Earlier text: General ArticlesThe First Migrations of the Goths.
THE night of January 1, A. D. 193, the Emperor Commodus, after having reached "the summit of vice and infamy," was poisoned by Marcia, his favorite concubine, and, at the instance of her accomplices, who were impatient of the poison, was strangled by a wrestler. From that night till the reign of Constantine as sole emperor, A. D. 323, of more than sixty who assumed the "bloody purple" none lived in peace; only four—Severus, Claudius, Constantius, and Galerius—died in quietness; only one—Decius—fell in battle with the barbarians; and one—Valerian—died in captivity in Persia. All the others were either assassinated, or else took their own lives to prevent being massacred, or else fell in battle with their successful rivals. De Quincey, however, lengthens the period and lessens the number. Of the office of emperor he says, it was "always a post of danger, and so regularly closed by assassination, that in the course of two centuries there are hardly to be found three or four cases of exception."—Essay, Ancient History, the Cæsars, chap. 6, par. 6. A few strokes of Gibbon's vigorous pen will illustrate for us the terrible history of this dreary period of the empire. He says:— "From the great secular games celebrated by Philip, to the death of the Emperor Gallienus, there elapsed [A. D. 248-268] twenty years of shame and misfortune. During that calamitous period, every instant of time was marked, every province of the Roman world was afflicted, by barbarous invaders and military tyrants, and the ruined empire seemed to approach the last and fatal moment of its dissolution."—Chap. 10, par. 1. In this twenty years there were seven emperors,—Philip, Decius, Hostilianus, Gallus, Æmilianus, Valerian, and Gallienus. Of the reigns of the last two—father and son—Gibbon says:— "The joint government of the father and the son subsisted about seven, and the sole administration of Gallienus continued about eight years [A. D. 253-268]. But the whole period was one uninterrupted series of confusion and calamity. The Roman Empire was at the same time, and on every side, attacked by the blind fury of foreign invaders, and the wild ambition of domestic usurpers."—Id., par. 21. Of Gallienus and his reign we are told that,— "In every art that he attempted, his lively genius enabled him to succeed; and as his genius was destitute of judgment, he attempted every art, except the important ones of war and government. He was a master of several curious but useless sciences, a ready orator, an elegant poet, a skillful gardener, an excellent cook, and most contemptible prince. When the great emergencies of the State required his presence and attention, he was engaged in conversation with the philosopher Plotinus, wasting his time in trifling or licentious pleasures, preparing his initiation to the Grecian mysteries, or soliciting a place in the Areopagus of Athens. . . . At a time when the reins of government were held with so loose a hand, it is not surprising that a crowd of usurpers should start up in every province of the empire against the son of Valerian. . . . To illustrate the obscure monuments of the life and death of each individual, would prove a laborious task, alike barren of instruction and amusement. Of the nineteen tyrants who started up under the reign of Gallienus there was not one who enjoyed a life of peace or a natural death."—Id., par. 46, 47, 50. Except in the number of the usurpers, the reign of Gallienus may be taken as a fair picture of the whole period from Commodus to Constantine. In concluding his observations upon these "rapid and perpetual transitions from the cottage to the throne, and from the throne to the grave," the historian adds:— "Such were the barbarians [which we shall introduce presently], and such the tyrants, who, under the reigns of Valerian and Gallienus, dismembered the provinces, and reduced the empire to the lowest pitch of disgrace and ruin, from whence it seemed impossible that it should ever emerge."—Id., par. 52. We have now reached the time when we can enter intelligently upon the study of the course of the flood of barbarians which comes pouring down from the North upon the already torn and distracted empire. And we now propose to trace the ten kingdoms from their origin among the savage tribes of ancient Germany to their establishment within the Western Empire, and to the present condition of such of them as remain, among the civilized nations of modern Europe. Of all these, to the Goths belongs the first place. Although the Goths were not absolutely the first to invade the empire, nor yet actually the first to fix their final settlement within its limits; yet as they did more than any other nation to break the power of Rome, and so to prepare the way for the other nations to enter, to them rightly belongs the foremost place among all the nations that had any share in the breaking up of the once so mighty empire of Rome. "The Emperor Decius had employed a few months in the works of peace and the administration of justice, when [A. D. 250] he was summoned to the banks of the Danube by the invasion of the Goths. This is the first considerable occasion in which history mentions that great people, who afterwards broke the Roman power, sacked the capital, and reigned in Gaul, Spain, and Italy. So memorable was the part which they acted in the subversion of the Western Empire, that the name of Goths is frequently, but improperly, used as a general appellation of rude and warlike barbarism." "Many vestiges, which cannot be ascribed to the arts of popular vanity, attest the ancient residence of the Goths in the countries beyond the Baltic. From the time of the geographer Ptolemy, the southern part of Sweden seems to have continued in the