rience to all the exercises of sieges and battles, anima- | minious; but Alexander could never prevail upon ted by the remembrance of their past victories, by the himself to employ treachery. He indeed, endeavoured hopes of an immense booty, and still more by their to draw over the ablest of all Darius's generals; but hereditary and irreconcilable hatred to the Persians; then he employed honourable means. When he such troops, I say, headed by Alexander, were almost marched near Memnon's lands, he commanded his sure of conquering an army, composed indeed of infi- soldiers, under the severest penalties, not to make the nite numbers of men, but of few soldiers. least havoc in them. His design, by this conduct, was either to gain him over to his side, or to make the Persians suspect his fidelity. Memnon also prided himself in behaving with generosity towards Alexander; and hearing a soldier speak ill of that prince; "I did not take thee into my pay," says that general, striking him with his javelin, "to speak injuriously of that prince, but to fight against him." The swiftness of the execution was answerable to the wisdom of the project. After having gained the affections of all his generals and officers, by an unparalleled liberality; and of all his soldiers by an air of goodness, affability, and even familiarity, which, so far from debasing the majesty of a prince, adds to the respect which is paid him, such a zeal and tenderness, as is proof against all things: after this, I say, The circumstance which raises Alexander above the next thing to be done, was to astonish his enemies most conquerors, and, as it were, above himself, is the by bold enterprises, to terrify them by examples of se-use he made of victory after the battle of Issus. This verity; and, lastly, to win them by acts of humanity is the most beautiful incident of his life; is the point and clemency. He succeeded wonderfully in these. of view in which it is his interest to be considered, and The passage of the Granicus, followed by a famous in which it is impossible for him not to appear truly victory; the two celebrated sieges of Miletus and Ha- great. By the victory of Issus, he had possessed himlicarnassus showed to Asia a young conqueror, to self, not indeed of Darius's person, but of his empire. whom no part of military knowledge was unknown. Not only Sysigambis, that king's mother, was his The razing of the latter city to the very foundations, captive, but also his wife and daughters, princesses, spread a universal terror; but the allowing the enjoy- whose beauty was not to be paralleled in all Asia. ment of their liberties and ancient laws to all those Alexander was in the bloom of life, a conqueror, free, who submitted cheerfully, made the world believe that and not yet in the bands of marriage, as an author the conqueror had no other view than to make nations observes of the first Scipio Africanus, on a like occahappy, and to procure them an easy and lasting peace. sion: nevertheless his camp was to those princesses a His impatience to bathe himself, when covered with sacred asylum, or rather a temple, in which their sweat, in the river Cydnus, might be looked upon as chastity was secured, as under the guard of virtue a giddy, juvenile action, unworthy of his dignity; but itself, and so highly revered, that Darius, in his expiring we must not judge of it from the manners of the pre- moments, hearing the kind treatment they had met with, sent age. The ancients, all whose exercises had a could not forbear lifting up his dying hands towards reference to those of war, accustomed themselves heaven, and wishing success to so wise and generous early to bathing and swimming. It is well known, a conqueror, who governed his passions so absolutely. that in Rome, the sons of the nobility, after having In the enumeration of Alexander's good qualities, I heated themselves in the military exercises of the must not omit one rarely found among the great, and Campus Martius, in running, wrestling, and hurling which nevertheless does honour to human nature, and the javelin, used to plunge into the Tiber, which runs makes life happy; this is, his being informed by a soul by that city. By these means they enabled themselves capable of a friendship, tender, unreserved, active, to pass rivers and lakes in an enemy's country; for constant, void of pride and arrogance, in so exalted a those are never crossed, but after painful marches, fortune, which generally considers it alone, makes its and after having been long exposed to the sun-beams, grandeur consist in humbling all around it, and is which, with the weight of the soldier's arms, must ne- better pleased with servile wretches, than with frank cessarily make them sweat. Hence we may apologize sincere friends. for Alexander's bathing himself, which had like to have been fatal to him; especially as he might