on the character of a single man”—that is, on whoever happened to be the Roman Emperor. In an agricultural society, where people could find refuge and a living in the interstices of the economy, this could hardly have been the case. But in view of the immense powers for good or evil wielded by the Roman Emperors, we can appreciate the truth behind Gibbon’s exaggeration. Yet historically, the most uneventful period of the Roman Empire from the point of view of wars, rebellions, palace revolutions, incursions of barbarians, etc., was the forty-two-year reign of the two Antonines, Pius and Marcus, in the second century of the Christian era. Of their united reigns Gibbon writes with positively un-English enthusiasm and unrestraint. They are “possibly the only period of history in which the happiness of a great people was the sole object of government.” And not merely the object of government, but the result. In one of the most extreme statements ever penned by any historian of note he asserts: “If a man were called to fix the period in the history of the world, during which the condition of the human race was most happy and prosperous, he would, without hesitation, name that which elapsed from the death of Domitian to the accession of Commodus.”[1]
A truly remarkable—and uneventful—period. At first glance it appears that our categories do not apply to it. Where nothing or little happens there is no call for eventful or event-making men. Yet we cannot resist the feeling that if only a tithe of what Gibbon says of them is true, the Antonines are historically just as significant as the Emperors who extended the boundaries of Rome, codified its laws, or altered its religion. But to be justified, this feeling must rest on the belief, tacitly assumed by Gibbon, that the order, tranquillity, and prosperity of an era are the consequences of policies adopted by these absolute rulers during their reign. That is to say, they prevented dire events that otherwise would have occurred. Certainly, if we hold the Roman Emperors responsible for the “crimes, follies, and misfortunes” of their reigns, as Gibbon does, we must credit them for the peace, wisdom, and good fortune, too, even if their lives do not
- ↑ Op. cit., vol. I., p. 70. It is in this connection that his famous remark about history was made. Of the first Antonine he tells us: “His reign is marked by the rare advantage of furnishing very few materials for history: which is, indeed, little more than the register of the crimes, follies, and misfortunes of mankind.” As a historian Gibbon himself did not live up to this gloomy conception of history, i. e. his history registers much more.