possession of the less enterprising remnant of the nation, and a large territory is even at present divided into East and West Gothland. During the Middle Ages (from the ninth to the twelfth century), whilst Christianity was advancing with a slow progress into the North, the Goths and the Swedes composed two distinct, and sometimes hostile, members of the same monarchy. The latter of these two names has prevailed without extinguishing the former. The Swedes, who might well be satisfied with their own fame in arms, have in every age claimed the kindred glory of the Goths." "If so many successive generations of Goths were capable of preserving a faint tradition of their Scandinavian origin, we must not expect from such unlettered barbarians any distinct account of the time and circumstances of their emigration. To cross the Baltic was an easy and natural attempt. The inhabitants of Sweden were masters of a sufficient number of large vessels with oars, and the distance is little more than one hundred miles from Carscrona to the nearest ports of Pomerania and Prussia. Here, at length, we land on firm and historic ground. At least as early as the Christian era, and as late as the age of the Antonines [A. D. 138-180], the Goths were established towards the mouth of the Vistula, and in that fertile province where the commercial cities of Thorn, Elbing, Konigsberg, and Dantzic were long afterwards founded." "In the age of the Antonines the Goths were still seated in Prussia. About the reign of Alexander Severus [A. D. 222-235], the Roman province of Dacia had already experienced their proximity by frequent and destructive inroads. In this interval, therefore, of about seventy years, we must place the second migration of the Goths from the Baltic to the Euxine; but the cause that produced it lies concealed among the various motives which actuate the conduct of unsettled barbarians. Either a pestilence or a famine, a victory or a defeat, an oracle of the gods or the eloquence of a daring leader, was sufficient to impel the Gothic arms on the milder climate of the south. Besides the influence of a martial religion, the numbers and spirit of the Goths were equal to the most dangerous adventures. The use of round bucklers and short swords rendered them formidable in a close engagement; the manly obedience which they yielded to hereditary kings gave uncommon union and stability to their councils; and the renowned Amala, the hero of that age and the tenth ancestor of Theodoric, king of Italy, enforced, by the ascendant of personal merit, the prerogative of his birth, which he derived from the Anses, or demigods of the Gothic nation." "The fame of a great enterprise excited the bravest warriors from all the Vandalic States of Germany, many of whom are seen a few years afterwards combating under the common standard of the Goths. The first motions of the emigrants carried them to the banks of the Prypec, a river universally conceived by the ancients to be the southern branch of the Borysthenes [Dnieper]. The windings of that great stream through the plains of Poland and Russia gave a direction to their line of march, and a constant supply of fresh water and pasturage to their numerous herds of cattle. They followed the unknown course of the river, confident in their valor, and careless of whatever power might oppose their progress. The Bastarnæ and the Venedi were the first who presented themselves; and the flower of their youth, either from choice or compulsion, increased the Gothic army. The Bastarnæ dwelt on the northern side of the Carpathian Mountains; the immense tract of land that separated the Bastarnæ from the savages of Finland was possessed, or rather wasted, by the Venedi. . . ." "As the Goths advanced near the Euxine [Black] Sea, they encountered a purer race of Sarmatians, the Jazyges, the Alani, and the Roxolani; and they were probably the first Germans who saw the mouths of the Borysthenes and of the Tanais [Don]. If we inquire into the characteristic marks of the people of Germany and of Sarmatia, we shall discover that those two great portions of human kind were principally distinguished by fixed huts or movable tents; by a close dress or flowing garments; by the marriage of one or of several wives; by a military force, consisting, for the most part, either of infantry or cavalry; and, above all, by the use of the Teutonic or of the Slavonian language—the last of which has been diffused by conquest [of Russia] from the confines of Italy to the neighborhood of Japan." "The Goths were now in possession of the Ukraine, a country of considerable extent and uncommon fertility, intersected with navigable rivers which from either side discharge themselves into the Borysthenes, and interspersed with large and lofty forests of oak. The plenty of game and fish, the innumerable bee-hives, deposited in the hollows of old trees and in the cavities of rocks, and forming, even in that rude age, a valuable branch of commerce, the size of the cattle, the temperature of the air, the aptness of the soil for every species of grain, and the luxuriance of the vegetation, all displayed the liberality of nature, and tempted the industry of man. But the Goths withstood all these temptations, and still adhered to a life of idleness, of poverty, and of rapine."—Id., chap. 10, par. 3, 4, 8-11. Satan’s Winding Stairs
By Worthington
MANY have yielded to go a mile with Satan who never intended to go with him twain; but when once on the way with him, they have been inveigled farther and farther, until they know not how to leave him. Thus he leads poor creatures down into the depths of sin by winding stairs, so that they see not the end of that to which they are going.—Worthington. The Relation of England's Opium Policy to Christian Missions in China.