not know that the waters of this river were so excessively cold. The two battles of Issus and Arbela, with the siege of Tyre, one of the most famous of antiquity, completed the proof that Alexander possessed all the qualities which form the great soldier; as skill in making choice of a field of battle; such a presence of mind in the heat of action, as is necessary for the giving out proper orders; a courage and bravery, which the most evident dangers served only to animate; an impetuous activity, tempered and guided by such a prudent restraint, as will not suffer the hero to be carried away by an indiscreet ardour; lastly, such a resolution and constancy, as is neither disconcerted by unforeseen obstacles, nor discouraged by difficulties, though seemingly insurmountable, and which knows no other limits or end but victory. Historians have observed a great difference between Alexander and his father,' in their manner of making war. Stratagem, and even knavery, were the prevailing arts of Philip, who always acted secretly, and in the dark; but his son pursued his schemes with more candour and without disguise. The one endeavoured to deceive his enemies by cunning, the other to subdue them by force. The former discovered more art, the latter more magnanimity. Philip did not look upon any methods, which conduce to conquest, as igno 1 Vincendi ratio utrique diversa. Hic apertè, ille artibus bella tractabat. Deceptis ille gaudere hostibus, hic palam fusis. Prudentior ille consilio, hic animo magnificentior-Nulla apud Philippum turpis ratio vincendi. Justin. lib. ix. cap. 8. "Pausan. I. vii. p. 415. Alexander endeared himself to his officers and sok. diers; treated them with the greatest familiarity; admitted them to his table, his exercises, and conversations; was truly concerned for them when involved in any calamity, grieved for them when sick, rejoiced at their recovery, and was interested in whatever befell them. We have examples of this in Hephaestion, in Ptolemy, in Craterus, and many others. A prince of real merit loses none of his dignity by such a familiarity and condescension; but, on the contrary, is more beloved and respected upon that very account. Every man of a tall stature, does not scruple to put himself upon a level with the rest of mankind, well knowing that he shall overtop them all. It is the interest of truly diminutive persons alone not to vie in stature with the tall, nor to appear in a crowd. Alexander was dear to others, because they were sensible he was beforehand with them in affection. This circumstance made the soldiers strongly desirous to please him, and fired them with intrepidity; hence they were always ready to execute all his orders though attended with the greatest difficulties and dangers; this made them submit patiently to the severest hardships, and threw them into the deepest affliction, whenever they happened to give him any room for discontent. In the picture which has hitherto been given of Alexander, what was wanting to complete his glory? Military virtue has been exhibited in its utmost splendour; goodness, clemency, moderation, and wisdom, have crowned it, and added such a lustre, as greatly enhances its value. Let us suppose, that Alexander, at this juncture, to secure his glory and his victories, stops short in his career; that he himself checks his ambition, and raises Darius to the throne with the same hand that had dispossessed him of it; makes Asia Minor, inhabited chiefly by Greeks, free and independent of Persia: that he declares himself protector of all the cities and states of Greece, in no other view than to secure them their liberties, and the enjoyment of their respective laws and customs; that he afterwards returns to Macedon, and there, contented with the lawful bounds of his empire, makes all his glory and delight consist in rendering his people happy, in procuring for them abundance of all things, in seeing the laws put in execution, and making justice flourish; in causing virtue to be had in honour, and endearing himself to his subjects: in fine, that now become, by the terror of his arms, and much more so by the fame of his virtues, the admiration of the whole world, he sees himself, in some measure, the arbiter of all nations; and exercises, over the minds of men, such an empire, as is infinitely more lasting and honourable than that which is founded on fear only; supposing all this to have happened, would ever any prince have been as great, as glorious, as revered as Alexander? To adopt such a resolution, a greatness of soul, and a most refined taste for true glory, are required, such as is seldom met with in history. Men generally do not consider that the glory which attends the most shining conquests,' is greatly inferior to the reputation of a prince, who has despised and trampled upon ambition, and known how to give bounds to universal