RAVENNAA STUDY

BYEDWARD HUTTON

ILLUSTRATED IN COLOUR AND LINEBYHARALD SUND

1913

TO MY FRIENDARTHUR SYMONSIN AFFECTIONATE HOMAGE

PREFACE

My intention in writing this book has been to demonstrate the uniqueimportance of Ravenna in the history of Italy and of Europe, especiallyduring the Dark Age from the time of Alaric's first descent into theCisalpine plain to the coming of Charlemagne. That importance, as it seemsto me, has been wholly or almost wholly misunderstood, and certainly, as Iunderstand it, has never been explained. In this book, which is offered tothe public not without a keen sense of its inadequacy, I have tried to showin as clear a manner as was at my command, what Ravenna really was in thepolitical geography of the empire, and to explain the part that positionallowed her to play in the great tragedy of the decline and fall of theRoman administration. If I have succeeded in this I am amply repaid for allthe labour the book has cost me. 

The principal sources, both ancient and modern, which I have consulted inthe preparation of this volume have been cited, but I must here acknowledgethe special debt I owe to the late Dr. Hodgkin, to Professor Diehl, toDr. Corrado Ricci, and to the many contributors to the various ItalianBollettini which I have ransacked. 

E. H. 

_March_ 1913. 

CONTENTS

CHAP. 

I. THE GEOGRAPHICAL AND POLITICAL POSITION OF RAVENNA

II. JULIUS CAESAR IN RAVENNA

III. RAVENNA IN THE TIME OF THE EMPIRE

IV. THE RETREAT UPON RAVENNA Honorius and Galla Placidia

V. THE FALL OF THE EMPIRE IN THE WEST

VI. THEODORIC

VII. THE RECONQUEST Vitiges, Belisarius, Totila, Narses

VIII. MODICA QUIES The Pragmatic Sanction and the Settlement of Italy

IX. THE CITADEL OF THE EMPIRE IN ITALY The Lombard Invasion

X. THE PAPAL STATE Pepin and Charlemagne

XI. THE CATHOLIC CHURCHES OF THE FIFTH CENTURY The Cathedral, Baptistery, Arcivescovado, S. Agata, S. Pietro Maggiore, S. Giovanni Evangelista, S. Giovanni Battista, and the Mausoleum of Galla Placidia

XII. THE ARIAN CHURCHES OF THE SIXTH CENTURY The Palace of Theodoric, S. Apollinare Nuovo, S. Spirito, S. Maria in Cosmedin, the Mausoleum ofTheodoric

XII. THE BYZANTINE CHURCHES S. Vitale and S. Apollinare in Classe

XIV. RAVENNA IN THE MIDDLE AGE

XV. DANTE IN RAVENNA

XVI. MEDIAEVAL RAVENNA The Churches

XVII. RAVENNA IN THE RENAISSANCE The Battle of 1512

XVIII. RENAISSANCE RAVENNA Churches and Palaces

XIX. THE GALLERY AND THE MUSEUM

XX. THE PINETA

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

COLOURED PLATES

S. APOLLINARE NUOVO

S. AGATA

THE MAUSOLEUM OF THEODORIC

S. VITALE: THE GALLERY

S. GIOVANNI EVANGELISTA

THE MAUSOLEUM OF GALLA PLACIDIA

S. VITALE: THE PRESBYTERY

S. GIOVANNI BATTISTA

S. MARIA IN PORTO

PORTA SERRATA

LINE DRAWINGS

SKETCH MAP

SKETCH MAP

SKETCH MAP

GREEK RELIEF FROM A TEMPLE OF NEPTUNE

SARCOPHAGUS OF THE EMPEROR HONORIUS

THE APSE OF S. GIOVANNI EVANGELISTA

THE MAUSOLEUM OF GALLA PLACIDIA

CAPITAL FROM THE COLONNADE IN PIAZZA MAGGIORE

S. APOLLINARE IN CLASSE

CAPITAL FROM S. VITALE

CAPITAL FROM SANTO SPIRITO

SKETCH MAP

SKETCH MAP OF CITIES IN IMPERIAL HANDS

SKETCH MAP SHOWING NARSES' MARCH TO MEET TOTILA

SKETCH MAP

THE SARCOPHAGUS OF THE EXARCH ISAAC

GUARDHOUSE OF THE PALACE OF THEODORIC

THE CATHEDRAL (_Basilica Ursiana_)

THE BAPTISTERY AND CAMPANILE OF THE CATHEDRAL

THE CAMPANILE OF S. GIOVANNI EVANGELISTA

S. VITALE

CAPITAL FROM S. VITALE

INTERIOR OF S. APOLLINARE IN CLASSE

CAPITAL FROM S. VITALE

THE CAMPANILE OF S. APOLLINARE

CASA POLENTANA

DANTE'S TOMB

CAMPANILE OF S. FRANCESCO

INTERIOR OF S. MARIA IN PORTO FUORI

TORRE DEL COMUNE

PORTAL OF S. GIOVANNI EVANGELISTA

ROCCA VENIZIANA

MONUMENT OF GASTON DE FOIX

THE CLOISTER OF S. GIOVANNI EVANGELISTA

THE PINETA

THE PINETA

TO PORTO CORSINI

PLAN OF RAVENNA _see front end paper_

[Illustration: Colour Plate S. APOLLINARE NUOVO]

RAVENNA

A STUDY

I

THE GEOGRAPHICAL AND POLITICAL POSITION OF RAVENNA

Upon the loneliest and most desolate shore of Italy, where the vastmonotony of the Emilian plain fades away at last, almostimperceptibly, into the Adrian Sea, there stands, half abandoned inthat soundless place, and often wrapt in a white shroud of mist, acity like a marvellous reliquary, richly wrought, as is meet, beautiful with many fading colours, and encrusted with preciousstones: its name is Ravenna. 

It stands there laden with the mysterious centuries as with halfbarbaric jewels, weighed down with the ornaments of Byzantium, rigid, hieratic, constrained; and however you come to it, whether from Riminiby the lost and forgotten towns of Classis and Caesarea, or fromFerrara through all the bitter desolation of Comacchio, or across theendless marsh from Bologna or Faenza, its wide and empty horizons, itsastonishing silence, and the difficulty of every approach will seem toyou but a fitting environment for a place so solitary and soimperious. 

For this city of mute and closed churches, where imperishable mosaicsglisten in the awful damp, and beautiful pillars of most preciousmarbles gleam through a humid mist, of mausoleums empty butindestructible, of tottering _campanili_, of sumptuous splendour andincredible decay, is the sepulchre of the great civilisation whichChristianity failed to save alive, but to which we owe everything andout of which we are come; the only monument that remains to us ofthose confused and half barbaric centuries which lie between Antiquityand the Middle Age. 

Mysteriously secured by nature and doubly so after the failure of theRoman administration, Ravenna was the death-bed of the empire and itstomb. To her the emperor Honorius fled from Milan in the first yearsof the fifth century; within her walls Odoacer dethroned the lastemperor of the West, founded a kingdom, and was in his turn supplantedby Theodoric the Ostrogoth. It was from her almost impregnableisolation that the attempt was made by Byzantium--it seemed andperhaps it was our only hope--to reconquer Italy and the West forcivilisation; while her fall before the appalling Lombard onset in theeighth century brought Pepin into Italy in 754, to lay the foundationof a new Christendom, to establish the temporal power of the papacy, and to prophesy of the resurrection of the empire, of the unity ofEurope. 

But though it is as the imperishable monument of those tragiccenturies that we rightly look upon Ravenna: before the empire wasfounded she was already famous. It was from her silence that Caesaremerged to cross the Rubicon and all unknowing to found what, when allis said, was the most beneficent, as it was the most universal, government that Europe has ever known. In the first years of thatgovernment Ravenna became, and through the four hundred years of itsunhampered life she remained, one of its greatest bulwarks. While uponits failure, as I have said, she suddenly assumed a position which forsome three hundred and fifty years was unique not only in Italy but inEurope. And when with the re-establishment of an universal governmenther importance declined and at length passed away, she yet lived on inthe minds and the memory of men as something fabulous and still, curiously enough, as a refuge, the refuge of the great poet of the newage; so that to-day, beside the empty tombs of Galla Placidia andTheodoric, there stands the great sarcophagus which holds the dust ofDante Alighieri. 

We may well ask how it was that a city so solitary, so inaccessible, and so remote should have played so great a part in the history ofEurope. It is to answer this question that I have set myself to writethis book, which is rather an essay _in memoriam_ of her greatness, her beauty, and her forlorn hope, than a history properly so called ofRavenna. But if we are to come to any real understanding of what shestood for, of what she meant to us once upon a time, we must first ofall decide for ourselves what was the fundamental reason of her greatrenown. I shall maintain in this book that the cause of her greatness, of her opportunity for greatness, was always the same, namely, hergeographical position in relation to the peninsula of Italy, theCisalpine plain, and the sea. Let us then consider these things. 

Italy, the country we know as Italy, properly understood, isfundamentally divided into two absolutely different parts by a greatrange of mountains, the Apennines, which stretches roughly from sea tosea, from Genoa almost but not quite to Rimini. 

The country which lies to the south of that line of mountains is Italyproper, and it consists as we know of a long narrow mountainouspeninsula, while its history throughout antiquity may be said to bealtogether Roman. 

What lies to the north of the Apennines is not Italy at all, butCisalpine Gaul. 

In its nature this country is altogether continental. It consists forthe most part of a vast plain divided from west to east by a greatriver, the Po, and everywhere it is watered and nourished by its twohundred tributaries. 

Shut off as it is on the south from Italy proper by the Apennines, this plain is defended from Gaul and the Germanics, on the west andthe north, by the mightiest mountains in Europe, the Alps, which hereenclose it in a vast concave rampart that stretches from theMediterranean to the Adriatic. On the east it is contained by the sea. 

[Illustration: Sketch Map of northern Italy]

The history of this vast country before the Roman Conquest is, as ishistory everywhere in the West before that event, vague and obscure. But this at least may be said: it was first in the occupation of theEtruscans, who in time were turned out, destroyed, or enslaved by theGauls, those invaders who crossed the Alps from the west and whoduring nearly two hundred years, continually, though never with anenduring success, invaded Italy, and in 388 B. C. Actually captured theCity. Rome, however, had by the year 223 B. C. Succeeded in plantingher fortresses at Placentia and Cremona and in fortifying Mutina(Modena), when suddenly in 218 B. C. Hannibal unexpectedly descendedinto the Cisalpine plain and destroyed all she had achieved. With hisdefeat, however, the conquest of Cisalpine Gaul was undertaken anew, and at some time after 183 B. C. --we do not know exactly when--thewhole of this vast lowland country passed into Roman administration, to become the chief province of Caesar's great triple command, and oneof the most valuable parts of the empire. 

What, then, is the relation of this vast lowland country between theAlps and the Apennines to Italy proper? It stands as it has alwaysstood to her as a great defence. For if, as we must, we consider Italyas the shrine, the sanctuary, and the citadel of Europe, a place apartand separate--and because of this she has been able to do her workboth secular and religious--what has secured her but Cisalpine Gaul?The valley of the Po, all this vast plain, appears in history as thecockpit of Europe, the battlefield of the Celt, the Phoenician, theLatin, and the Teuton, of Catholic and Arian, strewn with victories, littered with defeats, the theatre of those great wars which havebuilt up Europe and the modern world. If the Gauls had not been brokenby the plain, they would perhaps have overwhelmed Italy and Rome; ifHannibal had found there enemies instead of friends, the Orientalwould not so nearly have overthrown Europe. It broke the Gothicinvasion, Attila never crossed it, it absorbed the worst of theappalling Lombard flood; Italy remains to us because of it. 

Now since Cisalpine Gaul thus secured Italy, the entry from the one tothe other, the road between them must always have been of an immenseimportance. That entry and that road, whenever they were in dispute, Ravenna commanded, and a good half of her importance lies in this. 

I say whenever they were in dispute: in time of peace that road andthat entry were not in the keeping of Ravenna but of Rimini. 

A study of the map will show us that though the Apennines shut offItaly proper from Cisalpine Gaul along a line roughly from Genoa toRimini, actually that difficult and barren range just fails to reachthe Adriatic as it curves southward to divide the peninsula in itsentire length into two not unequal parts. This failure of themountains quite to reach the sea leaves at this corner a narrow stripof lowland, of marshy plain in fact, between them. Therefore theRomans, though they were compelled to cross the Apennines, for Romelay upon their western side, were able to do so where they chose andnot of necessity to make the difficult passage at a crucial point. 

[Illustration: Sketch Map of Ravenna region]

The road they planned and laid out, the Flaminian Way, the great northroad of the Romans, was built by Caius Flaminius the Censor about 220B. C. [1], that is to say, immediately after the first subjection of theGauls south of the Po which had been largely his achievement, and formilitary and political business which that achievement entailed. Thisroad ran from Rome directly to Ariminum (Rimini) and it crossed theApennines near the modern Scheggia and by the great pass of theFurlo. [2]

[Footnote 1: It is, of course, certain that a road was in existencelong before; but not as a constructed, permanent, and military Way. ]

[Footnote 2: The Furlo was to be held in the time of Aurelius Victor, if not of Vespasian, by the fortress of Petra Pertusa. ]

The first act of the Romans after the defeat of Hannibal was there-establishment of their fortresses at Placentia, Cremona, and Mutina(Modena), the second was the construction of a great highway whichconnected Placentia through Mutina with the Via Flaminia at Rimini. This was the work of the Consul Aemilius Lepidus in 187 B. C. And theroad still bears his name. 

It is obvious then that the command of the way from Italy intoCisalpine Gaul, or _vice versa_, lay in the hands of Rimini, and it issignificant that the political boundary between them was here markedby a little river, the Rubicon, a few miles to the north of that city. The command which Rimini thus held was purely political; it passedfrom her to Ravenna automatically whenever that entry was threatened. Why?

The answer is very simple: because Rimini could not easily bedefended, while Ravenna was impregnable. 

Ravenna stood from fifteen to eighteen miles north and east of theAemilian Way and some thirty-one miles north and a little west ofRimini. Its extraordinary situation was almost unique in antiquity andis only matched by one city of later times--Venice. It was built asVenice is literally upon the waters. Strabo thus describes it:"Situated in the marshes is the great Ravenna, built entirely onpiles, and traversed by canals which you cross by bridges orferry-boats. At the full tides it is washed by a considerable quantityof sea water, as well as by the river, and thus the sewage is carriedoff and the air purified; in fact, the district is considered sosalubrious that the (Roman) governors have selected it as a spot inwhich to bring up and exercise the gladiators. It is a remarkablepeculiarity of this place that, though situated in the midst of amarsh, the air is perfectly innocuous. "[1]

[Footnote 1: Strabo, v. I. 7, tells us Altinum was similarlysituated. ]

[Illustration: Sketch Map or Ravenna region in more detail]

Ravenna must always have been impregnable to any save a modern army, so long as it was able to hold the road in and out and was not takenfrom the sea. The one account we have of an attack upon it before thefall of the empire is given us by Appian and recounts a raid from thesea. It is but an incident in the civil wars of Marius and Sulla whenRavenna, we learn, was occupied for the latter by Metellus hislieutenant. In the year 82 B. C. , says Appian, "Sulla overcame adetachment of his enemies near Saturnia, and Metellus sailed roundtoward Ravenna and took possession of the level wheat-growing countryof Uritanus. "

This impregnable city, the most southern of Cisalpine Gaul, immediately commanded the pass between Cisalpine Gaul and Italydirectly that pass was threatened, and to this I say was due a goodhalf of its fame. The rest must be equally divided between the factthat the city was impregnable, and therefore a secure refuge or _pointd'appui_, and its situation upon the sea. 

Strabo in his account of Ravenna, which I have quoted above, emphasises the fact rather of its situation among the marshes than ofits position with regard to the sea. This is perhaps natural. Thesociety to which he belonged (though indeed he was of Greek descent)loathed and feared the sea with an unappeasable horror. No journey wastoo long to make if thereby the sea passage might be avoided, no roadtoo rough and rude if to take it was to escape the unstable winds andwaters. That too was a part of Ravenna's strength. She was as much acity of the sea as Venice is; but of what a sea?

The Adriatic, upon whose western shore she stood at the gate of Italyand Cisalpine Gaul, was--and this partly because of the Roman horrorof the sea--the fault between Greek and Latin, East and West. To thisgreat fact she owes much of her later splendour, much of her uniqueimportance in those centuries we call the Dark Age. 

Even to-day as one stands upon the height of the republic of S. Marinoand catches, faintly at dawn, the sunlight upon the Dalmatian hills, one instinctively feels it is the Orient one sees. 

This, then, is the cause of the greatness, of the opportunity forgreatness, of Ravenna: her geographical position in regard to thepeninsula of Italy, the Cisalpine plain, and the sea. Each of theseexalt her in turn and all together give her the unique and almostfabulous position she holds in the history of Europe. 

Because she held the gateway between Italy and the Cisalpine plain, Caesar repaired to her when he was treating with the Senate for theconsulship, and from her he set out to possess himself of all thatgreat government. 

Because she was impregnable, and held both the plain where the enemymust be met and the peninsula with Rome within it, Honorius retreatedto her from Milan when Alaric crossed the Alps. 

Because she was set upon the sea, and that sea was the fault betweenEast and West, and because she held the key as it were of all Italyand through Italy of the West, Justinian there established hisgovernment when the great attempt was made by Byzantium to reconquerus from the barbarian. 

"_Ravenna Felix_" we read on many an old coin of that time, andwhatever we may think of that title or prophecy, which indeed mightseem never to have come true for her, this at least we mustacknowledge, that she was happy in her situation which offered suchopportunities for greatness and so certain an immortality. 

II

JULIUS CAESAR IN RAVENNA

When we first come upon Ravenna in the pages of Strabo, its origin isalready obscured; but this at least seems certain, that it was never aGaulish city. Strabo tells us that "Ravenna is reputed to have beenfounded by Thessalians, who, not being able to sustain the violence ofthe Tyrrheni, welcomed into their city some of the Umbri who stillpossess it, while they themselves returned home. "[1] The Thessalianswere probably Pelasgi, but apart from that Strabo's statement wouldseem to be reasonably accurate. At any rate he continually repeats it, for he goes on to tell us that "Ariminum (Rimini), like Ravenna, is anancient colony of the Umbri, but both of them received also Romancolonies. " Again, in the same book of his Geography, he tells us: "TheUmbri lie between the country of the Sabini and the Tyrrheni, butextend beyond the mountains as far as Ariminum and Ravenna. " And againhe says: "Umbria lies along the eastern boundary of Tyrrhenia andbeginning from the Apennines, or rather beyond these mountains(extends) as far as the Adriatic. For commencing from Ravenna theUmbri inhabit the neighbouring country ... All allow that Umbriaextends as far as Ravenna, as the inhabitants are Umbri. "

[Footnote 1: Strabo _ut supra_. ]

We may take it, then, that when Rome annexed Ravenna it was a city ofthe Umbri, and we may dismiss Pliny's statement[1] that it was aSabine city altogether for it is both improbable and inexplicable. 

[Footnote 1: Pliny, III. 15; v. 20. ]

When Ravenna received a Roman colony we do not know, for though Strabostates this fact, he does not tell us when it occurred and we have noother means of knowing. All we can be reasonably sure of is that thisUmbrian city on the verge of Cisalpine Gaul, hemmed in on the west bythe Lingonian Gauls, received a Roman colony certainly not before 268B. C. When Ariminum was occupied. The name of Ravenna, however, doesnot occur in history till a late period of the Roman republic, and thefirst incident in which we hear of Ravenna having any part occurs in82 B. C. , when, as I have already related, Metellus, the lieutenant ofSulla, landed there or thereabouts from his ships and seems to havemade the city, already a place of some importance, the centre of hisoperations. 

Ravenna really entered history--and surely gloriously enough--whenJulius Caesar chose it, the last great town of his command towardsItaly, as his headquarters while he treated with the senate before hecrossed the Rubicon. 

"Caesar, " says Appian, "had lately recrossed the straits from Britain, and, after traversing the Gallic country along the Rhine, had passedthe Alps with 5000 foot and 300 horse, and arrived at Ravenna whichwas contiguous to Italy and the last town in his government. " This wasin 50 B. C. The state of affairs which that act was meant to elucidatemay be briefly stated as follows. 

The Roman republic, still in the midst of the political, social, andeconomic revolution whose first phase was the awful civil wars ofMarius and Sulla, had long been at the mercy of Pompey theopportunist, Crassus the plutocrat, and Julius Caesar--the firstTriumvirate. Crassus had always leaned towards Caesar and the_entente_ between Caesar and Pompey had been strengthened by themarriage of the latter with Caesar's daughter Julia, who was to die inthe midst of the crisis 54 B. C. In 58 B. C. , the year following thismarriage, Caesar went to take up his great command in the Gauls, butPompey remained in Rome, where every day his influence and popularitywere failing while the astonishing successes of Caesar made him theidol of the populace. In 55 B. C. Pompey was consul for the second timewith Crassus. He received as his provinces the two Spains, but hegoverned them by his legates and remained in the neighbourhood of theCity. Crassus received the province of Syria, and the appallingdisasters of the Parthian war, in which he most miserably lost lifeand honour, seemed to give Pompey the opportunity for which he hadlong been waiting. He encouraged the growing civil discord which wastearing the state in pieces, and with such success that the senate wascompelled to call for his assistance. In 52 B. C. He became soleconsul, restored order, and placed himself at the head of thearistocratic party which he had deserted to become the great popularhero when he was consul with Crassus in 70 B. C. 

Now Caesar had long watched the astonishing actions of Pompey, and hadno intention of leaving the fate of the republic to him and thearistocracy. He does not seem to have wished to break altogether withPompey, but only to hold him in check. At his meeting with Pompey atLuca (Lucca) in 56 B. C. He had been promised the consulship for 48B. C. When his governorship came to an end, and he now determined toinsure the fulfilment of this promise which would place him upon alegal equality with his rival. For the rest he knew that he was assuperior to Pompey as a statesman as he was as a soldier, and he didnot apparently anticipate any difficulty in out-manoeuvring him in thesenate and in the forum. Caesar, then, claimed no more than anequality with Pompey and the fulfilment of his promise; but these hedetermined to have. All through the winter of 52-51 B. C. He wasarming. Well served by his friends, among whom were Mark Antony andCurio the tribunes, in 50 B. C. , "having gone the circuit for theadministration of justice, " as Suetonius tells us, "he made a halt atRavenna resolved to have recourse to arms if the senate should proceedto extremity against the tribunes of the people, who had espoused hiscause. " But first he determined for many reasons to send ambassadorsto Rome, to request the fulfilment of the promise made to him at Luca. Pompey, who was not yet at open enmity with him, determined, althoughhe had made the promise, neither to aid him by his influence noropenly to oppose him on this occasion. But the consuls Lentulus andMarcellus, who had always been his enemies, resolved to use all meansin their power to prevent him gaining his object. 

At this juncture Caius Curio, tribune of the people, came to Caesar inRavenna. Curio had made many energetic struggles in behalf of therepublic and Caesar's cause; but at last, when he perceived that allhis efforts were in vain, he fled through fear of his enemies andCaesar's to Ravenna and told Caesar all that had taken place; and, seeing that war was openly being prepared against Caesar, advised himto bring up his army and to rescue the republic. 

Now Caesar was not ignorant of the real state of affairs, but he wasperhaps not yet ready to act, or he hoped in fact to save the ancientstate; at any rate, he gave it as his opinion that particular regardshould be had to the tranquillity of the republic, lest any one shouldassert that he was the originator of civil war. Therefore he sentagain to his friends, making through them this very moderate request, that two legions and the provinces of Cisalpine Gaul and Illyricumshould be left him. No one could openly quarrel with such a reasonabledemand and the patience with which it was more than once put forward;for when Caesar could not obtain a favourable answer from the consuls, he wrote a letter to the senate in which he briefly recounted hisexploits and public services, and entreated that he should not bedeprived of the favour of the people who had ordered that he, althoughabsent, should be considered a candidate for the consulship at thenext election. He stated also that he would disband his army if thesenate and the Roman people desired it, provided that Pompey would dothe same. But he stated also that, as long as Pompey retained thecommand of his army, there could be no just reason why Caesar shoulddisband his troops and expose himself to the power of his enemies. 

This was Caesar's third offer to his opponents. He entrusted theletter to Curio, who travelled one hundred and sixty miles in threedays and reached the City early in January. He did not, however, deliver the letter until there was a crowded meeting of the senate andthe tribunes of the people were present; for he was afraid lest, if hegave it up without the utmost publicity, the consuls would suppressit. A sort of debate followed the reading of the letter, but whenScipio, Pompey's mouthpiece, spoke and declared, among other things, that Pompey was resolved to take up the cause of the senate now ornever, and that he would drop it if a decision were delayed, themajority, overawed, decreed that Caesar should "at a definite and notdistant day give up Transalpine Gaul to Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus, and Cisalpine Gaul to Marcus Servilius Nonianus and should dismiss hisarmy, failing which he should be esteemed a traitor. When thetribunes, of Caesar's party, made use of their right of veto againstthis resolution not only were they, as they at least asserted, threatened in the senate house itself by the swords of Pompeiansoldiers and forced, in order to save their lives, to flee in slaves'clothing from the capital, but the senate, now sufficiently overawed, treated their interference as an attempt at revolution, declared thecountry in danger, and in the usual form called the burgesses to takeup arms, and all the magistrates faithful to the constitution to placethemselves at the head of the armed. "

That was on January 7th. Five days later Caesar was on his way at thehead of his troops to invade Italy and, without knowing it, to foundthe empire, that universal government out of which we are come. 

It was with one legion[1] that Caesar undertook his great adventure. That legion, the Thirteenth, had been stationed near Tergeste(Trieste), but at Caesar's orders it had marched into Ravenna in thefirst days of January. Upon the fateful twelfth, with some secrecy, while Caesar himself attended a public spectacle, examined the modelof a fencing school, which he proposed to build, and, as usual, satdown to table with a numerous party of friends, [2] the first companiesof this legion left Ravenna by the Rimini gate, to be followed aftersunset by its great commander; still with all possible secrecy itseems, for mules were put to his carriage, a hired one, at a milloutside Ravenna and he went almost alone. 

[Footnote 1: Plutarch says "Caesar had not then with him more than 300horse and 5000 foot. The rest of his forces were left on the otherside of the Alps. "]

[Footnote 2: So Suetonius; but Plutarch says "As for himself, he spentthe day at a public show of gladiators, and a little before eveningbathed, and then went into the apartment, where he entertainedcompany. When it was growing dark, he left the company, having desiredthem to make merry till his return, which they would not have long towait for. "]

The road he travelled was not the great way to Rimini, but a by-wayacross the marshes, and it would seem to have been in a wretchedstate. At any rate Caesar lost his way, the lights of his littlecompany were extinguished, his carriage had to be abandoned, and itwas only after wandering about for a long time that, with the help ofa peasant whom he found towards daybreak, he was able to get on, afootnow, and at last to reach the great highway. That night must havetried even the iron nerves and dauntless courage of the greatestsoldier of all time. 

Caesar came up with his troops on the banks of the Rubicon, the sacredboundary of Italy and Cisalpine Gaul in the narrow pass between themountains and the sea. "There, " says Suetonius, whose account I havefollowed, "he halted for a while revolving in his mind the importanceof the step he was about to take. At last turning to those about him, he said: 'We may still retreat; but if we pass this little bridgenothing is left us but to fight it out in arms. '"

Now while he was thus hesitating, staggered, even he, by the greatnessof what he would attempt, doubtless resolving in silence arguments forand against it, and, if we may believe Plutarch, "many times changinghis opinion, " the following strange incident is said to have happened. 

A person, remarkable, says Suetonius, for his noble aspect andgraceful mien, appeared close at hand sitting by the wayside playingupon a pipe. When not only the shepherds herding their flocksthereabout, but a number of the legionaries also gathered round tohear this fellow play, and there happened to be among them sometrumpeters, the piper suddenly snatched a trumpet from one of these, ran to the river, and, sounding the advance with a piercing blast, crossed to the other side. Upon which Caesar on a sudden impulseexclaimed: "Let us go whither the omens of the gods and the iniquityof our enemies call us. The die is cast. " And immediately at the headof his troops he crossed the river and found awaiting him the tribunesof the people who, having fled from Rome, had come to meet him. Therein their presence he called upon the troops to pledge him theirfidelity, with tears in his eyes, Suetonius assures us, and hisgarments rent from his bosom. And when he had received their oath heset out, and with his legion marched so fast the rest of the way thathe reached Ariminum before morning and took it. 

The fall of Ariminum was but a presage, as we know, of Caesar'striumph. In three months he was master of all Italy. From Ravenna hehad emerged to seize the lordship of the world, and out of a misery ofchaos to create Europe. 

III

RAVENNA IN THE TIME OF THE EMPIRE

That great revolutionary act of Julius Caesar's may be said to havemade manifest, and for the first time, the unique position of Ravennain relation to Italy and Cisalpine Gaul. In the years which followed, that position remained always unchanged, and is, indeed, moreprominent than ever in the civil wars between Antony and Octavianuswhich followed Caesar's murder; but with the establishment of theempire by Octavianus and the universal peace, the _pax romana_, whichit ensured, this position of Ravenna in relation to Italy and toCisalpine Gaul sank into insignificance in comparison with her otherunique advantage, her position upon the sea. For Octavianus, as weshall see, established her as the great naval port of Italy upon theeast, and as such she chiefly appears to us during all the years ofthe unhampered government of the empire. 

In the civil wars between Antony and Octavianus, however, she appearsstill as the key to the narrow pass between Italy and Cisalpine Gaul. Let us consider this for a moment. 

Antony, as we know, after that great scene in the senate house whenthe supporters of Pompey and the aristocrats had succeeded in denyingCaesar everything, had fled to Caesar at Ravenna. In the war whichfollowed he had been Caesar's chief lieutenant and friend. At thecrucial battle of Pharsalus in 48 B. C. He had commanded, and withgreat success, the left wing. In 44 B. C. He had been consul withCaesar and had then offered him the crown at the festival of the_Lupercalia_. After Caesar's murder he had attempted, and not withouta sort of right, to succeed to his power. It was he who pronounced thespeech over Caesar's body and read his will to the people. It was hewho obtained Caesar's papers and his private property. It cannot thenhave been without resentment and surprise that he found presently arival in the young Octavianus, the great-nephew and adopted son of thedictator, who joined the senate with the express purpose of crushinghim. 

Now Antony, perhaps remembering his master, had obtained from thesenate the promise of Cisalpine Gaul, then in the hands of DecimusBrutus, who, encouraged by Octavianus, refused to surrender it to him. Antony proceeded to Ariminum (Rimini), but Octavianus seized Ravennaand supplied it both with stores and money. [1] Antony was beaten andcompelled to retreat across the Alps. In these acts we may see whichof the two rivals understood the reality of things, and from thisalone we might perhaps foresee the victor. 

[Footnote 1: Appian, III. 42. ]

That was in 44 B. C. A reconciliation between the rivals followed andthe government was vested in them and in Lepidus under the title of_Triumviri Reipublicae Constituendae_ for five years. In 42 B. C. Brutus and Cassius and the aristocratic party were crushed by Antonyand Octavianus at Philippi; and Antony received Asia as his share ofthe Roman world. Proceeding to his government in Cilicia, Antony metCleopatra and followed her to Egypt. Meanwhile Fulvia, his wife, andL. Antonius, his brother, made war upon Octavianus in Italy, for theylike Antony hoped for the lordship of the world. In the war whichfollowed, Ravenna played a considerable part. In 41 B. C. , forinstance, the year in which the war opened, the Antonine party securedthemselves in Ravenna, not only because of its strategical importancein regard to Italy and Cisalpine Gaul, but also because as a seaportit allowed of their communication with Antony in Egypt from whom theyexpected support. All this exposed and demonstrated more and more theimportance of Ravenna, and we may be sure that the wise and astuteOctavianus marked it. 

But it was the war with Sextus Pompeius which clearly showed what thefuture of Ravenna was to be. In that affair we find Ravenna alreadyestablished as a naval port apparently subsidiary, on that coast, toBrundusium, as Misenum was upon the Tyrrhene sea to Puteoli; and thereOctavianus built ships. 

It was not, however, till Octavianus, his enemies one and all disposedof, had made himself emperor at last, that, on the establishment andgeneral regulation of his great government, he chose Ravenna as themajor naval port of Italy upon the east, even as he chose Misenum uponthe west. 

Octavianus had learned two things, certainly, in the wars he hadfought to establish himself in the monarchy his great-uncle hadfounded. He had learned the necessity and the value of sea power, andhe had understood the unique position of Ravenna in relation to theEast and the West. That he had been able to appreciate both thesefacts is enough to mark him as the great man he was. 

Julius Caesar, for all his mighty grasp of reality, had not perceivedthe enormous value, nay the necessity, of sea power, and because ofthis failure his career had been twice nearly cut short; at Ilerda, where the naval victory of Decimus Brutus over the Massiliots alonesaved him; and at Alexandria. Both the liberators and Antony hadpossessed ships; but both had failed to use them with any real effect. It was Sextus Pompeius who forced Octavianus to turn to the sea, andwhen Octavianus became Augustus he did not forget the lesson. Solemaster of the Mediterranean and of all its ships of war, he understoodat once how great a support sea power offered him and his principate. Nor was the empire, while it was vigorous, though always fearful ofand averse from the sea, ever to forget the power that lay in thatcommand. 

Thus it was that among the first acts of Augustus was theestablishment of two fleets, as we might say, "in being" in theMediterranean; the fleet of Misenum and the fleet of Ravenna; thelatter with stations probably at Aquileia, Brundusium, the Piraeus, and probably elsewhere. 

The fleet of Ravenna was, certainly after A. D. 70, probably about A. D. 127, entitled _Praetoria_. The origin of this title is unknown, but itwas also borne by the fleet of Misenum and it distinguishes theItalian from the later Provincial fleets, the former being in closerrelation to the emperor, just as the Praetorian cohorts weredistinguished from the legions. 

The emperor was, of course, head of all the fleets, which were, eachof them, commanded by a prefect and sub-prefect appointed by him; andif we may judge from the recorded promotions we have, it would seemthat the Misenate prefect ranked before the Ravennate and both beforethe Provincial. But in the general military system the navy stoodlowest in respect of pay and position. The fleets were manned by freedmen and foreigners who could not obtain citizenship until aftertwenty-six years' service. We find Claudius employing the marines ofthe _Classis Ravennas_ to drain lake Fucinus, and it was probablyVespasian who formed the Legion II. _Adjutrix_ from the Ravennate, even as Nero had formed Legion I. _Adjutrix_ from the Misenatemarines. 

The Ravenna that Augustus thus chose to be the great base and port ofhis fleet in the eastern sea was, as we have seen, a place built uponpiles in the midst of the marshes, impregnable from the land, and, because impregnable, able, whenever it was in dispute, to command thenarrow pass between the mountains and the sea that was the gate ofItaly and Cisalpine Gaul. Such a place, situated as it was upon thewestern shore of that sea which was the fault between East and West, was eminently suitable for the great purpose of the emperor. Pliny[1]indeed would seem to tell us that from time immemorial Ravenna hadpossessed a small port; but such a place, well enough for the smalltraders of those days, could not serve usefully the requirements of agreat fleet. Therefore the first act of Augustus, when he had chosenRavenna as his naval base, was the construction of a proper port andharbour, and these came to be named, after the fleet they served andaccommodated, Classis. Classis was situated some two and a half milesfrom the town of Ravenna to the east-south-east. We may perhaps havesome idea both of its situation and of its relation to Ravenna if wesay that it was to that city what the Porto di Lido is to Venice. 

[Footnote 1: Pliny, iii. 20; cf. Also Strabo, v. 7. ]

It is very difficult, in looking upon Ravenna as we see it to-day, toreconstruct it, even in the imagination, as it was when Augustus haddone with it. To begin with, the sea has retreated several miles fromthe city, which is no longer within sight of it, while all that isleft of Classis, which is also now out of sight of the sea, is asingle decayed and deserted church, S. Apollinare in Classe. Strabo, however, who wrote his _Geography_ a few years after Augustus hadchosen Ravenna for his port upon the Adriatic, has left us adescription both of it and the country in which it stood, from whichmust be drawn any picture we would possess of so changed a place. Hespeaks of it, as we have seen, as "a great city" situated in themarshes, built entirely upon piles, and traversed by canals which wereeverywhere crossed by bridges or ferry-boats. While at the full tidehe tells us it was swept by the sea and always by the river, and thusthe sewage was carried off and the air purified, and this sothoroughly, that even before its establishment by Augustus thedistrict was considered so healthy that the Roman governors had chosenit as a spot in which to train gladiators. [1] That river we know fromPliny[2] was called the Bedesis; and the same writer tells us thatAugustus built a canal which brought the water of the Po to Ravenna. 

[Footnote 1: Strabo, v. 7. ]

[Footnote 2: Pliny, iii. 20. ]

Tacitus in his _Annals_[1] merely tells us that Italy was guarded onboth sides by fleets at Misenum and Ravenna, and in his _Histories_[2]speaks of these places as the well known naval stations withoutstopping to describe them. While Suetonius, [3] though he mentions thegreat achievement of Augustus, does not emphasise it and does notattempt to tell us what these ports were like. 

[Footnote 1: Tacitus, Ann. Iv. 5. ]

[Footnote 2: Tacitus, Hist. Ii. 100; iii. 6, 40. ]

[Footnote 3: Suetonius, _Augustus_. ]

Perhaps the best description we have of Augustan Ravenna comes to usfrom a writer who certainly never saw the port in its great Romandays, but who probably followed a well established tradition in hisdescription of it. This is Jornandes, who was born about A. D. 500 andwas first a notary at the Ostrogothic court and later became a monkand finally bishop of Crotona. In his _De Getarum Origins et RebusGestis_ he thus describes Ravenna:

"This city (says he) between the marshes, the sea, and the Po is onlyaccessible on one side. Situated beside the Ionian Sea it issurrounded and almost submerged by lagoons. On the east is the sea, onthe west it is defended by marshes across which there remains a narrowpassage, a kind of gate. The city is encircled on the north by abranch of the Po, called the Fossa Asconis, and on the south by the Poitself, which is called the Eridanus, and which is there known as theKing of Rivers. Augustus deepened its bed and made it larger; itflowed quite through the city, and its mouth formed an excellent portwhere once, as Dion reports [this passage of Dion Cassius is lost], afleet of 250 ships could be stationed in all security.... The city hasthree names with which she glorifies herself and she is divided intothree parts to which they correspond; the first is Ravenna, the lastClassis, that in the midst is Caesarea between Ravenna and the sea. Built on a sandy soil this quarter is easily approached and iscommodiously situated for trade and transport. "

We thus have a picture of Ravenna as a triune city, consisting ofRavenna proper, the port Classis, and the long suburb between them, Caesarea, connected by a great causeway and everywhere watered bycanals, the greatest of which was the Fossa Augusta by which a part ofthe waters of the Po were carried to Ravenna and thence to Classis andthe sea; a city very much, we may suppose, what we know Venice to be, if we think of her in connection with the Riva, the great suburb ofthe Marina, and the Porto di Lido. At Classis we must understand therewas room for a fleet of two hundred and fifty ships and accommodationfor arsenals, magazines, barracks, and so forth, while there is oneother thing we know of this port, and that from Pliny, [1] who tells usthat it had a Pharos like the famous one of Alexandria. "There isanother building (says he) that is highly celebrated, the tower thatwas built by a king of Egypt on the island of Pharos at the entranceto the harbour of Alexandria.... At present there are similar fireslighted up in numerous places, Ostia and Ravenna for example. The onlydanger is that when these fires are thus kept burning withoutintermission they may be mistaken for stars. "

[Footnote 1: Pliny xxx. Vi. 18]

Such was the splendour of Ravenna in the time of Augustus. Hisachievement so far as Ravenna was concerned was to understand herimportance not only in regard to Italy and Cisalpine Gaul, animportance already discounted by the universal peace he hadestablished, but in regard to the sea. He turned Ravenna into afirst-class naval port and based his eastern fleet upon her; and thiswas so wise an act that, so long as the empire remained strong andunhampered, Ravenna appears as the great base of its sea power in theEast. 

In that long peace which Italy enjoyed under the empire we hear littleof Ravenna. We know Claudius built a great gate called Porta Aurea, which was only destroyed in 1582; and we know that the great sea porthad one weakness, the scarcity of good water for drinking purposes. Martial writes

 "I'd rather at Ravenna have a cistern than a vine Since I could sell my water there much better than my wine, "

and again:

 "That landlord at Ravenna is plainly but a cheat I paid for wine and water, but he served wine to me neat"[1]

[Footnote 1: Martial, _Fp_ iii. 56, 57. Trs Hodgkin]

This weakness would seem, however, to have been overcome by Trajan, who built an aqueduct nearly twenty miles long, which Theodoricrestored, after the fall of the empire, in 524. This aqueduct, ofwhich some arches remain in the bed of the Bedesis (Ronco), seems tohave run, following the course of the river, from near Forli, wherethere still remains a village called S. Maria in Acquedotto, toRavenna. 