By James Brand
IN attempting to estimate the influence of this enormous evil on the spread of Christianity in China, two things must be borne in mind: (1) That the last war with England was undoubtedly used in the providence of God to open China to Christian missions. The good that may flow to China in the future from this circumstance is of course beyond computation. But the unfortunate thing connected with this gaining of liberty to propagate Christianity in that empire is that while it opened Chinese ports, it closed Chinese hearts. (2) It must also be borne in mind, that the comparatively slow progress of Christianity in China is not all to be attributed to this evil. There are other formidable hindrances, apart from opium, which missionaries have to meet, and which render China perhaps the hardest field in the world to evangelize. But, with a language said to be "invented by the devil to exclude Christianity," and a system of government backed by a superstition which constitutes the "Gibraltar of heathenism," was it not all the more inexcusable to add the curse of opium to these other hindrances to the cause of Christ? There can be little doubt that of the difficulties which lie in the way of the conversion of China, the various unchristian influences which proceed from nominally Christian ends are the hardest to overcome. The vices of civilization are always more deadly foes of Christ than are those of savage life. The opium traffic as a hindrance to Christianity is seen first of all in its effects upon the immediate victims of the vice. Here the hindrance lies, not chiefly in the prejudice awakened against Christian nations, but in the tremendous hold which the opium habit has upon Chinese life, and the extent to which it prevails. It is now a national vice. It is fastened upon the people more firmly than the drink habit of England or America. The hope of ever eradicating it from the life of the Chinese is now dying out of the hearts of intelligent Christian missionaries. The time for that hope has gone by. The sublime struggle of the Chinese Government, which has been compared to that of Laocoon in the coils of the serpents, has failed. The best that can now be done by human agency is to mitigate the evil as far as possible, by urging upon China the gospel, on the one hand, and by getting England to clear herself from further criminal responsibility, on the other. The extent to which the evil prevails is a vexed question. No reliable statistics have yet been prepared. The evil manifestly prevails more in the cities than in the country. Dr. Williams, writing nearly forty years ago, was of the opinion that the smokers of China numbered not less than 2,500,000. At a meeting held in Exeter Hall two years ago, for the investigation of this subject, J. Maxwell, M. D., testified that in the city of Taiwan Foo more than one-fifth of the adult male population used the pipe, and that the Chinese estimate was much higher than that. In the city of Soo Chow, one of the largest in China, the same witness said that there was unimpeachable evidence that seven-tenths of the adult male population used opium. At a missionary conference held in Shanghai in 1877, Rev. H. C. Dubois, of Soo Chow, said that thirty years ago there were five or six opium dens in that city; now, there are 7,000, and eight out of every ten men smoke. In the province of Sze Chuen it is said that seven in every ten men and three in every ten women use opium. It has been estimated that if 60,000 die annually in Great Britain from the use of strong drink, 600,000 die in China annually from the use of opium. The simple fact that the Chinese pay $125,000,000 a year for opium shows that the evil is colossal. Sir Robert Hart claims that it only draws "from five pence to eleven pence apiece per day from the pockets of those who indulge in it." Now five pence to eleven pence apiece per day may seem a small matter to Sir Robert Hart, with a salary of thirty or forty thousand a year, but his suggestion loses its force when we remember that a good mechanic in China earns only about eleven pence per day, and a common laborer only about seven pence per day, when health is good and the weather fine. This would not seem to leave very much for the support of wife and children. Yet these stupid people, he adds, "do not find in either the revenue produced or in the statistical demonstration of its percentage innocuousness any sufficient reason for welcoming the growth of the trade, or from desisting from the attempt to check the consumption of opium." Marvelous stupidity! The opinion of many missionaries on the field to-day is that most of the estimates of the number of smokers are too small. Dr. Henry Porter, writing from Shantung last fall, not only shows that the vice is enormously increasing, but is inclined to estimate the victims not far from 10,000,000. He says: "Mr. Sheffield has just spent a month in Mongolia, and reports that the majority of the faces of the men bear the marks of opium." Mr. Bagnall, of the American Bible Society, says of the people of Shantung and Honan, "The men all seem to smoke." A writer in the Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. 