power. But Alexander was far from possessing these happy qualities. His uninterrupted felicity, that never experienced adverse fortune, intoxicated and changed him to such a degree, that he no longer appeared the same man; and I do not remember, that ever the poison of prosperity had a more sudden or more forcible effect than upon him. Second Part. spend whole days and nights in carousing, to continue these excesses for weeks together; to pride one's self in exceeding other men in intemperance, and to endanger one's life in no other view than to gain such a victory! Not to mention the infamous enormities that attend these debauches, how shocking it is to hear the frantic discourses of a son, who, intoxicated with the fumes of wine, industriously strives to defame his father, to sully his glory, and, lost to all shame, scruples not to prefer himself to him? Drunkenness is only the occasion, not the cause, of these excesses. It betrays the sentiments of the heart, but does not place them there. Alexander, puffed up by his victories, greedy and insatiable of praise, intoxicated with the mighty idea he entertained of his own merit, jealous of, or despising all mankind, is able in his sober moments to conceal his sentiments; but no sooner is he intoxicated, than he shows himself to be what he really is. What shall we say of his barbarously murdering an old friend; who, though indiscreet and rash, was yet his friend? Of the death of the most honest man in all his court, whose only crime was his refusing to pay him divine homage? Of the execution of two of his principal officers, who were condemned, though nothing could be proved against them, and on the slightest suspicions? I pass over a great many other vices, which Alexander, according to most historians, gave into, and which are not to be justified: to speak of him, therefore, only as a warrior and a conqueror; qualities with respect to which he is generally considered, and which have gained him the esteem of all ages and nations; all we now have to do, is, to examine whether this esteem be so well grounded as is generally supposed I have already observed, that, to the battle of Issus and the siege of Tyre inclusively, it cannot be denied, but that Alexander was a great warrior and an illus trious general. But yet I doubt very much, whether, during these first years of his exploits, he ought to be From the siege of Tyre, which was soon after the so dazzling, are however as much applauded by good set above his father Philip; whose actions, though not battle of Issus, in which Alexander displayed all the judges, and those of the military profession. Philip, courage and abilities of a great warrior, we see the at his accession to the throne, found all things unsetvirtues and noble qualities of this prince, degenerate tled. He himself was obliged to lay the foundations on a sudden, and make way for the grossest vices and of his own fortune, and was not supported by the least most brutal passions. If we sometimes, through the foreign assistance. He alone raised himself to the excesses to which he abandons himself, bright rays of humanity, gentleness, and moderation, He was obliged to train up, not only his soldiers, but perceive some power and grandeur to which he afterwards attained. these are the effects of a happy natural disposition, his officers; to instruct them in all the military exerwhich, though not quite extinguished by vice, is how-cises; to inure them to the fatigues of war; and to ever governed by it. Was ever enterprise more wild and extravagant, than that of crossing the sandy deserts of Libya; of exposing his army to the danger of perishing with thirst and fatigue: of interrupting the course of his victories, and giving his enemy time to raise a new army, merely for the sake of marching so far, in order to get himself named the son of Jupiter Ammon; and purchase, at so dear a rate, a title which could only render him contemptible? How mean it was in Alexander, to omit always in his letters, after Darius's defeat, the Greek word, which signifies health, except in those he wrote to Phocion and Antipater! As if this title, because employed by other men, could have degraded a king, who is obliged by his office to procure, at least to wish, all his subjects the enjoyment of the felicity implied by that word. Of all vices, none is so grovelling, none so unworthy, not only of a prince but of a man of honour, as drunkenness; its bare name is intolerable, and strikes us with horror. How infamous a pleasure is it, to 1 Scis ubi vera principis, ubi sempiterna sit gloriaArcus, et statuas, aras etiam templaque demolitur et obscurat oblivio; contrà, contemptor ambitionis, et infinite potentiæ domitor ac frænator animus ipsâ vetustate florescit. Plin. in Pan. Trajan. * Χαίρειν. 