[Illustration: GREEK RELIEF FROM A TEMPLE OF NEPTUNE]

The great city-port thus became one of the most important andconsiderable of the cities of Italy, at a time when the whole of theWest was rapidly increasing in wealth and population, and especiallythe old province of Cisapline Gaul, which had indeed become, duringthe _pax romana_, the richest part of the new Italy. Always animportant military port it was often occupied by the emperors as theirheadquarters from which to watch and to oppose the advance of theirenemies into Italy, and the possessor of it, for the reasons I haveset forth, was always in a commanding position. Thus in A. D. 193 itwas the surrender of Ravenna without resistance that gave the empireto Septimius Severus, when, scarcely allowing himself time for sleepor food, marching on foot and in complete armour, he crossed the Alpsat the head of his columns to punish the wretched Didius Julianus andto avenge Pertinax. It was there in 238 that Pupienus was busyassembling his army to oppose Maximin when he received the news of thedeath of his enemy before Aquileia. 

And because it was impregnable and secluded it was often chosen too asa place of imprisonment for important prisoners. 

It is true that we know very little, in detail, of the life of anycity other than Rome during those years of the great Peace in which wesee the empire change from a Pagan to a Christian state. Thosecenturies which saw Christendom slowly emerge, in which Europe wasfounded, still lack a modern historian, and the magnitude andsplendour of their achievement are too generally misconceived orignored. We are largely unaware still of what they were in themselvesand of what we owe to them. By reason of the miserable collapse ofEurope, of Christendom, in the sixteenth century and its appallingresults both in thought and in politics, we are led, too often byprejudices, to regard those mighty years rather as the prelude to thedecline and fall of the empire than as the great and indestructiblefoundations of all that is still worth having in the world. 

For rightly understood those centuries gave us not only our culture, our civilisation, and our Faith, but ensured them to us that theyshould always endure. They established for ever the great lines uponwhich our art was to develop, to change, and yet not to sufferannihilation or barrenness. They established the supremacy of theidea, so that it might always renew our lives, our culture, and ourpolity, and that we might judge everything by it and fear neitherrevolution, defeat, nor decay. They, and they alone, established us inthe secure possession of our own souls so that we alone in the worldmight develop from within, to change but never to die, and to be--yes, alone in the world--Christians. 

The almost incredible strength and well being of those years must beseized also. There was not a town in Italy and the West that did notexpand and increase in a fashion almost miraculous during that period. It was then the rivers were embanked, the canals made, the great roadsplanned and constructed, and our communications established for ever. There was no industry that did not grow marvellously in strength, there is not a class that did not increase in wealth and well-beingbeyond our dreams of progress. There is scarcely anything that isreally fundamental in our lives that was not then created that itmight endure. It was then our religion, the soul of Europe, was born. 

Christianity, the Faith, which, little by little, absorbed the empire, till it became the energy and the cause of all that undying butchangeful principle of life and freedom which rightly understood isEurope, is thought to have been brought first to Ravenna by S. Apollinaris, a disciple as we are told of S. Peter, who made him herfirst bishop. So at least his acts assert; and though little credencemay, I fear, be placed in them, that he was the first bishop ofRavenna, and in the time of S. Peter, is not at variance with what weknow of that age, is attested by the traditions of the city, and issupported by later authorities. S. Peter Chrysologus (_c_. 440), themost famous of his successors, for instance, assures us of it. Thisgreat churchman calls S. Apollinaris martyr, and in that there isnothing strange, but he asserts that though he often spilt his bloodfor the Faith, yet God preserved him a long time, not less than twentyyears, to his church, and that his persecution did not take away hislife. [1]

[Footnote 1: His relics lay for many years in the church dedicated inhis honour at Classis; but in 549 they were removed from their greattomb and placed in a more secret spot in the same church. Cf. Agnellus. _Liber Pontificalis Ecclesiae Ravennatis_ (Ed. Holder--Eggerin _Monumenta Germanicae Historica_) and S. Peter Chrysologus, Sermon128 in Migne. ]

The empire which it had taken more than a millenium to build, whichwas the most noble and perhaps the most beneficient experiment ingovernment that has ever been made, was in obvious economic andadministrative decay by the middle of the fourth century. Christianityperhaps was already undermining the servile state, which in its effortof self-preservation adopted an economic system hopelessly at variancewith the facts of the situation; while the weakness of its frontiersoffered a military problem which the empire was unable to face. Diocletian had attempted to solve it by dividing the empire, but thedivision he made was rather racial that strategic, for under it thetwo parts of the empire, East and West, met on the Danube. The easternpart, by force of geography, was inclined to an Asiatic point of viewand to the neglect of the Danube; the western was by no means strongenough either financially or militarily to hold that tremendous line. 

We read, in the letters of S. Ambrose among others, of the decay ofthe great cities of Cisalpine Gaul, [1] of the failure of agriculturein that rich countryside, of the poverty and misery that wereeverywhere falling upon that great state. It is possible that in thegeneral weakening of administrative power even the roads, the canals, the whole system of communications were allowed to become less perfectthan they had been; everywhere there was a retreat. The frontiers wereno longer inviolate, and it is probable that in the general decay theport of Classis, the city of Ravenna, suffered not less than theirneighbours. 

[Footnote 1: See S. Ambrose, _Ep_. 39, written in 388, quoted byMuratori, _Dissertazioni_, vol. I. 21. "De Bonomensi veniens Urbe, atergo Claternam, ipsam Bononiam, Mutinam, Regium derelinquebas; indextera erat Brixillum; a fronte occurrebat Placentia.... Te igitursemirutarum Urbium cadavera, terrarumque sub eodem conspectu expositafunera non te admonent.... "]

Indeed already in 306 it is rather as a refuge than as a great andactive naval base that Ravenna appears to us, when Severus, destituteof force, "retired or rather fled" thither from the pursuit ofMaximian. He flung himself into Ravenna because it was impregnable andbecause he expected reinforcements from Illyricum and the East, butthough he held the sea with a powerful fleet he made no use of it, andthe emissaries of Maximian easily persuaded him to surrender. Alreadyperhaps, a century later, when Honorius retired from Milan on theapproach of Alaric and the first of those barbarian invasions whichbroke up the decaying western empire had penetrated into CisalpineGaul, the great works of Augustus and Trajan at Ravenna, the canals, the mighty Fossa, and the port itself had fallen into a sort of decaywhich the fifth century was to complete, till that marvellous city, once the base of the eastern fleet and one of the great naval ports ofthe world, became just a decaying citadel engulfed in the marshes, impregnable it is true, but for barbarian reasons, lost in the fogsand the miasma of her shallow and undredged lagoons. 

IV

THE RETREAT UPON RAVENNA

HONORIUS AND GALLA PLACIDIA

When Honorius left Milan on the approach of Alaric he went to Ravenna. Why?

Gibbon, whom every writer since has followed without question, tellsus, in one of his most scornful passages, that "the emperor Honoriuswas distinguished, above his subjects, by the pre-eminence of fear, aswell as of rank. The pride and luxury in which he was educated had notallowed him to suspect that there existed on the earth any powerpresumptuous enough to invade the repose of the successor of Augustus. The acts of flattery concealed the impending danger till Alaricapproached the palace of Milan. But when the sound of war had awakenedthe young emperor, instead of flying to arms with the spirit, or eventhe rashness, of his age, he eagerly listened to those timidcounsellors who proposed to convey his sacred person and his faithfulattendants to some secure and distant station in the provinces ofGaul.... The recent danger to which the person of the emperor had beenexposed in the defenceless palace of Milan urged him to seek a retreatin some inaccessible fortress of Italy, where he might securely remainwhile the open country was covered by a deluge of barbarians. "

No historian of Ravenna, and certainly no writer upon the fall of theempire, has cared to understand what Ravenna was. Gibbon complainsthat he lacks "a local antiquarian and a good topographical map;" yetit is not so much the lack of local knowledge that leads himunreservedly to censure Honorius for his retreat upon Ravenna, as thefact that he has not perhaps really grasped what Ravenna was, what washer relation to Italy and Cisalpine Gaul, and especially how she stoodto the sea, and what part that sea played in the geography andstrategy of the empire. 

For my part I shall maintain that, whatever may be the truth as to theprivate character of Honorius, which would indeed be difficult todefend, he was wisely advised by those counsellors who conceived hisretreat from Milan to Ravenna; that this retreat was not a mereflight, but a consummate and well thought out strategical andpolitical move, and that any other would have been for the worse andwould probably have involved the West in an utter destruction. 

Cisalpine Gaul, at this crisis, as always both before and since, wasthe great and proper defence of Italy; not the Alps nor the Apenninesbut Cisalpine Gaul broke the barbarians, and, in so far as it could bematerially saved, saved Italy and our civilisation, of which Rome wasthe soul. There Stilicho met Alaric and broke his first and worstenthusiasm; there Leo the Great turned back Attila; there the fiercestterror of the Lombard tide spent itself. 

Now, as we have seen, Cisalpine Gaul, in its relation to Italy, wasbest held and contained from Ravenna, which commanded, whenever it wasin danger, the narrow pass between them. Therefore the retreat ofHonorius upon Ravenna was a consummate strategical act, well advisedand such as we might expect from "the successor of Augustus. " Itsresults were momentous and entirely fortunate for Italy, and indeed, when the truth about Ravenna is once grasped, any other move wouldappear to have been craven and ridiculous. 

But there is something more that is of an even greater importance. 

The best hope of the West in its fight with the barbarian undoubtedlylay in its own virility and arms, but it had the right to expect thatin such a fight it would not be unaided by the eastern empire and thegreat civilisation whose capital was that New Rome upon the Bosphorus. If it was to receive such assistance, it must receive it at Ravenna, which held Cisalpine Gaul and was the gate of the eastern sea. 

When Honorius then retreated upon Ravenna, he did so, not merelybecause Ravenna was impregnable, though that of course weighed toowith his advisers, for the base of any virile and active defence must, or should, be itself secure; but also because it held the great passand the great road into Italy, and as the eastern gate of the Westwould receive and thrust forward whatever help and reinforcement theempire in the East might care or be able to give. 

[Illustration: SARCOPHAGUS OF THE EMPEROR HONORIUS]

That the defence which was made with Ravenna for its citadel was notwholly victorious, that the attack which the eastern empire plannedand delivered from Ravenna, perhaps too late, was not completelysuccessful, were the results of many and various causes, but not ofany want of Judgment in the choice of Ravenna as their base. That basewas rightly and consummately chosen without hesitation and from thefirst; and because it was chosen, the hope of the restoration neverquite passed away and seemed to have been realised at last whenCharlemagne, following Pepin into Italy, was crowned emperor in S. Peter's Church on Christmas Day in the year 800. 

It will readily be understood, then, that the most important and themost interesting part of the history of Ravenna begins when Honoriusretreated upon her before the invasion of Alaric, and not only theWest, but Italy and Rome, the heart and soul of it, seemed about to bein dispute. 

But first amid all the loose thought and confusion of the last threehundred years let us make sure of fundamentals. 

I shall take for granted in this book that Rome accepted the Faith notbecause the Roman mind was senile, but because it was mature; that thefailure of the empire is to be regretted; that the barbarians werebarbarians; that not from them but from the new and Christiancivilisation of the empire itself came the strength of therestoration, the mighty achievements of the Middle Age, of theRenaissance, of the Modern world. The barbarian, as I understand it, did nothing. He came in naked and ashamed, without laws orinstitutions. To some extent, though even in this he was a failure, hedestroyed; it was his one service. He came and he tried to learn; helearnt to be a Christian. When the empire re-arose it was Roman notbarbarian, it was Christian not heathen, it was Catholic notheretical. It owed the barbarian nothing. That it re-arose, and thatas a Roman and a Catholic state, is due largely to the fact thatHonorius retreated upon Ravenna. 

If we could depend upon the dates in the Theodosian Code we should beable to say that Honorius finally retreated upon Ravenna beforeDecember 402;[1] unhappily the dates we find there must not be reliedupon with absolute confidence. We may take it that Alaric enteredVenetia in November 401, and that at the same time Radagaisus invadedRhaetia. Stilicho, Honorius' great general and the hero of the wholedefence, advanced against Radagaisus. Upon Easter Day in the followingyear, however, he met Alaric at Pollentia and defeated him, but theGothic king was allowed to withdraw from that field with the greaterpart of his cavalry entire and unbroken. Stilicho hoping to annihilatehim forced him to retreat, overtook him at Asta (Asti), but againallowed him to escape and this time to retreat into Istria. 

[Footnote 1: Cf. Hodgkin, _Italy and her Invaders_, vol. I. Pt. 2, p. 712. ]

In the summer of 403 Alaric again entered Italy and laid siege toVerona; Stilicho, however, met him and defeated him, but again allowedhim to retreat. Well might Orosius, his contemporary, exclaim thatthis king with his Goths, though often hemmed in, often defeated, wasalways allowed to escape. 

The battle of Verona was followed by a peace of two years duration. But in 405 the other barbarian Radagaisus came down into CisalpineGaul as Alaric had done, and Stilicho, knowing that the pass throughwhich the great road entered Italy was secured by Ravenna, assailedhim at Ticinum (Pavia). Radagaisus, however, did a bold and perhaps anunexpected thing. He attempted to cross the Apennines themselves bythe difficult and neglected route that ran over them and led toFiesole. [2] But the Romans had been right in their judgment. That waywas barred by nature. It needed no defence. Before the barbarian hadquite pierced the mountains Stilicho caught him, slew him, andannihilated his already starving bands at Fiesole. Cisalpine Gaul andthe fortress of Ravenna, its key, still held Italy secure. 

[Footnote 2: Livy asserts that C. Flamimus, the colleague of M. Aemilius Lepidus in B. C. 187, built a road direct from Arezzo toBologna across the Tuscan Apennines. This road early fell into disuseand ruin. We hear nothing of it (but see Cicero, _Phil_. Xii. 9) tillthis raid of Radagaisus. Later, Totila came this way to besiege Rome. Cf. Repetti, _Dizionavio della Toscana_, vol. V. 713-715. ]

Honorius and his great general and minister now essayed what perhapsshould have been attempted earlier, namely, to employ Alaric in theservice of Rome, as the East had known how to employ him, at adistance from the capital. He was first offered the province ofIllyricum; but the senate refused to hear of any such treaty, andthough at last it consented to pay the Goth 4000 pounds in gold "tosecure the peace of Italy and conciliate the friendship of the Gothicking, " Lampadius, one of the most illustrious members of thatassembly, asserted that "this is not a treaty of peace but ofservitude. " Thus the senate was alienated from Stilicho, and not thesenate only but the army also, which was exasperated by his affectionfor the barbarians. Nor was the great general more fortunate with theemperor, who had come of late under the influence of Olympius, a manwho, Zosimus tells us, under an appearance of Christian piety, concealed a great deal of rascality. Stilicho had promoted him to avery honourable place in the household of the emperor; nevertheless heplotted against him. At his suggestion Honorius proposed to showhimself to the army at Pavia, already at enmity with Stilicho. Theresult was disastrous. For the occasion was seized for a revolt inwhich the best officers of the empire perished. Stilicho, not daringto march his barbarians from Bologna upon the Roman army, and by thisrefusal incurring their enmity also, flung himself into Ravenna andtook refuge in the great church there. On the following day, however, he was delivered up by the bishop to Count Heraclian and slain. 

Thus perished in the great fortress of the defence the great defender, leaving the whole of Italy in confusion. He was not long to gounavenged. 

[Illustration: Colour Plate S. AGATA]

Stilicho was slain in Ravenna upon August 23rd, 408. In October ofthat year Alaric, who had watched the appalling revolution thatfollowed his own defeat and the annihilation of Radagaisus, afterfruitless negotiations with Honorius, descended into Italy, passedAquileia, and coming into the Aemilian Way at Bologna found the passopen and without misadventure entered Italy at Rimini, and, withoutattacking Ravenna, marched on "to Rome, to make that city desolate. "He besieged Rome three times and pillaged it, taking with him, when heleft it, hostages. As we know he never returned, but died at Cosentiain southern Italy, and was buried in the bed of the Buxentius, whichhad been turned aside, for a moment, by a captive multitude, to givehim sepulture. 

Among those hostages which Alaric had claimed from the City and takenwith him southward was the sister of the two emperors, the daughter ofthe great Theodosius, Galla Placidia. 

This great lady had been born, as is thought, in Rome about 390; shehad, however, spent the first seven years of her life inConstantinople, but had returned to Italy on the death of Theodosiuswith her brother Honorius, in the care of the beautiful Serena, thewife of Stilicho. She does not seem to have followed her brothereither to Milan or to Ravenna, for indeed his residence in both thesecities was part of the great defence. She remained in Rome, probablyin the house of her kinswoman Laeta, the widow of Gratian. That shehad a grudge against Serena seems certain, though the whole story ofthe plot to marry her to Eucherius, Serena's son, would appeardoubtful. That she initiated her murder, as Zosimus[1] asserts, isextremely improbable and altogether unproven. However that may be, after one of his three sieges of Rome, Alaric carried Galla Placidiaoff as a hostage. He seems, according to Zosimus, to have treated herwith courtesy and even with an exaggerated reverence, as the sister ofthe emperor and the daughter of Theodosius, but she was compelled tofollow in his train and to see the ruin of Lucania and Calabria. For, as a matter of fact and reality, Galla Placidia was the one hope ofthe Goths and this became obvious after the death of Alaric. 

[Footnote 1: Zosimus, v. 38. Zosimus was a pagan. Placidia was adevout and enthusiastic Catholic. ]

The Gothic army was in a sort of trap; it could not return without theconsent of Ravenna, and if it were compelled to remain in Italy it wasonly a question of time till it should be crushed or gradually wastedaway. It is probable that Alaric was aware of this; it is certain thatit was well appreciated by his successor Ataulfus. He saw that his onechance of coming to terms with the empire lay in his possession ofGalla Placidia. Moreover, Italy and Rome had worked in the mind andthe spirit of this man the extraordinary change that was to declareitself in the soul of almost every barbarian who came to ravage them. He began dimly to understand what the empire was. He felt ashamed ofhis own rudeness and of the barbarism of his people. Years afterwardshe related to a citizen of Narbonne, who in his turn repeated theconfession to S. Jerome in Palestine in the presence of the historianOrosius, the curious "conversion" that Italy had worked in his heart. "In the full confidence of valour and victory, " said Ataulfus, "I onceaspired to change the face of the universe; to obliterate the name ofRome; to erect on its ruins the dominion of the Goths; and to acquire, like Augustus, the immortal fame of the founder of a new empire. Byrepeated experiments I was gradually convinced that laws areessentially necessary to maintain and regulate a well constitutedstate, and that the fierce untractable humour of the Goths wasincapable of bearing the salutary yoke of laws and civil government. From that moment I proposed to myself a different object of glory andambition; and it is now my sincere wish that the gratitude of futureages should acknowledge the merit of a stranger who employed the swordof the Goths not to subvert but to restore and maintain the prosperityof the Roman Empire. "[1]

[Footnote 1: Orosius, vii. C. 43. Gibbon, c. Xxxi. ]

With this change in his heart and the necessity of securing a retreatupon the best terms he could arrange, Ataulfus looked on Placidia hiscaptive and found her perhaps fair, certainly a prize almost beyondthe dreams of a barbarian. He aspired to marry her, and she does notseem to have been unready to grant him her hand. Doubtless she hadbeen treated by Alaric and his successor with an extraordinary respectnot displeasing to so royal a lady, and Ataulfus, though not so tallas Alaric, was both shapely and noble. [1] There seems indeed to havebeen but one obstacle to this match. This was the ambition ofConstantius, the new minister of Honorius, who wished to make hisposition secure by marrying Placidia himself. 

[Footnote 1: Jornandes, c. Xxxi. ]

Italy, however, needed peace as badly as the Goths needed a secureretreat. And when negotiations were opened it was seen that theirsuccess depended entirely upon this question of Placidia. A treaty wasdrawn up of friendship and alliance between the Goths and the empire. The services of Ataulfus were accepted against the barbarians who wereharrying the provinces beyond the Alps, and the king, with GallaPlacidia a willing captive, began his retreat from Campania into Gaul. His troops occupied the cities of Narbonne, Toulouse, and Bordeaux, and in spite of the protests and resistance of the harassedprovincials soon extended their quarters from the Mediterranean to theAtlantic. 

To hold the Goth to his friendship and to secure his absence fromItaly nothing remained but to accord him the hand of Placidia; and inthe year 414 at Narbonne their marriage was solemnised. [2]

[Footnote 2: Olympiodorus and Idatius say the marriage took place atNarbonne, but Jornandes, _op cit_. C. 31, asserts that it took placeat Forli before Ataulfus left Italy. Perhaps there were twoceremonies, or perhaps the ceremony at Narbonne was but thecelebration of an anniversary. ]

With the retreat of the Goth and the treaty sealed by the marriage ofPlacidia, the sister of Honorius, and the Gothic king, Italy securedherself a peace and a repose which endured for some forty-two years, only broken by the raid of Heraclian from Africa in 413. 

But Ataulfus did not long survive his marriage. Having crossed thePyrenees and surprised in the name of Honorius the city of Barcelona, he was assassinated in the palace there, and in the tumult whichfollowed, Singeric, the brother of his enemy and a stranger to theroyal race, was hailed as king. This revolution made Placidia oncemore a fugitive, and we see the daughter of Theodosius "confoundedamong a crowd of vulgar captives, compelled to march on foot abovetwelve miles before the horse of a barbarian, the assassin of ahusband whom Placidia loved and lamented. " On the seventh day of hisreign, however, Singeric was himself assassinated and Wallia, who thenbecame king of the Goths, after repeated representations backed atlast by the despatch of an army surrendered the princess to herbrother in exchange for 600, 000 measures of wheat. 

That must have been a strange home-coming for Placidia. Bought andsold twice over, twice a fugitive, the companion of the rude Goth, sheis the most pathetic figure in all that terrible fifth century, andnever does she appear more pitiful than on her return from the campsand the triumphs of the barbarians to the decadent splendour and thecorruption of the imperial court of Ravenna, and again as a captive, aprize, booty. 

For the man who had been at the head of that army whose approach, realor supposed, had decided the Goths to deliver up the sister of theemperor was Constantius, her old lover, he who had delayed hermarriage with Ataulfus and who now determined to marry her himself. 

It was in 416 that Placidia returned to Ravenna. In the following yearHonorius gave her to Constantius, then his colleague in the consularoffice for the second time. The marriage ceremony of very greatsplendour took place in Ravenna; and in the same year was born of thatmarriage Honoria, who was to offer herself to Attila, and in 419Valentinian, one day to be emperor. 

That marriage soon had the result Constantius had intended. In 421Honorius was compelled to associate him with himself on the imperialthrone and to give to Placidia the title of Augusta. The new emperor, however, survived his elevation to the throne but seven months andonce more Placidia was a widow. Her life, never a happy one, if weexcept the few years in which she was the wife of Ataulfus, whom sheseems really to have loved, became unbearable after the death ofConstantius. At the mercy of her brother who was fast sinking, at theage of thirty-nine, into a vicious and idiotic senility, she, always asincere Catholic in spite of her romantic marriage with the ArianAtaulfus, seems to have been forced into a horrible intimacy with him;at least we know that he obliged her to receive his obscene kisses, even in public, to the scandal and perhaps the amusement of thatcorrupt society. And then suddenly her brother's dreadful love seemsto have turned to hate and she is a fugitive again with her twochildren at the court of her nephew Theodosius II. At Constantinople. In the very year of her flight Honorius died and the throne of theWest was vacant. 

It was filled by the obscure civil servant Joannes, the chief of thenotaries, the creature of some palace intrigue. But such a choicecould not be tolerated by Theodosius, who immediately confirmedPlacidia in her title of Augusta, which had not before been recognisedat Constantinople, and accepted Valentinian, whose title wasNobilissimus, as the heir to the western throne, giving him the titleof Caesar. To suppress the usurper Joannes, Theodosius despatched anarmy to bring Placidia and her children to Ravenna. After a shortcampaign in northern Italy, by a miracle, according to thecontemporary historian Socrates, the troops of Theodosius arrivedbefore Ravenna. "The prayer of the pious emperor again prevailed. Foran angel of God, under the semblance of a shepherd, undertook theguidance of Aspar and his troops, and led them through the lake nearRavenna. Now no one had ever been known to ford that lake before; butGod then caused that to be possible which before had been impossible. But when they had crossed the lake, as if going over dry land, theyfound the gates of the city open and seized the tyrant Joannes. "[1]

[Footnote 1: Socrates, vii. 23. Cf. Hodgkin, _op cit_. I. 847. ]

So the Augusta with the young Caesar and her daughter Honoria enteredRavenna, to reign there, first as regent and then as the no lesspowerful adviser of her son, for some twenty-five years. 

When Ravenna opened its gates some eighteen months had passed sincethe death of Honorius. But the appearance of that "angel of God underthe semblance of a shepherd" had not been the only miracle that hadoccurred on the return of Placidia to the imperial city by the easternsea. For it seems that on her voyage either from Constantinople toAquileia, where she remained till Ravenna was taken, or from Aquileiato Ravenna, Placidia and her children were caught in a great storm atsea and came near to suffer shipwreck. Then Placidia prayed aloud, invoking the aid of S. John the Evangelist for deliverance from sogreat a peril, and vowing to build a church in his honour in Ravennaif he would bring them to land. And immediately the winds and thewaves abated and the ship came safely to port. [2] It was in fulfilmentof her vow that Placidia built in Ravenna the Basilica of S. John theEvangelist. 

[Footnote 2: The invocation of S. John is curious, and we have not thekey to it. For though he was a fisherman, so was S. Peter forinstance. It is interesting, though not perhaps really significant, tonote that it is only S. John who notes in his Gospel (vi. 21) that, when the Apostles saw Our Lord walking on the water in the greatstorm, and had received Him into their ship, "immediately the ship wasat the land. "]

The city of Ravenna at this time would seem to have been full ofchurches. Its first bishop, S. Apollinaris, had been the friend of S. Peter who, as it was believed, had appointed him to the see ofRavenna. That was in the earliest days of the Christian Church. But wefind the tradition still living in the fourth century when Severus, bishop of Ravenna, miraculously chosen to fill the see, sat in thecouncil of Sardica in 344 and refused to make any alteration in theNicene Creed. About the end of the century Ursus had been bishop andhad built the great cathedral church, the Basilica Ursiana, dedicatedin honour of the Resurrection, with its five naves and fifty-sixcolumns of marble, its _schola cantorum_ in the midst, and itsmosaics, all of which were finally and utterly destroyed in 1733. There was too the baptistery which remains and the church of S. Agataand many others which have perished. 

With the church of S. Agata we connect one of the great bishops of thefifth century, Joannes Angeloptes, who was there served at Mass by anangel. While with the beautiful little chapel in the bishop's palace, which still, in some sort at least, remains to us, we connect perhapsthe greatest bishop Ravenna can boast of, S. Peter Chrysologus, for hebuilt it. 

Nor was Placidia herself slow to add to the ecclesiastical splendourof her city. We have already seen that she built S. GiovanniEvangelista, rebuilt in the thirteenth century, in fulfilment of hervow and in memory of her salvation from shipwreck. Close to her palaceshe built another church in honour of the Holy Cross, and attached toit she erected her mausoleum, which remains perhaps the most preciousmonument in the city. The church and the monastery which her nieceSingleida built beside it have perished. 

But though during the lifetime of Placidia Italy was free from foreigninvasion, the decay of the western empire, of what had been thewestern empire, was by no means arrested; on the contrary, Britain, Gaul, Spain, and Africa were finally lost. Two appalling catastrophesmark her reign, the Vandal invasion of the province of Africa and theever growing cloud of Huns upon the north-eastern frontiers. 

[Illustration: THE APSE OF S. GIOVANNI EVANGELISTA]

Placidia's two chief ministers were Boniface and Aetius, either ofwhom, according to Procopius, "had the other not been hiscontemporary, might truly have been called the last of the Romans. "Their simultaneous appearance, however, finally destroyed all hope ofan immediate resurrection of civilisation in the West. For Boniface, whose "one great object was the deliverance of Africa from all sortsof barbarians, " betrayed Africa to the Vandals, and to this he was ledby the rivalry and intrigue of Aetius who, on the other hand, mustalways be remembered for his heroic and glorious victory over Attilaat Chalons which delivered Gaul from the worst deluge of all--that ofthe Huns. 

The truth would seem to be that while corruption of every sort, andespecially political corruption, was destroying the empire, theimportance of Christianity was vastly increasing. The great quarrelwas really that between Catholicism and heresy. This was a livingissue while the cause of the empire as a political entity was alreadydead. Placidia certainly eagerly considered all sorts ofecclesiastical problems and provided and legislated for theirsolution. We do not find her seeking the advice and offensive anddefensive alliance of Constantinople for the restoration of herprovinces. It might seem almost as though the mind of her time wasunable to fix itself upon the vast political and economic problem thatnow for many generations had demanded a solution in vain. No one seemsto have cared in any fundamental way, or even to have been aware, thatthe empire as a great state was gradually being ruined, was indeedalready in full decadence--a thing to despair of. That is the curiousthing--no one seems to have despaired. On the other hand, every onewas keenly interested in the religious controversy of the time which, because we cannot fully understand that time, seems to us so futile. But it is only what is in the mind that is fundamentally important toman, and that will force him to action. The council of Ephesus whichdestroyed Nestorius in 431, the council of Chalcedon which condemnedDioscorus in 451, seemed to be the important things, and one day wemay come to think again, that on those great decisions, and not on thematerial defence, both military and economic, of the West, dependedthe future of the world. If this be so, it would at least explain thehopeless variance of East and West, which, almost equally concerned inthe material problem, were by no means at one in philosophy. 

[Illustration: THE MAUSOLEUM OF GALLA PLACIDIA]

Nevertheless, although Theodosius II. Had not trodden "the narrow pathof orthodoxy with reputation unimpaired, " as Placidia certainly had, the material alliance of East and West were seen to be so importantthat in 437 Valentinian III. , the son of Placidia, and emperor in theWest, was married to Eudoxia, the daughter of Theodosius II. , inConstantinople. 

Neither the accession of her son nor his marriage seem to have madeany real difference in the power of Placidia who, we may believe, not, as Procopius asserts, by a cunning system of training by which she hadruined his character, but rather by reason of her innate virility, retained the reins of government in her own hands. Certainly sheruled, the Augusta of the West, during the twelve years that remainedto her after her son's marriage. And when at last she died in Rome in450, on the 27th November, [1] in the sixtieth year of her age, and afew months after her nephew Theodosius II. , and was borne in a lasttriumph along the Via Flaminia, to be laid, seated in a chair ofcedar, in a sarcophagus of alabaster in the gorgeous mausoleum she hadprepared for herself beside the church of S. Croce in Ravenna, sheleft Italy at least in a profound peace, so secure, as it seemed, thatthe whole court had in that very year removed to Rome. It might appearas though the barbarian had but awaited her passing to descend oncemore upon the citadel of Europe. 

[Footnote 1: Agnellus asserts that on the Ides of March in the yearfollowing Placidia's death Ravenna suffered from a great fire, inwhich many buildings perished, but he does not tell us what theywere. ]

V

THE FALL OF THE EMPIRE IN THE WEST

For more than ten years before the death of Placidia both East andWest had been aware of a new cloud in the north-east. This darknesswas the vast army of Huns, which, in the exodus from Asia proper, under Attila, threatened to overrun the empire and to lay it waste. In447, indeed, Attila fell upon the Adriatic and Aegean provinces of theeastern empire and ravaged them till he was bought off with a shamefultribute. His thoughts inevitably turned towards the capital, and it issaid, I know not with how much truth, that in the very year of theirdeath both Placidia and Theodosius received from this new barbarian aninsolent message which said: "Attila, thy master and mine, bids theeprepare a palace for him. "

Theodosius II. , however, was succeeded upon the Eastern throne by hissister Pulcheria who shared her government with the virile and boldsoldier Marcian. But upon Placidia's death, on the other hand, thegovernment of the West fell into the hands of her weak and sensual sonValentinian III. 

Placidia's greatest failure, indeed, was in the training and educationof her children. Valentinian was incapable and vicious, while Honoria, who had inherited much of the romantic temperament of her mother, wasboth unscrupulous and irresponsible. Sent to Constantinople on accountof an intrigue with her chamberlain, Honoria, bored by the asceticlife in which she found herself and furious at her virtualimprisonment, sent her ring to Attila and besought him to deliver herand make her his wife as Ataulfus had done Placidia her mother. Though, it seems, the Hun disdained her, he made this appeal hisexcuse. Within a year of the death of Theodosius and Placidia hedecided that the way of least resistance lay westward. If he weresuccessful he could make his own terms, and, among his spoil, if hecared, should be the sister of the emperor. 

At first it was Gaul that was to be plundered; but there, as we know, the wild beast was met by Aetius who defeated him at the battle ofChalons and thus saved the western provinces. But that victory was notfollowed up. Attila and his vast army were allowed to retreat; andthough Gaul was saved, Italy lay at their mercy. That was in 451. Attila retreated into Pannonia, and prepared for a new raid in thefollowing year. 

He came, as Alaric had done, through the Julian Alps; and beforespring had gone Aquileia was not, Concordia was utterly destroyed, Altinum became nothing. Nor have these cities ever lived again; out oftheir ruin Venice sprang in the midst of the lagoons. All theCisalpine plain north of the Po was in Attila's hands; Vicenza, Verona, Brescia, Bergamo, Pavia, even Milan opened their gates. Nodefence was offered, they saved themselves alive. And southward, overthe Po, between the mountains and the sea, the gate which Ravenna heldstood open wide. Italy without defence lay at the mercy of the Asiaticinvader. 

Without defence! Valentinian and his court were in Rome; no one armedand ready waited in impregnable Ravenna to break the Hun as with ahammer when he should venture to take the road through the narrow passbetween the mountains and the sea. The great defence was not to beheld; the road, as once before, lay open and unguarded. In thismoment, one of the greatest crises in the history of Europe, suddenly, and without warning, the reality of that age, which had changed soimperceptibly, was revealed. The material civilisation and defence ofthe empire were, at least as organised things, seen to be dead; itsspiritual virility and splendour were about to be made manifest. 

For it was not any emperor or great soldier at the head of an armythat faced Attila by the Mincio on the Cisalpine plain and savedItaly, but an old and unarmed man, alone and defenceless. Our saviourwas pope Leo the Great; but above him, in the sky, the Hun perceivedthe mighty figures, overshadowing all that world, of S. Peter and S. Paul, and his eyes dazzled, he bowed his head. "What, " he askedhimself, "if I conquer like Alaric only to die as he did?" He yieldedand consented to retreat, Italy was saved. The new emperor, the truehead and champion of the new civilisation that was to arise out of allthis confusion, had declared himself. It was the pope. 

There, it might seem, we have the truth at last, the explanation, perhaps, of all the extraordinary ennui and neglect that had made suchan invasion as that of Alaric, as that of Radagaisus, as this ofAttila, possible. For it is only what is in the mind that is of anyimportance. The empire rightly understood was not about to die, but tochange into a new spiritual kingdom in the hearts of men; and there, in the place of the emperor, would sit God's Vicegerent, till in thefullness of time the material empire should be re-established and thatVicegerent should place the imperial crown once more upon a merelyroyal head. The force of the old empire had always lain in whollymaterial things and its excuse had been its material success; but itwas a servile state, and after the advent of Christianity it wasinevitable that it should change or perish. It changed. The force ofthe new empire was to be so completely spiritual that to-day we canscarcely understand it. Upon the banks of the Mincio it declareditself; and when, twenty-three years later, Odoacer the barbariandeposed Romulus Augustulus and made himself king of Italy, the truechampion of all that Latin genius had established was alreadyenthroned in Rome; but the throne was Peter's, and men called him notEmperor but Father. 

Those twenty-three years, so brief a period, are, as we might imagine, full of confusion and strange barbarian voices. 

After Leo had turned him back from Italy there by the Mincio, Attilaretreated again into Pannonia, but he still insisted "on this pointabove all, that Honoria, the sister of the emperor and the daughter ofthe Augusta Placidia, should be sent to him with the portion of theroyal wealth which was her due; and he threatened that unless thiswere done he would lay upon Italy a far heavier punishment than anywhich it had yet borne. " But within a year Attila was dead in abarbaric marriage-bed by the Danube, and his empire destroyed. And asfor Honoria we know no more of her, she disappears from history, though tradition has it that she spent the rest of her life in aconvent in southern Italy. 

The two heroes of the Hunnish deluge in the West were Aetius, thegreat general who broke Attila upon the plain of Chalons, and Leo thepope surnamed the Great. Aetius had been unable to persuade hisvictorious troops to march to the defence of Italy, and in this againwe see the growing failure of the imperial idea; but he was a greatsoldier, and certainly the greatest minister that Valentinian III. Could boast. Nevertheless, after the death of Attila he seemed to theemperor both dangerous and useless; dangerous because, like Stilicho, he thought of the empire for his son, and useless because Valentinianhad recently placed his confidence in another, the eunuch Heraclius. Just as Honorius contrived the murder of Stilicho, so did Valentiniancontrive to rid himself of Aetius, and with his own hand, forValentinian stabbed him himself in his palace on the Palatine Hill inRome, towards the end of 454. Six months, however, had not gone bywhen Aetius was avenged and Valentinian lay dead in the Campus Martiusstabbed by two soldiers of barbarian origin. Beside him, dead too, laythe eunuch Heraclius. This was the vengeance of the friends of Aetius, and of him who was to be emperor, Petronius Maximus, whose wifeValentinian had ravished. 

With Valentinian III. , who had no children, the great line ofTheodosius came to an end both in the East and in the West, forPulcheria had died in 453. In Constantinople Marcian continued to ruletill 457, when he was succeeded by Leo I. The Thracian. In Rome he whohad so signally avenged himself, Petronius Maximus, a senator, sixtyyears of age, reigned during seventy days in which he was rather aprisoner than a monarch. During those seventy days, whether moved bylust or revenge we know not, he attempted to make the widow ofValentinian his wife. This brought all down, for Eudoxia, without afriend in the world, followed the fatal example of Honoria and calledin the Vandal to her assistance. And when Genseric was on his way toanswer her from Carthage, the terrified City, by the hands of theimperial servants and the soldiers, tore the emperor limb from limband flung what remained into the Tiber so that even burial was deniedhim. But the Vandal came on, and in spite of Leo, as we know, sackedthe City and departed--to lose the mighty booty in the midst of thesea. 

What are we to say of the years which follow, and what are we to sayof those ghostly figures, which hover, always uncertainly and briefly, about the imperial throne after the assassination of Valentinian III. And the second sack of the City? There was Avitus the Gaul (455-456), Majorian (457-461), Libius Severus (461-465), Anthemius (467-472), Olybrius (472), Glycerius (473-474), Julius Nepos (474-475), and atlast the pitiful boy Romulus Augustulus (475-476). Nothing can be saidof them; they are less than shadows, and their empire, the materialempire they represented, was no longer conscious of itself, was nolonger a reality, but an hallucination, haunting the mind. It is truethat the chief seat of their government, if government it can becalled, was Ravenna, and that the city is concerned with most of theincidents of those vague and confused years; the proclamations ofMajorian, of Severus, of Glycerius, and of Romulus Augustulus, theabdication of the last and the fight in the pinewood in which hisuncle Paulus was broken and Odoacer made himself master. But they are, for the most part, the years of Ricimer the patrician, for they arefull of his puppets. 

This man is another Stilicho, another Aetius, a great and heroicsoldier, but of a sinister and subtle policy without loyalty orscruple. His is a figure that often appears about the death-bed ofdying states, but his genius has not so often been matched. The son ofa Suevic father, his mother the daughter of Wallia, the successor andavenger of Ataulfus the Visigoth, he was the champion of the empireagainst the Vandal, that is to say, against her most relentless foe. His success in this was the secret of his power. Pondering the fate ofhis predecessors he determined he would not end as they did. Thereforehe determined to make whom he would emperor and to depose him when hehad done with him; in a word, he meant to be the master as well as thesaviour of Italy. In this he was successful. He deposed Avitus andcaused him to be consecrated bishop of Placentia. In his place he seta man of his own choice, Majorian, whom he raised to the empire onApril 1, 457, in the camp at Columellae, at the sixth milestone, itseems, from Ravenna; and upon August 2, 461, he caused him to be put todeath near Tortona. 

He chose Libius Severus to fill the place of Majorian and had himproclaimed in Ravenna upon November 19, 461; and upheld him for nearlyfour years till he died in Rome on August 15, 465, poisoned, men said, by Ricimer. Then the "king-maker" allied himself with Constantinopleand placed Anthemius, son-in-law of Marcian, upon the throne of theWest, in 467, kept him there till 472, and then proclaimed Olybrius, another Byzantine, emperor; laid siege to Anthemius in Rome, took theCity, slew Anthemius, and forty days later himself died, leaving thecommand of his army to his nephew Gundobald, one of the princes of theBurgundians. Seven months later Olybrius died. 