17, p. 794, states that "in 1858 it was estimated that about 2,000,000 of Chinese smoked opium, and in 1878 from one-fourth to three-tenths of the entire population of 400,000,000." But suppose even the English Inspector-General's report to be correct as to the number of smokers, is it not safe to add three more to every one of his two millions to represent the wives, children, and friends who directly suffer from this vice? No honest estimate of the evil of intemperance could be made by simply giving the number of drinking men. Moreover, thinking people will be slow to believe the statement of Sir Robert Hart, that the opium business "does not specially damage either the finances of the State or the wealth of the people," when we are informed that China pays out annually $4,000,000 more for opium than she receives for tea; and $10,000,000 more than from her exportation of silk, and $12,000,000 more than she pays other countries for cotton and woolen goods. The moral argument, however, against the opium business, does not rest solely upon the exact estimate of the number of smokers. It rests chiefly upon the intrinsic evil effects upon man's moral and physical nature, upon the tremendous hold which the habit has upon the victim, and the fact that it is now become, through English influence, a national vice. This gigantic national evil, thus fastened upon the people, it is needless to say, is essentially antagonistic to the religion of Christ. These millions of victims, like the drunkards of our own land, are almost hopelessly beyond the reach of the gospel. The moral nature of the confirmed smoker becomes so debauched that Christian truth finds but little to which it can appeal. This enormous class cannot be received into missionary churches, even when they seem to have accepted Christian truth, till the habit is abandoned, and that is well-nigh beyond reasonable expectation. "Thus this trade," said an English missionary in 1877, "speaks more convincingly to the Chinese mind against Christianity than the missionary does or can do for it." Another class of the Chinese people, strongly armed by the opium business against the gospel, are the producers. This class must also be very large. One-half of all the opium consumed in China is now raised at home. It has become a national product, and when we remember that the profit on opium on a given quantity of land is twice as great as that from grain, we can understand the fearful temptation to extend and perpetuate the evil to which Chinese farmers are exposed. It is precisely the temptation which the brewers and distillers in our own country are too weak or too selfish to resist. And as the financial interest of every manufacturer and trafficker in intoxicants is measured by the zeal with which he fights Christianity, so it must be with the producers of opium. In both cases the manufacturers are the most heartless and inveterate foes of Christ. That radical antagonism between the preacher of the gospel and every man who proposes to enrich himself by pandering to the moral weaknesses of his fellow-men, must grow more and more deadly as the struggle goes on. A further hindrance which this satanic business puts in the way of Christ is the effect it has had on the Chinese Government officials. Multitudes of them have been utterly corrupted by English smuggling and bribes, so that they are secretly on the side of the producer and the trader, and hostile to those who oppose the traffic. Those of them who have not been corrupted have been alienated in their feeling and disgusted with the selfish and mercenary spirit of western nations which claim to be governed by the principles of the gospel. This corruption of lower officials has both discouraged and baffled the Government of China in its long, heroic struggles against the vice. Perhaps the greatest obstruction in the way of Christianity is the prejudice the opium traffic has created in the mind, not of producer, or trader, or consumer, or official, but in the minds of the great mass of the better classes of the Chinese people against all who bear the Christian name. The masses of the people suspect, ignorantly of course, but sincerely, that the design, even of Christians, is to ruin, not to save, them as a people. Dr. Nevins remarks that "the suspicion and distrust which the Chinese have manifested is not so much the result of their natural disposition or the teaching of their sages, as of their unfortunate and prejudicing experience in their intercourse with foreigners." We need not be surprised, therefore, to find, as we do, a Chinese Christian referring to the sentiments of the countrymen on this subject in the following language: "It is clear, say they [the Chinese], that our country is being ruined. These mission schools and hospitals are