2 Plut. in Phoc. P. 749. of the celebrated phalanx, that is, of the best troops ander with Philip, which all, who do not consider he- Alexander, passionately fond of glory, of which he neither knew the nature nor just bounds, prided himself upon treading in the steps of Hercules, and even in carrying his victorious arms farther than he. What resemblance was there, says the same Seneca, between that wise conqueror and this frantic youth, who mistook his successful rashness for merit and virtue? Hercules, in his expeditions, made no conquests for himself. He overran the universe as the subduer of monsters, the enemy of the wicked, the avenger of the good, and the restorer of peace by land and sea. Alexander, on the contrary, an unjust robber from his youth, a cruel ravager of provinces, an infamous murderer of his friends, makes his happiness and glory consist in making himself formidable to all mortals, forgetting that not only the fiercest animals, but even the vilest, make themselves feared by their venom. In this inquiry, I shall begin with that which is | pare these pretended heroes, who have gained renown unanimously agreed, by all the writers on this subject, no otherwise than by the ruin of nations, to a conflato be the foundation of the solid glory of a hero; Í gration and a flood, which lay waste and destroy all mean the justice of the war in which he engages, with- things; or to wild beasts, who live merely by blood out which he is not a conqueror and a hero, but an and slaughter? usurper and a robber. Alexander, in making Asia the seat of war, and turning his arms against Darius, had a plausible pretence for it; because the Persians had been in all ages, and were at that time, professed enemies to the Greeks, over whom he had been appointed generalissimo, and whose injuries he therefore might think himself justly entitled to revenge. But then, what right had Alexander over the great number of nations, who did not know even the name of Greece, and had never done him the least injury? The Scythian ambassador spoke very judiciously, when he addressed him in these words: "What have we to do with thee? We never once set our feet in thy country. Are not those who live in woods allowed to be ignorant of thee, and the place from whence thou comest? Thou boastest, that the only design of thy marching is to extirpate robbers; thou thyself art the greatest robber in the world." This is Alexander's exact character, in which there is nothing to be rejected. A pirate spoke to him to the same effect, and in stronger terms. Alexander asked him what right he had to infest the seas? "The same that thou hast," replied the robber with a generous liberty," to infest the universe; but because I do this in a small ship, I am called a robber; and because thou actest the same part with a great fleet, thou art entitled a conqueror." This was a witty and just answer, says St. Austin, who has preserved this small fragment of Cicero. If therefore it ought to be laid down as a maxim, and no reasonable man can doubt of its being so, that every war, undertaken merely from views of ambition, is unjust; and that the prince who begins it is guilty of all the sad consequences, and all the blood shed on that occasion: what idea ought we to form of Alexander's last conquests? Was ever ambition more extravagant, or rather more furious, than that of this prince? Coming from a little spot of ground; and forgetting the narrow limits of his paternal domains, after he has far extended his conquests; has subdued, not only the Persians, but also the Bactrians and Indians; has added kingdom to kingdom: after all this, I say, he still finds himself pent up; and determined to force, if possible, the barriers of nature, he endeavours to discover a new world, and does not scruple to sacrifice millions of men to his ambition or curiosity. It is related that Alexander, upon Anaxarchus the philosopher's telling him that there were an infinite number of worlds, wept to think that it would be impossible for him to conquer them all, since he had not yet conquered one. Is it wrong in Seneca' to com 1 3 Eleganter et veraciter Alexandro illi Magno comprehensus pirata respondit. Nam cùm idem rex hominem interrogâsset, quid ei videretur ut mare haberet infestum; ille, liberâ contumacia: Quod tibi, inquit ut orbem terrarum. Sed quia id ego exiguo navigio facio, latro vocor; quia tu magnâ classe, imperator. Refert Nonius Marc. ex Cicer. 3 de rep. 2 St. Aust. de Civ. Dei, l. iv. c. iv. Agebat infelicem Alexandrum furor aliena devastandi, et ad ignota mittebat-Jam in unum regnum, multa rega conjecit; (or congessit) jam Græci Persæque eundem timent: jam etiam à Darío libera nationes jugum accipiunt. Hic tamen, ultra Oceanum Solemque, indignatur ab Herculis Liberique vestigiis victoriam flectere, ipsi naturæ vim parat-et, ut ita dicam, mundi claustra perrumpit. Tanta est cæcitas mentium, et tanta initiorum suorum oblivio. Ille modò ignobilis anguli non sine controversiâ Dominus, detecto fine terrarum, per suum rediturus orbem, tristis est. Senec. Epist. 