The alliance Ricimer had made with Constantinople, though he repentedit, was the one hope of the future, and as a fact the future belongedto it. For a moment Gundobald was able to place an obscure soldierGlycerius upon the throne, but he soon exchanged the purple for thebishopric of Salona, and the nominee of Constantinople, Julius Nepos, reigned in Ravenna in his stead. But though the future belonged toConstantinople, the present did not. The barbarian confederates, discontented and unwilling to give their allegiance to this Greek, rebelled and under Orestes their general marched upon Ravenna. JuliusNepos fled by ship to Dalmatia and Orestes in Ravenna proclaimed hisyoung son Romulus Augustulus emperor. But those barbarian mercenarieswere not to be so easily satisfied. Of the new emperor they demanded athird of the lands of all Italy, and when this was refused them theyflocked to the standard of that barbarian general in the Roman servicewhom we know as Odoacer. "From all the camps and garrisons of Italy"the barbarian confederates flocked to the new standard and Orestes wascompelled to shut himself up in Pavia while Paulus, his brother, heldRavenna for the boy emperor. Upon August 23, 476, Odoacer was raisedlike the barbarian he was, upon the shield, as Alaric had been, andhis troops proclaimed him king. Five days later Orestes, who hadescaped from Pavia, was taken and put to death at Placentia, and onSeptember 4 Paulus his brother was taken in the Pineta outside Classisby Ravenna and was slain. The gates of Ravenna were open, RomulusAugustulus, the last emperor in the West, was forced to abdicate andwas sent by Odoacer to the famous villa that Lucullus had built forhimself long and long ago in Campania, and was granted a pension ofsix thousand _soldi_, and Odoacer reigned as the first king of Italy;the western empire, as such, was at an end. 

And the senate addressed, by unanimous decree, to the emperor Zeno inConstantinople an epistle, in which they disclaimed "the necessity, oreven the wish, of continuing any longer the imperial succession inItaly, since, in their opinion, the majesty of a sole monarch issufficient to pervade and protect at the same time both East and West. In their own name and in the name of the people they consent to theseat of universal empire being transferred from Rome toConstantinople, and they renounce the right of choosing their master. They further state that the republic (they repeat that name without ablush) might safely confide in the civil and military virtues ofOdoacer; and they humbly request that the emperor would invest himwith the title of patrician and the administration of the _diocese_ ofItaly. "

And Odoacer sent the diadem and the purple robe, the imperial ensigns, the sacred ornaments of the throne and palace to Byzantium andreceived thence the title of patrician. 

VI

THEODORIC

We may well ask what was the condition of Ravenna when the westernempire fell and Odoacer made himself king of Italy. And by thegreatest of good fortune we can answer that question. For we have afairly vivid account of Ravenna from the hand of Sidonius Apollinariswho passed through the city on his way to Rome in 467. 

Ravenna had been the chief city of Italy during the seventy years ofrevolution and administrative disaster and decay which had followedthe incursion of Alaric. For the greater part of that period she hadbeen the seat of the emperors and of their government, and it isperhaps for reasons such as these that we find, after all, but littlechange in her condition. She does not seem to have suffered much decaysince Honorius retreated upon her. 

"It is difficult, " Sidonius tells us, "to say whether the old city ofRavenna is separated from the new port or joined to it by the ViaCaesaris which lies between them. Above the town the Po is dividedinto two streams, of which one washes its walls and the other passesthrough its streets. The whole river has been diverted from its truechannel by means of large mounds thrown across it at the publicexpense, and being thus drawn off into channels marked out for it, sodivides its waters, that they offer protection to the walls which theyencompass and bring commerce into the city which they penetrate. Bythis route, which is most convenient for the purpose, all kinds ofmechandise arrive, and especially food. But against this must be setthe fact that the supply of drinking water is wretched. On the oneside you have the salt waves of the sea dashing against the gates, onthe other the canals, filled with sewage of the consistency of gruel, are being constantly churned up by the passage of the barges; and theriver itself, here gliding along with a very slow current, is mademuddy by the poles of the bargemen which are being continually thrustinto its clayey bed. The consequence was that we were thirsty in themidst of the waves, since no wholesome water was brought to us by theaqueducts, no cistern was flowing, no well was without its mud. "[1]

[Footnote 1: Sidonius Apoll. _Ep_. 1 5. Cf. Hodgkin, _op. Cit_. Vol. 1. P. 859. ]

In another letter we have a rather more fantastic picture. "A prettyplace Cesena must be if Ravenna is better, for there your ears arepierced by the mosquito of the Po and a talkative mob of frogs isalways croaking round you. Ravenna is a mere marsh where all theconditions of life are reversed, where walls fall and waters stand, towers flow down and ships squat, invalids walk about and theirdoctors take to bed, baths freeze and houses burn, the living perishwith thirst and the dead swim about on the surface of the water, thieves watch and magistrates sleep, priests lend at usury and Syrianssing psalms, merchants shoulder arms and soldiers haggle likehucksters, greybeards play at ball and striplings at dice, and eunuchsstudy the art of war and the barbarian mercenaries studyliterature. "[2]

[Footnote 2: _Idem. Ep_. 1. 8. Cf. Hodgkin, _op cit_ vol. 1. P. 860. ]

Such was the Ravenna of the barbarian who called himself king ofItaly. 

We have seen Ravenna since her incorporation into the Romanadministrative system fulfilling the various reasons of her existence;as the fortress which held the gate into Italy from Cisalpine Gaul, asthe second naval port of the West, and as the great impregnablefortress of Italy in the barbarian invasions. Odoacer, also, chose itas his chief seat of government for similar advantages. Ravennastrongly held gave him, as strongly held she had given every one ofher masters, Italy and Cisalpine Gaul; while as the gate of theeastern sea, Ravenna was his proper means of communication with hisover-lord and the eastern provinces of what was, rightly understood, the reunited empire. 

That, theoretically at least, is how Odoacer regarded the state inwhich, by the good pleasure of the emperor Zeno, he held the title ofpatrician. He was an unlettered man, an Arian, as were all thebarbarians, and he held what he held by permission of Constantinople, though he had won it by his own strength in the weakness and misery ofthe time. He never aspired, it would seem, to make himself emperor. Certainly for the first four years of his rule in Ravenna that greatoffice was filled by Julius Nepos in exile at Salona, whose depositionat the hands of Orestes had never been recognised by Constantinople. Thereafter, the western and the eastern empire were in theoryreunited, with New Rome upon the Bosphorus for their true capital; andboth before and after that event Odoacer ruled in Italy with the titleof patrician conferred upon him by Constantinople. When that consentwas withdrawn, as it was immediately Odoacer showed signs of ambition, he fell. 

Odoacer had ruled in Ravenna from 476 to 493, when he fell in thatcity after sustaining a siege of three years. He ruled well andstrongly and by the laws of the empire. He was compelled by thebarbaric confederates, who had placed him where he was, to grant thema third of the lands, certainly, of the great Italian landowners; buthe created nothing new; like all the barbarians he was sterile, hisonly service was a service of destruction. With him even this servicewas small. 

His fall was curious and is exceedingly significant. 

In 481, after the murder of the emperor Julius Nepos in Salona, Odoacer led an expedition into Dalmatia to chastise the murderers andseized the opportunity to make himself master of Dalmatia. This actionat once renewed the suspicion of Constantinople; but when in 484Odoacer entered into negotiations with Illus, the last of theinsurgents who disturbed the reign of Zeno, Constantinople decidedthat he must be broken; therefore Feletheus, king of the Rugians uponthe Danube, was stirred up against him, and when that failed, forOdoacer defeated him, Constantinople sent Theodoric and hisOstrogothic host into Italy to dispose of Odoacer the patrician[1]. 

[Footnote 1: Cf. Anon. Valesii, "Missus ab imperatore Zenone departibus orientis ad defendendam sibi Italiam.... "]

Theodoric, another unlettered barbarian and heretic, but a man of agreat and noble character, set out for Italy from Nova on the southernbank of the Danube, where he had been a constant danger to the Easternprovinces, in the autumn of 488. His purpose, set forth in his ownwords to the Emperor Zeno, was as follows: "Although your servant ismaintained in affluence by your liberality, graciously listen to thewishes of my heart. Italy, the inheritance of your predecessors, andRome itself, the head and mistress of the world, now fluctuate underthe violence and oppression of Odoacer the mercenary. Direct me withmy national troops to march against this tyrant. If I fall, you willbe delivered from an expensive and troublesome friend; if, with theDivine permission, I succeed, I shall govern, in your name and to yourglory, the Roman senate and the part of the republic delivered fromslavery by my victorious arms. "

That march was an exodus. Procopius tells us that, "with Theodoricwent the people of the Goths, putting their wives and children and asmuch of their furniture as they could take with them into theirwaggons, " and as Ennodius, bishop of Ticinum, asserts, it was "a worldthat migrated" with Theodoric into Italy, "a world of which everymember is nevertheless your kinsman. " "Waggons, " says he, "are made todo duty as houses, and into these wandering habitations all thingsthat can minister to the needs of the occupants are poured. Then werethe tools of Ceres, and the stones with which the corn is ground, dragged along by the labouring oxen. Pregnant mothers, forgetful oftheir sex and of the burden which they bore, undertook the toil ofproviding food for the families of thy people. Followed the reign ofwinter in thy camp. Over the hair of thy men the long frost threw aveil of snowy white; the icicles hung in a tangle from their beards. So hard was the frost that the garment which the matron's perseveringtoil had woven had to be broken before a man might fit it to his body. Food for thy marching armies was forced from the grasp of the hostilenations around, or procured by the cunning of the hunter. "[1] It hasbeen supposed by Mr. Hodgkin that not less than 40, 000 fighting menand some 200, 000 souls in all thus entered Italy. To us it might seemthat no such number of people could have lived without commissariatduring that tremendous march of seven hundred miles through some ofthe poorest land of Europe in the depth of winter. However that maybe, Theodoric after many an encounter with barbarians wilder than hisown descended from the Julian Alps into Venetia in August 489, after amarch of not less than ten months. 

[Footnote 1: Ennodius, _Panegyricus_, p. 173. Trs. By Hodgkin, _op. Cit_. Iii. 179-80. ]

Odoacer was waiting for him. He met him near the site of the oldfortress of Aquileia, which Attila had annihilated, that once held thepassage of the Sontius (Isonzo). He was defeated and all Venetia fellinto the hands of the Ostrogoth. Odoacer retreated to Verona, that redfortress on the Adige; once more and more certainly he was beaten. Heretreated to Ravenna, [2] while Theodoric advanced to Milan, to Milanwhich now led nowhere. 

[Footnote 2: "Et Ravennam cum exercitu fugiens pervenit. " Anon. Valesii, 50. ]

After Verona, Theodoric had received the submission of a part ofOdoacer's army under Tufa. When he had possessed himself of Milan, hesent these renegades and certain nobles with their men from his ownarmy, apparently under the leadership of Tufa, to besiege Ravenna. They came down the Aemilian Way as far as Faventia (Faenza). There nodoubt a road left the great highway for the impregnable city of themarshes. At Faventia, then, Theodoric expected to begin to blockadeRavenna. In this he was mistaken. Suddenly Tufa deserted his newmaster, was joined by Odoacer, who came to Faventia, and certain ofthe Ostrogothic nobles, if not all of them, were slaughtered. Theexpedition was lost and not the expedition alone: Milan was no longersafe. Therefore Theodoric evacuated that city, always almostindefensible, and occupied Ticinum (Pavia), which was naturallydefended by the Ticino and the Po. There he established himself inwinter quarters. 

A new diversion from the west, a frustrated attack of Gundobald andhis Burgundians, kept Theodoric busy for a year. Meantime Odoacerappeared in the plain, retook and held all the country betweenFaventia and Cremona and even visited Milan, which he chastised. Thenin August 490 Theodoric met him on the Adda, and again Odoacer wasdefeated, and again he fled back to Ravenna. All over Italy his causetottered, was betrayed, or failed. A general massacre of theconfederate troops throughout the peninsula seems to have occurred. And by the end of the year there remained to him but Ravenna, hisfortress, and the two cities that it commanded, Cesena upon theAemilian Way and Rimini in the midst of the narrow pass at the head ofthe Via Flaminia. Theodoric himself began the siege of Ravenna. 

This siege, the first that Ravenna had ever experienced, endured fornear three years, from the autumn of 490 to the spring of 493. "_Etmox_" says a chronicle of the time, "_subsecutus est eum patriciusTheodoricus veniens in Pineta, et fixit fossatum, obsidiens Odoacremclausum per trienum in Ravenna et factus est usque ad sex solidosmodicus tritici_.... "[1] Theodoric established himself in a fortifiedcamp in the Pineta with a view to preventing food or reinforcementsarriving to his enemy from the sea. Ravenna was closed upon all sidesand before the end of the siege corn rose in the beleaguered city tofamine price, some seventy-two shillings of our money per peck, andthe inhabitants were forced to eat the skins of animals and all sortsof offal, and many died of hunger. 

[Footnote 1: Anon. Valesii. ]

In 491, according to the same chronicler, [1] a sortie was made byOdoacer and his barbarians, but after a desperate fight in the Pinetathis was repelled by Theodoric. In 492, another chronicle tells us, [2]Theodoric took Rimini and from thence brought a fleet of ships to thePorto Leone, some six miles from Ravenna, thus cutting off the cityfrom the sea. Till at last in the beginning of 493 Odoacer wascompelled to open negotiations for surrender. He gave his son Thelaneas a hostage, and on the 26th February Theodoric entered Classis, andon the following day the treaty of peace was signed. Upon the 5thMarch 493, according to Agnellus, "that most blessed man, thearchbishop John, opened the gates of the city which Odoacer hadclosed, and went forth with crosses and thuribles and the Holy Gospelsseeking peace, with the priests and clergy singing psalms, andprostrating himself upon the ground obtained what he sought. Hewelcomed the new king coming from the East and peace was granted tohim, not only with the citizens of Ravenna, but with the other Romansfor whom the blessed John asked it. "

[Footnote 1: Anon. Valesii. ]

[Footnote 2: Agnellus, _Liber Pontificalis Rav_. ]

The terms of that treaty are extraordinarily significant of theimportance of Ravenna in the defence of Italy. It would seem thatTheodoric had possessed himself of everything but Ravenna easilyenough, yet without Ravenna everything else was nothing. The city was, in spite of blockade and famine, impregnable, and it commanded somuch, was still indeed, as always, the key to Italy and the plain andthe very gate of the West, that not to possess it was to loseeverything. Its surrender was necessary and Theodoric offeredextraordinary terms to obtain it. Odoacer was not only to keep hislife but his power. He was to rule as the equal of Theodoric. Thismighty concession shows us at once what Ravenna really was, what partshe played in the government of Italy, and how unique was her positionin the military scheme of that country. 

Theodoric had certainly no intention of carrying out the terms of histreaty. In the very month in which he signed it, he invited Odoacer toa feast at the Palace "in Lauro" to the south-east of Ravenna. Whenthe patrician arrived two petitioners knelt before him each claspingone of his hands, and two of Theodoric's men stepped from hiding tokill him. Perhaps they were not barbarians: at any rate, they lackedthe courage and the contempt alike of law and of honour necessary tocommit so cold a murder. It was Theodoric himself who lifted his swordand hewed his enemy in twain from the shoulder to the loins. "Where isGod?" Odoacer, expecting the stroke, had demanded. And Theodoricanswered, "Thus didst thou to my friends. " And after he said, "I thinkthe wretch had no bones in his body. "

The barbarian it might seem had certainly nothing to learn from theworst of the emperors in treachery and dishonour. 

Theodoric set up his seat in the city he had so perfidiously won, andfor the next thirty years appears as the governour of Italy. He hadset out, it will be remembered, as the soldier of Constantinople, hadasked for leave to make his expedition, and had protested hiswillingness to govern in the name of the emperor and for his glory. Itis not perhaps surprising that a barbarian, and especially Theodoricwho knew so well how to win by treachery what he could not otherwiseobtain, should after his victory forget the promise he had made to hismaster. After the battle of the Adda he had the audacity to send anembassy to the emperor to request that he might be allowed to clothehimself in the royal mantle. This was of course refused. Neverthelessthe Goths "confirmed Theodoric to themselves as king without waitingfor the order of the new emperor Anastasius. "[1] This "confirmation, "whatever it may have meant to the Goths, meant nothing to the Romansor to the empire. For some years Constantinople refused allacknowledgment to Theodoric, till in 497 peace was made and Theodoricobtained recognition, much it may be thought as Odoacer had done, fromConstantinople; but the ornaments of the palace at Ravenna, whichOdoacer had sent to New Rome, were brought back, and therefore itwould seem that the royalty of Theodoric was acknowledged by theempire; but we have no authority to see in this more than anacknowledgment of the king of the Goths, the vicegerent perhaps of theemperor in Italy. What Theodoric's title may have been we have nomeans of knowing: _de jure_ he was the representative of the emperorin Italy: _de facto_ he was the absolute ruler, the _tyrannus_, asOdoacer had been, of the country; but he never ventured to coin moneybearing his effigy and superscription and he invariably sent the namesof the consuls, whom he appointed, to Constantinople for confirmation. He ruled too, as Odoacer had done, by Roman law, and the Arian heresy, which he and his barbarians professed as their religion, was not tillthe very end of his reign permitted precedence over the CatholicFaith. For the most part too he governed by means of Roman officials, and to this must be ascribed the enormous success of his longgovernment. 

[Footnote 1: Anon. Valesu, 57. ]

[Illustration: CAPITAL FROM THE COLONNADE IN PIAZZA MAGGIORE]

For that he was successful, that he gave Italy peace during a wholegeneration, is undeniable. In all the chronicles there is little butpraise of him. The chief of them[1] says of him: "He was anillustrious man and full of good-will towards all. He reignedthirty-three years[2] and during thirty of these years so great wasthe happiness of Italy that even the wayfarers were at peace. For hedid nothing evil. He governed the two nations, the Goths and theRomans, as though they were one people. Belonging himself to the Ariansect, he yet ordained that the civil administration should remain forthe Romans as it had been under the emperors. He gave presents andrations to the people, yet though he found the treasury ruined hebrought it by hard work into a flourishing state. He attempted nothingagainst the Catholic Faith. He exhibited games in the circus andamphitheatre, and received from the Romans the names of Trajan andValentinian, for the happy days of those most prosperous emperors hedid in truth seek to restore, and at the same time the Goths renderedtrue obedience to their valiant king according to the edict which hehad given them. 

[Footnote 1: Anon. Valesii. This was probably Bishop Maximian, aCatholic bishop of Ravenna. I follow, with a few changes, Mr. Hodgkin's translation. ]

[Footnote 2: Thirty-two years and a half from the death of Odoacer;thirty-seven from his descent into Italy. ]

"He gave one of his daughters in marriage to the king of the Visigothsin Gaul, another to the son of the Burgundian king; his sister to theking of the Vandals and his niece to the king of the Thuringians. Thushe pleased all the nations round him, for he was a lover ofmanufactures and a great restorer of cities. He restored the Aqueductof Ravenna which Trajan had built, and again after a long intervalbrought water into the city. He completed but did not dedicate thePalace, and he finished the Porticoes about it. At Verona he erectedBaths and a Palace, and constructed a Portico from the Gate to thePalace. The Aqueduct, which had been destroyed long since, he renewed, and brought in water through it. He also surrounded the city with newwalls. At Ticinum (Pavia) too he built a Palace, Baths, and anAmphitheatre and erected walls round the city. On many other cities hebestowed similar benefits. 

"Thus he so delighted the nations near him that they entered into aleague with him hoping that he would be their king. The merchants, too, from many provinces flocked to his dominions, for so great wasthe order which he maintained, that, if any one wished to keep goldand silver in the country it was as safe as in a walled city. A proofof this was that he never made gates for any city of Italy, and thegates that already existed were never closed. Any one who had businessto do, might go about it as safely by night as by day. "

But if such praise sound fulsome, let us hear what the sceptical andcensorious Procopius has to say:

"Theodoric, " he tells us, "was an extraordinary lover of justice andadhered vigorously to the laws. He guarded the country from barbarianinvasions, and displayed the greatest intelligence and prudence. Therewas in his government scarcely a trace of injustice towards hissubjects, nor would he permit any of those under him to attemptanything of the kind except that the Goths divided among themselvesthe same proportion of the land of Italy as Odoacer had given to hisconfederates. Thus then Theodoric was in name a tyrant, in fact a trueking, not inferior to the best of his predecessors, and his popularityincreased greatly both with the Goths and the Italians, and this wascontrary to the ordinary course of human affairs. For generally asdifferent classes in the state want different things, the governmentwhich pleases one party incurs the hatred of the other. After a reignof thirty-seven years he died having been a terror to all his enemies, but leaving a deep regret for his loss in the hearts of his subjects. "

In these panegyrics, which we cannot but accept as sincere, mention ismade of one of the greatest virtues of Theodoric, his reparation ofand care for the great monuments of the empire. In Ravenna we read herepaired the Aqueduct which Trajan had built and which had long beenout of repair, so that Ravenna always deficient in water had for manyyears suffered on this account. In the _Variae_ of Cassiodorus, hisminister and a Roman, we read as follows:--

"_King Theodoric to all Cultivators_. 

"The Aqueducts are an object of our special care. We desire you atonce to root up the shrubs growing in the Signine channel, which willbefore long become big trees scarcely to be hewn down with an axe andwhich interfere with the purity of the water in the Aqueduct ofRavenna. Vegetation is the peaceable overturner of buildings, thebattering-ram which brings them to the ground, though the trumpetsnever sound for siege. Now we shall have Baths again that we may lookupon with pleasure; water which will cleanse not stain[1]; water afterusing which we shall not require to wash ourselves again; drinkingwater too, such as the mere sight of it will not take away allappetite for food[2]. "

[Footnote 1: Cf. Sidonius Apollinaris above. ]

[Footnote 2: Cassiodorus, _Variae_, v. 38. Trs. Hodgkin, _The Lettersof Cassiodorus_ (Oxford, 1886). ]

The general restoration of the great material works of the empire wascharacteristic of the reign of Theodoric and could only have beencarried out by Roman officials and workmen. It is especially frequentin Ravenna and in Rome. Theodoric will, if he can help it, havenothing more destroyed. He is afraid of destruction, and that is amark of the barbarian. He wishes, Cassiodorus tells us, "to build newedifices without despoiling the old. But we are informed that in yourmunicipality (of Aestunae) there are blocks of masonry and columns, formerly belonging to some building, now lying absolutely useless andunhonoured. If this be so, send these slabs of marble and columns byall means to Ravenna that they may again be made beautiful and taketheir place in a building there. "[1] And again: "We rely upon yourzeal and prudence to see that the required blocks of marble areforwarded from Faenza to Ravenna without any extortion from privatepersons; so that, on the one hand, our desire for the adornment ofthat city may be gratified, and, on the other, there may be no causefor complaint on the part of our subjects. [2]

His care and adornment of Ravenna are remarkable. It was his capitaland he built there with a truly Roman splendour. We hear vaguely of aBasilica of Hercules which was to be adorned with a mosaic, thoughwhat this may have been we do not know; but we still have themagnificent Arian church of S. Apollinare, which he called S. Martin_de Coelo Aureo_ because of its beautiful gilded roof; and lessperfectly there remains to us the Arian church he built, called thenS. Theodore and now S. Spirito, and the Arian baptistery beside it;the ruin, known as his palace, and his mighty tomb. 

The government of Theodoric was great and generous, Roman in itscompleteness and in its largeness; but he did not succeed inestablishing a new kingdom, a nation of Goths and Romans in Italy. Why?

The answer to that question must be given and it is this: Theodoricand his Goths were Arians. Much more than race or nationality religionforms and inspires a people, welds them into one or divides themasunder. Even though there had been no visible difference in cultureand civilisation between the Goths, when for a generation they hadbeen settled south of the Alps, and the Romans of the plain and ofItaly, nevertheless they would have remained barbarians, for Arianismat this time was the certain mark of barbarism. [3] Had the barbariansnot fallen into this strange heresy, had the Goths, above all, beenCatholics, who knows what new nation might have arisen upon the ruinof the Western empire to create, more than five hundred years before, as things were, it was to blossom, the rose of the Middle Age?

[Footnote 1: Cassiodorus, op cit. Iii. 9. Trs. Hodgkin, op. Cit. ]

[Footnote 2: Cassiodorus, op. Cit. V. 8. ]

[Footnote 3: Heathenism even more so of course. It cannot bealtogether a cooincidence that those barbarians which first becameCatholic, though they had been ruder and rougher than the rest, weredestined to re-establish the empire in the West--the Franks. ]

[Illustration: S. APOLLINARE IN CLASSE]

[Illustration: Colour Plate THE MAUSOLEUM OF THEODORIC]

But this was not to be. The work of Theodoric, a useful work as weshall see, was serving quite another purpose than that of establishinga new Gothic kingdom. As for him and his government, they were utterlyto pass away and by reason of the religion they professed. 

The first blow at the endurance and security of the Ostrogothichegemony was the conversion of Clovis to Catholicism in 496. Thischanged the political relations, not only of every state in Gaul, butof every state in Europe, and enormously to the disadvantage of theArians. The second was the reconciliation, in 519, of the pope and theemperor, which rightly understood was the death warrant of the Gothickingdom. Had the Goths been Catholic, either that reconciliation wouldnot have taken place, or it would have been without ill results forthem. As it was it was fatal, though not all at once. 

The Arian heresy, if we are to understand it aright, must berecognised as an orientalism having much in common with Judaism andthe later Mahometanism. It denied several of the statements of theNicene Creed, those monoliths upon which the new Europe was to befounded. It maintained that the Father and the Son are distinctBeings; that the Son though divine is not equal to the Father; thatthe Son had a state of existence previous to His appearance uponearth, but is not from Eternity; that Christ Jesus was not really manbut a divine being in a case of flesh. Already against it the futurefrowned dark and enormous as the Alps. 

Such was the heresy at the root of the Ostrogothic kingdom, and it issignificant that the cause of the first open alienation betweenTheodoric and the Catholics of Italy was concerned with the Jews. Itseems that the Jews, whom Theodoric had always protected, had, duringhis absence from Ravenna, mocked the Christian rite of baptism andmade sport of it by throwing one another into one of the two muddyrivers of that city, and also by some blasphemous foolishness aimed atthe Mass. The Catholic population had naturally retaliated by burningall the Jewish synagogues to the ground. Theodoric, like all theGothic Arians, sided with the Jews and fined the Catholic citizens ofRavenna, publicly flogging those who could not pay, in order that thesynagogues might be rebuilt. Such was the first open breach betweenthe king and the Romans, who now began to remind themselves that therewas an Augustus at Constantinople. This memory, which had slumberedwhile pope and emperor were in conflict--such is the creative andformative power of religion--was stirred and strengthened by thereconciliation between the emperor Justin and the Holy See. It iscurious that the man who was to lead the Catholic party and to sufferin the national cause had translated thirty books of Aristotle intoLatin; his name was Boethius and he was master of the offices. 

This great and pathetic figure had been till the year 523 continuallyin the favour of Theodoric. In that year suddenly an accusation wasbrought against the patrician Albinus of "sending letters to theemperor Justin hostile to the royal rule of Theodoric. " In the debatewhich followed, Boethius claimed to speak and declared that theaccusation was false, "but whatever Albinus did, I and the wholesenate of Rome with one purpose did the same. " We may well ask for aclear statement of what they had done; we shall get no answer. Boethius himself speaks of "the accusation against me of having hopedfor Roman freedom, " and adds: "As for Roman freedom, what hope is leftto us of that? Would that there were any such hope. " To the charge of"hoping for Roman freedom" was added an accusation of sorcery. 

Boethius was tried in the senate house in Rome while he was lying inprison in Pavia. Without being permitted to answer his accusers or tobe heard by his judges he was sentenced to death by the intimidatedsenate whose freedom he was accused of seeking to establish. FromPavia, where in prison awaiting death he had written his _DeConsolatione Philosophiae_ which was so largely to inform the newEurope, he was carried to "the _ager Calventianus_" a few miles fromMilan; where he was tortured, a cord was twisted round his foreheadtill his eyes burst from their sockets, and then he was clubbed todeath. This occurred in 524, and in that same year throughout theempire we find the great movement against Arianism take on new life. 

[Illustration: CAPITAL FROM S. VITALE]

This irresistible attack began in the East and Theodoric seems at onceto have seen in it the culmination of all those dangers he had tofear. He recognised, too, at last, that it was Catholicism he had toface. Therefore he sent for pope John I. When the pope, old andinfirm, appeared in Ravenna, Theodoric made the greatest diplomaticmistake of his life. He bade the pope go to Constantinople to theemperor and tell him that "he must not in any way attempt to win overthose whom he calls heretics to the Catholic religion. "

Apart from the impertinence of this command to the emperor from theking of the Goths, it was foolish in the extreme. His object shouldhave been, above all else, to keep the emperor and the pope apart, butby this act he forced them together; only anger can have suggestedsuch an impolitic move. "The king, " says the chronicler[1], "returningin great anger [from the murder of Boethius] and unmindful of theblessings of God, considered that he might frighten Justin by anembassy. Therefore he sent for John the chief of the Apostolic See toRavenna and said to him, 'Go to Justin the emperor and tell him thatamong other things he must restore the converted heretics to the(Arian) faith. ' And the pope answered, 'What thou doest do quickly. Behold here I stand in thy sight. I will not promise to do this thingfor thee nor to say this to the emperor. But in other matters, withGod's help, I may succeed. ' Then the king being angered ordered a shipto be prepared and placed the pope aboard together with other bishops, namely, Ecclesius of Ravenna, Eusebius of Fano, Sabinus of Campania, and two others with the following senators, Theodorus, Importunus, Agapitus, and another Agapitus. But God, who does not forsake thosewho are faithful, brought them prosperously to their journey's end. Then the emperor Justin met the pope on his arrival as though he wereSt. Peter himself[2], and when he heard his message promised that hewould comply with all his requests, but _the converts who had giventhemselves to the Catholic Faith he could by no means restore to theArians_. "

[Footnote 1: Anon. Valesii, _ut supra_. ]

[Footnote 2: "Prone on the ground the emperor, whom all other menadored, adored the weary pontiff.... When Easter-day came, the pope, taking the place of honour at the right hand of the patriarch ofConstantinople, celebrated Mass according to the Latin use in thegreat cathedral. "--Marcellinus Comes, quoted by Hodgkin, _op. Cit_. Iii. P. 463. ]

That was a great day not only for the papacy but for Italy. The popecan never have hoped that Theodoric would open to him so great anopportunity for confirming the reconciliation between the emperor andthe papacy which was the great need of the Latin cause. There can belittle doubt that pope John used his advantage to the utmost. Early in526 he returned to Ravenna to find Theodoric beside himself withanger. The barbarian who had perfidiously murdered Odoacer his rival, and most foully tortured the old philosopher Boethius to death, wasnot likely to shrink from any outrage that he thought might serve him, even though his victim were the pope. Symmachus, the father-in-law ofBoethius, a venerable and a saintly man, was barbarously done to deathand Pope John and his colleagues were thrown into prison in Ravenna, where the pope died on May 18 of that same year, and one hundred andfour days later was followed to the grave by the unhappy Gothic king. 

[Illustration: CAPITAL FROM SANTO SPIRITO]

Theodoric had utterly failed in everything he had attempted. HisRomano-Gothic kingdom proved to be a hopeless chimaera, and thisbecause he had not been able to understand the forces with which hehad to deal. Nor was he capable of learning from experience. Evenafter the death of Pope John he countersigned the death warrant of hiskingdom by an edict, issued with the signature of a Jewish treasuryclerk, that all the Catholic churches of Italy should be handed overto the Arians. He had scarcely published this amazing document, however, when he died after three days of pain on August 30, 526, thevery day the revolution was to have taken place. 

The Gothic king was buried outside Ravenna upon the north-east and inthe mighty tomb--a truly Roman work--that the Romans, at his orders, had prepared for him: a marvellous mausoleum of squared stones in twostories, the lower a decagon, the upper an octagon covered by a vastdome hewn out of a single block of Istrian marble. There in a porphyryvase reposed all that was mortal of the great barbarian who failed tounderstand what the Roman empire was, but who almost without knowingit rendered it, as we shall see, so great a service. But the body ofTheodoric did not long remain in the enormous silence of thatsepulchre. Even in the time of Agnellus (ninth century) the body wasno longer in the mausoleum and what had become of it will alwaysremain a mystery. A weird and awful legend, in keeping with thetremendous tragedy that was played out in his time and in which he hadfilled the main role, relates how a holy hermit upon the island ofLipari on the day and in the hour of the great king's death saw him, his hands and feet bound, his garments all disarrayed, dragged up themountain of Stromboli by his two victims, pope John and Symmachus, thefather-in-law of Boethius, and hurled by them into the fiery crater ofthe volcano. 

Agnellus, of Ravenna, who records that the body of Theodoric was nolonger in the great mausoleum, tells us that as it seems to him it wascast forth out of that sepulchre. A later suggestion would lead us tosuppose that this was done by the monks of a neighbouring monastery, who are said to have cast the body in its golden armour into theCanale Corsini close by[1]. A few pieces of a golden cuirassdiscovered there and now in the museum of Ravenna, seem to confirmthis story, which certainly is not unreasonable though of course it isthe merest conjecture. It is possible that the body of Theodoric didnot rest longer in its tomb than the Gothic power remained in Italy. For already within a year of the death of Theodoric the new saviourhad appeared. Once more a great man sat upon the throne of the empire, in whose mind and in whose will was set the dream of the reconquest, of the re-establishment of the empire through the West, of thepromulgation of the great code by which the new Europe was to realiseitself. Justinian reigned in the New Rome upon the Bosphorus. 

[Footnote 1: There is apparently no foundation for the assertion ofFra Salimbene, the thirteenth-century chronicler of Parma (_Cronica_, ed Holder-Egger, pp 209-210), that it was S. Gregory the Great himselfwho ordered the body of Theodoric to be cast forth from its tomb. Cf. E. G. Gardner _The Dialogues of S. Gregory_ (1911), p 273]

VII

THE RECONQUEST

VITIGES, BELISARIUS, TOTILA, NARSES

The failure of Theodoric, the failure of barbarism, of Arianism thatis, for barbarism and civilisation were now for all intents andpurposes mere synonyms for heresy and Catholicism, was probably fullyappreciated by the Gothic king, who was, nevertheless, incapable ofmastering his fate. The great lady who succeeded to his power in Italyas the guardian of her son, his heir, Athalaric, was certainly asfully aware as Theodoric may have been of the cause of that failure, and she made the attempt, which he had not wished or dared to make, tosave the kingdom. The value of her heroic effort, which, for all itscourage, utterly failed, lies for us in the confirmation it gives toour analysis of the causes of the Gothic failure to establish anenduring government in the West. 

That Amalasuntha wished to become a Catholic is probably true enough;it is certain that she understood from the first that, in such an act, she would not be able to carry her people with her. Therefore, she didwhat she could short of this the only real remedy. She attempted toeducate her little son as a Roman, and hoped thus to insure his powerwith the Latin population, trusting that the fact of his birth wouldperhaps ensure the loyalty of the Gothic nation. In this she waswholly to fail, because, as her attempt shows, she had notfundamentally understood, any more than her father had been able todo, the realities of the situation in which she found herself. 

For all her genuine love for Roman things, her contempt of Gothicrudeness and barbarism, she failed to see that the one living thingthat impressed the Roman mind, and really differentiated the Latinfrom the Goth, was religion, was Catholicism. She remained, possiblyfrom necessity, but she remained, an Arian, and though she broughtAthalaric up "in all respects after the manner of the Romans, " she didnot make him a Catholic, nor did she attempt the certainly hopelesstask of leading the Gothic nation towards the only means ofreconciliation that might have been successful. 

The compromise she adopted was useless and futile, and only succeededin alienating the Goths, without winning her a single ally among theRomans. Her own people utterly disapproved of her method of educationfor her son, their king, "because they wished him to be trained inmore barbaric style so that they might the more readily oppress theirsubjects. " Presently they remonstrated with her: "O Lady, you are notdealing justly with us, nor doing what is best for the nation when youthus educate your son. Letters and book-learning are different fromcourage and fortitude, and to permit a boy to be trained by old men isthe way to make him a coward and a fool. He who is to dare and to winglory, and fame, must not be subjected to the fear of a pedagogue, butmust spend his time in martial exercise. Your father, Theodoric, wouldnever suffer his Goths to send their sons to the grammarians, for heused to say: 'If they fear the teacher's strap they will never look onsword or javelin without a shudder. ' He himself, who won the lordshipof such wide lands and died king of so fair a kingdom, which he hadnot inherited from his fathers, knew nothing, even by hearsay, of booklearning. Therefore, lady, you must say 'good-bye' to thesepedagogues, and give Athalaric companions of his own age, who may growup with him to manhood, and make him a valiant king after the mannerof the barbarians. "[1]

[Footnote 1: Hodgkin, _Theodoric_ (Putnam, 1900), pp. 307-308. ]

Amalasuntha was forced to bow to this, the public opinion of her ownpeople. The result was disastrous; for the young Athalaric, like atrue barbarian, was soon led away into a bestial sensuality whichpresently destroyed his health and sent him to an early grave. Seeinghis instability both of body and mind, Amalasuntha entered into secretcommunication with Constantinople, where Justinian was now emperor, and even prepared for a possible flight to that city. Thus in 534, when she received an ambassador in Ravenna from Justinian who demandedof her the surrender of Lilybaeum, a barren rock in Sicily whichTheodoric had assigned to Thrasamund on his marriage with his sisterAmalafrida, in public she protested vigorously against the attempt ofthe emperor to pick a quarrel with "an orphaned king" too young todefend himself; but in private she assured the imperial ambassador ofher readiness "to transfer to the emperor the whole of Italy. "

Italy was in this unstable state when, on the 2nd October 534, Athalaric died in his eighteenth year. This apparently upsetAmalasuntha's plans. At any rate, we see her suddenly face quite aboutand sending for Theodahad, the son of Amalafrida, upon whom she hadbut lately pronounced a humiliating sentence, she offered to make himher official colleague upon the Gothic throne. This man was anambitious villain. Of course he accepted Amalasuntha's foolish offerand swore to observe the agreement made between them. But before manyweeks had passed he had made her a prisoner and had her securelyhidden upon an island in the Lake of Bolsena in Umbria. But Theodahadappears to have been a fool as well as a villain. Having disposed ofAmalasuntha, he sent an embassy to Constantinople to explain hisconduct and to attempt to come to terms with Caesar. For hisambassadors he chose not Gothic nobles, who might have found hisactions to their advantage, but Roman senators all but one of whomtold a plain tale. Justinian immediately despatched his ambassadorPeter to reassure Amalasuntha of his protection and to threatenTheodahad that if she were hurt it would be at the price of his ownhead. Peter however, had scarcely landed in Italy when he had news ofAmalasuntha's murder in her island prison. He continued at once on hisway to Ravenna, and there in the court before all the Gothic noblesnot only denounced the murderer, but declared "truceless war" upon theGoths. [1]

[Footnote 1: Cf. Procopius, _De Bello Gotico_, 25. The murder ofAmalasuntha served the interests of the imperialists so well thatpublic opinion at Constantinople attributed it to Peter the ambassadorand to Theodora, the wife of Justinian. It remains, however, extremelydoubtful whether there is any truth in this accusation, although it iscertain that Theodora was in communication with Theodahad. ]

The truth was that Justinian was ready, the hour had struck, and withthe hour had appeared the man who with his great master was ready toattempt the reconquest of the West for civilisation. 

We shall see the true state of affairs from the point of view ofConstantinople if we retrace our steps a little. 

Justinian had succeeded Justin upon the imperial throne in 527. Thisgreat man had early set before himself the real recovery of the Westfor the empire. Circumstances, which he was not slow to use, causedhim to attempt first the reconquest of Africa from the Vandals, andthe true state of affairs is disclosed by the causes which broughtabout this great campaign. 

Hilderic, who had succeeded Thrasamund on the Vandal throne in Africa, had put Amalafrida, the queen dowager, the sister of Theodoric, todeath. In June 531, he was deposed. Now Hilderic favoured theCatholics, was the ally of the empire, and was descended on hismother's side from the great Theodosius. Justinian determined toavenge him, and in avenging him to reconquer Africa for the empire. The hour had struck as I say, and the man had appeared with the hour. That man was the great soldier Belisarius, the instrument of Justinianin all his heroic design. 

Belisarius was entirely successful in his African campaign. On 15thSeptember 533, he entered Carthage, and "was received by the majorityof the citizens who spoke the Latin tongue and professed the CatholicFaith with unconcealed rejoicing. " And as it happened he enteredCarthage only to hear of Hilderic's murder. Before the end of the yearthe reconquest was complete. Africa was once more and in reality aprovince of the empire, and offered an excellent base of operationsfor the conquest of Italy, now to be undertaken. 

