ancients had of astronomy; so that the determination
of the earth's figure by the measure of latitude and longitude, the
essential foundations of geographical description, was unknown. The
enormous strides, which all forms of physical science have made since
the discovery of America, throw all ancient descriptions and
investigations into the shade, and Strabo appears at as great
disadvantage as Pliny or Ptolemy; yet the work of Strabo, considering
his means, and the imperfect knowledge of the earth's surface, and
astronomical science, was really a great achievement of industry. He
treats of the form and magnitude of the earth, and devotes eight books
to Europe, six to Asia, and one to Africa. His great authorities are
Eratosthenes, Polybius, Aristotle, Antiochus of Syracuse, Posidonius,
Theopompus, Artemidorus Ephorus, Herodotus, Anaximenes, Thucydides, and
Aristo, chiefly historians and philosophers. Whatever may be said of the
accuracy of the great geographer of antiquity, it cannot be denied that
he was a man of immense research and learning. His work in seventeen
books is one of the most valuable which have come down from antiquity,
both from the discussions which run through it, and the curious facts
which can be found nowhere else. It is scarcely fair to estimate the
genius of Strabo by the correctness and extent of his geographical
knowledge. All men are lost in science, and science is progressive. The
great scientific lights of our day may be insignificant, compared with
those who are to arise, if profundity and accuracy of knowledge is the
test. It is the genius of the ancients, their grasp and power of mind,
their original labors which we are to consider. Anaxagoras was one of
the greatest philosophical geniuses of all ages; but, as philosophy is a
science, and is progressive, his knowledge could not be compared with
that of Aristotle. Again, who doubts the original genius and grasp of
Aristotle, but what was he, in accuracy of knowledge and true method, in
comparison with the savants of the nineteenth century; yet, it would be
difficult to show that Aristotle was inferior to Bacon or Cuvier, or
Stuart Mill. If, however, we would compare the geographical knowledge of
the ancients with that of the moderns, we confess to the immeasurable
inferiority of the ancients in this branch. When Eratosthenes began his
labors, it was known that the surface of the earth was spherical. He
established parallels of latitude and longitude, and attempted the
difficult undertaking of measuring the circumference of the globe by the
actual measurement of a segment of one of its great circles. Posidonius
determined the arc of a meridian between Rhodes and Alexandria to be a
forty-eighth part of the whole circumference--an enormous calculation,
yet a remarkable one in the infancy of astronomical science. Hipparchus
introduced into geography a great improvement, namely, the relative
situation of places, by the same process that he determined the
positions of the heavenly bodies. He also pointed out how longitude
might be determined by observing the eclipses of the sun and moon. This
led to the construction of maps; but none have reached us except those
which were used to illustrate the geography of Ptolemy. Hipparchus was
born B.C. 276, the first who raised geography to the rank of a science.
He starved himself to death, being tired of life, like Eratosthenes,
more properly an astronomer, and the most distinguished among the
ancients, born about 160 B.C., although none of his writings have
reached us. The improvements he pointed out were applied by Ptolemy
himself, an astronomer who flourished about the year 160 at Alexandria.
His work was a presentation of geographical knowledge known in his day,
so far as geography is the science of determining the position of places
on the earth's surface. The description of places belongs to Strabo. His
work was accepted as the textbook of the science till the fifteenth
century, for in his day the Roman empire had been well surveyed. He
maintained that the earth is _spherical_, and introduced the terms
_longitude_ and _latitude_, which Eratosthenes had established,
and computed the earth to be one hundred and eighty thousand
stadia in circumference, and a degree five hundred stadia in length,
or sixty-two and a half Roman miles. His estimates of the length
of a degree of latitude were nearly correct; but he made great errors in
the degrees of longitude, making the length of the world from east to
west too great, which led to the belief in the practicability of a
western passage to India. He also assigned too great length to the
Mediterranean, arising from the difficulty of finding the longitude with
accuracy. But it was impossible, with the scientific knowledge of his
day, to avoid errors, and we are surprised that he made so few.

* * * * *

REFERENCES.--An exceedingly learned work has recently been issued in
London, by Parker and Son, on the Astronomy of the Ancients, by Sir
George Cornwall Lewis, though rather ostentatious in his parade of
authorities, and minute on points which are not of much consequence.
Delambre's History of Ancient Astronomy has long been a classic, but
richer in materials for a history than a history itself. There is a
valuable essay in the Encyclopedia Britannica, which refers to a list of
authors, among which are Biccoli, Weilder, Bailly, Playfair, La Lande.
Lewis makes much reference to Macrobius, Vitruvius, Diogenes Laertius,
Plutarch, and Suidas, among the ancients, and to Ideler, Unters. uber
die Art. Beob. der Alten.

Whewell's History of the Inductive Sciences may also be consulted with
profit. Leclerc, Hist, de Med.; Spengel, Gesch. der Arzneykunde.
Strabo's Geography is the most valuable of Antiquity. See also Polybius.