94 & 119. Alexandro pectus insatiabile laudis, qui Anaxarchoinnumerabiles mundos esse referenti; Heu me, inquit, miserum, quòd ne uno quidem adhuc potitus sum! Angusta homini possessio gloriæ fuit, quæ Deorum omnium domicilio suffecit. Val. Max. lib. viii. cap. 14. Exitio gentium clari, non minores fuere pestes mortalium, quem inundatio-quàm conflagratio. Senec. Nat. Quæst. lib. iii. in Præfat. But leaving this first consideration, which represents conquerors to us as so many scourges sent by the wrath of Heaven into the world to punish the sins of it, let us proceed to examine the latter conquests of Alexander abstractedly in themselves, in order to see what judgment we are to form of them. It must be confessed, that the actions of this prince diffuse a splendour that dazzles and astonishes the imagination, which is ever fond of the great and marvellous. His enthusiastic courage, raises and transports all who read his history, as it transported himself. But ought we to give the name of bravery and valour to a boldness that is equally blind, rash, and impetuous; a boldness void of all rule, that will never listen to the voice of reason, and has no other guide than a senseless ardour for false glory, and a wild desire of distinguishing itself, at any price? This character suits only a military robber, who has no attendants; whose own life is alone exposed; and who, for that reason, may be employed in some desperate action: but the case is far otherwise with regard to a king, for he owes his life to all his army and his whole kingdom. If we expect some very rare occasions, on which a prince is obliged to venture his person, and share the danger with his troops in order to preserve them; he ought to call to mind, that there is a great difference between a general and a private soldier. True valour is not desirous of displaying itself, is no ways anxious about its own reputation, but is solely intent on preserving the army. It steers equally between a timid prudence, that foresees and dreads all difficulties, and a brutal ardour which industriously pursues and confronts dangers of every kind. In a word, to form an accomplished general, prudence must soften and direct the too fiery temper of valour; as valour in return must animate and warm the coldness and slowness of prudence. Do any of these characteristics suit Alexander? When we peruse his history, and follow him to sieges and battles, we are perpetually alarmed for his safety, and that of his army; and conclude every moment that they are upon the point of being destroyed. Here we see a rapid flood, which is going to draw in and swallow up this conqueror: there we behold a craggy rock, which he climbs, and perceives round him soldiers, either transfixed by the enemy's darts, or thrown Homo gloriæ deditus, cujus nec naturam nec modum noverat, Herculis vestigia sequens, ac ne ibi quidem resistens, ubi illa defecerant. Quid illi (Herculi) simile habebat, vesanus adolescens, cui pro virtute erat felix temeritas? Hercules nihil sibi vicit: orbem terrarum transivit, non concupiscendo, sed vindicando. Quid vinceret malorum hostis, bonorum vindex, terrarum marisque pacator? At hic à pueritiâ latro, gentiumque vastator, tam hostium pernicies quàm amicorum, qui summum bonum duceret terrori esse cunctis mortalibus; oblitus, non ferocissima tantùm sed ignavissima quoque animalia timeri ob virus malum. Senec, de Benef. L. 1. c. 13. headlong by huge stones from precipices. We tremble when we perceive in a battle the axe just ready to cleave his head; and much more when we behold him alone in a fortress, whither his rashness had drawn him, exposed to all the javelins of the enemy. Alexander was ever persuaded, that miracles would be wrought in his favour, than which nothing could be more unreasonable, as Plutarch observes; for miracles do not always happen; and the gods at last are weary of guiding and preserving rash mortals, who abuse the assistance they afford them. Plutarch, in a treatise where he makes the eulogium of Alexander, and exhibits him as an accomplished hero, gives a long detail of the several wounds he received in every part of his body; and pretends that the only design of fortune, in thus piercing him with wounds, was to make his courage more conspicuous. A renowned warrior, whose eulogium Plutarch has drawn in another part of his writings, did not judge in this manner. Some persons applauding him for a wound he had received in battle, the general himself declared, that it was a fault which could only be excused in a young man, and justly deserved censure. It has been observed in Hannibal's praise, and I myself have taken notice of it elsewhere, that he never was wounded in all his battles. I cannot say whether Cæsar ever was. The last observation, which