In the summer of 535, eighteen months later, Justinian began the greatwar against the Goths, the opportunity for which was offered him bythe murder of Amalasuntha, and the result of which was to be there-establishment of the empire in Italy. Rightly understood the trueservice of Theodoric--and it was a real and a precious service--wasthat the thirty years of settled government and peace which he hadgiven Italy had prepared the way for the reconquest. 

That reconquest occupied five years. It was begun with an attack uponSicily and proceeded northward by way of Naples and Rome to Ravenna, with the fall of which it was achieved. From a purely strategicalpoint of view Belisarius was wrong to attack Sicily first and to carrythe campaign from south to north; he should have attacked Ravennafirst, and from the sea, and thus possessed himself of the key ofItaly, and this especially as his base was Constantinople. Butpolitically he was absolutely right. Sicily was almost empty of Gothictroops and the provincials were eagerly Catholic and only too willingto make a real part of the Roman empire. Thus the campaign opened withsurrender after surrender, was indeed almost a procession; onlyPalermo offered resistance, and this because it was held by a garrisonof Goths; but before the end of 535 the whole island was once moresubject to the empire. 

Early in 536 a rebellion in Africa, which proved to be little morethan a mutiny in Carthage, took Belisarius away; but he was back inSicily before the end of the spring, and in the early summer wasmarching through southern Italy almost unresisted, welcomed everywherewith joy and thanksgiving till he came to the fortress of Naples, which was held by a Gothic garrison. Here the people wished to welcomehim and surrender the city, but were prevented by the garrison, which, however, was soon cleverly outwitted and taken prisoner, and by theend of November all southern Italy was in Belisarius' hands. 

The fall of Naples brought Theodahad to the ground. The Goths deposedhim and raised upon their shields Vitiges the soldier. As forTheodahad he was overtaken on the road to Ravenna, whither he wasflying, and his throat was cut as he lay on the pavement of the way, "as a priest cuts the throat of his victim. "

If Theodahad was a villain as well as a fool, perhaps Vitiges was onlythe latter. At any rate, he is generally considered to have acted withcriminal folly, when, as the first act of his reign, he abandoned Romeand fell back upon Ravenna, determined to make his great defence innorthern Italy. But I think, if we consider the position more closely, we shall see that Vitiges was not such a fool as he looks. He had seenthe two great fortresses of Palermo and Naples fall, and mainly forthe same reason, the fact that the whole of their populations exceptthe Gothic garrisons were eagerly on the side of the enemy. Thesituation of Rome, its great size, made it difficult to defend exceptwith a very great army, and this would become a hundred times moredifficult, if not impossible, if the population were to side with theattack. Yet not only was that already certain, but the sympathies ofthe citizens there might be expected to be even more passionatelyRoman than others had been elsewhere; for Rome was the capital ofCatholicism, the throne of the Church, the seat of Peter. The Goth hadto face the fact that, while he was perhaps hardly holding his own inRome, Belisarius might stealthily pass on to overthrow the Gothiccitadel at Ravenna. He had to ask himself whether he could expect todefend both Rome and Ravenna, for if Ravenna were to fall the wholekingdom was lost, since now, not less but rather more than before, Ravenna was the key to Italy. 

There is this also; Justinian had in the summer of 535 despatched twoarmies from Constantinople. One of these was that which Belisarius haddisembarked in Sicily, and which till now had been so uniformly and soeasily victorious. The other under Mundus had entered Dalmatia whichit had completely wrested from the Goths by the middle of 536. It isprobable that Vitiges expected to be attacked in the rear and from thenorth by this victorious army. If that should fall upon Ravenna whilethe Gothic strength was engaged in the defence of Rome, what would bethe fate of that principal city, and with that lost, what would becomeof him in the Catholic capital?

Of course Vitiges ought to have met the imperial army in the field andgiven battle. That was the true solution. But no Gothic army everdared to face Belisarius in the open, for though the Goths enormouslyoutnumbered his small force of some 8000 men, they feared him as thepossessor of a superior arm in the _Hippotoxotai_, mounted troopsarmed with the bow, and above all they feared his genius. 

But Vitiges was no fool; his cause was hopeless from the first. Heabandoned Rome and fell back upon Ravenna, because that was the bestthing to be done in the circumstances in which he found himself. Amongthese must be reckoned the newness of his authority and the necessityof consolidating it by a marriage with a princess of the blood ofTheodoric. As it happened, this retreat enabled him to prolong a warthat at first looked like coming to an end in a few months for fourmore years. 

Vitiges then abandoned Rome, but it seems not altogether. What he maybe supposed to have imagined Belisarius doing to his disadvantage, that he himself did. He left in Rome a garrison of four thousand menunder a veteran general Leudaris, while he himself with the Gothicarmy fell back upon Ravenna. No sooner was he gone than the surrenderof the City was offered to Belisarius by pope Silverius who spoke forthe citizens and the Roman people. This was the reality of thesituation. Then indeed an almost incredible blunder was committed, butnot by Vitiges. The four thousand Goths whom he had left to hold theCity, and at least to delay and waste the imperialists, marched out ofRome along the Flaminian Way as Belisarius entered from the south bythe Via Latina. Leudaris alone refused to quit this post. He was takenprisoner, and sent with the keys of the Eternal City to Justinian. 

Belisarius established himself upon the Pincian Hill, and his firstact after his occupation of the City is significant both of hisprofound knowledge of the barbarians and of the immutablecharacteristics of a Latin people. 

It is possible that the Romans, seeing the fall of Palermo and Naplesand the occupation of Rome itself obtained so easily, believed thatthe Goths were finally disposed of. But Belisarius' vast experience ofthe character of the barbarians taught him otherwise. He immediatelybegan to provision Rome from Sicily as fast as he could, and he atonce undertook the fortification of the City, the repair of theAurelian Wall. In these acts of Belisarius two things become evident. We see that he expected the return of the Goths, and we are made awareof the fact that they had neglected to fortify the City. 

It must be well seized by the reader, that the Gothic armies verygreatly outnumbered the imperial troops, who were but a smallexpedition of not more than eight thousand men face to face with animmense horde of barbarians. The great advantage of the imperialistswas that they were fighting in a friendly country, and they had toocertain superiorities of armament which civilisation may always dependupon having at its command as against barbarians. Nevertheless, Belisarius knew that his end would be more securely won if he couldwear down the barbarians, always impatient of so slow a business as asiege, from behind fortifications. He expected the barbarians, unstable in judgment and impatient of any but the simplest strategyand tactics, to swarm again and again about the City, and he wasright: what he expected came to pass. 

On the other hand, we see in the neglect on the part of the Goths ofall fortification of the City a neglect instantly repaired byBelisarius, a characteristic persistent and perhaps ineradicable inthe Teutonic mind from the days of Tacitus to our own time. The Romanshad always asserted, and those nations to-day who are of theirtradition still assert, that the spade is the indispensable weapon ofthe soldier. But the barbarians and those nations to-day who are oftheir tradition, while they have not been so foolish as to refuse thespade altogether, have always fortified reluctantly. You see these twocharacteristics at work to-day in the opposite methods of the Frenchand the Germans, just as you see them at work in the sixth centurywhen Belisarius rebuilt the fortifications of the City which the Gothshad neglected. 

And if we have praised Vitiges for his retreat upon Ravenna, how muchmore must we praise Belisarius for the fortification of Rome. For ifthe one had for its result the prolongation of the war for some fouryears, the other determined what the end of that war should be. 

Let us once more consider the military situation. It is evident thatVitiges evacuated Rome because he was afraid of losing Ravenna, hisbase, by an outflanking movement on the part of Belisarius and perhapsby a new attack from Dalmatia. [1]

[Footnote 1: My theory of the strategy of Vitiges and of his purposeis perhaps unorthodox; the orthodox theory being that he was a fooland the abandonment of Rome a mere blunder. But my theory would seemto be accurate enough, for Vitiges's first act from Ravenna was todespatch an army into Dalmatia. ]

In leaving a garrison within the City of some four thousand men--sayhalf as many as the whole imperialist army--he at least hoped to delaythe enemy till he had secured himself in the north and to waste him. Ido not think he expected to hold the city for any length of time, forthe whole country was spiritually with the enemy. 

What he hoped to gain by his retreat was, however, not merely thesecurity of the north. He hoped also to lure Belisarius thither afterhim where, in a country less wholly Latin and imperialist, he wouldhave a better chance of annihilating him by mere numbers once and forall. To this supreme hope and expectation of the Goth's, therefortification of Rome by Belisarius finally put an end. It was acountermove worthy of such a master and entirely in keeping with theRoman tradition. 

At first it must have appeared to Vitiges that the course he hadexpected Belisarius to pursue was actually being followed; forpresently the imperialists began to move up the Flaminian Way. But itwas soon evident that this was no advance in force, but rather a partof the fortification of the City. All the places occupied werefortresses and all were with one exception upon the Via Flaminia whichthey commanded. The first of these strong places was Narni, which heldthe great bridge over the Nera at the southern exit of the passesbetween the valley of Spoleto and the lower Tiber valley, where thetwo roads over the mountains, one by Todi, the other by Spoleto, met. The second place occupied was Spoleto at the head, and the third wasPerugia at the foot, of the great valley of Spoleto, from which theVia Flaminia rose to cross the central Apennines. The three placeswere occupied without much trouble, and it was thus attempted to makethe great road from the north impassable. 

If Vitiges, as I believe, thought the imperialists would immediatelyfollow him northward he was no more deceived than the Romansthemselves. They had surrendered the City to Belisarius to save itfrom attack and the last thing they desired was to suffer a siege. Afeeling of resentment, the old jealousy of Constantinople, seems tohave appeared, and in this Vitiges thought he saw his opportunity. With 150, 000 men, according to Procopius, he issued from Ravenna andmarched upon Rome, avoiding apparently the three forts held by theimperialists, for he came, again according to Procopius, throughSabine territory and therefore his advance was upon the eastern bankof the Tiber. However that may be, he got without being attacked asfar as the bridge over the Anio on the Via Salaria, or as the MilvianBridge over the Tiber where the Via Cassia and the Via Flaminia meetto enter the City. [1] This bridge, whichever it was, Belisarius haddetermined to hold, but without his knowledge it was deserted. TheGoths were crossing unopposed when the general himself appeared with1000 horse. A tremendous fight followed in which, such was his rageand astonishment, Belisarius bore himself rather like a brave soldierthan a wise general. Unhurt in spite of the _melee_ he fell backeither upon the Porta Salaria[2] or upon the Porta Flaminia (delPopolo), which he found closed against him, for the City believed himdead. Almost in despair he rallied his men and made a desperatecharge, which, such was the number of the Goths in the road and theconfusion of their advance, was successful. The barbarians fled andBelisarius and his gallant troopers entered the City at nightfall. 

[Footnote 1: Procopius tells us both that Vitiges advanced through theSabine country and that he crossed the Tiber--an impossible thing. Gibbon and Hodgkin refuse the former, Gregorovius the latterstatement. I agree with Gregorovius, for Procopius confuses the Tiberand Anio elsewhere, notably iii. 10. ]

[Footnote 2: Possibly the Porta Pinciana. ]

[Illustration: Sketch Map of VITIGES, MARCH]

All through that night the walls of Rome were aflame with watchfiresand disastrous tidings, happily false; and when the dawn rose out ofthe Campagna, Rome was still inviolate. 

Thus began the first siege of Rome in the early days of March 537. Itlasted for three hundred and seventy-four days and ended in the sullenretreat of the barbarians to save Ravenna, which as Vitiges had atfirst foreseen would happen was threatened with attack. But as sooften in later times, those three hundred and seventy-four days haddealt incomparably more hardly with the besiegers than with thebesieged. The Campagna had done its work, and it has been calculatedthat of the 150, 000 men that are said to have marched with Vitiges toattack the city, not more than 10, 000 returned to Ravenna. 

Meanwhile during the great siege Belisarius, by means of hissubordinate general, John, had carried on a campaign in Picenum andhad been able to send assistance to the people of Milan, eagerly Romanas they were. 

In Picenum, John had perhaps rashly pushed forward from Ancona toRimini; which he held precariously and to the danger of Ancona. Thefirst act of Belisarius after the raising of the siege of the City wasto despatch troops post haste to Rimini. He sent Ildiger and Martinwith a thousand horse to fight their way if necessary to Rimini towithdraw John and his two thousand horse. He purposed to hold Riminionly with the tips of his fingers, for his determination was to secureall he held before he entered upon a final and a real advancenorthward. 

The position of Belisarius seemed more insecure than in fact it was. If we consider the great artery of his advance northward, the ViaFlaminia, we shall find that he held everything to the east of theroad between Rome and Ancona save one fortress, Osimo above Ancona, which was held by four thousand of the enemy. But all was or seemed tobe insecure because he held nothing to the west of the great road savePerugia: Orvieto, Todi, Chiusi, Urbino were all in Gothic hands, whilethe Furlo Pass over the Apennines was also held by the enemy. 

Well might Belisarius desire the cavalry of John, useless in Rimini, for the direct road to that city was still in the hands of the enemy. But when John got his orders he refused to obey them and Ildiger andMartin returned without him. What excuse is possible for this refusalof obedience on the part of a subordinate which might well haveimperilled the whole campaign? This only: that he had orders from onesuperior even to Belisarius. It is probable that John in Rimini andAncona was aware that he might expect reinforcement fromConstantinople and that Belisarius knew nothing of them. Thesereinforcements arrived under Narses, the great and famous chamberlainof Justinian, not long after Rimini had begun to suffer the memorablesiege that followed the departure of Ildiger and Martin, and Anconahad only just been saved. The presence of Narses in Italy changed thewhole aspect of the campaign, and whatever motives Justinian may havehad for sending him thither, the effect of his landing at Ancona withgreat reinforcements can have had only a good effect upon the war. 

[Illustration: Sketch Map CITIES UNDERLINED WERE IN IMPERIAL HANDS]

Belisarius had now secured himself to this extent that Todi and Chiusiwere in his hands, and he hastened to meet Narses at Fermo forty milessouth of Ancona. There a council of war was held in which Belisariusmaintained his plan, namely, that Rimini should be abandoned becauseOsimo, very strongly held over Ancona, was in the hands of the Goths. Narses, on the contrary, looked only to the spiritual side of war. Hemaintained that if a city once recovered for the empire was abandonedthe moral result would be disastrous. At any cost he was for therelief of Rimini. Somewhat reluctantly, realising the danger, Belisarius consented to try. A screen of a thousand men was placedbefore Osimo, an army was embarked for Rimini and another was sent outby the coast road, while Belisarius himself and Narses with a columnof cavalry set out from Fermo westward, crossed the Apennines aboveSpoleto, struck into the Flaminian Way, recrossed the Apennines by theFurlo, and had come within a day's journey of Rimini when they cameupon a party of Goths, who fled and gave the alarm to Vitiges. Butbefore the Goth could decide what to do, Ildiger was upon him from thesea, Martin was upon him with a great army from the south, andBelisarius and Narses came down from the mountains in time to rejoiceat the delivery of the city. 

That deliverance but disclosed the two parties that divided theimperial army. When John refused obedience to Belisarius we may besure he was not acting wholly without encouragement, and this at oncebecame obvious after the deliverance of Rimini which Belisarius hadcarried out but which had been conceived by Narses. It will beremembered that Milan was by the act of Belisarius in the hands of theRomans; it was, however, now besieged even as Rimini had been by avery redoubtable Gothic leader, Uraius. Orvieto and Osimo also werestill in barbarian hands. Belisarius now proposed to employ the armyin the relief of the one and the capture of the others. Narses, on theother hand, proposed to take his part of the army and with it toreoccupy the province of Aemilia between the Apennines and the Po. These rivalries and differences were to cost the life of a great city, Milan. For since Narses would not consent to the plan of Belisarius, only what seemed most urgent was done; Orvieto was taken, Urbino too, and the energy of the imperial army and its purpose, also, wasexpended upon many unimportant things, an attempt upon Cesena, thereduction of Imola, which involved a hopeless dispersal of forces uponno great end. Belisarius, warned of the danger, ordered John to therelief of Milan; again that creature of Narses refused. And down cameMilan before Uraius the Goth, who fell upon the helpless citizens andmassacred three hundred thousand of them, being all the men of thecity; and the women he gave as payment to his Burgundian ally; and ofMilan he left not one stone upon another. But when Justinian read thedespatch of Belisarius, he recalled Narses, for if the fall of Riminiwould have injured so sorely the imperial cause, what of the fall ofMilan, the massacre of its inhabitants, the utter destruction of thecity? So great was its effect that we read even Justinian thought oftreating with the Goths; for he was haunted by the weakness of hisPersian frontier, and he had soon to look to the western Alps. 

Not so Belisarius. He went on his way and first he reduced twofortresses that had long threatened him, Osimo and Fiesole, and thenand at long last he began the great advance upon Ravenna. 

In this he was attempting with a small and weary force what had neverbefore been accomplished. Theodoric, it is true, had entered Ravennaas a conqueror, but only by stratagem and deceptive promises after asiege of three years. Belisarius, none knew it better than he, hadneither the time nor the forces that were at the disposal of the greatGothic king. He must act quickly if at all, and nowhere and on nooccasion does this great and resourceful man appear to betteradvantage than in his achievement at Ravenna, which should have beenthe last military action of the reconquest. 

Procopius, who was perhaps an eye-witness of the whole business of thesiege and certainly entered Ravenna in triumph with Belisarius, tellsus that, after the fall of Osimo, Belisarius made haste to Ravennawith his whole army. He sent one of his generals, Magnus, before himwith a sufficient force, to march along the Po and to preventprovisions being taken into the impregnable city from the AemilianWay; while another general, Vitalius, he called out of Dalmatia withhis forces to hold the northern bank of the river. When this was donea most extraordinary accident occurred which it seems impossible toexplain. "An accident then befell, " says Procopius, "which clearlyshows that Fortuna determines even yet every struggle. For the Gothshad brought down the Po many barges from Liguria[1] laden with corn, bound for Ravenna; but the water suddenly grew so low in the riverthat they could not row on; and the Romans coming upon them took themand all their lading. Soon after the river had again its wonted streamand was navigable as before. This scarcity of water had never tillthen occurred so far as we could hear. "

[Footnote 1: Cf. Cassiodorus, _Variae_, II. 20, where we read ofTheodoric in a time of scarcity supplying Liguria with food fromRavenna. "Let any provision ships which may be now lying at Ravenna beordered round to Liguna, which in ordinary times supplies the needs ofRavenna herself. "]

Owing to this accident and the closeness of the investment the Gothsbegan to be short of provisions, for they could import nothing fromthe sea, since the Romans were masters there. In their need, however, the King of the Franks, knowing how things were, sent ambassadors toVitiges in Ravenna, and so did Belisarius. The Franks offered to leadan army of five hundred thousand men over the Alps and to bury theRomans in utter ruin if the Goths would consent to share Italy withthem. But the Goths feared the Franks, and the ambassadors ofBelisarius were able to persuade them to reject their offers. Fromthis time forward negotiations went on without ceasing betweenBelisarius and the Goths, for the one was short of time, the other offood. Nevertheless, the Romans did not relax their investment of thecity in any way. Indeed, Belisarius chose this moment for hisshrewdest and cruellest blow. "For hearing how there was much corn inthe public magazines of Ravenna, he won a citizen with money to setthem afire; which loss, some say, happened by Matasuntha's advice, thewife of Vitiges. It was so suddenly done that some thought it was bylightning, as others by design, and Vitiges and the Goths, taking itin either kind, fell into more irresolution, mistrusting one another, and thinking that God himself made war against them. "

At this misfortune Uraius, the destroyer of Milan, proposed to attemptto relieve Ravenna, but Belisarius easily outwitted him and hisintervention came to nothing. 

Nevertheless time, so scarce with the Romans, was running short. Justinian was impatient to have done with the Italian war, for thegeneral situation was extremely grave; upon the Danube an invasion ofSlavs was gathering; in Asia, Persia threatened the empire. It is notaltogether surprising then that Justinian now made an attempt to cometo terms with Vitiges behind the back of Belisarius. He sent twoambassadors to offer peace upon the following really amazing terms, namely, that the Goths were to have half the royal treasure and thedominion of the country beyond the Po, that is to say, to the north ofthe Po; the other half of the revenues and the rest of Italy withSicily were to be the emperor's. The ambassadors showed theirinstructions to Belisarius, who had them conducted into Ravenna, whereVitiges and the Goths gladly consented to make peace and to acceptthese conditions. But both sides had reckoned without Belisarius, whodoubtless saw that such a peace could not endure and that all hislabour, if such terms were to be made, had gone for nothing. Nothingwould satisfy his ideas of security save the absolute defeat of theGoths with its natural sequel, the bringing of Vitiges toConstantinople as a prisoner. He, therefore, refused to sign thetreaty, leaving it to be established by the ambassadors alone. Butwhen the Goths saw this they thought that the Romans cozened them, andrefused to conclude anything without the signature and oath ofBelisarius. 

That Belisarius was right we cannot doubt; but his action naturallylaid him open to be accused of a design, against the emperor'sintentions, to prolong the war for his own glory. Nor were certain ofhis generals slow to make such an accusation. When he heard of it, he(who had suffered more than enough from the disloyalty ofsubordinates) called them all together, and in the presence of theambassadors confessed that Fortune was the great decider of war, andthat a good opportunity for peace should ever be seized. Then he badethem speak their minds in the present case. They declared then, oneand all, that it were best to follow the instructions of the emperor. When Belisarius heard them speak thus he was glad and bade them puttheir opinions in writing, that neither he nor they might afterwardsdeny their confession that they were not able to subdue the enemy bywar. 

But Belisarius was sure of his ground. The Goths pressed by faminecould hold out no longer, and weary of Vitiges, who had given them nosuccess, yet afraid of yielding to the emperor lest he should removethem out of Italy to Constantinople and thereabout, they resolved, ofall things, to declare Belisarius emperor in the West. Secretly theysent to entreat him to accept the empire, professing to be mostwilling to obey him. Such an astonishing proposal must have filledBelisarius with delight. He, indeed, had no intention of receivingfrom such hands a gift so fantastic, for he hated the name of usurper;but he saw at once how this proposal might help his ends. Heimmediately called his generals and the ambassadors together and askedthem if they did not think it a matter of importance to make all theGoths and Vitiges the emperor's captives, to capture their wealth, andto recover all Italy to the Romans. They answered it would be anextreme high fortune and bade him effect it if he could. ThenBelisarius sent to the Goths and bade them perform what they hadoffered. And they, for the famine was too hard to bear, agreed andsent ambassadors to take the oath of the great Roman for theirindemnity and that he would be King of Italy, and when they had it, toreturn into Ravenna with the Roman army. Now as to their indemnityBelisarius bound himself, but touching the kingdom he said he wouldswear it to Vitiges himself and the Gothic commanders. And theambassadors, not thinking he would forego the kingdom, but that hedesired it above all things, prayed him forthwith to march intoRavenna. And he himself with his army and the Gothic ambassadorsentered Ravenna; and he commanded also ships to be laden with corn andto come into Classis. 

"When I saw, " says Procopius, whose account of the siege and fall ofRavenna I have followed so far, "when I saw the entrance of their armyinto Ravenna, I considered how actions are not concluded by valour, multitudes, or human virtue, but by some Divinity that steers the actsand judgements of men. The Goths had much the advantage in numbers andpower, and since they came to Ravenna no defeat there had overthrownthem, yet they became prisoners and thought it no shame to be slavesto fewer in number. The women (who had heard from their husbands thatthe enemy were tall and gallant men and not to be numbered) lookedwith contempt upon the Roman soldiers when they saw them in the city, and spat in the faces of their husbands, reviling them with cowardice, pointing at their conquerors. "

Thus Ravenna, the impregnable city, was taken by stratagem andwillingly; never again to pass out of Roman hands till Aistulf theLombard in 752 seized it for a few years and thus caused Pepin tocross the Alps to vindicate the Roman name. 

 * * * * *

The first Gothic war, against Vitiges, (536-540) had thus for itscrown and end, the capture of Ravenna; the second, against Totila(541-553), proceeded from Ravenna for the reconquest, yet once again, of Italy. 

In 540, after Ravenna had been occupied, Belisarius recalled, andVitiges taken as a captive to Constantinople, the Romans held allItaly except the city of Pavia. In 544, when Belisarius returned, theyheld only Ravenna, Rome, Spoleto, and a few other strongholds such asPerugia and Piacenza. Nor was this all. In this second war all Italywas laid waste and ruined, Rome was twice besieged and occupied by theGoths, and in 546, when Totila had done with her, during a space offorty days the City remained utterly desolate, without a singleinhabitant. How had such a miserable and unexpected catastrophebefallen the Catholic cause?

In the first place it must be admitted that the capture of Ravenna bystratagem was not the final catastrophe it appeared for the Goths. Itis true that that triumph seemed to give, and indeed did give, allItaly into the hands of the Romans, but that gift was never secured. Belisarius, partly from necessity, partly on account of the suspiciousjealousy of the emperor, was withdrawn from Italy too soon. He wasvictorious, but he was not given time to secure his victories. Theextraordinary incompetence and rivalries of the committee of generalswhich succeeded him let the opportunity for securing and establishingan enduring peace slip through its fingers; the inevitable reactionthat followed the departure of Belisarius was not met at all, thewhole situation that then developed was misunderstood, with the resultthat the Goths were soon able to find a leader, perhaps the mostformidable, and certainly the most destructive, that they had everproduced. 

The cause of the imperial incompetence and failure would appear tohave been financial. The empire had been perhaps always, certainly fortwo hundred years, bankrupt. Its administration and above all itsdefence were beyond its means. The Gothic war had been a tremendousstrain upon the imperial finances already incredibly involved in thedefence of the East. It was necessary to find in Italy the money forthat war and for the future defence of that country; but Italy hadbeen ruined by the Gothic war and above all things needed capital anda period of reproductive repose. These Justinian was unable to giveher. His necessities forced him to cover the peninsula with taxgatherers, to bleed an already ruined country of the little thatremained to her. If the result was a reaction, in the north activelyGothic, in the centre and south certainly indifferent to the imperialcause, we cannot wonder at it. The spiritual situation and theeconomic or material would not chime. The result was the appallingconfusion we know as the second Gothic war. 

[Illustration: Colour Plate S. VITALE: THE GALLERY]

I say it was a confusion. No clear issue seems to present itself frombeginning to end; the old democratic cause, the Catholicism of thepeople rising in rage and fury against the Arianism of the courts, burnt low for a moment, and was indeed in part extinguished by theappalling misery of the material situation of Italy. Upon thismaterialism, the material benefits that Theodoric had undoubtedlyconferred upon the Italian people, Totila, that formidable chieftainwho now came to the front as the Gothic leader, based his appeal andhis hope of victory. "Surely, " he says to the Roman senate, "you mustremember sometimes in these evil days the benefits which you receivednot so very long ago at the hands of Theodoric and Amalasuntha. " Andagain: "What harm did the Goths ever do you? And tell me then whatgood you received from Justinian the emperor?... Has he not compelledyou to give an account of every _solidus_ which you received from thepublic funds even under the Gothic kings? All harassed andimpoverished as you are by the war, has he not compelled you to pay tothe Greeks the full taxes which could be levied in a time ofprofoundest peace?" Totila based his appeal upon the materialwell-being of the people. It was a formidable appeal; it nearlysucceeded. That it did not succeed, though it had so much in itsfavour, is the best testimony we could have to the real nature of thewar, which was not a struggle between two races or even primarily, atany rate, between barbarism and civilisation, but something greaterand more fundamental, a fight to the death between two religionsArianism and Catholicism, upon the result of which the whole future ofEurope depended. 

The confusion of the second Gothic war, in which the future of theworld and the major interests of man were in jeopardy, may be dividedinto three parts. The first of these is that in which the wholeadministration precariously established by Belisarius fell to piecesbefore the earthquake that was Totila, who, never systematically metand opposed, by the year 544 held all Italy with the exception, as Ihave said, of Ravenna, Rome, Spoleto, Perugia, Piacenza, and a fewother strongholds. The second is that in which Belisarius againappears, and from the citadel of Ravenna, without ceasing or rest, butwithout much success, opposes him everywhere. In this period Rome wasoccupied and reoccupied no less than four times, and, as I have said, in 546 was left utterly desolate. Nevertheless, when for the secondtime Belisarius was recalled, in 548, he left things much as he hadfound them. He had at least--and with what scarcity of men and moneywe may see in his letters to the emperor--opposed and perhaps stemmedthe overwhelming Gothic advance. At his departure the imperialistsheld Ravenna, Rome (but after the sack of 546), Rimini, Spoleto, Ancona, and Perugia. But before he arrived in Constantinople, Perugiahad fallen; in the same year, 549, a mutiny in Rome gave the City tothe Goths and Rimini was betrayed. In the year 551, the year ofNarses' appointment as general-in-chief in Italy and the opening ofthe third period, only Ravenna and Ancona, with Hydruntum (Otranto)and Crotona in southern Italy, remained to the empire. 

In that year, 551, however, everywhere the Gothic cause began to fail. In a sea-fight off Sinigaglia the imperial forces disposed of theGothic sea power and relieved Ancona, which was in grave danger. Aboutthe same time Sicily was delivered from the Gothic yoke, and in thespring of 552 Crotona was relieved. Meanwhile, in Illyricum, Narsesgathered his army, in which Ardoin, King of the Lombards, rode at thehead of two thousand of his people, and prepared for the great marchinto Italy. 

He came through Venetia round the head of the Adriatic, close to thesea (for a formidable Frankish host held the great roads), crossingwith what anxiety we may guess, the mouths of the Piave, the Brenta, the Adige, and the Po by means of his ships, and having thus turnedthe flank of the Frankish armies he triumphantly marched into Ravenna. There he remained for nine days, as it were another Caesar about tocross the Rubicon. 

While he waited in Ravenna an insulting challenge reached him from thebarbarian Usdrilas who held Rimini. "After your boasted preparations, which have kept all Italy in a ferment, and after striking terror intoour hearts by knitting your brows and looking more awful than mortalmen, you have crept into Ravenna and are skulking there afraid of thevery name of the Goths. Come out with all that mongrel host ofbarbarians to whom you want to deliver Italy and let us behold you, for the eyes of the Goths hunger for the sight of you. "[1] And Narseslaughed at the insolence of the barbarian, and presently he setforward with the army he had made, upon the great road through Classisfor Rimini, till he came to the bridge over the Marecchia, there whichAugustus had built and which was held by the enemy. There in the fightwhich followed--little more than a skirmish--the barbarian Usdrilascame by his end, and Narses ignoring Rimini marched on, his greatobject before him, Totila and his army, which he meant, before allthings else, to seek out and to destroy. So he went down the FlaminianWay to Fano and there presently left it for a by-way upon the left, rejoining the great highway some miles beyond the fortress of PetraPertusa, which he disregarded as he had done that of Rimini. Hemarched on till he came to the very crest of the Apennines, over whichhe passed and camped upon the west under the great heights, at a placethen called Ad Ensem and to-day Scheggia. 

[Footnote 1: Hodgkin's free translation of Procopius, _op. Cit_. Iv. 28. ]

[Illustration: Sketch Map NARSES' MARCH FROM RAVENNA _To Meet_ TOTILA]

Meanwhile Totila had come to meet him from Rome, and had managed toreach Tadinum, the modern Gualdo Tadino, when he found Narses, unexpectedly, for he must have thought the way over the mountainssecurely barred by the fortress of Petra Pertusa, upon the great roadbefore him. 

Narses sent an embassy to Totila to offer, "not peace, but pardon;"this the barbarian refused. Asked when he would fight Totila answered, "In eight days from this day. " But Narses, knowing what manner of manhis enemy was, made all ready for the morrow, and at once occupied thegreat hill upon his left which overlooked both camps. In this he wasright, for no sooner had he seized this advantage than Totilaattempted to do the same, but without any success. 

Then on the morrow Totila, having meanwhile been reinforced with twothousand men, rode forth before the two armies and "exhibited in anarrow space the strength and agility of a warrior. His armour wasenchased with gold; his purple banner floated with the wind; he casthis lance into the air; caught himself backwards; recovered his seatand managed a fiery steed in all the paces and evolutions of theequestrian school. "[1] No doubt Narses the eunuch smiled. Thebarbarians were all the same, and they remain unaltered. Totila'stheatrical antics are but the prototype to those amazing cavalrycharges, excellently stage-managed, that may be seen almost any autumnduring the German manoeuvres, a new Totila at their head. 

[Footnote 1: Gibbon's free translation of Procopius, iv. 31. ]

When Totila had finished his display the two armies faced one another, the imperialists with Narses and John upon the left, the Lombards inthe centre, and Valerian upon the right with John the Glutton; theGoths in what order of battle we do not know. At length at noon thebattle was joined. The Gothic charge failed, Narses drew his straightline of troops into a crescent, and the short battle ended in theutter rout of the Goths, Totila flying from the field. In that flightone Asbad a Gepid struck at him and fatally wounded him. He was borneby his companions to the village of Caprae, more than twelve milesaway, and there he died. 

Thus ended Totila the Goth and with him the Gothic cause in Italy. Aremnant of his army made its way to Pavia, where it was contained byValerian; and all over Italy the Gothic fortresses hastened tosurrender, Perugia, Spoleto, Narni, all opened their gates, and Narsesmarched on to occupy Rome which he did without much difficulty. AllItaly lay open to the imperialists, and when Totila's successor Teiaswas slain all hope of recovery was gone. The Goths offered to leaveItaly, and their offer was accepted. For a year longer a desultorywar, the reduction of Cumae and Lucca, occupied Narses; but by 554this too was brought to an end, and unhappy Italy was once moregathered into the government of the empire. 

VIII

MODICA QUIES

THE PRAGMATIC SANCTION AND THE SETTLEMENT OF ITALY

Such was the inevitable end of the Gothic war in Italy. The issue thusdecided was, as I have tried to show, something much more tremendousthan the mere supremacy of a race. Nothing less than the future of theworld was assured upon those stricken fields and about those ruinedfortresses, the supremacy of the Catholic religion in which wasinvolved the whole destiny of Europe, the continuance of ourcivilisation and culture. For let it be said again: these wars of thesixth century were not a struggle to the death between two races, butbetween two religions; the opponents were not really Roman and Goth, but Catholic and Arian, and in the victory of the former was involvedthe major interest of mankind. The whole energy of that age wasdevoted to the final establishment of what for a thousand years was tobe the universal religion of Europe, the source of all her greatnessand the reason of her being. What was saved in those unhappy campaignswas not Italy, but the soul of Europe. 

Certainly it was not Italy. Materially the result of those eighteenyears of war, which began with the invasion of Italy by Belisarius in536, reached their crisis in 540 with the capture of Ravenna, and werefinally decided by Narses in 552-554, was the ruin of Italy. Exhausted, devastated, and unfilled, the prey, for half a generation, of a fundamental war, Italy was materially ruined by Justinian'sGothic campaigns, and so hopelessly that, when in 568 the Lombardsfell upon her, she was almost unable to defend herself, to offer anyresistance to what proved--and in part for this reason--the onlybarbaric invasion which had upon her any enduring consequences. Visigoths, Huns, Vandals, Ostrogoths, all poured over her, andpresently, like winter floods, retreated and subsided, leaving nothingto remind us of their fear and devastation; the Lombards remained. 

I say this was largely due to the appalling exhaustion and ruin ofItaly in the Gothic war; but there was something else which we mustnot forget. The Gothic war was a religious war. The Arianism of theGoths had really threatened our civilisation. But the Lombards werelargely mere heathens. Their heathenism was not at all dangerous to usas a heresy must always be. [1] Therefore Italy never roused herselffrom her exhaustion, one might almost say her indifference. It wasonly her material well-being that was at stake, her future was safe. Her great attempt against the Lombards was a spiritual effort, was aneffort for their conversion, and their final discomfiture, wrought notfrom within the peninsula, but from over the Alps, did not involvetheir expulsion from Italy, but was seized upon as the opportunity forthe re-establishment in name and in fact of the Western Empire, andfor the great crowning of Charlemagne by the pope in S. Peter'schurch. 

[Footnote 1: It was not the paganism of the Italian Renaissance butthe heresy of the Teutons which destroyed the unity of Europe in thesixteenth century. ]

Italy, and with Italy Europe, were, then, saved from nothing less thandeath when Narses finally disposed of Totila in the Apennines in 552;but that war which had a result so very glorious had materially ruinedthe country. 

From this general bankruptcy one city certainly escaped; that city wasRavenna, which since the year 540, when she had opened her gates toBelisarius, had been free from attack, and had more than ever beenestablished as the capital of the West. That position was secured toher, as I have already said, by her geographical position, which nowthat Constantinople had reasserted the claim of the empire to Italyestablished her more than at any time in her history as the necessaryseat of military and administrative power; and from Ravenna as fromthe citadel the whole of the second part of the Gothic war was wagedby the imperialists. As we might expect the true nature of that war isimmediately manifested in her history at this time. 

It would seem that very shortly after the occupation of Ravenna by theimperialists in 540, the re-edification of the city and its splendidembellishment was begun. The church of S. Vitalis begun by S. Ecclesius (_c_. 521-532) was finished and gloriously adorned withmosaics by S. Maximianus (_c_ 546-556), and not long after S. Apollonaris in Classe begun by S. Ursicinus (532-536) was completedand adorned by the same great bishop. 

But this eagerness to mark and to express in such glorious monumentsas these the great victory for Catholicism and civilisation that wasthen in the winning becomes even more manifest after the death ofTotila and the end of the war. To the S. Agnellus and to the Church ofRavenna Justinian "_rectae fidei Augustus_" gave all the substance ofthe Goths, according to the _Liber Pontificalis_, [1] "not only inRavenna itself, but in the suburban towns and in the villages, bothsanctuaries and altars, slaves and maidens, whatever was theirs. _S. Mater Ecclesia Ravennas, vera mater, vera orthodoxa nam ceterae multaeEcclesiae falsam propter metum et terrores Principum superinduxeredoctrinam; haec vero et veram et unicam Sanctam Catholicam tenuitFidem, nunquam mutavit fluctuationem sustinuit, a tempestate quassataimmobilis permansit_. Therefore S. Agnellus the archbishop reconciledall the churches of the Goths, which in their time or in that of KingTheodoric had been built or had been occupied by the false doctrinesof the Arians.... He thus reconciled the church of S. Eusebius whichUnimundus the (Arian) bishop had built in the twenty-third year ofKing Theodoric. In the same year he reconciled the church of S. Georgius (S. Giorgio ad Tabulam fuori delle Mura) ... The church of S. Sergius which is in Classis and of S. Zenone which is in Caesarea. " InRavenna itself he reconciled the churches of S. Theodorus (S. Spirito), S. Maria in Cosmedin (the Arian Baptistery), the church ofS. Martin (S. Apollinare Nuovo) which Theodoric had built, which wascalled _Caelum Aureum_ and which Agnellus re-decorated with themosaics of the Martyrs and Virgins we see and the effigies ofJustinian and himself. 

[Footnote 1: Agnellus, _Liber Pontificalis_ (ed. Holder-Egger. P. 334)_ad vitam Sancti Agnelli_. ]

Such was the work achieved in the fortunate capital. But ruined Italyawaited a more necessary, if less splendid, labour. This can have beennothing less than the resurrection of the country, which, in thoseeighteen years of war, can have become little less than a desert; and, as we might expect, all Italy desolate and depopulated looked toJustinian to succour her in her misery if she was not to perish underher ruins and her debts. The first step in that work was undertaken inthe very year of the peace, in the August of the year 554, and it tookthe form of a solemn "Pragmatic Sanction" addressed to Narses and toAntiochus, the Prefect of Italy, [1] in Ravenna. It had for its objectthe social peace of Italy, the re-establishment of order out of thechaos of the Ostrogothic war; and it is significant of the trueposition of affairs that this decree asserts that it is issued by theemperor in reply to the petition of the pope. 

[Footnote 1: The fact that it was addressed to both surely seems toshow that Narses at this time only held a military power in Italy. This is interesting as touching the discussion later on of the genesisof the exarchate. ]

It consists of twenty-seven articles, and first establishes what is tobe considered as still having authority in that tempestuous past; whatpart of it is to remain and to be confirmed and what is to be utterlyswept away. Thus the emperor confirms all dispositions made byAmalasuntha, Athalaric, and Theodahad, as well as all his ownacts--and these would include Theodoric's--and those of Theodora. Buteverything done by "the most wicked tyrant Totila" is null and void, "for we will not allow these law-abiding days of ours to take anyaccount of what was done by him in the time of his tyranny. "[1] Totilahad indeed most cruelly attacked the great landed proprietors whom hesuspected of too great an attachment for Constantinople; he hadattacked them in their persons and in their wealth. With a singlestroke of the pen Justinian, as it were, effaced all the ordinances ofthe tyrant and rendered again to their legitimate masters, as far asit could be done, their lands, their flocks, their peasants, and theirslaves which had been taken from them, or which fear had caused themto alienate. 