not really established with good intention. Why do they not put an end to the sale of opium? Would not this be better than ten thousand hospitals and ten thousand preaching halls?" English Christians themselves have said: "There is not a greater barrier to the introduction of the gospel in China by the hand of foreigners than the trade in opium by those who bear the Christian name." This reasonable and universal feeling, be it remembered, is not simply against the British Government, as such, but against the English people. The Chinese, as a whole, cannot distinguish, as we can, between England as a Government and England as individuals. Hence any act of that Government which claims to be Christian is taken by the Chinese masses as a measure of the principles of Christianity, and thus the prejudice is in some degree against all Christian nations.—James Brand, D. D., in Bibliotheca Sacra. Spiritual Poverty in Prosperous Churches
ONE of the requests at a recent Fulton-street prayer-meeting was, "Will you pray for a church which is prospering every way except spiritually?" We fear that these words represent the condition of too many of our churches, though it is seldom that so frank an acknowledgment of spiritual poverty is made.—Sel. God’s Judgments Are Right
“I KNOW, O Lord, that thy judgments are right.” The Sabbath-School.
By Editor
LESSON FOR THE PACIFIC COAST—DEC. 26.
THE lesson for this date is a recapitulation, and as we have commented on nearly every point quite fully, to cover the ground again so soon might be wearisome to the reader. We shall therefore make only a few brief comments on a point that has not received the fullest attention. WE have given 538 A. D. as the date for the beginning of the 1260 years of papal supremacy. But there are commentators who give other dates for the beginning of this period, and it becomes necessary to notice their claims, and see what worth there is to them. There are only two dates that need claim our attention,—A. D. 606 and A. D. 755. Dowling, in his "History of Romanism," gives 606 A. D. as the true date for the complete establishment of the papacy. His reason is that it was in 606 that Phocas, the Greek emperor, bestowed on Boniface III. the title of "Universal Bishop of Christendom." There are two reasons why we cannot accept this date as the one when papal supremacy began. THE first reason that we offer against the date fixed upon by Dowling, is that nearly one hundred years before, the equivalent of the above-mentioned title had been bestowed on the bishop of Rome, and that the power of the papacy was then equal to what it was in 606. Says D'Aubigne:— "To silence the cries of the churches [against the usurpations of Rome], Rome found new allies. Princes who in those troublesome times often saw their thrones tottering, offered their adherence to the church in exchange for her support. They yielded to her spiritual authority, on condition of her paying them with secular dominion. They left her to deal at will with the souls of men, provided only she would deliver them from their enemies. The power of the hierarchy in the ascending scale, and of the imperial power which was declining, leaned thus one toward another, and so accelerated the twofold destiny.
"Rome could not lose by this. An edict of Theodosius II. and of Valentinian III. proclaimed the bishop of Rome 'ruler of all the churches.' Justinian issued a similar decree [A. D. 533]."—Hist. Ref., Book 1, chap. 1. HERE we see that before 538 the power of the bishops of Rome was so great that secular princes sought their support. So great had become the influence of the Catholic Church in 370 A. D., that Ambrose, bishop of Milan, deprived the Emperor Theodosius of the communion for eight months, not permitting him to enter the church during that time, but subjecting him to severe penance, because he had allowed the massacre at Thessalonica. Socrates, the church historian, writing in the fifth century, shows in the following language, the power which was accorded to Rome nearly a hundred years before:— "After experiencing considerable difficulties, Athanasius at last reached Italy. The whole western division of the empire was then under the power of Constans, the youngest of Constantine's sons, his brother Constantine having been slain by the soldiery, as before stated. At the same time also, Paul, bishop of Constantinople, Asclepas of Gaza, Marcellus of Ancyra, a city of Galatia Minor, and Lucius of Adrianople, having been expelled from their several churches on various charges, arrived at the imperial city. There each laid his case before Julius, bishop of Rome, who sent them back again into the East, restoring them to their respective sees, by virtue of his letters, in the exercise of the church of Rome's peculiar privilege; and at the same time, in the liberty of that prerogative, sharply rebuking those by whom they had been deposed."