relates in general to Alexander's expeditions in Asia, must necessarily lessen very much the merit of his victories, and the splendour of his reputation; and this is the genius and character of the nations against whom he fought. Livy, in a digression, where he inquires what would have been the fate of Alexander's arms, in case he had turned them towards Italy; and where he shows that Rome would certainly have checked his conquests, insists strongly on the reflection in question. He opposes to this prince, in the article of courage, a great ⚫ number of illustrious Romans, who would have resisted him on all occasions; and in the article of prudence, that august senate, which Cineas, to give a more noble idea of it to Pyrrhus his sovereign, said, was composed of so many kings. "Had he marched," says Livy," "against the Romans, he would soon have found, that he was no longer combating against a Darius, who, encumbered with gold and purple, the vain equipage of his grandeur, and dragging after him a multitude of women and eunuchs, came as a prey rather than as an enemy; and whom Alexander conquered without shedding much blood, and without wanting any other merit, than that of daring to despise what was really contemptible. He would have found Italy very different from India, through which he marched in a riotous manner, his army quite stupified with wine; particularly when he should have seen the forests of Apulia, the mountains of Lucania, and the still recent footsteps of the defeat of Alexander his uncle, king of Epirus, who there lost his life." The historian adds, that he speaks of Alexander, not yet depraved and corrupted by prosperity, whose subtle poison worked as strongly upon him, as upon any man that ever lived; and he concludes, that being thus transformed, he would have appeared very different in Italy, from what he had seemed hitherto. These reflections of Livy show, that Alexander 1 Plut. de fortun. Alex. Orat. II. P. 341. This treatise, if written by Plutarch, seems a juvenile performance, and has very much the air of declamation. Timotheus, Plut. in Pelop. p. 278. Mention is made but of one single wound. Non jam cum Dario rem esse dixisset, quem mulierum ac spadonum agmen trahentem, inter purpuram atque aurum, oneratum fortunæ suæ apparatibus, prædam veriùs quàm hostem, nihil aliud quàm bene ausus vana contemnere, incruentus devicit. Longè alius Italiæ, quàm India, per quam temulento agmine commissabundus incessit, visus illi habitus esset, saltus Apuliæ ac montes Lucanos cernenti, et vestigia recentia domestic cladis, ubi avunculus ejus nuper, Epiri rex, Alexander absumptus erat. Liv. 1, ix. n. 17. partly owed his victories to the weakness of his ene mies; and that, had he met with nations as courageous, and as well inured to all the hardships of war as the Ro mans, and commanded by as able, experienced generals as those of Rome; his victories would not have been either so rapid, or so uninterrupted. Nevertheless these are the points from which we are to judge of the merits of a conqueror. Hannibal and Scipio are considered as two of the greatest generals that ever lived, and for this reason: because both of them not only understood perfectly the military science, but their experience, their abilities, their resolution and courage, were put to the trial, and set in the strongest light. Now, should we give to either of them an unequal antagonist, one whose reputation is not answerable to theirs, we shall no longer have the same idea of them; and their victories, though supposed alike, appear no longer with the same lustre, nor deserve the same applause. Mankind are but too apt to be dazzled by shining actions and a pompous exterior, and blindly abandon themselves to prejudices of every kind. It cannot be denied that Alexander possessed very great qualities; but if we throw into the other scale his errors and vices, the presumptuous idea he entertained of his own merit, the high contempt he had for other men, not excepting his own father; his ardent thirst of praise and flattery; his ridiculous notion of making himself believed to be the son of Jupiter; of ascribing divinity to himself; of requiring a free victorious people to pay him a servile homage, and prostrate themselves igno miniously before him; his abandoning himself so shamefully to wine; his violent anger, which rises to brutal ferocity; the unjust and barbarous execution of his bravest and most faithful officers, and the murder of his most worthy friends in the midst of feasts and carousals; can any one, says Livy, believe, that all these imperfections do not greatly sully the reputation of a conqueror ? But Alexander's frantic ambition, which knows neither law nor limits; the rash intrepidity with which he braves dangers, without the least reason or necessity; the weakness and ignorance of the nations (totally unskilled in