[Footnote 1: Cf. Hodgkin, _op. Cit_. Vi. Pp. 519-520. ]

Such were the political achievements of the decree. Nor were itsfinancial provisions less far-reaching. Something had to be done tomeet the crisis resulting from the enormous quantity of debt. Everywhere Justinian undertook great public works, and tried to repairthe destruction caused by the war; but it is probable that in realityhe achieved very little. He had enriched the Church; he hadre-established the great proprietors in their lands and their rights, but the industry and commerce of Italy, save perhaps at Ravenna and atNaples, he could not restore. And we seem to understand that the merelack of men left whole districts of Italy uncultivated and desert. 

As for the administrative and legal clauses of the decree, they gavethe Italian--the Roman as he is called--the right to have his suitheard by a civil judge instead of a military official. Thisestablished the security of the Italian against the barbaric hosts theimperial armies had brought into the country. But perhaps moreimportant, and certainly more significant, is the twelfth clause ofthe decree which relates to the way in which the _JudicesProvinciarum_ are to be appointed. "We order, " says Justinian, "thatonly fit and proper persons able to administer the local governmentshall be chosen, and this by the bishops and chief persons of eachprovince from the inhabitants of that province. " This clause was soonproved to contain so much wisdom that in 569 by Justinian's successorit was extended to the provinces of the Eastern empire. 

In all this we recognise the work of the great reformer who hadalready produced the _Corpus Juris Civilis_, consisting of theInstitutes, Digest, Code, and Novellae, which more than anything elsehe did--and he did everything--determined that Europe, which he hadsecured for ever, should be a Roman thing established upon Roman Law. But are we also to see in this great man the creator of the exarchate, that citadel of the empire in Italy which was to endure, though almostall else perished, till Charlemagne appeared and the empire itselfsuddenly re-arose, armed at all points and ready for battle? It mightseem that we are not to attribute that great scheme to Justinian, butrather to a later recognition of the force and reality of thedisasters that so few years after his death descended once more uponItaly. 

When Narses at the head of the armies of Justinian had in 554conquered the Goths and possessed Italy, the administrative divisionsof the peninsula would seem to have remained almost the same as theyhad been in the time of Honorius. Indeed the re-entry of Italy withinthe empire was accompanied by no important change in the provincialdivisions of the peninsular because there was no necessity for it. Narses, who ruled just eleven years in Ravenna, was never known by thetitle of exarch. On the contrary, Procopius and Agathias call himsimply the general-in-chief of the Roman army [Greek: o Romaionstrataegos], and pope Pelagius calls him _Patricius et Dux in Italia_, and others, among them Gregory the Great and Agnellus, simply_Patricius_. But it is obvious that there was something new in theofficial situation and that certain extraordinary powers wereconferred upon Narses. And it is the same with his successor Longinus. All the texts that mention him, including the _Liber Pontificalis_, call him _Praefectus_. But the transformation from which the exarchatearose was more obscure and far more slow than any official reform ofJustinian's could have been. It is in part the result of the newcondition of the country, which Justinian had had to take intoaccount, but it is much more the result of the progress of the Lombardconquest and the new necessities of defence, which not one of thethree great men who had restored Italy to the empire lived to see. 

For Belisarius and Justinian both died in 565, and Narses, who wasrecalled in that year by the foolish and insolent Sophia, the wife ofthe new emperor Justin II. , seems to have died about 572. 

It is difficult to determine to which of these three great and heroicfigures Italy, and through Italy, Europe, owes most, but since it wasJustinian who chose and employed them we must, I think, accord him, here too, the first place in our remembrance. 

Belisarius, who had fought the first great war so gloriously againstVitiges, and for so long and with so little encouragement had opposedTotila in the second, is of course one of the great soldiers of theworld and perhaps the greatest the empire ever employed. His captureof Ravenna, by stratagem it is true, but against time and, as it were, in spite of the emperor, brought the first Gothic war to an end, andwould, had he been left in Italy a few months longer, have preventedall the long drawn out agony of the second. As it was his achievement, and his achievement alone, made that second war something better thanthe hopeless affair it seemed for so long, and though he himself toall appearances made little headway against Totila, it was his seriesof heroic campaigns, in which he refused despair, that made the everglorious march of Narses possible, and the final crushing of thebarbarian in the Apennines after all but the crown of his endeavour. 

Of his master, the great emperor, it is not for me to speak since tothis day his works speak for him. The thirty-eight years of his reignare the most brilliant period of the later Roman empire, and if themilitary triumphs he conceived were the work of Belisarius and Narseswe must attribute to him alone the magnificent conception, thetireless energy, and the heroic purpose which established the greatpillars of the _Corpus Juris Civilis_ which is the legal foundation ofmediaeval and of modern Europe, the basis of all Canon Law and of allCivil Law in every civilised country. Of his great ecclesiasticalpolity perhaps we must speak with less enthusiasm, though not withless wonder; while his glorious buildings remain only less enduringthan his codification of the laws. If in Ravenna we are most nearlyand splendidly reminded of him in S. Vitale, we do not forget that hewas the creator of perhaps the greatest ecclesiastical building leftto us, the mighty church--lost to us now for near five hundredyears--of S. Sophia in Constantinople. On the whole we see inJustinian the greatest of all the emperors save Augustus, and perhapsConstantine. Nor can any later state show us so great a ruler. 

Justinian in his Italian designs had been very well served byBelisarius, nor were his ideas less splendidly carried out by Narses. Indeed, in many ways the eunuch was the better instrument andespecially in administration. He ruled in peace in Ravenna as I havesaid for eleven years, devoting himself to the resurrection of unhappyItaly. In this we may think he was as successful as the shortness ofthe time of his rule would allow. The catastrophe that put an endalike to his work and to the regeneration of Italy was the death ofJustinian. In that very year, 565, the great eunuch was deposed, aninsulting recall reached him from the empress Sophia, and he retiredto Rome, where he passed the few years that remained to him inretirement, and died there, it is thought, in 572. 

A curious and certainly an unproved accusation hangs over his name. Itseems that his government of Italy was not wholly grateful to theItalians, who it must be remembered were ruined and whom many years ofeager self-denial would hardly render solvent again. Now the businessof Narses was to achieve this solvency and to pay out of Italy somesort of interest upon the enormous sums Justinian had disbursed forthe great war. If he incurred the hatred of the Italians it would notbe surprising, nor would it lead us to accuse him of tyranny. "WhereNarses the eunuch rules, " they said, "he makes us slaves. " This crycame to the ears of the emperor for whom it was meant. No doubt, beinga fool, he was anxious to be rid of Justinian's pro-consul. Howeverthat may be, Narses was recalled, the empress, it is said, sending hima message to the effect that as he was a eunuch she would appoint himto apportion the spinning to the women of her household. To thisNarses is reported to have replied, doubtless with much the same smileas that with which he had greeted the equestrian display of Totila, that he would spin her a thread of which neither she nor the emperorJustin would be able to find the end. In the course of time thismysterious threat, which was probably never uttered, was said to referto the enormous catastrophe which within three years of Narses' recallfell upon Italy--the Lombard invasion. And Narses, who had employedthe Lombards in the last campaign against Totila, was said to haverevenged himself by inviting them into Italy to possess it. 

The accusation rests upon no good authority, and is altogetherunlikely when we remember how great a part of his life had beendevoted to the incorportion of Italy within the empire. But there isthis much truth in it we may perhaps think; that had the great eunuchbeen left in command, Alboin would not have dared to come on, and ifhe had dared, would have found an army and an Italy ready to fling himback into his darkness. 

IX

THE CITADEL OF THE EMPIRE IN ITALY

THE LOMBARD INVASION

It was upon the second day of April 568, upon the Monday within theoctave of Easter, that Alboin set out to cross the Julian Alps, todescend upon an Italy which even the great Narses had not been able, in the short sixteen years of peace he had secured her, to recoverfrom the utter exhaustion of a generation of war. No army awaited him, no attempt was made to crush his rude and barbarous army in themarches, he was unopposed, save that the bishop of Treviso begged himto spare the property of his church, and presently the whole provinceof Venetia, with the exception of Padua, Mantua, and Monselice, was inhis hands. Those who could, doubtless fled away, for the most part tothat new settlement in the Venetian lagoons which was presently togive birth to Venice and which had been founded by those who had fledfrom Attila; but there were many who could not flee. These came underthe cruel yoke of the invader. Perhaps Alboin spent the winter inVerona, perhaps in Friuli; wherever it was, he but prepared hisadvance and still no one appeared to say him nay. By the end of 569all Cisalpine Gaul with Liguria and Milan, except Pavia, the coast, Cremona, Piacenza, and a few smaller places, were in his hands. Indeed, in all that terrible flood of disasters we hear of but onegreat city which offered even for a time a successful resistance. Thiswas Pavia, naturally so strongly defended by the Po and the Ticino. Alboin established an army about it, and swore to massacre all itsinhabitants since it alone had dared to resist him. Pavia fell to theLombard, after a three years' siege, in 572; but Alboin was preventedfrom carrying out his vow, and not long after Pavia became the capitalof the Lombard power in Italy. 

Meantime, those three years, during which Pavia held her own, had notbeen wasted by the barbarian. He crossed the Apennines, we may believeas Totila had done, by the old deserted way to Fiesole, brought allTuscany under his yoke and a great part both of central and ofsouthern Italy, establishing there two "duchies" as the centres of hispower at Spoleto and Benevento. Then he returned to take Pavia, allthis time besieged, and in the same year, 572, it is probable thatPiacenza fell also, and Mantua. All Italy was in confusion, the systemof government re-established by Narses broken; the work of Justinian'sreconquest seemed all undone. That it was not wholly undone, that itlived on and was at last re-established, we owe to two great facts:the conversion of the Lombards to Catholicism by Gregory the Great andthe establishment of the exarchate, the entrenchment of Roman powerand civilisation in Ravenna. Let us consider these things. 

The Lombards were barbarians and therefore pagans or Arians, but theirArianism was of a different kind from that of the Huns, different evenfrom that of the Ostrogoths. Indeed, though the Lombards may be calledArian, for indeed such Christianity as they possessed was whollyArian, they were but little removed from mere heathenism. It is truethat they sacked churches, slaughtered priests, and carried off theholy vessels everywhere as they came into Italy; but they did this, itwould seem, not from a sectarian hatred of the Catholic Faith, butfrom mere heathenism. As pagans, heathen or semi-heathen, they mightbe converted, and thus their advent was ultimately less dangerous toour civilisation than the conquest of the Ostrogoths threatened to be. I do not mean to suggest that that advent was without danger. It wasof course full of dreadful peril, but that peril was chiefly materialand not spiritual; it could destroy, but not create; moreover, sincein the main it was pagan, it could only destroy material things. 

It is unthinkable that the Italy of the sixth century was for a momentin danger of losing its Faith, of being dechristianised. That, allthings considered, in the third fourth and fifth centuries there hadmore than once been a real danger of the victory of some heresy, andespecially of that subtle Arianism, the forerunner of Mahometanism, which all the invaders professed, and most of them so bitterly, weknow; as we know that with the hard won victory of the Catholic Faiththe whole of the future was safe; but that in the Italy of the sixthcentury the Faith was in danger from a horde of semi-pagan barbariansis not to be thought of. To this extent, and it is three parts atleast of the whole, the Lombard invasion was less perilous than thosewhich had come and passed away before it. Once more, the Catholicchurch was to be victorious, but in a different fashion. It cast outthe Visigoths, the Huns, the Vandals, and the Ostrogoths from Italy, for it could not convert them; the Lombards it converted and theyremained. It converted them because they were rather heathen thanArian, and the victory was won by that great Gregory who, seeing ourforefathers in the Forum of Rome, and loving them for their brighthair and open faces--_non Angli sed Angeli si Christiani_--sent S. Austin to turn them too from their pagan rites and gather them intothe fold of Christ. 

But there was something else beside the fact that the Lombards werepagan, and therefore to be converted, which was a part of thesalvation of Italy. 

It is possible that the Lombards might have been as Catholic as theFranks and yet, barbarians as they were, have destroyed civilisationin Italy, have broken the continuity of Europe, have obliterated allour traditions, and altogether undone the great work of Justinian. Itis possible, but it is highly improbable; that it was impossible weowe to Ravenna. 

Ravenna was impregnable and her seaward gate was always open. Duringall the years of the Lombard domination she was the citadel of theempire in Italy, the seat of the prefect and the exarch, the imperialrepresentatives. 

It must be grasped that even after the fall of Ticinum in 572, as theByzantine historian tells us, perhaps no one, and certainly no one inRavenna, regarded the invasion as anything but a passing evil like allthe other barbarian incursions. No one believed Italy to beirrevocably lost; on the contrary, everyone was assured that the lostprovinces could soon be delivered again. 

This may explain, though perhaps it cannot excuse, the passiveattitude of Longinus, the successor of Narses, who in Ravennarepresented the emperor in Italy, perhaps till the year 584. We knownothing of any attempts he may have made to stem the barbarian flood, and indeed the only incident in his career with which we areacquainted is romantic rather than military or political. For whenRosamond, the queen of the Lombards, murdered her husband Alboin inhis palace at Verona, because he had forced her to pledge him in agoblet fashioned from the skull of her father, she fled away with herstepdaughter Albswinda, the great Lombard spoil, and her twoaccomplices, Helmichis her lover and Peredeus the chamberlain, andcame to seek shelter in Ravenna. It seems she had written to Longinusand he, perhaps, hoping for some political advantage, and certainlyfull of the tales of her beauty, sent a ship up the Po to bring her tohim with her two companions. When he saw her he found that rumour hadnot lied, and longing for her, suggested that she should killHelmichis and marry himself. Whether from fear or ambition she didthis thing, and slew her lover with a cup of poison as he came fromthe bath. But he, even as he drank understanding all, suddenly forcedthe same cup upon her, and standing over her with a naked sword forcedher to drink; so that they both lay dead upon the pavement. 

Albswinda and the Lombard treasure, the spoil of the cities of Italy, were sent with Peredeus to Constantinople. And it may be that it wasin them Longinus hoped to find his political advantage; in this, however, he was deceived. It is true that a pause in the Lombardadvance followed the death of Alboin, and that Cleph, his successor, was soon murdered. But the pause in the advance, though, through itall, Rome was blockaded, was due to the fact that Authari, the heir tothe Lombard throne, was but a boy. Nevertheless, this interval wasused by Constantinople to despatch Baduarius, the son-in-law of theemperor Justin, to Italy with an army, but without success; and in578, the year in which Justin died, the Lombards were bought off fromRome with imperial gold, only to turn upon the very citadel of theempire in Italy, Ravenna itself. In the year 579 Faroald, duke ofSpoleto, fell upon Classis, and took it and spoiled it. 

This, however, was but an isolated effort, and though the Lombardsheld Classis, they achieved little else in Italy till after Authariwas chosen king in 584. 

In the following year Smaragdus, as we may think, was appointed tosucceed Longinus and apparently with new powers, and three yearslater, in the very year that the heroic Insula Comacina was taken bythe Lombards, Classis was recovered for the empire. 

The Lombards had then been ravaging Italy for twenty years, anextraordinary change had come over the provinces that Justinian had sohardly recovered, and this change is at once visible in the imperialadministration in Italy. The exarchate appears. 

It has been maintained by many historians that the great reform ofwhich the establishment of the exarch and the exarchate is the resultwas the work of that very great reformer Justinian. It was worthy ofhim; but the Italy he knew and saved was not in need of any change inher administrative divisions which, as I have said, remained underNarses almost the same as they had been in the last days of theWestern empire. [1]

[Footnote 1: For what follows cf. Diehl, _Etudes sur l'administrationByzantine dans l'Exarchat de Ravenne_ (1888). ]

The transformation out of which the exarchate arose was slow andobscure, not the work of a great creative mind, but of necessity. Itwas the result of many causes which it is not difficult to name; theywere the progress of the Lombard conquest, the condition imposed uponthe unconquered parts of Italy by that conquest, and especially thenew necessity for defence imposed on the imperial power. 

It is obvious that the result of the first ten years of that conquestwas a complete destruction of the limits of the old Roman provinces ofItaly. A new grouping of territories was not only necessary but wasalready forming itself under the pressure of the conquest and itsterror. The regions which had escaped the barbarians were drawingtogether without any regard for the ancient provincial divisions andwere grouping themselves about the cities, where the resistance, suchas it was, was concentrating itself, and where the imperialadministration had taken refuge. 

If we confine ourselves for the moment to Italy north of theApennines, we shall find that in the old province of Liguria the vicarof the prefect of the praetorium had fled from Milan to Genoa, andthat about that city the debris of the old province was slowlyre-assembling itself. In Venetia we shall find that the governor haddeparted to Grado, and about this town as a centre the eastern part ofthe old province was gathered. The western part of that province, cutoff from its capital, attached itself by force of circumstances towhat remained of Aemilia and of Flaminia, whose neighbour she was, andthese fragments of the ancient provinces all together groupedthemselves about, or found their centre in, Ravenna, the capital ofFlaminia and the residence of the prefect of Italy. 

In these new groupings the great pre-occupation and the supremeinterest are defence--the defence of civilisation against thebarbarian. 

Now, it was to regulate this new state of affairs that the exarchatewas created; or rather the exarchate was the official acknowledgmentof a state of affairs that the disastrous invasion of the Lombards hadbrought about. The new order was established at the end of the reignof Justin II. (565-578) under a new and supreme official. Withoutdoing away with the prefect of Italy the emperor placed over him assupreme head of the new administration the exarch[1] who was both themilitary commander-in-chief and the governor-general of Italy; and, since the chief need of Italy was defence, without entirelysuppressing the civil administration, he placed at the head of each ofthe re-organised provinces a certain military officer--the duke. 

[Footnote 1: For the discussion of the derivation of the title"Exarch, " _see_ Diehl, _op. Cit_. Pp. 15-16. ]

The earliest document that remains to us in which we find definitemention of the exarch is the famous letter, dated October 4, 584, ofpope Pelagius II. To the deacon Gregory, his nuncio in Constantinople. It is probable that the exarch at this time was Smaragdus, but it isextremely improbable that he was the first to bear the new title. Thisit would seem was a much nobler and more notable person. 

It will be remembered that in the year 575 Baduarius, the son-in-lawof the emperor, had appeared in Italy at the head of an army, had beenbeaten by the Lombards, and a little later had died, probably in575. [1] This man was not only a great Byzantine official, but thedestined successor of Justin and one of the first personages of theempire. It is obvious, if at such a moment he commanded the imperialarmies in Italy, he was supreme governor of the province And it seemscertain that it was to mark the amalgamation in him of the twooffices, military and civil, that the new title of exarch wascreated. [2]

[Footnote 1: Migne, lxxii. 865; Joannes Biclarensis, _s. A_. 575; cf. Hodgkin, _op. Cit_. V. P. 195, and Diehl, _u. S_. ]

[Footnote 2: "It is only an hypothesis, " says M. Charles Diehl, theoriginator of this theory, "but it explains how, between the prefectLonginus (569-572) and the exarch Smaragdus (584) was produced in theyears 572-576 the administrative transformation out of which rose theexarchate. "]

At the same time as the central government took on a new form theprovincial administration was re-organised. Before the year 590, thishad been certainly achieved. Istria, as we have seen, was divided fromVenetia and formed a new and a special government. In Flaminia Rimini, which till now had been a part of the same province as Ravenna, wasdetached and became the capital of a new government in which a part ofthe Picenum, Ancona, and Osimo were involved. While the exarchateproperly so called, that is the region of Ravenna from which Riminiand Picenum were now separate, formed a new province under the directauthority of the governors-general of Italy, that is to say, of theexarch of Ravenna. By the year 590, then, we see Italy thus dividedinto seven districts or governments: (1) the Duchy of Istria, (2) theDuchy of Venetia, (3) the Exarchate to which Calabria is attached, (4)the Duchy of Pentapolis, (5) the Duchy of Rome, (6) the Duchy ofNaples, (7) Liguria. 

Geographically the exarchate of Ravenna was bounded on the north bythe Adige, the Tartaro, and the principal branch of the Po as far asits confluence with the Panaro. Hadria and Gabellum were its mostnorthern towns in the hands of the imperialists. The western frontieris more difficult to determine with exactitude; it may be said to haverun between Modena and Bologna. On the south the Marecchia divided theexarchate from the duchy of Pentapolis whose capital was Rimini. ThePentapolis consisted of Rimini, Pesaro, Fano, Sinigaglia, and Anconaupon the sea and of the five inland cities of Urbino, Fossombrone, Jesi, Cagli, and Gubbio; while the great towns of the exarchate wereset along the Via Aemilia and were Bologna, Imola (Forum Cornelii), Faenza, Forli, Forlimpopoli, and Cesena. 

Such then, before the year 590, was the new imperial administration inthe Italy formed by the Lombard invasion. 

[Illustration: SKETCH MAP]

In the year after the recapture of Classis from the Lombards, that isto say, in 589, the exarch Smaragdus was recalled. He had apparentlybecome insane and had been guilty of extraordinary violence towardsthe patriarch of Aquileia and three other bishops whom he dragged toRavenna. His successor was Romanus who held office till 597. In thesame year, 589, Authari was married at Pavia to Theodelinda, who wasto be so potent an instrument in the conversion of the Lombards andtherefore in the salvation of Italy. And in the following year, 590, pope Pelagius II. Died, and Gregory the Great was chosen to succeedhim. 

With the advent of the new exarch a brighter prospect seemed for amoment to open for Italy. In the first year of Romanus's appointmentthe imperialists regained the greater part of the cities of the plain;they re-occupied Modena, Reggio, Parma, Piacenza, Altinum, and Mantua. But the strength of the Latin position in Italy lay, and continued tolie, in the two great imperial cities, Ravenna and Rome. Little bylittle this position had crystallised and now a new state appeared, astate which in one way or another was to endure till our day and whichour fathers knew as the States of the Church. With the two cities ofRavenna and Rome as _nuclei_, this state formed itself in the veryheart of Italy along the Via Flaminia which connected them. It cut, and effectually, the Lombard kingdom in two, and isolated the duchiesof Spoleto and Benevento from the real Lombard power in CisalpineGaul, with its great capital at Pavia; and indestructible as it was, it absolutely insured the final success of the Catholic Faith, theLatin nationality, and the imperial power, the three necessities forthe resurrection of Europe. 

This achievement was in the first place due to three greatpersonalities: to Justinian who had succeeded in establishing theimperial power with its capital at Ravenna, and whose work had suchlife in it that, in spite of every adverse circumstance, it was ableto develop and to maintain itself during more than two hundred yearsand uphold the imperial idea in Italy until the pope was able tore-establish the empire in the West as a self-supporting state; toGregory the Great in whom we see personified the hope and strength ofthe papacy and the Latin idea which it was to uphold and to glorify;and to Theodelinda, that passionately Catholic Lombard queen, who wasable to lead her Lombards into the fold of the Roman church, and whoin her son Adalwald by her second husband Agilulf, whom she had raisedto the throne, presented the Lombard kingdom with its first Catholicking, and had thus done her part to secure the future. 

Of these three powers those of Ravenna and Rome were, of course, byfar the more important; for indeed the conversion of the Lombards was, rightly understood, but a part of the work of Gregory. Yet though bothwere working for the same end they did not always propose to march bythe same road. In 592, for instance, the pope, seeing Naples thecapital of the little isolated duchy upon his southern flank very hardpressed, proposed at all costs to relieve it; but the exarch Romanus, perhaps seeing further, was not to be moved to the assistance of thepeasants of Campania from the all-important business of the defence ofcentral Italy and the Flaminian Way, the line of communication betweenRavenna and Rome. He proposed to let Naples look after itself and atall costs to hold Perugia. Gregory, however, who claimed in anindignant letter of this date (592) to be "far superior in place anddignity" to the exarch, proceeded to save Naples by making a sort ofpeace with the Lombard duchy of Spoleto. It is possible that thispeace saw the Lombard established in Perugia, which was the Roman key, till now always in Roman hands, of the great line of communicationbetween Rome and Ravenna. However that may be, Gregory's peace notonly aroused great anger in Constantinople, but brought Romanusquickly south with an army to re-occupy Perugia, Orte, Todi, Ameria, and various other cities of Umbria. But Romanus had been right. Hismovement southward alarmed Agilulf, who immediately left Pavia, andcrossing the Apennines, we may suppose, [1] as Totila had done, threatened Rome itself. Then, however, he had to face something moreformidable than an imperial army. Upon the steps of S. Peter's churchstood the Vicegerent of God, great S. Gregory, who alone turned himback and saved the city. 

[Footnote 1: All that Paulus Diaconus, _Hist. Lang_. Lib. Iv. Cap. 8, says is: "Hac etiam tempestate Romanus Patricius et Exarchus RavennaeRomam properavit. Qui dum Ravennam revertitur retenuit civitates, quaea Langobardis tenebantur, quarum ista sunt nomma: Sutrium, PolimartiumHortas, Tuder, Ameria, Perusia, Luceolis et alias quasdam civitates. Quod factum cum regi Agilulfo nunciatum esset statim Ticino egressuscum valido exercitu civitatem Perusium petiit ... "]

The truth of all this would appear to be that Gregory was reallyworking for peace. The Lombards were in a fair way to becomingCatholic, and as such they were no longer really dangerous to Italy. The real danger was, as the pope saw, the prolongation of a uselesswar. Two years later, in 595, we find Gregory writing to the"assessor" of the exarch enjoining peace. "Know then that Agilulf, king of the Lombards, is not unwilling to make a general peace, if mylord the patrician is of the same mood.... How necessary such a peaceis to all of us you know well. Act therefore with your usual wisdom, that the most excellent exarch may be induced to come in to thisproposal without delay, and may not prove himself to be the oneobstacle to a peace so expedient for the state. If he will notconsent, Agilulf again promises to make a separate peace with us; butwe know that in that case several islands and other places willnecessarily be lost. Let the exarch then consider these points, andhasten to make peace, that we may at least have a little interval inwhich we may enjoy a moderate amount of rest, and with the Lord's helpmay recruit the strength of the republic for future resistance. "[1]

[Footnote 1: Gregory, _Ep_. V. 36 (34), trs. Hodgkin, _op. Cit_. V. P. 382. ]

It is obvious from this letter that the pope and the emperor no longerunderstood one another, and it is not surprising that the one thoughtthe other a fool and told him so. Doubtless the emperor recalled thelong and finally successful war against the Ostrogoths, in whichBelisarius had always refused, not only terms of peace other thanunconditional surrender, but even to treat. That policy had been, atleast from the point of view of Constantinople, successful. From thepoint of view of the papacy and of Italy, it had had a more doubtfulresult, but the fact that the Ostrogoths were Arians had satisfiedperhaps both, and certainly the papacy, that a truce could not bethought of. 

From the imperial point of view things remained much the same in theLombard war as they had been in the war with the Ostrogoths. From thepapal and Italian point of view they were very different. To beginwith, the Lombards were fast accepting the Catholic Faith, and then ifItaly had suffered in the Ostrogothic wars, which were everywhereeagerly contested by Constantinople, what was she suffering now whenthe greater part of the country was open to a continual and an almostunopposed attack? "You think me a fool, " the pope wrote to theemperor. In Ravenna the papal envoy was lampooned and laughed at. Thenin the end of 596 the exarch Romanus died. 

Romanus was succeeded by Callinicus (Gallicinus) in whom the popefound a more congenial and perhaps a more reasonable spirit. By 598 anarmistice had been officially concluded between the imperialists andthe Lombards, and at length in 599, after some foolish delays in whichit would appear that the pope was not without blame, a peace wasconcluded. Gregory, however, for all his reluctance at the last, hadwon his way. Henceforth it would be impossible to regard the Lombardsas mere invaders after the pattern of their predecessors, Visigoths, Vandals, Huns, and Ostrogoths. They were, or would shortly be, aCatholic people; they held a very great part of Italy; they hadentered into a treaty with the emperor not as _foederati_ but asequals and conquerors. Gregory the Great had permanently establishedthe barbarians in Italy, and in his act, the act be it remembered ofthe apostle of the English, of the apostle of the Lombards, we seem tosee the shadowy power that had been Leo's by the Mincio suddenlyappear, a new glory in the world. The new power in the West, thepapacy, which thus shines forth really for the first time in the actsof Gregory, unlike the empire, whether Roman or Byzantine, will knowno frontiers, but will go into all the world and compel men to come inas its divine commission ordained. 

In Italy from the time of the peace with the Lombards (599) onwardswhat we see is the decline of the imperial power of Constantinople andthe rise of the papacy. And this was brought about not only by thecircumstances in which Italy and the West found themselves, but alsoby the character of the imperial government. 

When Justin II. Disappeared in 578, and made way for Tiberius II. , hewas already a madman, and though Tiberius was renowned for hisvirtues, he reigned but four years, and in 582 Maurice the Cappadociansat upon the throne of Justinian and ruled for twenty years notunwisely, but, so far as Italy was concerned, without success. It washe who was at last brought to make peace with the Lombards and thusfor the first time to acknowledge a barbarian state independent of theempire in Italy. He and his children were all murdered in 602 byPhocas, a centurion, whose shame and crimes and cruelties doubtlessdid much to weaken the moral power of the empire face to face with thepapacy. 

The peace of 599, the usurpation of Phocas in 602, and the death ofGregory the Great in 604, close a great period and stamp the seventhcentury in its very beginning with a new character. 

That character is in a sense almost wholly disastrous. Those vague andgloomy years, of which we know so little, are almost unrelieved intheir hopeless confusion. It is true that Italy had found a championin the papacy which would one day restore the empire in the West, asJustinian himself had not been able to do; it is true that alreadyArianism was defeated if not stamped out. But it is in the seventhcentury that Mahometanism, the greater successor of the Arian heresy, first appears; and it is in the seventh century that it first becomescertain that East and West are philosophically and politicallydifferent and irreconcilable. The whole period is full of disasters, and is as we may think the darkest hour before the dawn. 

As I have said, the history of those disastrous years is everywhere inthe West vague and confused, and this is not least so in Italy andRavenna. 

Ravenna as always remains the citadel of the imperialists in Italy andthe West, and as such we must regard her, passing in review as well aswe may those miserable years in which she played so great and sodifficult a part. 

When the Emperor Maurice was assassinated with his family in the year602, Callinicus was, as we have seen, exarch in Ravenna, but with theusurpation of Phocas that Smaragdus who had already been exarch andhad been recalled, perhaps for his too great violence, in 589, wasagain appointed. He seems to have ruled from 602 to 611. In the lastyear of the government of Callinicus an attempt had been made by theexarch to force the Lombards to renew the two years' peace establishedin 599, and on better terms, by the seizure of a daughter ofAgilulf's, then in Parma, with her husband. They were carried off toRavenna. But the imperialists got nothing by their treachery. Agilulfat once moved against Padua and took it and rased it to the ground. Inthe following year Monselice also fell to his arms, and though afterthe murder of the emperor Maurice in 602 the exarch Callinicus, theauthor of the abduction, fell, and Smaragdus was appointed by Phocas, the hostages were not returned, and in July 603, Agilulf, after acampaign of less than three months, had possessed himself of Cremona, Mantua, and Vulturina, and probably of most of those places which theimperialists had re-occupied in Cisalpine Gaul in 590. Smaragdus wasforced to make peace and to give up his hostages. The peace he made, which left Agilulf in possession of all the cities he had taken, wasto endure for eighteen months, but it seems to have been renewed fromyear to year, and when in 610 Phocas was assassinated and with theaccession of Heraclius (610-641) Smaragdus was again recalled andJoannes appointed to Ravenna, the same policy seems to have beenfollowed. 

Joannes Lemigius Thrax, as Rubeus, the sixteenth-century historian ofRavenna, calls him, ruled in Ravenna from 611 to 615, and in thelatter year was assassinated there apparently in the midst of apopular rising, though what this really was we do not know. Hissuccessor, the eunuch Eleutherius (616-620), seems to have found thenow fragmentary imperial state in Italy in utter confusion, and indeedon the verge of dissolution. Naples had been usurped by a certainJoannes of Compsa, perhaps "a wealthy Samnite landowner, " whoproclaimed himself lord there, and it is obvious that even in Ravennathere was grave discontent. Eleutherius soon disposed of the usurperof Naples, but only to find himself faced by a renewal of the Lombardwar, which he seems to have prevented by consenting to pay the yearlytribute which perhaps Gregory the Great had promised when he made aseparate peace with the Lombard in 593, when Rome was practically inthe hands of the barbarian. It was obvious that the imperial cause wasfailing. That the exarch thought so is obvious from the fact that in619 he actually assumed the diadem and proclaimed himself emperor inRavenna, and set out with an army along the Flaminian Way for Rome toget himself crowned by the pope Boniface V. But the eunuch was beforehis time; moreover, he was a defeated and not a victorious general. AtLuceoli upon the Flaminian Way, not far from Gualdo Tadino whereNarses had broken Totila, in that glorious place his own soldiers slewhim and sent his head to Heraclius. 

Of his immediate successor we know nothing--not even his name, [1] butin or about 625 Isaac the Armenian was appointed and he ruled, as hisepitaph tells us, for eighteen years (625-644). Isaac's rule was notfortunate for the imperialists. He is probably to be acquitted of themurder of Taso, Lombard duke of Tuscia, but it is certain thatRothari, the Lombard king in his time, "took all the cities of theRomans which are situated on the sea-coast from Luna in Tuscany to theboundary of the Franks; also he took and destroyed Opitergium, a citybetween Treviso and Friuli, and with the Romans of Ravenna he foughtat the river of Aemilia which is called Scultenna (Panaro). In thisfight 8000 fell on the Roman side, the rest fleeing away. "[2]

[Footnote 1: Mr. Hodgkin (_op. Cit_. Vi. 157) suggests that thepredecessor of Isaac was that Euselnus who, as ambassador forConstantinople, persuaded, or is said to have persuaded, Adalwald, King of the Lombards since the death of his father, Agilulf (615), toslay all his chief men and nobles, and to hand over the Lombardkingdom to the empire; but was poisoned, it is suggested, by Isaac inRavenna, whither he had fled when he had killed twelve among them. Ariwald succeeded him (625). ]

[Footnote 2: Paulus Diaconus, cf. Hodgkin, vi. 168. ]

[Illustration: THE SARCOPHAGUS OF EXARCH ISAAC]

Nor was this all. It is in Isaac's time that the growing jealousy ofthe empire in regard to the papacy for the first time breaks intoflame. Isaac, who as exarch had the right to "approve" the election ofthe pope, on the accession of Severinus (638) sent Maurice his_chartularius_ to Rome as his ambassador. This Maurice it seems waseager against the papal power, and finding an opportunity in Romesuddenly seized the Lateran and its wealth at the head of "the Romanarmy, " and wrote to Isaac that he might come and enjoy the spoil. Theexarch presently arrived in Rome, resided in the Lateran during eightdays, banished the cardinals, and proceeded to steal everything hecould lay his hands on in the name of the emperor, to whom he sent apart of the booty. A little later Maurice attempted to repeat hisrape, but doubtless hoping to enrich himself he began by repudiatingIsaac, who then dealt with him, had him brought northward, andbeheaded at a place called Ficulae, twelve miles from Ravenna; butbefore he could decide what punishment to mete out to Maurice'saccomplices the exarch himself died, "smitten, " as it was said, "byGod, " and the exarchate was filled apparently by Theodore Calliopas(644-646). 

Theodore Calliopas was twice exarch. Of his first administration weknow nothing at all; but in 646 he was succeeded by Plato (646-649), whose name we learn from a letter of the emperor Constans II. To hissuccessor Olympius (649-652), who had been imperial chamberlain inConstantinople. Theodore Calliopas was then again appointed and ruledin Ravenna for eleven years (653-664). 

We have seen the empire and the papacy politically at enmity andcertainly bent on attaining different political ends in Italy and theWest, and this is emphasised by the economic condition of Italy whichthe empire taxed heavily. Philosophically Constantinople had neverperhaps been very eagerly Catholic--or must one say papal? But now atthis dangerous moment a doctrine definitely heretical was to beofficially adopted there and supported by emperor and patriarch withinsistance and perhaps enthusiasm. Heraclius, the grandfather ofConstans II. , had asserted the Monothelete heresy which maintainedthat although Christ had two distinct natures yet He had but one_Will_--his human will being merged in the divine. The patriarch ofConstantinople, always jealous of the popes, eagerly upheld thisdoctrine which the papacy continually and consistently denounced. NowConstans II. Cared for none of these things. He refused to allow thateither pope or patriarch was right, but as though he had been livingin the sixteenth instead of the seventh century gravely announced that"the sacred Scriptures, the works of the Fathers, the Decrees of thefive General Councils are enough for us;" and asked: "Why should menseek to go beyond these?" Roundly he refused to allow the question tobe either supported or attacked. 

Now the whole of the West was very heartily with the pope insentiment; but save for the bishops of Italy he stood alone againstthe great patriarchates of the East. Nevertheless, he refused to besilent and to obey the emperor. Therefore Olympius, Constans'chamberlain in 649, came to Italy as exarch with orders to arrest thepope and bring him to Constantinople: this it seemed to him a prudentthing to do; he was to judge for himself. Olympius decided it was nota prudent thing to do. He found the Italian bishops and the peopleeagerly Catholic. There is a story that he attempted instead to takethe pope's life as he said Mass, but this is probably untrue, for wefind pope and exarch presently excellent friends. He went on intoSicily to meet the first invasion of the Saracens in that island, anddied there of the pestilence. 

Theodore Calliopas was appointed exarch for the second time as hissuccessor in 652. He had either less sagacity or less scruple than hispredecessor, for in the following year he appeared with an army inRome. He found the pope ill and in bed before the high altar of S. John Lateran. He surrounded the church and entered it with his men, who were guilty of violence and desecration. But the pope, to savebloodshed, surrendered himself to the exarch, shouting as he emergedfrom the church, "Anathema to all who say that Martin has changed ajot or tittle of the Faith Anathema to all who do not remain in hisorthodox Faith even to the death. " Through the tumultuous and weepingcity the pope passed to the palace of the exarch upon the PalatineHill. He entered it a prisoner and was presently smuggled away onboard ship to Constantinople, where he was examined and condemned todeath, insulted in the Hippodrome, and his sentence commuted toimprisonment and exile to Cherson, where he died in 655. 

The controversy slumbered. Before long, surely to the amazement of theWest, the emperor landed in Italy at Tarentum with the object offinally dealing with the Lombards, for Rothari was dead. It is said heasked some hermit there in the south: "Shall I vanquish and hold downthe nation of the Lombards which now dwelleth in Italy?" The answerwas as follows, and, rightly understood, contained at least thefundamental part of the truth: "The nation of the Lombards, " said thehermit after a night of prayer, "cannot be overcome because a piousqueen coming from a foreign land has built a church in honour of S. John Baptist who therefore pleads without ceasing for that people. Buta time will come when that sanctuary will be held in contempt, andthen the nation shall perish. "[1]

[Footnote 1: Diaconus. V. 6; cf. Hodgkin, _op. Cit_. Vi. 272. Paulusadds that the prophecy was fulfilled when adulterous and vile priestswere ordained in the church at Monza and the Lombards fell beforePepin. ]

That prophecy contained the fundamental truth that since the Lombardswere Catholic it was not possible to turn them out of Italy. ButConstans heeded it not. He marched on, besieged Beneventum, was notsuccessful, and went on to Rome, and himself spoiled the City. FromRome he returned southward to Naples and Sicily, where in 668 he died. 

All that time Gregory was exarch. He had succeeded Theodore Calliopasin 664, and he ruled till 677. We know little of him save that heappears to have attempted to confirm Maurus, archbishop of Ravenna, inhis "independence" of the Papal See. [1] This Maurus was undoubtedly aschismatic and Agnellus tells us that he had many troubles with theHoly See and many altercations. Indeed the position of the archbishopof Ravenna can never have been a very enviable one and especially atthis time when the breach between pope and emperor, papacy and empire, was continually widening. Always the archbishop of Ravenna, as thebishop of the imperial citadel in Italy, must have been tempted tofollow the emperor rather than the pope, and more especially since, personally, he might expect to gain both in power and wealth that way. 

[Footnote 1: That was the "Privilegium, " whatever it was worth andwhatever exactly it meant, conferred by Constans II. ConstantinePogonatus, the successor of Constans, is still to be seen in S. Apollinare in Classe the "Privilegium" in his hands in mosaic. See_infra_, p. 208. ]

The exarch Gregory was succeeded apparently by a certain Theodorewhose contemporary archbishop in Ravenna was also a Theodore. He ruledit seems for ten years, 677-687, and built near his palace an oratory, or a monastery, not far from the church of S. Martin (S. ApollinareNuovo), and was, according to Agnellus, a pious man, presenting threegolden chalices to the church in Ravenna and composing the differencesof his namesake the archbishop and his clergy. 