—Ecclesiastical History (Socrates), Book 2, chap. 15. THUS we see that the power of Rome was almost supreme nearly two hundred years before the decree of Justinian; and when, in 538, the last opposing power—the Ostrogoths—was plucked up, nothing remained to hinder the pope of Rome from exercising to the full his special prerogative. THE second reason why we reject 606 as the date for the establishment of the papacy is that, counting from that time, the 1260 years would end in 1866, at which time there was nothing of note that happened to the papacy. The temporal power of the pope was not taken away until 1870, and there was absolutely nothing in 1866 to mark a change in papal power. But in 1798, just 1260 years after 538, Pope Pius VI. was deposed by the French, and for two years the papacy was without a head, and therefore virtually dead. Thus we see that A. D. 538—1798 is established as the period of papal supremacy. THE year A. D. 755 is given by quite a number of authors as the date for the beginning of the 1260 years. The argument by which they attempt to substantiate this claim is that as the papacy was diverse from all other powers, in that it combined both civil and ecclesiastical authority, the papacy cannot be said to have been fully set up until it received temporal dominion. It was in 755 A. D. that Pepin of France ceded to Pope Stephen and his successors in the see of Rome, the territory which he had conquered from the Lombards. Thus the pope became a temporal sovereign in 755, and therefore that date is thought by many to be the proper time for the beginning of the 1260 years. IF we were living a hundred years ago, we might not be able to successfully refute this claim, but now we have no difficulty in showing its fallacy. Thus: If 755 be taken as the beginning of papal supremacy, then the 1260 years would not expire until 2,015 A. D. But the temporal dominion was taken away in 1870, and thus we would have the papacy continuing one hundred and forty-five years after its temporal power is destroyed. But this of itself kills the argument by which the beginning of the period is fixed at 755, because if the papacy could not exist until it had temporal power, it could not exist after that power should cease. So if 755 be taken as the date for the setting up of the papacy, the argument which fixes that date would make its supremacy end in 1870, thus allowing only 1115 years instead of the 1260 which the Bible allows. Therefore we see that this theory cannot stand; the year 538 A. D. stands without a rival, as the year when the papacy entered upon its unrestrained career of opposition to God and oppression of his people. WE have thought it necessary to speak of these dates, because they are given by eminent commentators, and would cause confusion in the minds of those who might come across them in their reading. But the names and authority of eminent men cannot have any weight whatever, when opposed by facts. IN closing, we copy from "Dowling's History of Romanism" the following interesting summary of events connected with the downfall of the temporal dominion of the pope:— "There is something very remarkable in the rapidity with which events connected with the downfall of the temporal power of the pope followed each other in quick succession, after the establishment of the papal infallibility. Let us recapitulate them in the order of their sequence:—
"On Wednesday, the 13th of July, 1870, the dogma of the infallibility of the pope was enacted into an article of faith, by the votes of the Council of the Vatican at Rome, and was publicly, and with great pomp and parade, proclaimed by Pope Pius IX. a few days afterward.
"On July 15th, war was most unjustly and causelessly proclaimed and commenced by the Emperor Louis Napoleon of France, long the protector and favorite of the pope, against King William of Prussia, one of the foremost Protestant sovereigns of Europe.
"On September 1st, this protector of the pope and 'eldest son of the church,' as he had been styled, Louis Napoleon, was captured by the aforesaid Protestant king, after a series of unsuccessful but fierce and bloody battles, and carried captive into Prussia as a prisoner of war.
"On September 20th, the city of Rome and the pope himself were captured by the soldiers of Victor Emanuel, a king whom he had himself excommunicated, and the pope was permitted to retire to his palace of the Vatican, but divested of all sovereign authority.
"On October 2d, the vote of the people of the city of Rome, subjects of the pope, was taken upon the question, whether Rome should be permanently annexed to the dominions of Victor Emanuel, and it be acknowledged as the capital of the Italian kingdom; or whether the city should continue, as heretofore, under the government of the pope. The question was decided against the pope by a majority of a thousand to one. Thus, by a virtually unanimous vote of the people of Rome, an end was put—it is to be hoped forever—to that anti-Christian usurpation, the temporal kingdom of the pope, after a continuance of about eleven hundred years."