War was the only art which he professed. In
a long course of service, he had distinguished himself on every frontier
of the empire; and though his military talents were formed to obey
rather than to command, though, perhaps, he never attained the skill
of a consummate general, he was capable, by his valor, constancy, and
experience, of executing the most arduous undertakings. Nor were the
vices of Maximian less useful to his benefactor. Insensible to pity, and
fearless of consequences, he was the ready instrument of every act of
cruelty which the policy of that artful prince might at once suggest and
disclaim. As soon as a bloody sacrifice had been offered to prudence
or to revenge, Diocletian, by his seasonable intercession, saved the
remaining few whom he had never designed to punish, gently censured the
severity of his stern colleague, and enjoyed the comparison of a golden
and an iron age, which was universally applied to their opposite maxims
of government. Notwithstanding the difference of their characters, the
two emperors maintained, on the throne, that friendship which they
had contracted in a private station. The haughty, turbulent spirit of
Maximian, so fatal, afterwards, to himself and to the public peace,
was accustomed to respect the genius of Diocletian, and confessed the
ascendant of reason over brutal violence. [8] From a motive either of
pride or superstition, the two emperors assumed the titles, the one of
Jovius, the other of Herculius. Whilst the motion of the world (such was
the language of their venal orators) was maintained by the all-seeing
wisdom of Jupiter, the invincible arm of Hercules purged the earth from
monsters and tyrants. [9]
[Footnote 6: The question of the time when Maximian received the honors
of Caesar and Augustus has divided modern critics, and given occasion
to a great deal of learned wrangling. I have followed M. de Tillemont,
(Histoire des Empereurs, tom. iv. p. 500-505,) who has weighed the
several reasons and difficulties with his scrupulous accuracy. *
Note: Eckbel concurs in this view, viii p. 15.--M.]
[Footnote 7: In an oration delivered before him, (Panegyr. Vet. ii. 8,)
Mamertinus expresses a doubt, whether his hero, in imitating the conduct
of Hannibal and Scipio, had ever heard of their names. From thence we
may fairly infer, that Maximian was more desirous of being considered as
a soldier than as a man of letters; and it is in this manner that we can
often tran
|