Theodore in his turn was succeeded by Joannes Platyn (687-701). Twoyears before his appointment in 685 Justinian II. (685-695) hadsucceeded to the imperial throne, and in that same year pope BenedictII. Died. John V. Succeeded him and reigned for a few months, whenthere followed two disputed elections, those of Conon and of Sergius. In the latter Joannes Platyn the exarch played a miserable anddisastrous part. For he suddenly appeared in Rome as the partisan ofPaschal, the rival of Sergius, who had obtained his support by apromise of one hundred pounds of gold if he would help him to thepapal throne. On his advent in Rome, however, the exarch found that hemust abandon Paschal and consent to the election of Sergius, in whichall concurred. He refused, however, to abandon his bribe which he nowdemanded of the new pope. Sergius replied that he had never promisedanything to the exarch and that he could not pay the sum demanded. Andhe brought forth in the sight of the people the holy vessels of S. Peter, saying these were all he had. As the pope doubtless intended, the Romans were enraged against the exarch, the money was scrapedtogether, and the holy vessels rescued. 

In all this we see the growing distrust and hatred of Constantinople, which the taxation had first aroused on the part of the Italian peopleand their champion the papacy. These feelings were to be crystallisedby the extraordinary and tactless council that the emperor convened in691, in which the empire attempted to avenge the defeat it hadsustained at the hands of the papacy in regard to the Monotheleteheresy. The council, which was mainly concerned with discipline, altogether disregarded Western custom and the See of Rome, andespecially asserted that "the patriarchal throne of Constantinopleshould enjoy the same privileges as that of Old Rome, and in allecclesiastical matters should be entitled to the same pre-eminence andshould count as second after it. " The pope promptly forbade thepublication of the decrees of this council which he had refused tosign. Then the emperor sent a truculent soldier, one Zacharias, toRome with orders to seize Sergius and bring him to Constantinople asMartin had been arrested and dragged away. It only needed this to makethe whole situation clear once and for all. 

For it was not only the people of Rome who rose to prevent thisoutrageous act. When Zacharias landed in Ravenna, the citadel of theempire in Italy, the "army of Ravenna, " no longer perhaps Byzantinemercenaries, but Italians, mutinied and determined to march to Rome todefend the pope. As they marched down the Flaminian Way, the soldiersof the Pentapolis joined them, a Holy War, a revolution, declareditself, and for this end: "We will not suffer the Pontiff of theApostolic See to be carried to Constantinople. " This curious mob ofsoldiers, gathering force and recruits as it marched with songs andshouting down the Way, hurled itself against the walls of the EternalCity, battered down the gate of S. Peter which Zacharias, afraid andin tears, had ordered to be closed, and demanded to see the pope whowas believed to have been spirited away in the night on board aByzantine ship like his predecessor Martin. Zacharias took refugeunder the pope's bed, and Sergius showed himself upon the balcony ofthe Lateran and was received with the wildest enthusiasm. 

In that revolution was destroyed all hope of the Byzantine empire inItaly. A new vision had suddenly appeared to those whom we may call, and rightly now, the Italian people. The long resurrection of theWest, the greatest miracle of the papacy, was upon that day securedfor the future. And henceforth the mere appearance of the exarch inRome was regarded as an insult and a declaration of war. 

In the year 695 Justinian II. Was deposed and mutilated by Leontius, but he was to appear again as emperor ten years later when Sergius wasdead and John VII. Sat on the throne of Peter. Pope John reigned butfor three years, in which he was successfully bullied by Justinian. Hewas then succeeded by Sisinnius, who reigned for a few months, andthen by Constantine who ruled for seven years (708-715). Thearchbishops of Ravenna had certainly not dared openly to side with theimperial party and the exarch during the revolution, but, with therestoration of Justinian, archbishop Felix (708-724) felt himselfstrong enough to oppose the pope when he categorically required of himan oath "to do nothing contrary to the unity of the Church and thesafety of the empire. " He had, however, chosen a bad time to sethimself against his superior, who in the minds of all was the championof Italy. 

Justinian II. Had by no means forgotten the injuries he had receivedat the hands of the Ravennati: "_ad Ravennam_, " says Agnellus, "_cordarevolvens retorsit, et per noctem plurima volvens, infra se taliteragens; heu quid agam et contra Ravennam quae exordia sumam_?" "Whatcan I do against Ravenna?" What he did was this. Theodore thepatrician, one of his generals, was despatched with a fleet to Ravennaby way of Sicily. He proceeded up the Adriatic and when far off he sawthe great imperial city, he first, according to Agnellus, lamented itsfate, "for she shall be levelled with the ground which lifted her headto the clouds;" and then having landed and been greeted with dueceremony, set his camp on the banks of the Po a few hundred yardsoutside the city walls. There he invited all the chief men of theRavennati to a banquet in the open air. As two by two they entered histent to be presented to their host they were bound and gagged and putaboard ship. Thus all the nobles and Felix the archbishop were takenand the soldiers of Theodore entered Ravenna and burned their housesto the ground. 

Theodore took his captives to Constantinople where they were all slainsave Felix, who, however, was blinded. Later he returned to Ravenna, was reconciled with the Holy See, and died archbishop in 725. 

It would appear that all this happened when Theophylact (702-709) wasexarch, though Theodore the patrician may have superseded him for amoment on his arrival. The exarch in 710 was Joannes Rizocopus, and inthat year pope Constantine visited Constantinople with the future popeGregory II. In his train. They met in Rome, the pope about to setsail, the exarch on his way to Ravenna, where he was apparentlyassassinated in a popular tumult, "the just reward of his wickedness. "The people of Ravenna then elected a certain Giorgius as theircaptain, and all the neighbouring cities, Cervia, Forli, Forlimpopoli, and others, placed themselves under his government and turned upon theimperial troops. We know very little of this revolution, what directlywas the cause of it, or how it was suppressed; but it is clear thatthe exarchate, if it did not actually perish, was from this time forthfor all intents and purposes dead. Three more exarchs were to reign inRavenna, but not to govern. In 713, Scholasticus was appointed andremained till 726. He was followed by Paulus (726-727) who attemptedto arrest Leo III. , was prevented by the joint action of the Romansand the Lombards, and met his death at the hands of the people ofRavenna; and by Eutychius (727-752) who it seems saw the fall ofRavenna before the assault of the Lombard Aistulf. He was the lastrepresentative of the Byzantine empire to govern in Ravenna or inItaly. 

But the fall of the imperial power in Italy was not the work of theRomans or of the Lombards. It fell because it had ceased to beCatholic. 

We have seen the invasions of the Visigoths and the Huns fade awayinto nothing; we have seen the greater attempt of the Ostrogoths tofound a kingdom in Italy brought to nought. One and all they failedfor this fundamental reason, that they were not Catholic. The futurebelonged to Catholicism, and since it is only what is in the mind andthe soul that is of any profound and lasting effect, to be Arian, tobe heretic, was to fail. The great attempt, the noble attempt ofJustinian to refound the empire in the West, to gather Italyespecially once more into a universal government, succeeded, in so faras it did succeed, because the circumstances of the time in Italyforced it to be a pre-eminently Catholic movement. When that movementceased to be Catholic it failed. 

Let us be sure of this, for our whole understanding of the Dark Agedepends upon it. Justinian's success in Italy was a Catholic success. What had always differentiated the imperialists from the barbarianssince the fall of the old empire was their Catholicism. Justinian, agreat Catholic emperor, perhaps the greatest, faced and outfaced theArian Goths. He succeeded because his cause was the Catholic cause. But when his successors had to meet the Lombards they soon found that, for all they could do, they had no success. The Lombards, never veryeagerly Arian, were open to conversion, slowly they became Catholic, and from the day they became Catholic there was no longer any hope ofturning them out of Italy. It is only what is in the mind that is ofany fundamental account. Face to face with such a thing as religion, race is as a tale that is told. But though all hope of turning theLombards out of Italy ceased with their conversion, and the plan ofJustinian, with nothing as it were to kick against, was thus rendereda thousand times more difficult, it did not become utterly hopelessand impossible till the empire, the East, that is, Constantinople, fell into heresy and ceased itself to be Catholic. It was the gradualfailure of Constantinople in Catholicism that disclosed the pope tothe Italians as their champion. It was this failure that raised upeven in the imperial citadel, even in Ravenna, men and armiespassionately antagonistic to the emperor, passionately papal too. During a hundred years this movement grew till, in the eight century, the _coup de grace_, as we might say, was given to the Justinian planby the Iconoclastic heresy. 

The Iconoclastic decrees of the emperor Leo are said to have appearedin Italy in the year 726. Leo was an adventurer from the mountains ofIsauria. He was, so Gibbon tells us, "ignorant of sacred and profaneletters; but his education, his reason, perhaps his intercourse withthe Jews and the Arabs, had inspired the martial peasant with anhatred of images. " It was his design to pronounce the condemnation ofimages as an article of faith by the authority of a general council. This, however, he was not able to do, for he was at once met and hisiconoclasm pronounced heretical by the greatest of all opponents, thepope--Gregory II. 

Gregory had been elected to the papacy in 715 upon the death ofConstantine. He was a man of great strength of purpose and nobility ofcharacter. Upon the Lombard throne sat Liutprand whose boast it wasthat "his nation was Catholic and beloved of God, " and whoacknowledged the pope as "the head of all the churches and priests ofGod through the world. " These three men were the great protagonistswho decided the fate of the empire in Italy. 

The Lombards though they were thus Catholic had certainly not ceasedto make war upon the empire. In this ceaseless quarrel, for instance, they had, perhaps about 720, possessed themselves of Classis, theseaport of Ravenna, and not long after of the fortress of Narni uponthe Flaminian Way, and a little later, about 752, Liutprand himselflaid siege to Ravenna, apparently without much result, though Classisseems to have suffered pillage. But if Ravenna did not then fall itwas because the emperor's Iconoclastic decrees had not then reachedItaly. They appear to have arrived in the following year andimmediately the whole peninsula was aflame. "No image of any saint, martyr, or angel shall be retained in the churches, " said Leo, "forall such things are accursed. " The pope was told to acquiesce or toprepare to endure degradation and exile. Then, says Gibbon, surelyhere an unbiassed authority, "without depending on prayers ormiracles, Gregory II. Boldly armed against the public enemy and hispastoral letters admonished the Italians of their danger and theirduty. At this signal Ravenna, Venice, and the cities of the Exarchateand Pentapolis adhered to the cause of religion; their military forceby sea and land consisted for the most part of the natives; and thespirit of patriotism and zeal was transfused into the mercenarystrangers. The Italians swore to live and die in the defence of thepope and the holy images; the Roman people were devoted to theirFather and even the Lombards were ambitious to share the merit andadvantage of this holy war. The most treasonable act, but the mostobvious revenge, was the destruction of the statues of Leo himself;the most effectual and most pleasing measure of rebellion was thewithholding of the tribute of Italy and depriving him of a power whichhe had recently abused by the imposition of a new duty. "

The life of the pope was attempted by the imperial officials and theexarch appears to have been privy to the plot. The Romans rose andprevented the murder by slaying two of the conspirators, and when theexarch attempted to arrest the pope the very Lombards "flocked fromall quarters" to defend him. In Ravenna itself there was revolution;Paulus the exarch was slain it seems in 727, and Ravenna apparentlyswore allegiance to the Holy See. Leo sent a fleet and an army tochastise her; "after suffering, " says Gibbon, "from the wind and wavemuch loss and delay, the Greeks made their descent in theneighbourhood of Ravenna; they threatened to depopulate the guiltycapital and to imitate, perhaps to surpass, the example of JustinianII. Who had chastised a former rebellion by the choice and executionof fifty of the principal inhabitants. The women and clergy insackcloth and ashes lay prostrate in prayer; the men were in arms forthe defence of their country; the common danger had united thefactions, and the event of a battle was preferred to the slow miseriesof a siege. In a hard-fought day, as the two armies alternatelyyielded and advanced, a phantom was seen, a voice was heard, andRavenna was victorious by the assurance of victory. The strangersretreated to their ships, but the populous sea-coast poured forth amultitude of boats; the waters of the Po were so deeply infected withblood that during six years the public prejudice abstained from thefish of the river; and the institution of an annual feast perpetuatedthe worship of images and the abhorrence of the Greek tyrant. "

So Gibbon, following Agnellus whose account is obscure and perhapsaltogether untrustworthy. What is certain is that Liutprand wasadvancing against the empire in war; that he took Bologna and withoutdifficulty made himself master of the whole of the Pentapolis. 

Yet the emperor took no heed. The eunuch Eutychius was appointed asexarch. He appeared in Naples and sent orders to Rome to have the popemurdered; but again the Roman people saved their champion and swore tohim a new allegiance. Then Eutychius turned to the Lombards. 

He attempted to bribe both Liutprand and the dukes. At first he wasunsuccessful, but presently they began to listen to him. Liutprandcertainly hoped to make himself king of Italy, and it may be that itwas this which Eutychius offered him under the emperor. Moreover, hewas jealous, and not without cause, of the dukes of Spoleto andBenevento, who had rallied to the pope, and was anxious to have themunder his feet. This, too, he may have hoped to attain as King ofItaly and the emperor's representative in Italy. 

When the pope saw Liutprand march southward with the exarch he musthave known that the whole of the future depended upon the outcome ofthis act. Liutprand presently encamped with his army in the plain ofNero between the Vatican and Monte Mario. There the pope met him and, even as Leo the Great had done upon the banks of the Mincio, and asGregory the Great had done upon the steps of S. Peter's, overawed thebarbarian. Liutprand laid his crown and his sword at the pope's feetand begged, not only for his own forgiveness, but for that of theexarch his ally. The moment of enormous danger passed, the popereceived both his enemies; but from that moment it was evident thatthe Lombards were not to be trusted and must one day feel the weightof the papal arm. 

Gregory died in February 731, and was succeeded by Gregory III. Whocontinued his predecessor's Italian policy. The great and terribledanger which had suddenly threatened the whole of papal policy whenLiutprand and the exarch approached one another seems to have hauntedthe third Gregory. His obvious defence was to support the dukesagainst Liutprand, and this he did. Liutprand marched down against himand seized several towns in the duchy of Rome. It is now that thefuture begins to declare itself. The pope in his peril, a peril thatwould presently increase, made an appeal to the great Christianchampion, Charles Martel; he appealed to the Franks; in the event, aswe know, it was the Franks who saved the situation. In 740, however, Charles Martel refused to interfere; he was the kinsman of Liutprandand his son was a guest at the court of Pavia; that son was to be kingPepin the Deliverer--the father of Charlemagne, the first emperor ofthe restored West. 

That appeal for help was in all probability not made only on accountof the threat of Liutprand against Rome. It was obvious and more andmore obvious that the imperial power in Italy was about to dissolve. What was to take its place? The papacy? Yes, but the state of Italy, the hostility of Liutprand, the whole attitude and condition of theLombards, forced upon the papacy the necessity of finding a champion, a soldier and an army. That champion Gregory hoped to find in CharlesMartel; his successors found him in Charles's son Pepin and inCharlemagne. 

I say the appeal of the pope for help was not made only on account ofthe Lombard threat against Rome. It was the sudden dissolution of theimperial power that called it forth. In or about 737, the city ofRavenna, as we may believe, was besieged and taken by Liutprand andfor some three years remained in his hands, till at the united prayersof exarch and pope the Venetians fitted out a fleet and recaptured itfor the empire as we may think in 740. [1]

[Footnote 1: I follow Hodgkin, vi. P. 482 _et seq_. , and Appendix F. Cf. Also for discussion as to the date, Pinton in _Archivio Veneto_(1889), pp. 368-384, and Monticolo in _Archivio della R. S. Romana diSt. Pat_. (1892), pp. 321-365. ]

We know nothing of that siege and capture and practically nothing ofthe splendid victory of the Venetians. But the tremendous significanceof the fall of Ravenna, which had been the impregnable seat of theempire in Italy since Belisarius entered it in 540, must not escapeus. Rightly understood it made necessary all that followed. 

At this dramatic moment the Emperor Leo died, to be followed in 741 byPope Gregory and Charles Martel. Gregory was succeeded by PopeZacharias, who in the year of his election met Liutprand at Narni andobtained from him the restoration of the four frontier towns he hadtaken two years before. But though Rome was thus secured Ravenna wasin worse danger than ever, for Liutprand now renewed his attack uponit and it was only the intervention of the pope in person at Paviathat saved the city. Zacharias set forth along the Flaminian Way; atAquila perhaps near Rimini the exarch met him, and he entered Ravennain triumph, the whole city coming out to meet him. In spite of theopposition of Liutprand he made his way to Pavia, and was successfulin persuading him to give up his attempt to take the once impregnablecity and to restore much he had captured. Liutprand was an old man;perhaps he was not hard to persuade, for he was on the eve of hisdeath, which came to him in 744. His successor Hildeprand reigned forsix months and was deposed. Ratchis became king, a pious man who madetruce with the pope, and in 749 abdicated and entered a monastery. Aistulf was chosen king, and at once turned his thoughts to Ravenna. The crisis so long foreseen, so often prevented by the papacy, came atlast with great suddenness. In 751 Ravenna fell and the Byzantineempire in Italy thereby came to an end. 

We know nothing of this tremendous affair; we do not know whether thegreat imperial city, full of all the strange wonder of Byzantium, andheavy with the destiny of Europe, was taken suddenly by assault orafter a long siege. We know only that it fell, and that Aistulf wasmaster there in the year of our Lord 751. 

A sort of silence followed that fall. In 752 Pope Zacharias died. Hissuccessor was never consecrated, but died within three days of hiselection and made way for Pope Stephen. In the confusion of all thingsit is said that a party in Rome urged Aistulf to usurp the empire. This was enough; it might have been, and perhaps was, expected. Thepope had his answer ready. The heir of the empire in Italy was not theLombard but the Holy See. Aistulf threatened to invade Romanterritory, and, indeed, occupied Ceccano in the duchy of Rome. Againthe pope had his answer. That answer was the appeal to Pepin and hisFranks. The papacy had found a champion. 

X

THE PAPAL STATE

PEPIN AND CHARLEMANGE

The appeal of Stephen, which was to have for its result theresurrection of the empire in the West and the establishment of thepapacy as a temporal power and sovereignty, was made in a letter nowlost to us, which a pilgrim on his way back to France from Romecarried to Pepin the king of the Franks. In reply to it, the abbot ofJumieges appeared in Rome as Pepin's ambassador to invite the popehimself to cross the Alps. 

Meantime two events occurred, which cannot but have hardened theresolve of the pope to find a champion. These events were theoccupation of Ceccano in the duchy of Rome by Aistulf and the appealof the emperor to the pope that he should go to Pavia and attempt topersuade the Lombard king to give up Ravenna and the cities he hadlately taken. The appeal of the emperor must have assured the pope, ifindeed he had any doubt about it, that the emperor, so far as Italywas concerned, was helpless; while the occupation of Ceccano made itdoubly obvious that the Lombard intended, now that the empire washelpless, to be absolute master throughout the peninsula. 

[Illustration: Colour Plate S. GlOVANNI EVANGELISTA]

Stephen considered what course he should pursue, received two otherPrankish envoys in Rome, consented to go to Pavia on behalf of theemperor, and determined at the same time to visit Pepin in the north. He set out for Pavia upon October 13, 753, leaving Rome with a vastconcourse of people, which accompanied him some distance along theWay, out of the Flaminian Gate. His mission on behalf of the empirewas naturally entirely fruitless, and early in November the pope leftPavia with the hardly won consent of Aistulf to cross the Alps by theGreat S. Bernard--a difficult and dangerous business at that time ofyear--and to meet the Frankish king at S. Maurice in the valley of theRhone. In the latter he was disappointed. Pepin had been called awayto deal with an incursion of the Saxons, and now awaited his amazingvisitor at Ponthion in Champagne, but he sent his son Charles, destined to be the first emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, a hundredmiles down the long roads to meet the pope, and it was in the companyof this youthful hero that upon the Feast of the Epiphany 754 Stephenentered Ponthion at last, and was greeted by Pepin, who cast himselfupon the ground before him and walked as his lackey beside him as herode. 

The result of their interview is given in the _Liber Pontificalis_:"The most blessed pope tearfully besought the said most Christian kingthat by means of a treaty of peace (? with him the pope) he woulddispose of the cause of the blessed Peter and the republic of theRomans, who by an oath there and then (de praesenti) satisfied themost blessed pope that he would obey all his commands and admonitionswith all his strength and that it pleased him to restore by everymeans the exarchate of Ravenna and the rights and territories of therepublic. "[1]

[Footnote 1: As this is very important I give the original Latin"Ibidem beatissmus Papa praefatum Christianissimum regemlacrimabiliter deprecatus est ut per pacis foedera causam beati Petriet reipublicarae Romanorum disponeret. Qui de praesenti jurejurandoeundem beatissimum Papam satisfecit omnibus ejus mandatis etammonitionibus sese totis nisibus obedire, et ut illi placitum fueritExarchatum Ravennae et reipublicae jura seu loca reddere modisomnibus. "]

That winter the pope spent at S. Denis, where he solemnly crownedPepin and his queen, and Charles and Carloman their children, pronouncing an anathema upon all or any who should ever attempt toelect a king not of their house. Upon Pepin too he conferred the titleof patrician. Can it be that by this he intended the king of theFranks to be his executor in the exarchate as the exarch had been theexecutor of the emperor?[1] We do not know; but a little later adocument was drawn up in which Pepin declared and enumerated theterritories he was ready to secure for the pope. This document, theDonation of Pepin, would seem to have confirmed in detail and inwriting the oath he had sworn to the pope at Ponthion. Unhappily thedocument has disappeared, and we can only judge of its contents bywhat actually happened. 

[Footnote 1: The title patrician was not exclusively borne by theexarch, the Dux Romae, for instance, bore that title in 743. ]

The adventure into Italy to which the pope had persuaded Pepin was notuniversally popular with the Frankish nobles. We find Pepin attemptingto gain his end by negotiation with Aistulf, but all to no purpose, and probably in March 755 the Franks set out with the pope at theirhead to march into Italy to curb and chastise the Lombard. 

The great army of Pepin crossed the Alps by the Mont Cenis, and inwhat was little more than a skirmish upon the northern side of thepass defeated the Lombard army and proceeded to invest Pavia andravish the country round about. Aistulf, who was rather an impetuousthan a great soldier, had soon had enough and was ready to entertainproposals for peace. A treaty was made in which he agreed "to restore"Ravenna and divers other cities, and to attempt nothing in the futureagainst Rome and the Holy See. This having been decided, the pope tookleave of Pepin, who returned to France, and went on his way to Rome. 

The pope had won and had really established the Holy See as the heirof the empire; but Aistulf was by no means done with. He forgot alikehis treaty and his promises. "Ever since the day when we parted, " thepope writes to Pepin and the young kings, his sons Charles andCarloman, "he has striven to put upon us such afflictions and on theHoly Church of God such insults as the tongue of man cannotdeclare.... You have made peace too easily, you have taken nosufficient security for the fulfilment of the promises you have madeto S. Peter, which you yourselves guaranteed by writing under yourhand and seal.... "

But the Franks were deaf. An expedition to crush the Lombards was alaborious and an expensive business, and Pepin had much to occupy himat home. 

In January 756, however, Aistulf, mad from the start, laid siege toRome, and for three months laid waste the farms of the Campagna, S. Peter's patrimony. Narni was taken and indeed all seemed as hopelessas ever. Then the pope took up his pen and as the successor of thePrince of the Apostles wrote a letter as from S. Peter himself andsent it to the three kings, Pepin, Charles, and Carloman, to thebishops, abbots, priests and monks, the dukes, counts, armies, andpeople of Francia. Gibbon thus summarises this extraordinary anddramatic epistle: "The apostle assures his adoptive sons the king, theclergy, and the nobles of France that dead in the flesh, he is stillalive in the spirit; that they now hear and must obey the voice of thefounder and guardian of the Roman Church; that the Virgin, the angels, the saints, and the martyrs, and all the host of heaven unanimouslyurge the request, and will confess the obligation; that riches, victory, and paradise will crown their pious enterprise; and thateternal damnation will be the penalty of their neglect, if they sufferhis tomb, his temple, and his people to fall into the hands of theperfidious Lombards. "

Pepin could not be deaf to such an appeal. He again crossed the MontCenis, and again the Lombards were as chaff before him. On his marchto Pavia he was met by two envoys from Constantinople who hadill-treated, detained, and outstripped the papal ambassador. Theybesought Pepin to restore Ravenna and the exarchate to the empire, buthe denied them and declared roundly that "on no account whatsoevershould those cities be alienated from the power of the blessed Peterand the jurisdiction of the Roman Church and the Apostolic See, affirming too with an oath that for no man's favour had he givenhimself once again to this conflict, but only for love of S. Peter andfor the pardon of his sins; asserting, also, that no abundance oftreasure would bribe him to take away what he had once offered for S. Peter's acceptance. "[1]

[Footnote 1: Cf. Hodgkin, _op, cit_. Vii. P. 217. ]

Pepin marched on; Pavia was besieged, Aistulf was beaten to the dust. A treaty was drawn up in which the Lombard gave to "S. Peter, the HolyRoman Church, and all the popes of the Apostolic See forever" theExarchate, the Pentapolis, and Comacchio. An officer was commissionedto receive the submission of every city, and their keys and the deedof Pepin's donation were placed upon the tomb of S. Peter in Rome. Thepapal state was founded; where the empire had ruled so long thereappeared the heir of the empire, the papacy "sitting crowned upon thegrave thereof. "

The cities that with their _contadi_ and dependencies thus formed thetemporal dominion of the pope were, according to the papal biographer, twenty-three in number; Ravenna first and foremost, then Rimini, Pesaro, Fano, Sinigaglia (but not Ancona) that had formed the oldPentapolis. To them was added La Cattolica. The whole of the inlandPentapolis--though Fossombrone is not mentioned--Urbino, Jesi, Cagli, Gubbio--passed to the pope as well as the following places: Cesena andthe Mons Lucatium, Forlimpopoli, Forli, Castro, Caro, S. Leo, Arcevia, Serra dei Conti, the Republic of S. Marino, Sarsina, and Cantianotogether with Comacchio and Narni. A few months after all this wasaccomplished, in December 756, Aistulf, "that follower of the devil, "as the pope called him, died. 

Every state that is nearing dissolution is the prey of civil discord. So it was with the Lombards. Ratchis, who had more than seven yearsbefore become a monk, claimed the throne; so did Desiderius, "mildestof men. " Pope Stephen supported the latter on condition that Ancona, that last city of the Pentapolis, Osimo which dominated it, and Umana, together with Faenza, Imola, and Ferrara, were "restored" to thepapacy. Desiderius agreed and became king, but failed, as the Lombardsalways failed, to keep his promise, for though he handed over Faenza, Bagnacavallo, and Gavello, he withheld Imola, Bologna, Ancona, Osimo, and Umana; this was in 757, the year of Stephen's death. 

In the same year Pope Paul I. Seems to have visited the chief city ofhis new state, Ravenna, mainly perhaps on ecclesiastical business, forthe archbishop Sergius was by no means a loyal subject and had onlybeen brought to heel when nothing but submission was left open to him. He had then, according to Agnellus, promised to deliver to the popeall the "gold, silver, vessels of price, hoards of money, " and soforth stored up in Ravenna. Agnellus tells a long and incoherent taleof the way the pope obtained this treasure and of certain plots tomurder him therefor. All that seems fairly certain is that in thefirst year of his reign pope Paul I. Visited Ravenna. Indeed the chiefdifficulty of the papacy at this time must have been the occupation ofthe state it had won so consummately. How were the popes to make goodtheir somewhat shadowy hold upon Ravenna, and the Pentapolis, andthose other strongholds in central Italy and Aemilia?

That they were not to hold them easily was soon evident. The empirewas plotting to win Pepin to its side, and when that failed again, rumours of an imperial invasion reached Rome. Politically allrelations ceased between Constantinople and Rome about this time; forthough the pope in reality had long ceased to be a subject of theemperor, when he had possessed himself of the exarchate even theoryhad to give way to fact. Nor was the papacy more fortunate in itsrelations with Desiderius. The pope's object was doubtless to keep theLombard kingdom weak, if not to destroy it. The first step to that endwas obviously to encourage the achievement of a real independence bythe duchies of Spoleto and Benevento, which, again, bordering as theydid upon the duchy of Rome, would be easier to deal with if they stoodalone. There can be little doubt that the pope fostered the sleeplessdisaffection of the dukes, but when their revolt matured Desideriuswas able to crush it, laying waste the Pentapolis on his way. He wasthen wise enough to visit Rome and to arrange a peace which was onlyonce broken during pope Paul's pontificate: in 761 when Desideriusattacked Sinigaglia. 

It was easier, however, for the pope to arrange successfully a foreignpolicy than to administer his new state. No machinery existed for thesecular government by the Holy See of a country so considerable; norwas this easy to invent. The pope was forced to fall back upon hisrepresentative in Ravenna, namely, the archbishop. Now the archbishopsof Ravenna had always been lacking in loyalty. Ravenna and theexarchate were governed in the name of the pope by the archbishop, assisted by three tribunes who were elected by the people. Thisgovernment was never very successful, for at every opportunity, andespecially after the resurrection of the empire in the West, thearchbishops were eager to consider themselves as feudatories of theempire. This was natural and it may be worth while briefly to inquirewhy. 

Because Ravenna had for so long, ever since the year 404, been theseat of the empire in Italy, the bishops of that city had acquiredextraordinary privileges and even a unique position among the bishopsof the West. As early as the time of Galla Placidia, the bishop ofRavenna had obtained from the Augusta the title and rights ofmetropolitan of the fourteen cities of Aemilia and Flaminia. It istrue that the bishop continued to be confirmed and consecrated by thepope--S. Peter Chrysologus was so confirmed and consecrated--but thepresence of the imperial court and later of the exarch encouraged inthe minds of the bishops a sense of their unique importance and acertain spirit of independence in regard to Rome. Of course the HolySee was not prepared to cede any of its rights; but the spirit ofdisloyalty remained, and presently the bishop of Ravenna at the timeof his consecration was forced to sign a declaration of loyalty, inwhich was set forth his chief duties and a definition of his rights. 

After the Byzantine conquest the church of Ravenna, which the empireregarded as a bulwark against the papal claims, received importantprivileges and its importance in the ecclesiastical hierarchy wasgreatly increased. Like the bishop of Rome, the bishop of Ravenna hada special envoy at Constantinople and was represented, again likeRome, in a special manner in the councils of the Orient. In religionsceremonies the bishops of Ravenna took a place immediately behind thepope, and in ecclesiastical assemblies they sat at the right hand ofthe pontiff. There can be little doubt indeed of the Erastianism ofJustinian nor of his encouragement of the bishop of Ravenna. 

The declaration that the bishops were forced to sign upon theirconsecration by the pope by no means settled matters. In 648 thisdeclaration itself was in dispute as to its interpretation, forConstans II. Had conferred upon the See of Ravenna the privilege ofautonomy, and at this time the bishop did not go to Rome forconsecration. The Iconoclastic heresy of Constantinople, however, indirectly brought about peace between the pope and his suffragan, forRavenna was in this whole heartedly Roman. 

It was then, by means of an instrument still very uncertain, that thepapacy was forced to govern its new state, and in these circumstances, friendly relationship with Constantinople daily becoming moreimpossible, it is not surprising that we see the pope making anattempt to come to some sort of permanent reconciliation withDesiderius; and indeed when pope Paul died in 767 undoubtedly a peacehad been arranged. 

All might have been well if pope Paul's successor had been regularlychosen; but a layman Constantine was elected by a rabble at theinstigation of his brother Toto of Nepi. Christopher and his sonSergius, who held two of the greatest offices in the papal chancery, decided to call in the aid of the duke of Spoleto to attackConstantine, Rome was entered, and in the appalling confusion theLombards elected a certain priest named Philip to be pope. Christopherappeared, Philip was turned out, and Stephen III. , a Sicilian, wasregularly chosen. That was in 768, and in the same year king Pepindied and was succeeded by his two sons, Charles to whom apparentlyfell Austrasia and Neustria, and Carloman who took Burgundy, Provence, and Swabia. 

The death of Pepin left the papacy without a champion. Nor was thisall, as soon appeared. Charles and Carloman began to quarrel and toeffect their reconciliation, or to avert its consequences, Bertrada, their mother, counselled and succeeded in forcing upon them afriendship and an alliance with the Lombards which meant the completeabandonment of Italy upon the part of the Franks. This alliance was tobe secured by a double marriage. Charles was to marry Desiderata, thedaughter of the Lombard king, while Gisila, Bertrada's daughter, wasto marry Desiderius' heir. It is obvious that S. Peter was in peril, nor was pope Stephen slow to denounce the whole arrangement. Hisremonstrance, however, was ineffectual and there remained to him butone thing to do: to arrange himself with the now uncurbed Lombardking. This was exceedingly difficult, because his own election hadbeen achieved only by the humiliation of the Lombards. However, hemanaged it at the price of civil war. Desiderius and his army enteredRome at the behest of the pope, who celebrated Mass before the king inS. Peter's. The Franks were checkmated. 

It was not long before Charles saw that he had been outwitted. Animmediate change of his policy was necessary. In 771 it came with therepudiation of Desiderata, who was sent back to her father's court atPavia. Henceforth Charles and Desiderius were implacable enemies. Andnow everything went in favour of the papal policy, just as beforeeverything had seemed to cross it. Carloman, who had not quarrelledwith Desiderius, and might have opposed Charles and changed all thefuture, suddenly died in December of the year of the quarrel. Charlesbecame thus sole king of the Frankish nation. When pope Stephen cameto die in February 772 he must have laid him down with a quiet mind. 

In Stephen's stead there was elected as pope a pure Roman, born in theVia Lata of the nobility of the City; he took the famous name ofHadrian I. Desiderius, who had watched with a growing anxiety theamazing policy of Stephen, now turned to his successor, and bothdemanded and begged a renewal of friendship. Hadrian answered hisambassador at last with the mere truth. "How can I trust your kingwhen I recall what my predecessor Lord Stephen of pious memory told mein confidence of his perfidy? He told me that he had lied to him ineverything as to the rights of Holy Church, though he swore upon thebody of the Blessed Peter.... Look you, such is the honour of kingDesiderius and the measure of the confidence I may repose in him. "

Desiderius' answer was not to the point. He seized the cities ofFaenza, Ferrara, and Comacchio and ravaged the territory aboutRavenna, burned the farms and carried off the cattle. Then he fellupon the Pentapolis, seized Sinigaglia, Jesi, Urbino, Gubbio, S. Leo, and other "Roman" cities, and indeed possessed himself of everythingsave only Ravenna and Rimini, and proceeded upon a raid into the duchyof Rome. 

The answer of the pope was mild but firm: mild, for the hour was notyet come; firm, for it would strike ere long. "Tell your king, " saidhe, "that I swear in the presence of God that if he choose to restorethose cities which in my time he has taken from S. Peter, I willhasten into his presence wherever he may appoint a meeting place, atPavia, Ravenna, Perugia, or here in Rome, that we may confertogether.... But if he does not restore what he has taken away heshall never see my face. "

The hour was not come. Charles was busy with the Saxon hordes upon thenorth and east of his kingdom. It was not till the beginning ofJanuary 773 that the pope sent his messenger Peter to summon him tohis aid. Meanwhile, Desiderius marched on Rome. But even withoutCharles the pope was not defenceless. The Vicegerent of God who hadwithout a soldier turned back Attila on the Mincio and had thrust backLiutprand from Rome was not to be at the mercy of such a king asDesiderius. At Viterbo his messengers, the three bishops of Albano, Palestrina, and Tivoli, met the Lombard king and gave him the pope'slast word: "Anathema. " Desiderius shrank back. In that moment as itseems the ambassadors of Charles arrived in Rome, satisfied themselvesof the justice of the papal summons, and carried back to the greatFrank the prayer of the pope that he would "redeem the Church of God. "In the late summer of that year the Frankish host was assembled atGeneva and was already beginning to cross the mountains in two mightycommands by the Great S. Bernard and the Mont Cenis; in October thesiege of Pavia was begun. 

That siege endured for more than eight months. Meanwhile Charles hadmade himself master of Verona and of many of the cities of the plain. The men of Spoleto hastened to "commend" themselves to the pope andthe citizens of Fermo, Osimo, and Ancona, and of Citta di Castello, weread, followed their example, and for the feast of Easter 774, Charlesappeared in Rome, and was greeted and embraced by the pope at S. Peter's. On Easter Day Charles heard Mass in S. Maria Maggiore, onEaster Monday in S. Peter's, on Easter Tuesday in S. Paul's. On theWednesday in that Easter week, according to Hadrian's biographer, hemade that great Donation to the papacy which confirmed and extendedand secured the gift of Pepin his father. The duchies of Spoleto andBenevento, and much else, were added to the exarchate "as it was ofold" and given to the pope. Then in June Pavia, the Lombard capital, fell and Desiderius and his wife were sent by Charles as prisoners toa convent in Picardy where it is said they ended their lives. 

[Illustration: GUARDHOUSE OF THE PALACE OF THEODORIC]

The Donation of Pepin, confirmed, renewed, and enlarged by Charles, may, of course, be understood in various ways; at any rate it has beenso understood; but it is certain that the pope saw in it both thefulfilment of his hopes and the final establishment of the papalmonarchy. Yet while he utterly refused, and rightly, to admit theclaim of Charles--not yet emperor--to interfere in the election of thearchbishop of Ravenna, the head of his new dominion, he graciouslypermitted the king to take away certain mosaics from the old imperialcity to adorn his palace at Aix; and that in the following letter, which Dr. Hodgkin translates: "We have received your bright andhoneysweet letters brought us by Duke Arwin. In these you expressedyour desire that we should grant you the mosaics and marbles of thepalace in the city of Ravenna, as well as other specimens to be foundboth in the pavement and on the walls. We willingly grant your requestbecause by your royal struggles the Church of your patron S. Peterdaily enjoys many benefits, for which great will be your reward inheaven.... " On no theory yet put forward can the pope be considered asthe subject of the king of the Franks. That he had been and was to bethe subject of the emperor can be defended, but when has S. Peter beenthe creature of a king?

It was not Hadrian as we know but Leo who was destined to crown whatpope Stephen had begun, and to re-establish the empire in the West, and as he thought to create for S. Peter not an occasional but apermanent champion. 

Twenty-five years after that great Easter in Rome, pope Leo, whosucceeded Hadrian, whose long pontificate lasted for twenty-threeyears, was attacked in the streets of Rome and thrown to the ground inthe Corso by two nephews of Hadrian's. Exactly what was the nature oftheir quarrel with Leo we do not know, but they managed to imprisonthe pope, who presently escaped and, assisted by Winichis, duke ofSpoleto, made his way to the court of Charles. During the summer of799 the pope remained in France, and probably in October returned toRome with a Frankish guard of honour. In the following autumn Charlesset out on his fourth journey to Rome. It was now that he visitedRavenna, as he had already done in 787, and remained for seven days. On the 24th November he arrived in Rome. A month later upon ChristmasDay the great king, attended by his nobles, amid a vast multitude, went to S. Peter's to hear Mass. It was there in the midst of thatgreat basilica, before the tomb of the Prince of the Apostles, thatupon the birthday of Christ the empire re-arose; the pope placed uponthe head of Charlemagne the golden diadem and the Roman people criedaloud, "_Carolo Piissimo Augusta Deo, Coronato Magno a PacificoImperatori Vita et Victoria_, " Three times that great acclamationechoed over the tomb of the Fisherman. Once more there was an emperorin the West, a champion of the Faith and defender of the Holy See. 

It has been asserted, and is still I believe maintained, that thatcoronation was a surprise to Charles. But such things do not comeunforeseen, nor was Charlemagne the man to permit or to tolerate soamazing an astonishment. All Rome knew what was about to beaccomplished and had gathered in the ancient basilica to await it andcomplete it. 

Such a question, however, concerns us but little. For us it remains tonote that with the re-creation of the empire, and the appearance ofthe Holy See as a great temporal sovereignty in Italy, the historicalimportance of Ravenna comes to an end. We have seen that in the autumnof the most famous year save that of the birth of Our Lord, Charlemagne had visited Ravenna and had spent seven days in the city. Once more he was to visit it, and that upon his return journeynorthward in May 801. From this time Ravenna ceases to be of anysignificance in the history of Europe. The pass it held was no longerof importance, for the barbarian invasions were at an end, and a newroad into Italy over the Apennines was coming into use, the ViaFrancigena, the way of the Franks. As the port upon the sea which wasthe fault between East and West it, too, ceased to exist; for East andWest were no longer of any real importance the one to the other, andalready the alteration of the coast line, which was one day to leavethe old seaport some miles from the shore, had begun. 