[Relocated Footnote: The style of modern historical criticism may thus
be exemplified, like the discussions of the Germans, whether the Arx on
the Capitoline Hill occupied the northeastern or southwestern corner,
which take up nearly one half of the learned article in Smith's
Dictionary, on the Capitoline. "Thales supposed the earth to float on
the water, like a plank of wood": [Greek: oi d hudatos keisthai touton
gar archaiotaton pareilaephamen ton logon hon phasin eipein thalae ton
Milaesion]. Aristot., _De Coel_., ii. 13: "_Quoe sequitur Thaletis
ineptq sententia est. Ait enim terrarum orbem aqua sustineri._" Seneca,
_Nat. Quoest_., iii. 13. This notion is mentioned in _Schol. Iliad_,
xiii. 125. This doctrine Thales brought from Egypt. See Plut., _Pac_.,
in. 10; Galen, c. 21. But this maybe doubted. Callimach., _Frag_., 94;
Hygin, _Poet. Astr_., ii. 2; Martin, _Timee de Platon_., tom. ii. p.
109, thinks it questionable whether Thales saw Egypt. Diog. Laert.,
viii. 60. Compare, however, Sturz, _Thales_, p. 80; Proclus, _in Tim_.,
i. p. 40; _Schol. Aristophanes, Nub_., ii. 31; Varro, ii. vi. 10. See
also, _Ideler Chron_., vol. i. p. 300. But Brandis sheds light upon the
point, though his suggestions conflict with Origen, _Phil_., p. 11; also
with Aristotle, _De Coel_., ii. 13.

This style of expending learning on nothing, meets with great favor with
the pedants, who attach no value to history unless one half of the page
is filled with erudite foot-notes which few can verify, and which prove
nothing, or nothing of any consequence.]

CHAPTER X.

INTERNAL CONDITION OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE.

We have now surveyed all that was glorious in the most splendid empire
of antiquity. We have seen a civilization which, in many respects,
rivals all that modern nations have to show. In art, in literature, in
philosophy, in laws, in the mechanism of government, in the cultivated
face of nature, in military strength, in aesthetic culture, the Romans
were our equals. And this high civilization was reached by the native
and unaided strength of man; by the power of will, by courage, by
perseverance, by genius, by fortunate circumstances; by great men,
gifted with unusual talents. We are filled with admiration by all these
trophies of genius, and cannot but feel that only a superior race could
have accomplished such mighty triumphs.

But all this splendid external was deceptive. It was hollow at heart.
And the deeper we penetrate the social condition of the people, their
real and practical life, the more we feel disgust and pity supplanting
all feelings of admiration and wonder. The Roman empire, in its shame
and degradation, suggests melancholy feelings in reference to the
destiny of man, so far as his happiness and welfare depend upon his own
unaided strength. And we see profoundly the necessity of some foreign
aid to rescue him from his miseries.

It is a sad picture of oppression, of injustice, of poverty, of vice,
and of wretchedness, which I have now to present. Glory is succeeded by
shame, and strength by weakness, and virtue by vice. The condition of
the great mass is deplorable, and even the great and fortunate shine in
a false and fictitious light. We see laws, theoretically good,
practically perverted; monstrous inequalities of condition, selfishness,
and egotism the mainsprings of life. We see energies misdirected, and
art corrupted. All noble aspirations have fled, and the good and the
wise retire from active life in despair and misanthropy. Poets flatter
the tyrants who trample on human rights, and sensuality and Epicurean
pleasures absorb the depraved thoughts of a perverse generation.

[Sidenote: The imperial despotism.]

The first thing which arrests our attention as we survey the grand
empire which embraced the civilized countries or the world, is the
imperial despotism. It may have been a necessity, an inevitable sequence
to the anarchy of civil war, the strife of parties, great military
successes, and the corruptions of society itself. It may be viewed as a
providential event in order that general peace and security might usher
in the triumphs of a new religion. It followed naturally the subversion
of the constitution by military leaders, the breaking up of the power of
the Senate, the encroachments of democracy and its leaders, the wars of
Sulla and Marius, of Pompey and Julius. It succeeded massacres and
factions and demagogues. It came when conspiracies and proscriptions and
general insecurity rendered a stronger government desirable. The empire
was too vast to be intrusted to the guidance of conflicting parties.
There was needed a strong, central, irrepressible, irresistible power in
the hands of a single man. Safety and peace seemed preferable to glory
and genius. So the people acquiesced in the changes which were made;
they had long anticipated them; they even hailed them with silent joy.
Patriots, like Brutus, Cassius, and Cato, gave themselves up to despair;
but most men were pleased with the revolution that seated Augustus on
the throne of the world. For twenty years the empire had been desolated
by destructive and exhaustive wars. The cry of the whole empire was for
peace, and peace could be secured only by the ascendency of a single
man, ruling with absolute and unresisted sway.