MISCELLANEOUS ESSAYS. 



S93 



igxtricate himself from the infamy. 

 Jt is true he was not successful. 

 Si'cli was l.he odium against hiin. 

 Non opf hiunfit'u, fion largitionilus 

 principis, ant deum placamentis de- 

 cedelat infamia. He then endea- 

 voured to throw the suspicion on the 

 Christians, since he found the world 

 too prejudiced to ascribe the event 

 to accident — with equal want of 

 success indeed. But all which I 

 wish to infer is, that this extreme 

 ^nxiety confutes the notion of his 

 rash unguarded promotion of the 

 calamity > and that he was particu- 

 larly distressed at this rumour ap- 

 pears from his known character, 

 which was, in general, to despise 

 all rumours. Nihil patientius cjiiam 

 maledicta ct convitia hominum tulu. 

 Suetonius, p. 258. 



The extent of the power of pre- 

 judice against this miserable prince 

 at this period cannot be more 

 strongly exemphfied than in the 

 murmurs which Tacitus mentions, 

 occasioned by his opening the city 

 and widening the streets, because, 

 as as was alleged, the old narrow 

 streets and lofty houses contributed 

 exceedingly to the salubrity of 

 Rome, by protecting the passenger 

 from the heat of the sun. I will 

 even draw an argument from the vi-^ 

 rulence of Suetonius. " He would 

 " not suffer," says the writer, " the 

 " bodies of the dead, who perished 

 <* in the fire, to be burnt by their 

 •' friends, nor the ruins of the edir 

 " fices to be removed by the own- 

 " crs, but took the charge upon 

 " himself, for the sake of plunder." 

 Whether those who were burnt al- 

 ready required to be burnt again 1 

 know not ; but does not the ill-na- 

 ture of the remark proclaim the in- 

 clination of the author ? Is it not 

 more natural to 'ioppose, that the 



^ear of pestilence, from tlie exposi. 

 tion of bodies left to the random 

 care of individuals, in a time of ge- 

 neral distraction, required the in- 

 terposition of government and the 

 adoption of pubhc regulations, to 

 prevent the possibility of private 

 negligence ? And was it not right 

 in the governing power of the state 

 to refuse to trust to the weakness or 

 indolence of the subject, tlie office 

 of removing rubbish and ruins, 

 whose immense heaps forbad im- 

 provement and postponed renova- 

 tion ? 



The truth is, when Suetonius 

 wrote, invective against the race of 

 CsEsar opened the way to honour 

 and preferment. Abuse of the Au- 

 gustan family was the fashion of 

 succeedinjx times, and the instrur 

 ment of flattery with succeedmg 

 emperors. With infinite caution, 

 therefore, are we to admit the adu-r 

 latory invective of the writers of 

 the age of Trajan. The fidelity pf 

 historj' was made to bow to the eti- 

 c^uette of CQUits and the interests of 

 historians. 



This propensity to blacken the 

 Cresars, received in the particular 

 instance of Nero, additional height 

 in later times, from the enmity of 

 the Chrislians. His cruel persecu- 

 tion of Christianity, and his inordi- 

 nate wickedness, in averting upon 

 its votaries the calumny thrown 

 upon himself, with the signal mar- 

 tyrdom of St. Ps'ter and St. Paul, 

 under his dominion, have stamped 

 him with the most sanguinary dye 

 in the annals of rehgion. It was na- 

 tural to surmise that the man who 

 so unjustly accused others, had not 

 been unjustly accused himself. His 

 innocence was supposed to include 

 their crimination ; and as the cni- 

 pli-e became Christian, it became 



in 