The history of Ravenna, her importance in the history of Europe andItaly, thus comes to an end with the appearance of Charlemagne and theresurrection of the West. The ancient and beautiful city which hadplayed so great a part in the fortunes of the empire, which had, as itwere, twice been its birthplace and twice its tomb, herself passesinto oblivion when that empire, Holy now and Roman still, rises againand in the West with the crowning of Charlemagne in S. Peter's Churchupon Christmas Day in the year of Our Lord 800. With her subsequentstory, interesting to us mainly in two of its episodes--the apparitionof Dante and the incident of 1512--I shall deal when I come toconsider the Mediaeval and Renaissance city. 

But in fact we always think of Ravenna as a city of the Dark Age, andin that we are right. She is a tomb, the tomb of the old empire, andlike the sepulchre outside the gates of Jerusalem, that was ArimatheanJoseph's, she held during an appalling interval of terror and doubtthe most precious thing in the world, to be herself utterly forgottenin the morning of the resurrection. And surely to one who hadapproached her in the dawn, while it was yet dark, of the ninthcentury, of mediaeval Europe that is, her words would have been thoseof the angels so long ago: _Non est hic; sed surrexit_. While to usto-day she would say: _Venite et videte locum ubi positus eratDominus_. 

XI

THE CATHOLIC CHURCHES OF THE FIFTH CENTURY

THE CATHEDRAL, BAPTISTERY, ARCIVESCOVADO, S. AGATA, S. PIETROMAGGIORE, S. GIOVANNI EVANGELISTA, S. GIOVANNI BATTISTA, AND THEMAUSOLEUM OF GALLA PLACIDIA

Ravenna, as we see her to-day, is like no other city in Italy. As inher geography and in her history, so in her aspect, she is a placeapart, a place very distinctive and special, and with a physiognomyand appearance all her own. What we see in her is still really thecity of Honorius, of Galla Placidia, of Theodoric, of Belisarius andNarses, of the exarchate, in a word, of the mighty revolution in whichEurope, all we mean by Europe, so nearly foundered, and which herealone is still splendidly visible to us in the great Roman andByzantine works of that time. 

For the age, the Dark Age, of her glory is illumined by no other cityin Italy or indeed in the world. She was the splendour of that age, alonely splendour. And because, when that age came to an end, she waspractically abandoned--abandoned, that is, by the great world--just asabout the same time she was abandoned by the sea, much of her ancientbeauty has remained to her through all the centuries since, even downto our own day, when, lovelier than ever in her lonely marsh, she is aplace so lugubrious, so infinitely still and sad, full of the autumnwind and the rumours of silence of the tomb, of the most reverent ofall tombs--the tomb of the empire. 

We shall not find in Ravenna anything at all, any building, that is, or work of art, of classical antiquity; all she was, all she did, allshe possessed in the great years of the empire has perished. Nor shallwe find much that may have been hers in the smaller life that came toher in the beginning of the Middle Age, or that was hers in the timeof the Renaissance; the memory and the dust of Dante, a few churches, a few frescoes, a few pictures, a few palaces; nothing beside. For allthese we must go to Pompeii and to Rome, or to Florence, Siena, Assisi, and Venice; in Ravenna we shall find something more rare, butnot these. She remains a city of the Dark Age, of the fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth centuries, and she is full of the churches, thetombs, and the art of that time, early Christian and Byzantine thingsthat we shall not find elsewhere, or, at any rate, not in the sameabundance, perfection, and beauty. 

And yet though so much remains, her story since the time ofCharlemagne might seem to be little else but a long catalogue ofpillage and destruction. Charlemagne himself began this cruel workwhen he carried off the mosaics and the marbles, the ornaments of theimperial palace, to adorn Aix-la-Chapelle, and since his day not acentury has passed without adding to this vandalism; the worstoffenders being the fourteenth, fifteenth, sixteenth, seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries, which by rebuilding, by frankpillage, by mere destruction, by earthquakes, by contempt, and worstof all by restoration have utterly destroyed much that should haveremained for ever, and have altogether spoilt and transformed most ofthat which, almost by chance it might seem, remains. 

And so it comes to pass that the oldest buildings remaining to usto-day in Ravenna are to be found in the baptistery, the cathedral, the arcivescovado, and the mausoleum of Galla Placidia, the oldestcomplete building being the last. Let us then first consider these. 

The first bishop, the "Apostle" of Ravenna, according to Agnellus, wasS. Apollinaris, a Syrian of Antioch, the friend and disciple of S. Peter, who, as we know, had been bishop of Antioch for seven yearsbefore he went to Rome. Apollinaris followed S. Peter to the EternalCity and was appointed by him bishop of Ravenna, whither he came toestablish the church. There might seem to be some doubt as to hismartyrdom; but, according to Agnellus, he was succeeded by hisdisciple S. Aderitus, and he in his turn by S. Eleucadius, atheologian, who is said to have written commentaries upon the books ofthe Old and New Testaments, and to have been followed as bishop by S. Martianus, a noble whom S. Apollinaris had ordained deacon. Therefollows in the _Liber Pontificalis_ of Agnellus a list of twelvebishops, S. Calocerus, S. Proculus, S. Probus, S. Datus, S. Liberius, S. Agapetus, S. Marcellinus, S. Severus (c. 344), S. Liberius II. , S. Probus II. , S. Florentius, and S. Liberius III. , who occupy the seebefore we come to S. Ursus, who "first began to build a Temple to God, so that the Christians previously scattered about in huts should becollected into one sheepfold. "[1] S. Ursus, according to Dr. Holder-Egger, ruled in Ravenna from 370 to 396, and his church wasdedicated in 385; but a later authority[2] would seem to place hispontificate later, and to argue that it immediately preceded that ofS. Peter Chrysologus, who, the same authority asserts, was elected in429. All agree that S. Ursus reigned for twenty-six years, andtherefore, if he immediately preceded S. Peter Chrysologus, he waselected not in 370, but in 403; that is to say, in or about the sametime as Honorius took up his residence in Ravenna. 

[Footnote 1: "Iste piimus hic initiavit Templum construere Dei, utplebes Christianorum quae in singulis tuguriis vagabant in unum ovilepiissimus collegeret Pastor ... Igitur aedificavit iste BeatissimusPraesul infra hanc Civitatem Ravennam Sanctam Ecclesiam Catholicam, quo omnes assidue concurremus, quam de suo nomine Ursianam nominavit... "]

[Footnote 2: A Testi Rasponi, _Note Marginali al Liber Pontificalis diAgnello Ravennate_ in _Atti e Memorie della R. Dep. Di St. Pat. Per laRomagna_, iii. 27 (Bologna, 1909-10). ]

However that may be, we must attribute the foundation of a newcathedral church in Ravenna to S. Ursus, for till this day it bearshis name, Ecclesia Ursiana, though it appears to have been dedicatedin honour of the Resurrection (Anastasis. )

[Illustration: THE CATHEDRAL (_Basilica Ursiana_)]

Agnellus gives us a fairly full account of this church, whichconsisted of five naves divided and upheld by four rows offifty-six[1] columns of precious marble from the temple of Jupiter. That the church was approached by steps we learn from Agnellus in hislife of S. Exuperantius, for he there tells us that Felix thepatrician was killed "on the steps of the Ecclesia Ursiana. " Both thevault and the walls were adorned with mosaics, [2] which Agnellusdescribes and which would seem to have covered then or later the wholeof the interior; the wall on the women's side of the church beingdecorated with a figure of S. Anastasia, while over all was a dome"adorned with various coloured tiles representing different figures. "When Agnellus wrote (ninth century) this great church was of coursestanding, but doubtless it had been added to and adorned from centuryto century, and it is impossible to learn from his description, orindeed any other that we have, what was due therein to S. Ursus andwhat to his successors. One of the most splendid ornaments the churchpossessed would seem to have been a ciborium of silver, borne bycolumns which stood over the high altar also of silver. This is saidby Agnellus to have been placed there by the bishop S. Victor, whoseems to have ruled in Ravenna from about 537 to 544. It is said tohave cost, with the consent of Justinian, the whole revenue of Italyfor a year and to have weighed some one hundred and twenty pounds. Thewhole stood in the midst of a circular choir of marble, itself coveredwith silver it might seem, if we may believe a chronicler of Vicenzaof the fifteenth century, quoted by Zirardini, [3] who says: "In thegreat church of Ravenna all the choir, the altar, and the greattabernacle over the altar are of silver. " Before the altar was the_Schola Caniorum_. 

[Footnote 1: Fabri, however, in his _Sacre Memorie_, says there wereforty-nine columns. ]

[Footnote 2: Agnellus gives the names of the mosaicists Euserius orCuserius, Paulus, Agatho, Satius, and Stephanus. ]

[Footnote 3: Zirardini, _De Antiquis Sacris Ravennae Aedificiis_. ]

Agnellus tells us further in his life of S. Felix (_c_. 693) that thatbishop built a _Salutatorium_ (? Sacristy), "whence the bishop and hisassistants proceeded at the Introit of the Mass into the presence ofthe people. " But the Epigram which Agnellus quotes from this buildingwould seem to suggest that the _salutatorium_ was rather then rebuiltthan added for the first time to the church. 

The magnificent basilica, one of the most splendid in Italy, wassacked by the French in April 1512, but, as Dr. Corrado Ricci says, itwas not they who destroyed the church itself, but the _accademici_ ofthe eighteenth century, who, instead of conserving the gloriousbuilding, then some thirteen hundred years old, began in 1733 to pullit down, to break up the beautiful capitals and columns of preciousmarbles, and to make out of the fragments the pavement of the newchurch we still see, begun in 1734 by Gian Francesco Buonamici daRimini. Only the apse with its beautiful great mosaic remained for afew years till at last it too was destroyed. 

Thus the church we have in place of the old Basilica Ursiana is abuilding of the eighteenth century, and all that we care for in it isthe fragments that are to be found there of its glorious predecessor. 

These are few in number and of little account. Supporting the centralarch of the portico are two marble columns which belonged to the oldbasilica, and by the main door are two others of granite which cameperhaps from the old nave. 

Entering the church we find ourselves in a cruciform buildingconsisting of three naves, divided by twenty-four columns of marble, transept, and apse, with a dome over the crossing. In the secondchapel on the right is an ancient marble sarcophagus said to be thatof S. Exuperantius, bishop of Ravenna about 470. The magnificent tombcarved in high relief did not, however, belong to the old cathedral, but was brought here when the church of S. Agnese was destroyed. Inthe south transept is the chapel of the Madonna del Sudore, where oneither side are two other sarcophagi of marble adorned with figuresand symbols. That on the right is said to be the tomb of S. Barbatianus, confessor of Galla Placidia, and was originally in thechurch of S. Lorenzo in Caesarea, whence it was brought to thecathedral in the thirteenth century by the archbishop Bonifazio de'Fieschi, whom Dante found in Purgatory among the gluttons:

 "Bonifazio che pasturo col rocco molte genti... "

He brought the sarcophagus to the cathedral for his own tomb and thereI suppose he was buried. The sarcophagus upon the left was likewiseused in 1321 as a tomb for himself by the archbishop, RainaldoConcoreggio. This, too, is sculptured with a bas-relief of Christ, animbus round His head, a book in His hand, seated on a throne set on arock, out of which four rivers flow. With outstretched hand He gives acrown to S. Paul, while S. Peter bearing a cross holds a crown, justreceived, in his hand. The sculpture on the sarcophagus of S. Barbatianus is ruder. 

The high altar is of course modern, but within it is an ancient marblesarcophagus of the sixth century, in which it is said the dust of ninebishops of about that time lies. 

But one noble thing remains here among all the modern trash to remindus of all we have lost: the glorious processional cross of silvercalled of S. Agnello. Yet even this, noble as it is, does not come tous from Roman or Byzantine times it seems, but is rather a work of theeleventh century. 

In the midst of this great cross, upon one side, is the Blessed Virginpraying, and upon the other Christ rising from the tomb. Upon the armsof the cross, and the uprights, are forty medallions of saints, ofwhich three would seem to be archbishops. I say this beautiful andprecious thing comes to us from the eleventh century; but it has beenvery much restored at various times and is now largely a work of thesixteenth century. Dr. Ricci tells us that on the side where we seethe Madonna only the five medallions on the lower upright and the twolast of the upper are original; while upon that of the Risen Christ, only the five medallions on the lower upright are untouched, all therest is restoration. 

Beneath the eighteenth-century apse of the cathedral is the ancientcrypt, no longer to be seen; it does not, according to Dr. Ricci, dateearlier than the ninth century nor do any of the other crypts in thecity. 

In the left aisle a few fragments from the old church remainrecognisable. They are the marble slabs of an _ambo_ erected by S. Agnellus, archbishop of Ravenna in the middle of the sixth century. There we read: _Servus Christi Agnellus Episcopus hunc pyrgum fecit_. Among these are some earlier panels of the fifth century. In thetreasury, again, we find two other panels from the _ambo_ of S. Agnellus, and a strange calendar carved upon a slab of marble toenable one to find the feast of Easter in any year from 532 to 626;this is certainly of the sixth century. 

A certain number of Mediaeval and Renaissance things are also to beseen in the church. Here in the treasury we have a cross of silvergilt, with reliefs of the Crucifixion, God the Father, the BlessedVirgin, S. John Baptist, and S. Mary Magdalen, dating from the middleof the fourteenth century (1366). Over the entrance to the sacristy isa fresco by Guido Reni of Elijah the prophet fed by an angel. Within, is a good picture by Marco Palmezzano: a Pieta with S. John Baptist;while the Chapel of the Blessed Sacrament is decorated by him and hispupils. 

It is obvious, then, that very little remains to us of the originalBasilica Ursiana; nor can we reckon among that little the beautifulround and isolated campanile. This is not older than the ninthcentury, and has been much tampered with, especially in the sixteenthcentury, after an earthquake, and in the seventeenth century afterboth earthquake and fire. Indeed, the upper storey dates entirely from1658. 

As it is with the cathedral, so it is with the _Arcivescovado_. Of theold palace of the Bishops of Ravenna only a few walls, a tower, and awonderful little chapel remain. What we see now is work of thesixteenth and the seventeenth centuries after a restoration at the endof the nineteenth. The old vast palace which has been destroyed wasthe work of many archbishops, achieved during many centuries. Itconsisted of a series of buildings grouped about the palace which thearchbishop S. Peter Chrysologus built in the fifth century, and itsmost magnificent part was due to S. Maximian, archbishop of Ravenna inthe time of Justinian. All their work, which we would so gladly see, is gone except the little chapel of S. Peter Chrysologus, which hebuilt and signed in one of the arches in the fifth century. [1]

[Footnote 1: According to Rasponi the chapel was dedicated originallyto S. Andrea and is to be identified with the Monasterium di S. Andrea, which was not built by S. Peter Chrysologus (429-_c_. 449), but by Peter II. (494-_c_. 519). Cf. Rasponi, _Note Marginali al LiberPontificalis di Agnello Ravennate_ (Atti e Memorie della R. Dep. DiStor. Pat. Per la Romagna, iii. 27), Bologna, 1909-1910. ]

Of this great man Agnellus records: "He was beautiful in appearance, lovely in aspect; before him there was no bishop like him in wisdom, nor any other after him. " He was a native of Imola, then called ForumCornelii, and was ordained deacon by the bishop of that city, oneCornelius, of whom he always speaks with affection and gratitude. Whenthe bishop of Ravenna died, it is said the clergy of the cathedral, then just built or building, with the people, chose a successor, andbesought the bishop of Imola to go to Rome to obtain the confirmationof the pope. Cornelius took with him his deacon Peter, and the pope, who had been commanded so to do by the Prince of the Apostles in adream, refused to ratify the election already made, but proposed Peterthe deacon as the bishop chosen by S. Peter himself. Peter was thereand then consecrated bishop, was conducted to Ravenna, and receivedwith acclamation. He is said to have found a certain amount ofpaganism still remaining in his diocese, and to have completelyextirpated it. He often preached before the Augusta Galla Placidia andher son Valentinian III. , and he was perhaps the first archbishop ofthe see, Ravenna till his time having been suffragan to Milan. Heseems to have died about 450 in Imola. Among his many buildings, whichincluded the monastery of S. Andrea at Classis, is the little chapelnow dedicated in his honour in the _Arcivescovado_ of Ravenna. It isperhaps the only one of his works which remains. The little squarechamber, out of which the sanctuary opens, is upheld by four arches, which are covered, as is the vaulting, with most precious mosaics, still of the fifth century, though they have been and are still beingmuch restored. On the angles of the vaulting, on a gold ground, we seefour glorious white angels holding aloft in their upraised hands thesymbol of Our Lord. Between them are the mighty signs of the FourEvangelists, the angel, the lion, the ox, and the eagle. In the key, as it were, of the arches east and west is a medallion of Our Lord, and three by three under the arch on either side the eleven Apostlesand S. Paul, who takes the place of Judas instead of Matthias. In thekey of the arches north and south is a medallion of the symbol ofChrist, and three by three under the arch on either side six saints, the men to the right SS. Damian, Fabian, Sebastian, Chrysanthus, Chrysologus, and Cassianus; the women to the left SS. Cecilia, Eugenia, Eufemia, Felicitas, Perpetua, and Daria. Here the SS. Fabian, Sebastian, and Damian, Dr. Ricci tells us, are altogetherrestorations. For the rest, these mosaics have suffered much, bothfrom restoration, properly so called, and from painting. 

The pavement is old and beautiful, as I think are the walls, but thefrescoes, once by Luca Longhi, are most unworthy and out of place. Therecess which now contains the altar might seem not to have made a partof the original chapel or oratory; it appears it was only in theeighteenth century that the two were thrown into one. At that time themosaics of the Blessed Virgin and of S. Apollinaris and S. Vitaliswere brought here from the old cathedral. 

Just outside this wonderful little chapel in the _Arcivescovado_ thereis an apartment devoted to Roman and other remains found from time totime in Ravenna: a torso of a statue, a work of Roman antiquity, should be noted, as should certain fragments of a frieze, also anantique Roman work. Here, too, is preserved the splendid cope of S. Giovanni Angeloptes who was archbishop from 477 to 494[1] when hedied. 

[Footnote 1: Cf. A. Testi Rasponi, _op. Cit. Supra_. ]

In another apartment of the _Arcivescovado_ is preserved a relic ofanother great archbishop of Ravenna: the ivory throne of S. Maximianus. This is a magnificent work of the early part of the sixthcentury, and is one of the most splendid works known to us of itskind. It was made for the cathedral of Ravenna, but in or about theyear 1001 it was carried off by the Venetians and given by doge PietroOrseolo II. To the emperor Otto III. , who left it to the church ofRavenna on his death. It is entirely formed of ivory leaves, most ofthem carved sumptuously in relief. In front we see the monogram of_Maximianus Episcopus_ and under it are carvings of S. John Baptistbetween the Four Evangelists; all these between elaborately carveddecorative panels. About the throne to right and left is the story ofJoseph in ten panels, and upon the back in the seven panels thatremain[2] the miracles of Our Lord. Altogether it is a work of themost lovely kind, and certainly Byzantine. 

[Footnote 2: Four of those missing, Dr. Ricci tells us, have of lateyears been discovered, one in the Naples Museum (1893), one in thecollection of Count Stroganoff (1903), one at Pesaro (1894), andanother in the Archaeological Museum at Milan (1905). ]

We shall come upon S. Maximianus again in S. Vitale, where somethingmust be said of him. He lies, as has already been noted, in one of thegreat sarcophagi in the second chapel on the right in the cathedral. 

From the _Arcivescovado_ we pass to what is now the most remarkablebuilding of the group--the Baptistery. 

Dr. Ricci tells us that it was originally one of the halls of thebaths that were near the present cathedral. But it was converted intoa baptistery and ornamented with mosaics by the archbishop Neon ofRavenna (_c_. 449-459) as its inscriptions tell us and is signed withhis monogram. The original floor is three metres below that we see, and a second floor about a metre and a half above the original floorhas been discovered; this it would seem is that made by Neon, while athird remains about half a metre under the pavement we use, and uponthis are set the eight columns, with their capitals, two of themByzantine and the rest Roman, which uphold the arches of the upperarcade upon which is set the great drum of the dome. The plan is asimple octagon, bare brick without, covered with a "tent" roof ofamphorae under the tiles; but within, everywhere encrusted withglorious marbles and mosaics. 

It is to the mosaic of the cupola that we instinctively turn first, for it is, perhaps, the finest left to us in Ravenna. It is dividedinto three parts. In the midst is the Baptism of Our Lord on a goldground. Christ stands up to His waist in the clear waters of theJordan, the god of which river waits upon Him. S. John high up on thebank, his staff, topped with a cross, in his hand, pours the waterfrom a shell upon Our Lord's head while the Dove, an almost heraldicfigure, is seen above About this circular mosaic is set a greatercircle in which we see, upon a blue ground, the twelve Apostles inprocession, each bearing his crown. Nothing left to us of that age isfiner or more gravely splendid than these mosaics, they seem to be thehighest expression of a great art which has known how to reject thebrutal realism of an earlier time and to seize perfectly the secret ofdecoration. Nothing of the kind more masterly remains to us in Europe. 

Beneath these two circles another is set in which are eight panels, each of three parts, where are represented eight temples, four of themwith thrones signed with the Cross, and four of them with altars uponwhich the book of the Gospel is open. 

[Illustration: THE BAPTISTERY AND CAMPANILE OF THE CATHEDRAL]

The whole cupola is borne by the upper arcade, where we see sixteenfigures of the Prophets in stucco. The upper arcade is in its turnborne by the lower, which is everywhere encrusted with mosaics, restorations of our own time. The walls are panelled with variousmarbles. In the midst of the building is a huge octagonal font withits _ambo_, and in one of the wall niches is an ancient altar, and inanother a vase of marble. 

The effect of all this splendour is even to-day very lovely andglorious; what it might have been if it had been properly cared forinstead of "restored" we can only guess. Unhappily the "restoration"has been very radical. Even in the central Baptism, the head andshoulders and right arm of the figure of the Saviour, the head andshoulders and right arm, the right leg and foot of the Baptist and thecross in his his left hand have been destroyed and the whole dimmedand even spoiled. Such as it is, however, where shall we find itsequal or anything to compare with it?

From the cathedral group we now turn to the other churches which werebuilt in the time of the old empire in Ravenna for the most part, inthe days, that is, of Galla Placidia and her son Valentinian III. 

Among these is the church of S. Agata (entrance Via Mazzini 46), whichthough entirely rebuilt, with its campanile, in the later part of thefifteenth century is since the "restoration" of 1893 interesting, ifat all, because the church dates originally from the fifth century. Itwould seem indeed that it was founded in the time of the Augusta, andto this the walls of part of the nave bear witness, but it wascontinued later perhaps by the archbishop Exuperantius (_c_. 470)whose monogram appears upon the second column to the left in the nave, and finally completed or in part rebuilt in the sixth century. In thefifteenth century (1476-94), the church was largely rebuilt again, butits tribune with its great mosaic remained till 1688 when it fell. Inthe sixth century it would seem to have had an atrium or narthex. Itsmain interest for us to-day lies in the beauty of its columns of bigioantico, cipollino, porphyry, granite, and other marbles belonging tothe original church, with their Roman and Byzantine capitals. Also tothe right of the nave we see a curious _ambone_ hollowed out of afragment of a gigantic column of Greek marble. The altar, too, isformed from an ancient sarcophagus which is said to hold the dust ofthe two archbishops, Sergius, with whom the pope had so much trouble, and Agnellus. According to Agnellus the chronicler there was aportrait of the archbishop S. John Angeloptes in the apse, but thislike the great mosaic of the tribune is gone. It was here, however, that S. John got that strange surname of his--Angeloptes. He and hispredecessor S. Peter Chrysologus with S. Maximian and Sergius were thegreat archbishops of this great see. We hear that the emperorValentinian III. , according to Agnellus--but we should place thebishopric of S. John Angeloptes 477-494--"was so much affected by thepreaching of this holy man that he took off his imperial crown andhumbly on his knees begged his blessing.... Not long after he gave himfourteen cities with their churches to be governed by him_Archieratica potestate_. And even to this day (ninth century), thesefourteen cities with their bishops are subject to the church ofRavenna. [1] This bishop first received from the emperor a _Pallium_ ofwhite wool, just such as it is the custom for the pope to wear overthe _Duplum_; and he and his successors have used such a vestment evento the present day. "

[Footnote 1: The Archbishop of Ravenna at the present day has sevensuffragans, Bertinoro, Cervia, Cesena, Comacchio, Forli, Rimini, Sarsina. It is hard to decide whether this man or Peter Chrysologuswas the first archbishop of Ravenna. ]

This passage of Agnellus is important, but does not seem, onexamination, to have any real bearing upon the question of thedependence of the See of Ravenna upon Rome. The Pallium was originallyan imperial gift to the popes, probably in the fourth century. And thefact that it is the emperor and not the pope who bestowes it upon thearchbishop of Ravenna in the fifth century, if it be true, can have nomeaning at all in the question of papal supremacy. 

Agnellus, whom I have quoted, goes on to tell us of that miracle whichgave S. John, archbishop of Ravenna, his surname of Angeloptes orAngel-seer. "When the said John, " he tells us, "was singing Mass inthe Basilica of S. Agata and had accomplished all things according tothe pontifical rite, after the reading of the Gospel, after theProtestation (? the Credo), the catechumens to whom it was given tosee saw marvellous things. For when that most blessed man began theCanon, and made the sign of the Cross over the sacrifice, suddenly anangel from heaven came and stood on the other side of the altar insight of the bishop. And when after finishing the consecration he hadreceived the Body of the Lord, the assisting deacon who wished tofulfil his ministry could not see the chalice which he had to hand tohim. Suddenly he was moved aside by the angel who offered the holychalice to the bishop in his place. Then all the priests and peoplebegan to shake and to tremble beholding the holy chalice self-moved, inclined to the bishop's mouth, and again lifted into the air, andlaid upon the holy altar. A strange thrill passed through the waitingmultitude. Some said: 'The deacon is unworthy;' others affirmed, 'Notso, but it is a heavenly visitation. ' And so long did the angel standby the holy man until all the solemnities of the Mass were ended. "

Soon after this strange miracle S. John Angeloptes died and was buriedin the basilica of S. Agata behind the altar in the place where he sawthe angel standing. 

Nothing seems to remain of his tomb or his grave; but the church isfull of curious fragments, broken pillars, bits of mosaic, ancientmarble panels, beautifully carved, and more than one old sarcophagus. Somewhere there no doubt the dust of S. John Angeloptes awaits theresurrection. 

From S. Agata we pass to S. Francesco. This church was founded by S. Peter Chrysologus (429-_c_. 449) and was completed by S. PeterChrysologus' successor, the archbishop S. Neon (_c_. 459). Its firsttitle would seem to have been that of S. Peter Major; we hear, too, that it was called SS. Peter and Paul, and Agnellus in his life of S. Neon calls the church Basilica Apostolorum. The region of the city inwhich it stands would seem to have borne also the name _Regio Apostolorum_, though whether it got the name from the church or the churchfrom it is impossible to decide. [1]

[Footnote 1: The Franciscans conventuals would seem to have possessedthe church from 1261 to 1810. ]

Unhappily the church has been entirely rebuilt in the eighteenthcentury, and our interest in it is confined for the most part to thetower, the crypt, the twenty-two columns of Greek marble which upholdthe nave, two of which are signed 'P. E. ' and four others 'E. V. G. , 'and the tombs. The tall square tower dates, perhaps, from the tenthcentury, the crypt from the ninth, but the columns are of the fifthcentury. Perhaps the oldest thing in the church is the sarcophagus onthe right of the main door which has on its front Pagan sculptures andon its sides Christian. Close to the holy water stoup is a very lovelysarcophagus of the fourth century with reliefs of Our Lord and eightApostles. The ribs of the cover have as finials the heads of lions;altogether this is a very splendid and noble tomb. In the last chapelupon the right we find the great sarcophagus, still used as an altar, of S. Liberius, bishop of Ravenna (_c_. 375), "a great man, anever-failing fountain of charity; who brought much honour to thechurch, " according to Agnellus. The sarcophagus dates from the end ofthe fourth century and is sculptured in high relief. 

I shall return to S. Francesco when I consider Mediaeval Ravenna. [2]At present I would direct the reader's attention to S. GiovanniEvangelista. 

[Footnote 2: See _infra_, p. 245 _et seq_. ]

This church was originally founded by Galla Placidia herself, infulfilment of a vow made by her to S. John Evangelist, when, on herway from Constantinople to Ravenna, she was in danger of shipwreck. [3]Agnellus tells us that of old the church bore an inscription to thiseffect, and he gives it to us: _Sancto ac Beatissimo Apostolo JohanniEvangelistae Galla Placidia Augusta cum filio suo PlacidioValentiniano Augusta et filia sua Justa Grata Honoria Augusta, Liberationis penculum marts votum solmentes_. The mosaic of the apseof old represented the incident. Unhappily the church was almostentirely rebuilt in 1747, only the tower of the eleventh century andthe portico of the fourteenth being left as they had been. Thebeautiful fourteenth-century door, however, bears above it a relief ofthat time in which we see Our Lord, S. John Evangelist, ValentinianIII. , Galla Placidia with her soldiers and her confessor, S. Barbatian, with priests. Below this on either side of the arch of thedoorway is a representation of the Annunciation and within the architself a relief which recounts the miracle which attended theconsecration of the church. For the church of S. Giovanni Evangelistawas not only founded in recompense for a miracle, but a miracleattended its consecration. It seems that when the church was to beconsecrated no relic of S. John Evangelist was to be had. Thereforethe Augusta and her confessor gave themselves a whole night to prayer, and suddenly there appeared to them S. John himself, vested like abishop with a thurible in his hand, with which he incensed the church. Then when he came to the altar to incense it, and they would havevenerated him, he suddenly vanished, only leaving in the hand of theAugusta one of his shoes. This legend, which is represented in reliefin the fourteenth-century doorway of S. Giovanni Evangelista, is alsothe subject of a picture by Rondinelli of Ravenna in the Brera atMilan. 

[Footnote 3: See _supra_, p. 41. ]

The church has, as I have said, been ruined by the rebuilding of 1747;but there still remain the twenty-four columns of bigio antico withtheir Roman capitals, which upheld the old basilica, and in the cryptis the ancient high altar of the fifth century. Something, too, of theold church would seem to remain in the much repaired walls of the apsewithout. 

[Illustration: THE CAMPANILE OF S. GIOVANNI EVANGELISTA]

The frescoes by Giotto, sadly repainted, in the fourth chapel on theleft, must be noted. They represent the four Evangelists with theirsymbols over them, and the four Latin fathers of the Church, S. Jerome, S. Ambrose, S. Austin, and S. Gregory. Certain fragments of athirteenth-century mosaic pavement are to be seen in the chapel of S. Bartholomew, which is itself perhaps the oldest part of the church. 

We turn now to the church of S. Giovanni Battista which was founded bya certain Baduarius, according to Agnellus, and consecrated by S. Peter Chrysologus. It is possible that Baduarius was the mere builder, and that he built by order of Galla Placidia. Nothing, however, isleft of the old church, which was entirely rebuilt in 1683, except theapse as it is seen from the outside, the round campanile in its firststory and the beautiful columns sixteen in number, four of bigioantico, two of pavonazzetto, one of cipollino, and the rest of grecovenato, according to Dr. Ricci. 

 * * * * *

There remains to be considered what is, when all is said, I supposethe noblest monument of the fifth century left to us in Italy or inEurope--the Mausoleum of Galla Placidia. 

Agnellus tells us that the Augusta built close to her palace a greatchurch in the shape of a Latin cross. This she dedicated in honour ofthe Holy Cross which it will be remembered her predecessor S. Helenahad discovered in Jerusalem. Of this church, though it has long sincedisappeared--the "western" part of it having been destroyed in 1602and what remained restored out of all recognition in 1716--we know agood deal. According to Agnellus it was covered with most preciousstones (? marbles) and apparently with mosaics and was full ofsplendid ornaments. It had, too, a great narthex, and at the end ofthis Galla Placidia presently built a cruciform oratory for her ownmausoleum, where she was to lie between her brother Honorius and herson Valentinian. 

[Illustration: Colour Plate THE MAUSOLEUM OF GALLA PLACIDIA]

The Mausoleum of Galla Placidia is the oldest complete building leftto us in Ravenna, for it dates from well within the first half of thefifth century, whereas the baptistery, altered and transformed as itwas by S. Neon, is as we see it a work of the first years of thesecond half of that century. Simple as it is, without, a cruciformbuilding of plain brick, within it is so sumptuously and splendidlyadorned that not an inch anywhere remains that is not encrusted withmosaic or precious marbles. These mosaics were, before their radical"restoration, " perhaps finer and more classical than those of thebaptistery. It might seem, indeed, that they were perhaps the finestand subtlest work done in the Roman realistic tradition, nor was thereperhaps anywhere to be found so noble a representation of the GoodShepherd as that which adorned this great monument. It is, however, impossible to speak with any confidence of what we see there now, forall has been restored again and again, and is now little better than a_rifacimento_ of our own time, a copy, faithful perhaps, but still acopy, of the work of the fifth century. 

Nevertheless, the impression of the whole is very splendid and solemn. The roofs and dome are covered with mosaics of a wonderful andindescribable night blue, powdered with stars. In the cupola is across and at the four angles are set the symbols of the fourEvangelists, glorious heraldic figures. 

Above the door we see Christ the Good Shepherd, youthful, classic inform and repose, very noble and Roman, seated on a rock in a brokenhilly landscape, a cross in His left hand, caressing His sheep withHis right. This figure even after "restoration" gives us more than aglimpse of what it once was. Nowhere had Christian art produced somajestic a representation of its Lord; nor had the subject of the GoodShepherd been anywhere more splendidly treated than here. 

Over the great sarcophagus, opposite the entrance, we see a verydifferent scene. Here is no longer a youthful Christ, with the hairand the noble aspect of Apollo, but a bearded and majestic figure inthe fullness of manhood, His eyes full of anger, His draperies flyingabout Him, moving swiftly, the cross on His shoulders, in His lefthand an heretical, probably Arian, book which he is about to cast intothe furnace in the midst. Upon the extreme left is a case or cupboardin which we see the books of the four Gospels. In the other lunetteswe see very gorgeous decorative work of arabesques and stags at afountain and two doves drinking from a vase. Above in the spandrils ofthe arches are figures of apostles or saints. Nothing in the world ismore solemnly gorgeous in effect than this beautiful rich interior. The pavement is composed of fragments of the same precious marbles asthose which line the lower parts of the walls. 

Under the mosaic of the burning of the heretical books we see themighty sarcophagus of plain Greek marble which once held the body ofthe Augusta. This, of old, was richly adorned with carved marbles andperhaps with silver or mosaic; and we know that in the fourteenthcentury certainly it was possible to see within the figure of a womanrichly dressed seated in a chair of cedar and this was believed to bethe mummy of the Augusta Galla Placidia. However, we hear nothing ofit before the fourteenth century, and Dr. Ricci suggests that it mayhave been an imposture of about that time. It is possible, but perhapsunlikely, for the Augusta was not a saint, and what reason could menhave in the thirteenth century, when the very meaning of the empirewas about to be forgotten, for such an imposture? However this may be, the figure remained there seated in its chair during the fourteenth, fifteenth, and the greater part of the sixteenth centuries. Andindeed, it might have been there still but that in 1577 some children, curious about it and anxious to see a thing so wonderful, thrust alighted taper into the tomb through one of the holes in the marble, when mummy, vestments, chair and all were consumed, and in a momentnothing remained but a handful of dust. 

The sarcophagi under the arches on either side, according to variousauthorities, hold the dust of the emperor Honorius, the brother of theAugusta, and of Constantius her husband, or of the emperor ValentinianIII. Her son. It is impossible to decide at this late day exactly whodoes and who does not lie in these great Christian tombs. 

The Mausoleum of the Augusta was long known, though not from itsorigin, as the sanctuary of SS. Nazaro e Celso. When it was sodedicated I am ignorant, but it was not in the time of the Augusta. Then, in the fifteenth century, when so much was remembered and somuch more was forgotten, it bore the title of SS. Gervasio e Protasio, and this name remained to it till the seventeenth century, when theold title was revived. To-day although it retains its name of SS. Nazaro and Celso, it is more rightly and universally known as theMausoleum of Galla Placidia. 

XII

THE ARIAN CHURCHES OF THE SIXTH CENTURY

THE PALACE OF THEODORIC, S. APOLLINARE NUOVO, S. SPIRITO, S. MARIA INCOSMEDIN, THE MAUSOLEUM OF THEODORIC

It was, as we have seen, upon March 5, 493, that Theodoric, king ofthe Ostrogoths, entered Ravenna as the representative of the emperorat Constantinople. One of his first acts seems to have been theerection of a palace designed for his habitation and that of hissuccessors. Why this should have been so we do not know. It might seemmore reasonable to find the Gothic king taking possession of theimperial palace, close to which the Augusta Galla Placidia had erectedthe church of S. Croce and her tomb. Perhaps this had been destroyedin the revolution or series of revolutions in which the empire in theWest had fallen, perhaps it had been ruined in the Gothic siege whichendured for some three years. Whatever had befallen it, it was notoccupied, restored, or rebuilt by Theodoric. He chose a situation uponthe other side of the city and there he built a new palace and besideit a great Arian church, for both he and his Goths were of that sect. We call the church to-day S. Apollinare Nuovo. 

The palace, of which nothing actually remains to us, though certainadditions made to it during the exarchate are still standing, was, according to the various chroniclers whose works remain to us, surrounded by porticoes, such as Theodoric built in many places, andwas carved with precious marbles and mosaics. It was of considerablesize, set in the midst of a park or gardens. Something of what it waswe may gather from the mosaics of S. Apollinare Nuovo in which it isconventionally represented. It came to owe much to Amalasuntha wholived there during her brief reign, and more to the exarchs who madeit their official residence. 

In 751 when Ravenna fell into the hands of the Lombards Aistulfestablished himself there, but it might seem that the place hadsuffered grievously in the wars, and it was probably little more thana mighty ruin when, in 784, Charlemagne obtained permission from thepope to strip it of its marbles and its ornaments and to carry themoff to Aix-la-Chapelle. Among these was an equestrian statue in gildedbronze, according to Agnellus a portrait of the great Gothic king, butas Dr Ricci suggests a statue of the Emperor Zeno. This too in thetime of Leo III. Charlemagne carried away. According to the sameauthority the back of the palace was not then very far from the sea, and this was so even in 1098. Nothing I think can give us a betteridea of the change that has come over the _contado_ of Ravenna than anexamination of its situation to-day, more than four miles from the seacoast. 

The only memorial we have left to us _in situ_ of that palace of theGothic king is a half-ruined building, really a mere facade withround-arched blind arcades and a central niche in the upper story, acolonnade in two stories, and the bases of two round towers with avast debris of ruined foundations, walls, and brickwork, scarcelyanything of which, in so far as it may be said to be still standing, would seem to have been a part of the palace Theodoric built. Indeedthe ruined facade would seem to belong to a guard house built in thetime of the exarchs in the seventh or eighth century. If we seek thenfor some memory of Theodoric in this place we shall be disappointed. 

Far otherwise is it with the great church, the noblest in Ravenna, ofS. Apollinare Nuovo. This was built about the same time as the palace, in the first twenty years of the sixth century, as the Arian cathedralby the Gothic king. It was the chief temple in Ravenna of that heresy, and it remained in Arian hands till with the re-establishment of theimperial power in Italy it was consecrated, in 560, for Catholic useby the archbishop S. Agnellus. It consists of a basilica divided intothree naves by twenty-four columns of Greek marble withRomano-Byzantine capitals. Of old it had an atrium, but this wasremoved in the sixteenth century, as was the ancient apse in theeighteenth. The original apse, however, was ruined in an earthquake, as Agnellus tells in his life of S. Agnellus, in the sixth century, and of the atrium only a single column remains _in situ_ before thechurch. The campanile, a noble great round tower, dates from the ninthcentury for the most part, its base is, however, new. The porticobefore the church is a work of the sixteenth century, as is thefacade, which nevertheless contains certain ancient marbles, amongwhich are two inscribed stones, one of the fourth century and theother of the eleventh. 

When Theodoric built this great and glorious church he dedicated it toJesus Christ. It seems to have been dedicated in honour of S. Martinin 560 by the archbishop S. Agnellus who consecrated it for Catholicworship, and finally in the middle of the ninth century to have beengiven the title of S. Apollinare by the archbishop John, who assertedthat he had brought hither the relics of the first archbishop of thesee from S. Apollinare in Classe when that church was threatened bythe Saracens. 

The oldest name by which the church was generally known, however, isthat of _Coelum Aureum_. Agnellus in his life of the archbishop S. Agnellus says, speaking of the Catholic consecration of the church, "Then the most blessed Agnellus the bishop reconciled within this citythe church of S. Martin Confessor, which Theodoric the king founded, and which was called _Coelum Aureum_.... " And he goes on to say thatit was found from an inscription that "King Theodoric made this churchfrom its foundations in the name of Our Lord Jesus Christ. "[1] It gotthe name of _Coelum Aureum_ perhaps from its glorious roof of gold. This, however, was destroyed in 1611. 