war) against whom he fought; do not these enervate the reasons for which he is thought to have merited the surname of Great, and the title of Hero? I leave the decision of the question to the prudence and equity of my reader. As to myself, I am surprised to find that all orators who applaud a prince, never fail to compare him to Alexander. They fancy that when he is once equalled to this king, it is impossible for panegyric to soar higher: they cannot imagine to themselves any thing more august; and think they have omitted the stroke which finishes the glory of a hero, should they not exalt him by this comparison. In my opinion this denotes a false taste, a wrong turn of thinking; and if I might be allowed to say it, a want of judgment, which must naturally shock a reasonable mind. For, as Alexander was invested with supreme power, he ought to have fulfilled the several duties of the sovereignty. We do not find that he possessed the first, the most essential and most excellent virtues of a great prince, which are to be the father, the guardian, and shepherd of his people; to govern them by good laws; to make their trade, both by sea and land, flourish; to encourage and protect arts and sciences, to establish peace and plenty, and not suffer his subjects to be in any manner aggrieved or injured; to maintain an agreeable harmony between all orders of the state, and make them conspire, in due proportion, to the public welfare: to employ himself in doing justice to all his subjects, to Referre in tanto rege piget superbam mutationem vestis, et desideratas humi jacentium adulationes, etiam victis Macedonibus graves, nedum victoribus; et fæda supplicia, et inter vinum et epulas cades amicorum, et vanitatem ementiende stirpis. Quid si vini amor in dies fieret acrior? quid si trux ac præfervida ira? (nec quicquam dubium inter scriptores refero) nullane hæc damna imperatoriis virtutibus ducimus? Liv. 1. ix. n. 18. and many others mentioned in history, prevented liberty from degenerating into licentiousness. Laws drawn up with great simplicity, and few in number, awed the people, held them in their duty, and made them all conspire to the general good of the country. The idea of liberty which such a conduct inspired was wonderful. For the liberty which the Greeks figured to themselves was subject to the law, that is, to reason itself, acknowledged as such by the whole nation. They would not let men rise to power among them. Magistrates, who were feared during their office, became afterwards private men, and had no authority but what their experience gave them. The law was considered as their sovereign; it was she who appointed magistrates, prescribed the limits of their power, and punished their mal-administration. The advantage of this government was, that the citizens bore so much the greater love to their country, as all shared in the government of it; and as every individual was capable of attaining its highest dignities. hear their disputes, and reconcile them; to consider | Thales, a Pythagoras, a Pittacus, a Lycurgus, a Solon, aimself as the father of his people, as obliged to provide for all their necessities, and to procure them the several enjoyments of life. Now Alexander, who almost a moment after he ascended the throne, left Macedonia, and never returned back into it, did not endeavour at any of these things, which however are the chief and most substantial duties of a great prince. He seems possessed of such qualities only as are of the second rank, I mean those of war, and these are all extravagant; are carried to the rashest and most odious excess, and to the extremes of folly and fury; whilst his kingdom is left a prey to the rapine and exactions of Antipater; and all the conquered provinces abandoned to the insatiable avarice of the governors, who carried their oppressions so far, that Alexander was forced to put them to death. Nor do his soldiers appear to be better regulated; for these, having plundered the wealth of the East, after the prince had given them the highest marks of his beneficence, grew so licentious, so disorderly, so debauched and abandoned to vices of every kind, that he was forced to pay their debts by a largess of 1,500,000!. What strange men were these! how depraved their school! how pernicious the fruit of their victories! Is it doing honour to a prince, is it adorning his panegyric, to compare him with such a model? man. 1 The Romans, indeed, seemed to have held Alexander's memory in great veneration; but I very much question, whether in the virtuous ages of the commonwealth, he would have been considered as so great a Cæsar seeing his statue in a temple in Spain, during his government of that country after his prætorship, could not forbear groaning and sighing, when he compared the few glorious actions achieved by himself, with the mighty exploits of this conqueror. It was said that Pompey, in one of his triumphs, appeared dressed in that king's surtout. Augustus pardoned the Alexandrians, for the sake of their founder. Caligula, in a ceremony in which he assumed the character of a mighty conqueror, wore Alexander's coat of mail. But no one carried his veneration for this monarch so far as Caracalla. He used the same kind of arms and goblets as that prince; he had a Macedonian phalanx in his army; he persecuted the Peripatetics, and would have burned all the books of Aristotle their founder, because he was suspected to have conspired with those who poisoned Alexander. I believe that I may justly assert, that, if an impartial person of good sense reads Plutarch's lives of illustrious men with attention, they will leave such a tacit and strong impression in his mind, as will make him consider Alexander one of the least valuable among them. But how strong would the contrast be found, had we the lives of Epaminondas, of Hannibal and Scipio, the loss of which can never be too much regretted! How little would Alexander appear, set off with all his titles, and surrounded by all his conquests, even if considered in a military light, when compared to those heroes who were truly great, and worthy their exalted reputation! SECTION XX.-REFLECTIONS ON THE PERSIANS, BISHOP OF MEAUX. 2 THE reader will not be displeased with my inserting here, part of the admirable reflections of the Bishop of Meaux, on the character and government of the Persians, Greeks, and Macedonians, with whose history we have been engaged. The Greek nations, several of whom had at first lived under a monarchical form of government, having studied the arts of civil polity, imagined they were able to govern themselves, and most of their cities formed themselves into commonwealths. But the wise legislators, who arose in every country, as a Dion. l. xxxvii. p. 53. App. de Bell. Mithrid. p. 253. Dion. I. li. p. 454. Id. 1. lix. p. 653. Id. l. lxxvii. p. 873. Discourse on Universal History. Part. iii. chap. 4. The advantage which accrued to Greece from philosophy, with regard to the preservation of its form of government, is incredible. The greater freedom these nations enjoyed, the greater necessity there was to settle the laws relating to manners and those of society, agreeably to reason and good sense. From Pythagoras, Thales, Anaxagoras, Socrates, Archytas, Plato, Xenophon, Aristotle, and a multitude more, the Greeks received their noble precepts. But why should we mention philosophers only? The writings of even the poets, which were in every body's hands, amused them very much, but instructed them still more. The most renowned of conquerors considered Homer as a master, who taught him to govern wisely. This great poet instructed people, no less happily, in obedience, and the duties of a good citizen. When the Greeks, thus educated, saw the delicacy of the Asiatics: their dress and beauty, emulating that of women, they held them in the utmost contempt. But their form of government that had no other rule than their prince's will, which took place of all laws, not excepting the most sacred, inspired them with horror; and the Barbarians were the most hateful of objects to Greece. 8 The Greeks had imbibed this hatred in the most early times, and it was become almost natural to them. A circumstance which made them delight so much in Homer's poems, was his celebrating the advantages and victories of Greece over Asia. On the side of Asia was Venus, that is to say, the pleasures, the idle loves, and effeminacy; on that of Greece was Juno, or in other words, gravity with conjugal affection, Mercury with eloquence, and Jupiter with wise policy. With the Asiatics was Mars, an impetuous and brutal deity, that is to say, war carried on with fury: with the Greeks, Pallas, or, in other words, the science of war and valour, conducted by reason. The Grecians, from this time, had ever imagined, that understanding and true bravery were natural as well as peculiar to them. They could not bear the thoughts of Asia's design to conquer them; and in bowing to this yoke, they would have thought they had subjected virtue to pleasure, the mind to the body, and true courage to brutal strength, which consisted merely in numbers. The Greeks were strongly inspired with these sentiments, when Darius, son of Hystaspes, and Xerxes, invaded them with armies so prodigiously numerous as exceeds all belief. The Persians found often, to their cost, the great advantage which discipline has over multitudes and confusion; and how greatly superior courage (when conducted by skill) is to a blind impetuosity. Persia, after having been so often conquered by the Greeks, had nothing to do but to sow divisions among them; and the height to which conquest had raised the latter, facilitated the design. As fear, held them in • Isocrates in Panegyr. Plat. de Leg. 1. iùì. |