[Footnote 1: Cf. Also Agnellus, _Liber Pontificalis_, Vita Theodori, cap. N. ]

The church has indeed suffered very much in the course of the fourteenhundred years of its existence, and yet in many ways it is the bestpreserved church in Ravenna. In the sixteenth century, for instance, it was fast sinking into ruin; the floor of the church and the basesof the columns were then more than a metre and a half beneath thelevel of the soil, and it was decided that something must be done ifthe building was to be saved. In 1514 this work was undertaken; thecolumns were raised and the arches cut and thus the church and itsgreat mosaics were preserved. It is, however, still sinking; the newpavement of the sixteenth century has disappeared, and that of 1873which was brought from the suppressed church of S. Niccolo covers thebases of the columns. 

If S. Apollinare Nuovo had been allowed to fall, nothing that wepossess in the world would have compensated us for its loss. For notonly have we here a beautiful interior very largely of the sixthcentury, but the great mosaics of the nave which cover the walls abovethe arcade under the windows are, I suppose, at once the largest andthe most remarkable works of that time which ever existed. They arealso of an extraordinary and exceptional beauty. They represent uponboth sides, through the whole length of the nave, as it were two longprocessions of saints. Upon the Epistle side are the martyrs issuingout of the city of Ravenna to lay their crowns at the feet of Our Lordon His throne, guarded by four angels. Upon the Gospel side are thevirgins headed by the three kings, who offer gifts to Our Lord in hisMother's arms enthroned between four angels. There is nothing inChristendom to compare with these mosaics. They are unique and, as Ilike to think, in their wonderful significance are the key to amystery that has for long remained unsolved. For these longprocessions of saints, representing that great crowd of witnesses ofwhich S. Paul speaks, stand there above the arcade and under theclerestory where in a Gothic church the triforium is set. But thetriforium is the one inexplicable and seemingly useless feature of aGothic building. It seems to us, in our ignorance of the mind of theMiddle Age, of what it took for granted, to be there simply for thesake of beauty, to have no use at all. But what if this church inRavenna, the work indeed of a very different school and time, butspringing out of the same spiritual tradition, should hold the key?What if the triforium of a Gothic church should have been built as itwere for a great crowd of witnesses--the invisible witnesses of theEverlasting Sacrifice, the sacrifice of Calvary, the sacrifice of theMass? It is not only in the presence of the living, devout or halfindifferent, that that great sacrifice is offered through the world, yesterday, to-day, and for ever, but be sure in the midst of thechivalry of heaven, a multitude that no man can number, none the lessreal because invisible, among whom one day we too are to be numbered. Not for the living only, but for the whole Church men offer thatsacrifice _pro redemptione animarum suarum, pro spe salutis etincolumitatis suae. Memento etiam Domine famulorum famularumque tuarumqui nos praecesserunt cum signo fidei et dormiunt in somno pacis_.... Here in S. Apollinare at any rate for ever they await the renewal ofthat moment. 

Those marvellous figures that appear in ghostly procession upon thewalls of S. Apollinare here in Ravenna are really indescribable, theymust be seen if the lovely significance of their beauty is to beunderstood. What can one say of them?

Upon the Epistle side we see as it were a procession of twenty-fivefigures all in white with palms in the right hands and crowns in theirleft. They are the martyrs SS. Clement, Sixtus, Laurence, Cyprian, Paul, Vitalis, Gervasius, Protasius, Hippolytus, Cornelius, Cassianus, John, Ursinus, Namor, Felix, Apollinaris, Demetrius, Polycarp, Vincent, Pancras, Chrysogonus, Protus, Jovenius, and Sabinus, andtheir names are written in a long line over them; each is aureoled, and each upon his white robe bears a letter the significance of whichis hidden from us. This procession comes out of the city of Ravennawhich is magnificently represented, occupying indeed a fifth of thewhole length of the mosaic. 

In the foreground is the palace of Theodoric, the whole facade of it, the triple arched peristyle in the midst flanked on either side by twotriple arched loggias, each having a second story of five arches. Inthe spandrils of the arches are figures of Victories, and of old inthe tympanum we might have seen Theodoric on horseback. Within, thearches are hung with curtains. On the extreme right is the great gateof the palace in the wall of the city, flanked on either side bytowers. In the lunette over the gateway we see three small figures ofChrist with the cross between two Apostles, and within the gate, Ithink, a great figure, seated. Over the facade of the palace we lookinto the city and see four churches, which Dr. Ricci suggests may be, on the right, this very church with its baptistery, now destroyed, together with the church of S. Teodoro (now S. Spirito) and the Arianbaptistery: they are altogether Byzantine in type. Out of this citycome the martyrs; there are twenty-five of them all in white, as Ihave said, and they are led by S. Martin Confessor, who bears ofcourse no palm, is robed in purple, and bears his crown in both hishands. He leads the procession along a way strewn with flowers to thethrone where Christ sits guarded by four angels. 

Above this great scene, between the windows, above each of which thereis an ornamental mosaic, we see sixteen figures of Prophets or perhapsFathers. Over these are twenty-seven compartments each filled with amosaic. Those over the heads of the prophets are, except in the caseof him who stands, at each end, last but one, filled with a sort ofrecessed throne in mosaic, over which in each case are set two doors. But the eleven compartments over the windows and the two over the twofigures last but one at either end are filled with thirteen scenesfrom the New Testament, beginning on the left as follows: (1) The LastSupper, (2) The Agony in the Garden, (3) The Kiss of Judas, (4) Christtaken, (5) Christ before the High Priest, (6) Christ before Herod, (7)The Denial of Peter, (8) Judas trying to restore the money to thepriests, (9) Christ before Pilate, (10) The Via Crucis, (n) The Mariesat the Sepulchre, (12) The way to Emmaus, (13) The Incredulity of S. Thomas. 

Turning now to the Gospel side of the church, we find a similarprocession over the arcade, but of twenty-one virgin martyrs bearingpalms and crowns richly dressed with precious ornaments and jewels. They bear the following names: SS. Pelagia, Agatha, Eulalia, Cecilia, Lucia, Crispina, Valeria, Vincentia, Agnes with her lamb, Perpetua, Felicitas, Justina, Anastasia, Daria, Paulina, Victoria, Anatolia, Christina, Savona, Eugenia. They issue out of the towered gate of theCastello of Classis, whose wall stretches before us to the great seagate through which we look upon the port with three ships on thewater, one of which is sailing in or out. Within the castello over thewall of it we see buildings of a distinctly Roman type. 

The procession of virgins which issues forth from this castello is ledby S Eufemia, who does not bear a palm, but carries her crown in hertwo hands. Before her go the three Magi, Balthassar, Melchior, andCaspar, bearing their gold, frankincense, and myrrh under the palms ofthe long way, guided by the star to where Madonna sits enthroned withher little Son between four angels. 

Above between the windows, as on the Epistle side, are sixteen figuresin mosaic of the Prophets or Fathers; and over them again, as before, are thirteen scenes from the life of Our Lord: (1) The Healing of thecripple at Capernaum, (2) The Herd of Swine, (3) The Healing of theparalytic who was let down in a bed to Jesus, (4) The Parable of thesheep and the goats, (5) The Widow's mite, (6) The Pharisee and thePublican, (7) The Raising of Lazarus, (8) The Woman of Samaria at thewell, (9) The Healing of the woman with an issue of blood, (10) TheHealing of the two blind men, (11) The Miraculous draught of fishes, (12) The Miracle of the Loaves and Fishes, (13) The Water turned intoWine. 

And what are we to say of these marvellous things? This first of all, that for the most part they are not of the time of Theodoric, butrather of that S. Agnellus who consecrated the church for Catholicuse. This is not to deny that there were always in the church mosaicsoccupying the place which these we see fill; on the contrary. But theprocessions of the martyrs and of the virgins with the three Magi arecertainly Catholic works, and of the middle or end of the sixthcentury; they obviously took the place of certain mosaics perhaps fullof Arian doctrines which then stood there. On the other hand, thecastello of Classis, the Christ enthroned with angels, the Virginenthroned with angels, the Prophets or Fathers, and the scenes of OurLord's life and teaching, above them, are of Theodoric's time. Thecity of Ravenna I am perhaps alone in attributing to the later period. Dr. Ricci--and he is of course an almost infallibleauthority--attributes it to the time of Theodoric. It does not seem tome to be so. All this, however, must be understood to refer to suchparts of these mosaics as have not suffered restoration, which, however, has not often been as drastic as that which has befallen thefigures of the Magi; of which the upper parts are new, as are thefigures of the two outer angels. 

We have here then under our eyes the two schools of mosaics, that ofRome and that of Constantinople. It is easy to see that the Romanwork, the original work that is, is more classical and realistic thanthe rich and glorious figures of the processions; but it is notdecoratively so successful. Indeed I know of nothing anywhere that ismore artistically, dramatically, and as it were liturgicallysatisfying than these long processions on either side of S. ApollinareNuovo. 

Little else remains in the church worth notice except an ancient ambounder the arcade in the nave and the chapel of the Relics at the topof the left aisle. This was largely built of ancient fragments in thesixteenth century. We see there two beautiful alabaster columns withcapitals of serpentine with two small columns of verde antico alsowith ancient capitals. The screen is Byzantine. The walls areornamented with bas-reliefs and paintings, but above all these we seethere a marvellous portrait in mosaic of the emperor Justinian as anold man, unhappily restored in 1863. The altar is ancient and above itis a marble coffer with Renaissance ornaments, upheld by four columnsof porphyry, having two Byzantine and two Roman capitals. On theEpistle side of the altar here is a marble chair--a Roman thing. 

From that splendid and well-preserved church we pass to that of theSpirito Santo. Unhappily this once glorious building has suffered asmuch as any church left to us in Ravenna, for it was almost entirelyrebuilt in 1543 when the portico we see was added to it, and in 1627was restored and adorned, as it was in 1854 and 1896. That it wasfounded and built by the Goths and reconciled later for Catholic useappears in Agnellus' life of the archbishop S. Agnellus, where we readthat of old the Arian Episcopio stood near by, together with a bathand a _monastero_ of S. Apollinare. What the _monastero_ may have beenwe do not know, but the bath was perhaps the Arian baptistery known asS. Maria in Cosmedin. 

The church of the Spirito Santo was not in Arian times known underthat dedication, but was called of S. Theodore. It owes the pleasingportico it now possesses, as I have said, to the sixteenth century, but that portico is itself largely constructed of old materials, beingupheld by eight antique columns, of which six are of Greek marble. These originally supported the baldacchino over the high altar. Within, the church is divided into three naves by fourteen columns, thirteen of which are of bigio antico, and the other, the last on theEpistle side towards the altar, of a rare and curious marble known asverde sanguigno. The capitals are of Theodoric's time, late Romanwork. 

Very little remains in the church that is of any interest to us. Inthe sacristy, however, we may see in the present lavabo some fragmentsof the ancient ciborio. And in the nave at the western end on theGospel side is an ancient sarcophagus of Greek marble which was carvedin the Renaissance and in the seventeenth century became the sepulchreof one of the Pasolini family. In the first chapel on this side of thechurch is the ancient _ambone_ removed from the nave in the sixteenthcentury, and in the second are two columns of pavonazzetto marble. 

Something better is to be had in the utterly desolate baptistery closeby known as S. Maria in Cosmedin. This was originally, as we maythink, the ancient bath of which Agnellus speaks, and it was convertedinto a baptistery by the Arians, and later consecrated for Catholicuses under the title of S. Maria in Cosmedin and used as an oratory. It is an octagonal building whose walls support a cupola which iscovered with mosaics in circles like that of the original baptisteryof the city. In the midst we see Christ almost a youth standing nakedin Jordan immersed to his waist. Upon His left, S. John stands upon arock, his staff in his left hand, while his right rests upon the headof Our Lord. Opposite to him sits enthroned the old god of Jordan, areed in his hand, listening, perhaps, to the words of the Father:"This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased. " Over Christ's headthe Dove is displayed in the golden heaven. 

About the central mosaic is set a band of palm leaves, while on theouter circle we see the twelve Apostles very much like the martyrs ofS. Apollinare standing dressed in white, their crowns in their handsbetween palms. Only S. Peter and another, perhaps S. John or S. Paul, do not bear crowns, but S. Peter his keys and the other a book. Between them is set a throne on which stands a jewelled cross. 

It is exceedingly difficult to say when these mosaics were executed, for they have been so entirely restored that very little of theoriginal work is left to us. They are certainly very early for work ofthe Catholic restoration; and yet they remind one strongly of theprocessions of S. Apollinare Nuovo. If as a whole the design of thesemosaics is of the time of the archbishop S. Agnellus, it is curiousthat the subject of the Baptism should have been used for a churchwhich by his act had ceased to be a baptistery. The most reasonablehypothesis would seem to be that the design and choice of subject isin the main due to the Arians; that the central disc remains late workof their time in so far as it is original at all. While the apostlesmay be in the main the work of the Catholic restoration. 

Theodoric was, as these works serve to show, a great builder ofchurches in his capital. Not all of them have remained to our day. Dr. Ricci has thought that we see something of one of them in the PorticoAntico of the Piazza Maggiore where there are eight columns of graniteupon the left of the Palazzo del Comune with late Roman capitals, fourof which have the monogram of the Gothic king. The church of S. Andrea, [1] according to Dr Ricci, stood by the city wall, near wherethe Venetians in the fifteenth century built their Rocca, destroyingthe church to make room for it. Dr. Ricci suggests that when theybegan to construct the Portico of the Piazza they used, as indeed theymore than any other people were wont to do, the material of thedemolished church in their new building and among it these greatcolumns with their Roman capitals and strange monograms. 

[Footnote 1: S. Andrea was, according to Rasponi, _op. Cit. Ut supra_, the same as the chapel of the Arcivescovado called S, Pier Crisologo. ]

But astonishing though these churches are which Theodoric built by theart and hands of the Italians during the generation of his rule inRavenna, they would not impress us with the strength and importance ofhis personality and government, as undoubtedly they do, if we had notin his mausoleum perhaps the most impressive late Roman building leftto us practically intact in all Italy, a thing which, quite as much asthe mightier tomb of Hadrian, assures us of the enormous vitality ofRoman civilisation, its weight, endurance, and unfailing continuancethrough every sort of disaster and misgovernment. 

This mighty monument is situated upon the north-east of the city, perhaps upon the old Roman road the Via Popilia. That it was built byTheodoric himself might seem certain. For though it has been said thatit was erected by Amalasuntha the Anonymus Valesii tells us thatTheodoric built it before he died. "While yet he lived he made amonument of squared stone, a work of marvellous greatness, coveredwith a single stone. " It is perhaps of little consequence to whom weowe this mighty tomb, for it is absolutely, and in any case, Romanwork, and might seem to have been modelled upon the far larger andmore tremendous mausoleum of Hadrian. [1]

[Footnote 1: Choisy points out that the mausoleum of Theodoric hasstylistic affinities with Syrian work, and Strzygowski, who reminds usthat several bishops of Ravenna were Syrians, thinks that Ravenna inmuch derived from Syria especially from Antioch. ]

The mausoleum is built in two stories of block after block of hewn andsquared stone. The lower of the two stories is decagonal and has inevery side a vast archway or niche, one of which forms the gateway. Within we find a huge cruciform chamber lighted by six squareopenings. The upper story, now reached by two stairways, built withancient materials in 1774, is circular, having about it eighteen blindarches and over it a vast circular roof hewn out of a single block ofIstrian stone that weighs, it is said, two hundred tons. It may bethat this upper story, smaller as it is than the lower, was of oldsurrounded by a colonnade, and it may be that the twelve projectionsupon the vast monolith of the roof once upheld statutes of the twelveApostles. We do not know. [1]

[Footnote 1: On the other hand, these projections are thought by manyto have been used as rings for the ropes by which the roof was hauledup an inclined bank of earth into place They each bear the name of anApostle, and are similar to the small abutting arches round the domeof S. Sophia at Salonica]

Here in this mighty tomb, which is known in Ravenna as _La Rotonda_, abandoned now in an unkempt garden, Theodoric, who expected to found aline of kings who would one day lie beside him; as long as he laythere at all, lay there alone. Not for long, however, did he enjoythat solitude. Already, when Agnellus wrote his _Liber Pontificalis_, the tomb was empty. He tells us that the porphyry urn, which hadserved as sepulchre for the Gothic king, then stood at the door of theBenedictine monastery close by, and that it was empty. And it seemedto him, he says, that the body of the king had been thrown out of themausoleum because a heretic and a barbarian, as we may suppose, wasnot worthy of it. At any rate the body of Theodoric was no longer inthe mausoleum in the beginning of the ninth century, and it is certainthat it had been ejected thence many years before. In the year 1854 agang of navvies who were excavating a dock between the railway stationand the Corsini Canal, some two hundred yards perhaps from themausoleum, and on the site of an old cemetery, came upon a skeleton"armed with a golden cuirass, a sword by its side, and a golden helmetupon its head. In the hilt of the sword and in the helmet large jewelswere blazing. " Most of this booty they disposed of, but a few pieceswere recovered and these are now in the Museo. It might seem that thiscan have been none other than the body of the great Gothic king. Indeed Dr. Ricci finds the ornament upon the armour to be similar tothe decoration upon the cornice of the mausoleum. If this be so itputs the matter almost beyond doubt. 

Theodoric was not allowed to rest in the mighty tomb that Latin geniushad built for him; but for ages many, famous and distinguished intheir day, sought to lie under a monument so splendid. The placebecame a sort of pantheon. Long before then, however, it had beenconsecrated as a church, S. Maria della Rotonda, and a Benedictinemonastery had been founded close by whose monks served it. To-day thatmonastery has utterly disappeared, and there are no signs of a churchin the _Rotonda_. Only the mausoleum remains in a tangled garden, farfrom any road, empty and deserted. 

XIII

THE BYZANTINE CHURCHES

S. VITALE AND S. APOLLINARE IN CLASSE

When Belisarius entered Ravenna in 540, he apparently found more thanone new building begun but not finished; of these the chief was thechurch of S. Vitale. This magnificent octagonal building with itsnarthex and atrium had, according to Agnellus, been founded by theArchbishop S. Ecclesius, that is to say, between 521 and 534. It wasapparently finished and decorated later by Julius Argentarius, and wasconsecrated by the archbishop S. Maximianus in 547. In plan itresembles very closely the church of SS. Sergius and Bacchus inConstantinople built by Justinian about 527. As we know both Justinianand Theodora, his empress, contributed largely to the perfecting of S. Vitale, which remains certainly his most glorious monument in theWest. 

The plan of the church, as I have said, is octagonal, surmounted by adome octagonal without but circular within. From one of these eightsides the sanctuary is thrust out, flanked on either side by acircular chapel with a rectangular presbytery. Standing obliquelyacross one of the two angles of the octagon, directly opposite thissanctuary, stretched the narthex flanked by circular towers. The greatoctagon is divided into two stories, each of which has three windowsupon each of the eight sides, the octagonal dome being lighted byeight single windows. 

[Illustration: S. VITALE]

Within the great octagon formed by the walls is a smaller octagonformed by an arcade of mighty piers which upholds the cupola. Thisarcade contains a double loggia which thus runs round the whole churchwith the exception of the presbytery, where it ends in lofty tribunes. It is upheld between the piers by columns of precious marble havingcapitals of the most marvellous beauty. 

The space within this inner octagon is covered with a pavement laiddown in the sixteenth century, consisting of all sorts of fragments ofmosaics and marbles which that century destroyed. The upper loggia wasof old the _gyneceo_, the place of the women. Nothing I think left tous in the world is more sumptuous and gorgeous than this interior. Everywhere are glittering mosaics, precious slabs of marble, pricelesscolumns of beautiful marble. And where the mosaics have been destroyedor left unfinished, as in the cupola and the body of the church, baroque artists have filled the place with their paintings, paintingswhich in their own style are matchless and which it is now foolishlyproposed should be destroyed. [1]

[Footnote 1: We know nothing of any mosaics other than those in thepresbytery and the tribunes, it may be that the church was coveredwith mosaic or was painted by the Byzantine artists, and this as wellwhere the marble slabs now cover the piers as elsewhere. If so it musthave been glorious indeed. Nothing that we can do can restore thiswork to us, and we achieve nothing but destruction by destroying thework that is now there. ]

In our examination of the church we turn first to the presbytery, which is entirely encrusted with most precious marbles and mosaics. Inthe midst of it stands the altar consisting of slabs ofsemi-transparent alabaster, within which of old lights were set. Themarvellously lovely piece which serves for the altar stone itself issupported by four columns, and that piece which serves for frontal iscarved with a great cross between two sheep. This altar had longdisappeared, but piece by piece it was recovered; the beautiful altarstone itself was found behind an altar in a chapel now destroyed inthis church, and was re-erected as we see it in 1899. 

[Illustration: Colour Plate S. VITALE: THE PRESBYTERY]

In the same chapel stood till then the beautiful low fretted screensthat now are set across the apse behind the altar, where indeed theyremained till 1700, according to Dr. Ricci. The lower part of the apseand the piers of the presbytery have been covered with fine marbles, some of which are ancient, but the vault, the lunettes, and the wallsare entirely encrusted with gorgeous mosaics. 

The presbytery is approached from the inner octagon of the churchunder a triumphal arch. In the curve of this we see amid muchdecorative ornament fifteen circular discs containing the head of OurLord, the twelve Apostles, S. Gervasius, and S. Protasius. Beneaththese are two monuments variously formed, Dr. Ricci tells us, in thesixteenth century. The four columns which they contain originallysupported the baldacchino over the high altar here; three of them areof verde antico. Framed by these columns are two Roman reliefs from afrieze originally in the Temple of Neptune, other parts of which arein the Sala Lapidaria in the Arcivescovado here, in the Louvre, in theUffizi, in the Castello of Milan, and in the Museo Archeologico atVenice. They are indubitably of course the oldest things in thechurch. 

Within this triumphal arch upon either side rise the tribunes in whichthe upper loggia of the church itself comes to an end. These tribunes, which are exceedingly beautiful, consist of two triple arches, oneabove the other on either side, and the columns which support them, with their marvellous capitals, are I suppose among the most gloriousleft in Christendom. The arches themselves and the lunettes uponeither side are encrusted with mosaics. In the lunette upon the righton either side an altar gorgeously draped, Abel offers to God thefirstling of his flock and Melchizedek Bread and Wine. Upon the faceof the arch we see Moses tending the sheep of Jethro, Moses upon MountHebron, and Moses before the burning bush. In the lunette upon theleft we have the sacrifice of Abraham of his only son, and the visitof the three angels to Abraham and Sara. Upon the face of the arch wesee Jeremiah the Prophet and Moses upon Mount Sinai. Above, upon thebalustrades, as it were, of the upper loggia we see angels upholding acircle in which is the sign of the Cross, and above again upon theface of the arches on either side the four Evangelists and theirsymbols. The vault is entirely covered with ornaments in mosaic, amidwhich three angels rise and support with uplifted hands the centraldisc in which is represented the Agnus Dei. 

Though these mosaics have suffered much from unforeseen disaster andfrom restoration they still delight us with their richness andsplendour, and nothing I think can well be finer than their effect, their decorative effect as a whole. They seem to hang there like somegorgeous Eastern tapestry of Persian stuff, as Dr. Ricci says, someunfading and indestructible tapestry of the Orient left by chance orforgetfulness in the old capital of the West. 

We now turn to the apse, which we enter under a second triumphal archupon the face of which we see upon the left the city of Hierusalem andupon the left Bethlehem. A cypress stands at the gate of each, andbetween them two angels in flight uphold a discus or aureole havingwithin it eight rays. Above this again are three windows about whichis spread a gorgeous decoration in mosaic. 

Beneath within the tribune of the apse we see Our Lord, "beautiful asApollo, " enthroned upon the orb of the world, an angel upon eitherhand, while to his right stands S. Vitalis to whom He hands a crown, to His left S. Ecclesius bearing the model of this church in his hand. 

Beneath upon either side stand the two great mosaic pictures, the mostmarvellous works of the sixth century that have come down to us andperhaps the most glorious and splendid works of art which that age wasable to achieve, and it is needless to say that there is nothing likethem anywhere in the world. 

Upon the left we see the great emperor, perhaps the greatest of allthe Caesars, Justinian, bearing in his hands a golden dish; beside himstands the archbishop of Ravenna, S. Maximianus. A little behind thesetwo figures and on either side stand five attendant priests, and onthe extreme left of the picture is a group of soldiers. 

[Illustration: Capital from S. Vitale]

In the mosaic upon the right we see the empress Theodora, straightbrowed, most gorgeously arrayed, very beautiful and a little sinister, bearing a golden chalice, attended by her splendid ladies and twopriests. Upon the extreme left of the picture stands a little fountainbefore an open doorway hung with a curtain. 

What can be said of these gorgeous and astonishingly lovely works?Nothing. They speak too eloquently for themselves. Not there do we seethe mere realism of Rome, the careful and often too carefularrangement that Roman art, able to speak but incapable of song, always gives us. Here we have something at once more gorgeous and moremysterious and more artistic, a symbolical and hieratic art, the giftof the Orient, of Byzantium. In the best Roman art of the best periodthere is always something of the street, something too close to life, too mere a transcription and a copy of actual things, a mere imitationwithout life of its own. But here is something outside the classicaltradition, outside what imperial Rome with its philistinism and itspuritanism has made of the art of Greece and thrust perhaps for everupon Europe. Here we are free from the overwhelming common-place ofRoman art, its mediocrity and respectable endeavour. 

It is, however, not in the gorgeous mosaics alone that we find thedelight and originality of S. Vitale. The whole church is amazinglydifferent from anything else to be seen in Italy, for it is altogetheroutside the Roman tradition, an absolutely Byzantine building as wellin its construction as in its decoration. It must be compared with thelater S. Sophia and SS Sergius and Bacchus of Constantinople. These, however, are works more assured and more gracious than S. Vitale, andyet in its plan at least S. Vitale is a masterpiece, and altogetherthe one great sanctuary of Byzantine art of the time of Justinian thatwe have in the West. Every part of it is worthy of the strictest andmost eager attention, from the ambulatory, which was covered in 1902with old marble slabs and where there are two early Christiansarcophagi, to the restored Cappella Sancta Sanctorum with itsfifth-century sarcophagus, the tomb of the exarch Isaac, and the lofty_Matronaeum_, the women's gallery, from which the best view of themosaics and the marvellously carved Byzantine capitals may be had. Norshould the narthex be forgotten, mere skeleton though it be. It ischaracteristic of such a church as this, and set as it is obliquely toit, is original in conception and curious. 

When we have finished with S. Vitale it is well to leave Ravenna andto drive by the lofty road over the marshes to the solitary church ofS. Apollinare in Classe which was built also by Giuliano Argentariofor archbishop Ursicinus (535-538) and was consecrated by archbishopMaximianus in 549. 

Classis, Classe, as we know, was the station or port of the Romanfleet, established and built by Augustus Caesar. It was doubtless agreat place enjoying the busy and noisy life of a great port andarsenal and possessed vast barracks for the soldiers and sailors ofthe imperial fleet. Later even when disasters had fallen upon thatgreat civilisation it maintained itself, and from the fifth to theseventh centuries we hear of its churches, S. Apollinare, S. Severo, S. Probo, S. Raffaele, S. Agnese, S. Giovanni "ad Titum, " S. Sergio_juxta viridarium_, and the great Basilica Petriana. 

It was joined to the city of Ravenna by the long suburb of the ViaCaesarea, much I suppose as the Porto di Lido is joined to Venice bythe Riva or as Rovezzano is joined to Florence by the Via Aretina. Ofall the buildings that together made up the Castello of Classe and thesuburb of Caesarea nothing remains to us but the mighty church of S. Apollinare and its great and now tottering campanile. For Classe andCassarea seem to have been finally destroyed in the long Lombard wars, either as a precautionary measure by the people of Ravenna and theimperialists or by the attacking Lombards, while the sea which oncewashed the walls of Classe has retreated so far that it is only fromthe top of her last watch tower it may now be seen. 

Nothing can be more desolate and sad than the miserable road acrossthe empty country between Ravenna and that lonely church of S. Apollinare. In summer deep in dust that rises, under the heavy treadof the great oxen which draw the curiously painted carts of thecountryside, in great clouds into the sky; in winter and after theautumn rains lost in the white curtain of mist that so often surroundsRavenna, it is an almost impassable morass of mud and misery. Even atits best in spring time it is melancholy and curiously mean withoutany beauty or nobility of its own, though it commands so much of thosevast spaces of flat and half desolate country which the sea hasdestroyed, on the verge of which stands the lonely church. 

One comes to this great basilica always I think as to a ruin, to findwithout surprise the doors closed and only to be opened after longknocking. The round campanile that towers and seems to totter in itsstrange dilapidation beside the church is so beautiful that itsurprises one at once by its melancholy nobility in the midst of somuch meanness and desolation. It is a building of the ninth century, and may well have been used as much as a watch tower as a bell tower. Till recently it had at its base a sacristy, but this has been sweptaway. Of old the church too had before it a great narthex of whichcertain ruins are left, among them a little tower on the left. 

Within we find ourselves in a vast basilica divided into three navesupheld by twenty-four marvellous columns of great size and beauty, ofGreek marble, with beautiful Byzantine bases and capitals. The centralnave is closed by a curved apse set high over a great crypt thrust outbeyond the rest of the church. Beyond the two aisles are two chapelseach with its little curved apse. The walls of the church and thewalls above the arcade were undoubtedly originally covered, in the onecase with splendid marbles, in the other with mosaics. The walls ofthe church were, however, stripped in 1449 by Sigismondo Malatesta ofRimini when he was building, or rather encasing, the church of S. Francesco in Rimini with marbles, and turning what had been a Gothicchurch of brick into what we know as the Tempio Malatestiano, by thehands of Alberti. We know that a great quantity of marble of differentkinds was gathered by Sigismondo from all parts of Italy, not only tofurnish the interior of his _Tempio_, but to cover the exterior alsoaccording to the design of Leon Alberti. Even the sepulchral stonesfrom the old Franciscan convent of S. Francesco in Rimini were usedand the blocks which the people of Fano had collected for theirchurch. S. Apollinare in Classe was then in Benedictine hands. Withthe consent of the Abate there, very many ancient and valuable marbleswere torn from the walls and carried off by Sigismondo to Rimini; somany in fact that the people of Ravenna complained to the Venetiandoge Francesco Foscari, saying that Sigismondo had despoiled thechurch. The doge, however, seems to have cared nothing about it andSigismondo sent to Ravenna and to the Abate two hundred gold florins, so that both declared themselves satisfied. Then the church passed tome, these three sheep belong rather to the upper part of the mosaicwhich, with the Cross in the midst, bearing the face of Our Lord, andon either side Moses and Elias, symbolises the Transfiguration. Thesethree sheep would thus represent S. Peter, S. James and S. John. 

[Illustration: INTERIOR OF S. APOLLINARE IN CLASSE]

[Illustration: CAPITAL FROM S. VITALE]

Beneath between the windows we see represented four Bishops ofRavenna, S. Ursinus, S. Ursus, S. Severus, and S. Ecclesius. To theright are the sacrifices of Abel, Melchizedek, and Abraham. To theleft the privileges of the church of Ravenna. In the midst we see anarchbishop and the emperor who hands him a scroll on which is written_privilegia_. To the left are three priests bearing fire, incense, anda thurible. To the right are three other figures supporting theemperor as the three priests support the archbishop. Doubtless thismosaic records the privileges granted to the church of Ravenna byConstantinople. The archbishop is probably Reparatus who received somuch from the Emperor Constantinus IV. Two of the figures who attendthe emperor represent Heraclius and Tiberius. This mosaic is thelatest in the church, dating from 668. 

Over the arch of the tribune is a medallion bust of the Saviourholding a book in His left hand and blessing us with His right. Uponeither side are symbols of the four Evangelists in the clouds of thesky. Beneath we see on either side the cities of Bethlehem andHierusalem, from each of which issue six sheep--perhaps the twelveapostles. Beneath again are two palm trees and again the archangelsGabriel and Michael and S. Luke and S. Matthew. 

These mosaics have often been remade and repaired. When Crowe andCavalcaselle examined them before 1860 they found that the whole tunicof the Moses had been repainted and half the face of the Elias hadbeen restored. They proceed: "The head of S. Apollinare is in partdamaged, the left hand and lower part of the figure destroyed. Thesheep beside S. Apollinare, but particularly those on the right ofthat figure, are almost completely modern. A large part of the leftside of the apsis is repainted, of the four bishops between thewindows of the tribune the head of Ecclesius is preserved, the lowerpart repainted. The head of S. Ursinus is a new mosaic, and the lowerhalf of the figure is restored. In the mosaic of the sacrifice halfthe head from the eyes upwards and part of the arms of Abel arerepainted, the legs have become dropsical under repair. The figures ofAbraham and Isaac are almost completely repainted, and the hands andfeet are formless for that reason. This mosaic is repaired in twodifferent ways with white cubes coloured over and with painted stucco. In the mosaic representing the tender of privileges the nimbi asalready stated are new, but besides, the lower part of all the figuresis repainted in stucco and the heads are all more or less repaired. Ofthe figures in the arch that of the archangel Gabriel is half ruinedand half restored, and part of S. Matthew and S. Luke are new. "

Since Crowe and Cavalcaselle wrote a vast restoration has beenundertaken, and this was finished in 1908. It was very carefullycarried out and it is to be believed that the work as we see it is nowsecure. 

There is much else of interest in the church: the beautiful crypt withits ancient sarcophagus of S. Apollinare and its columns; the tengreat sarcophagi which stand about the church, three of which containthe relics of archbishops of Ravenna; the curious tabernacle at theend of the north aisle. But a whole morning, or for that matter awhole day, is not too much to spend in this beautiful and desertedsanctuary which bridges for us so many centuries and in which we aremade one with those who helped to establish the foundations of Europe. 

XIV

RAVENNA IN THE MIDDLE AGE

The last great original work to be undertaken in Ravenna as thecapital of the empire in the West was the building and decoration ofthe churches of S. Vitale and S. Apollinare in Classe. All theByzantine work that was done later in Ravenna is merely imitative, anexpression of failing power under the crushing disaster of the Lombardinvasion. When at last Aistulf in 751 made himself master of theimpregnable city, it ceased, and suddenly, to be a capital, and thoughin 754 Pepin "restored" it to the papacy and established the popethroughout the Exarchate and the Pentapolis, he by that act foundedthe Papal States, whose capital of necessity was Rome. Thus Ravennafound herself when Charlemagne had been crowned emperor in 800 littlemore than a decaying provincial city, without authority or hope ofresurrection, and it is as a city of the provinces full only ofgigantic memories that she appears in the Middle Age and theRenaissance and remains to our own day. 

The appearance of Charlemagne, the resurrection of the empire in theWest, confirm and consolidate the misfortune of 751 in which indeedshe lost everything. But when we see the great Frank strip theimperial palace of its marbles and mosaics it is as though the fate ofRavenna had been expressed in some great ceremony and not by unworthyhands. An emperor had set her up so high, an emperor had kept herthere so long; it was an emperor who, as in a last great rite, stripther of her apparel and left her naked with her memories. 

[Illustration: The Campanile of S. Apollinare]

Those memories, not only splendid and glorious, but gaunt and terribletoo, smoulder in her ruined heart as the fire may do in the ashes whenall that was living and glorious has been consumed. Almost nothing asshe became when Charlemagne left her, a mere body still wrapt ingorgeous raiment stiff with gold, but without a soul, she still dreamtof dominion, of empire, and of power. Governed by her archbishops, sherebelled against Rome, struggled for a secular and sometimes areligious autonomy, and came at last, as surely might have beenprophesied, to consider herself as a feudatory of the Empire, not ofthe Church. 

But though this struggle might have been foreseen it is futile, it hasno life in it, it is without any real importance, it leads nowhere andfails to interest us. All that really concerns us in the confusedstory of Ravenna from the time of the resurrection of the empire tillour own day are two strange incidents that have nothing fundamentallyto do with her, that befell her by chance; I mean the apparition ofDante, when we see the most eager mediaeval apologist of the imperialidea fortunately and rightly find in her a refuge and a tomb; and thebattle of 1512 in which fell Gaston de Foix and which cost the livesof twelve thousand men and achieved nothing. 

Nevertheless Ravenna, for so long the citadel of the empire in theWest, of all the cities of Italy was least likely to forget her originor to forsake her memories, and it is both curious and interesting towatch her entry, little splendid though that entry be, into themarvellously vital world of the Middle Age in Italy. 

The slow re-establishment of Latin power which followed the crowningof Charlemagne, and which the Church secured by that act, first beganto come to its own with the rise of the bishops to civil power in thecities of Italy. Now Ravenna had certainly been governed by herarchbishop ever since Pepin in 754 had forced Aistulf to place thekeys of the city upon the tomb of the Prince of the Apostles. Ifnowhere else in the Cisalpine plain, Latin civilisation and law, then, never failed in Ravenna, and whatever may have happened elsewhere itmight seem certain that here in Ravenna and probably throughout theexarchate the curia existed and endured throughout the barbarianconfusion. 

This would explain the early and extraordinary development of communalinstitutions in Ravenna. And since, one may believe, the Roman legionswere replaced throughout the empire by the religious orders, it isinteresting to know that in the tenth century her Latin energy isborne witness to by the fact that in 956 she produced S. Romuald ofthe Onesti family of Ravenna, who was educated in the Benedictinemonastery of Classe and who founded the Order of Camaldoli, and towardthe end of the same century, in 988, she produced S. Peter Damian, thebrother of the arch-priest of Ravenna, cardinal-bishop of Ostia andpapal legate in Milan. 

Nor with the rise of the "spirito italico" everywhere in Italy do wefind Ravenna exhausted. Far from it, she is as ardent as any othercity of the peninsula whatsoever. Only always she is anti-papal, asthough, living in her memories, as she could not but do, and this washer greatest strength, she remembered her old allegiance to theemperor and could not forget that when the pope became his heir inItaly she had fallen from her old eminence. Thus as early as the firstyears of the eleventh century her archbishop obtains confirmation fromthe emperor of his temporal powers, in which confirmation norecognition of the sovereignty of the pope appears at all. This act ofallegiance to the emperor was repeated when Barbarossa appeared, andindeed the archbishops of Ravenna soon became the most eager if notmost the serious supporters of the emperors in all the great plain andperhaps in all Italy. Ravenna, once the imperial capital, thoughfallen was imperial still. She was haunted, haunted by ghosts thatwere restless in those marvellous tombs, that litter her churches, loom out of the grey curtain of mist like a fortress, or shine andglitter with imperishable colours and are full of memories asimperishable as themselves. 

Yet though it was to her the emperors so often looked for aid andsuccour and rest, it was not always so. The present, even with her, was more than the past. With the great development of communalinstitutions which marked especially the twelfth century, compelledtoo to face, though never with success, the increasing state ofVenice, which, indeed, and successfully, had usurped her place in theworld and had realised what she had failed to achieve, she was readyand able in 1198 to place herself at the head of the league of thecities of the Romagna and the Marches against the imperial power thenboth oppressive and feeble; so that pope Innocent III. Found it easyto restore the unforgotten rights of the Holy See there and these wereratified by Otto IV. And by Frederick II. As the price of papalsupport. 

It will thus be readily understood that if, at the opening of thethirteenth century, there was one city in Italy more certain thananother to be at the mercy of the universal quarrel of Guelf andGhibelline, that city was Ravenna. In its larger sense that quarrelwas her inheritance. It was the one thought which filled her mind. Buthere, as elsewhere, the great quarrel was insoluble or at any rate notto be solved. It merely bred faction and divided the city againstitself. Guelf and Ghibelline tore Ravenna as they tore Florence andSiena in pieces. 

The two great Ghibelline families were the Ubertini and the Mainardiand these at first gained the mastery of the city; but in 1218 PietroTraversari with the aid of the Mainardi turned the Ubertini out and, what is more, made himself master. 

Pietro Traversari was succeeded as Podesta in 1225 by his son Paolo, who became Guelf and fought in Innocent IV. 's quarrel against theemperor Frederick II. ; Frederick was able to turn the Traversari outof Ravenna in 1240 and to hold the city for eight years, but in 1248the pope retook it and the Traversari were restored though not I thinkto the chief power. They remained in power till in the last year ofthe reign of Gregory X. , 1275, Guido da Polenta appears. 

Rudolph of Hapsburg was now king--not emperor, for he was nevercrowned by the pope. He had been a partisan of the second Frederick's, but pope Nicholas III. Did not find in the founder of the Hapsburgdynasty the stuff of the Hohenstaufen. In 1278 he forced Rudolph tosecure to him by an "irrevocable decree" all that the papacy had everclaimed in the Exarchate and the Pentapolis. The empire renounced allits claims in the Romagna and the Marches; the confines of the statesof the Church were defined anew, and the cities of which the pope wasabsolute lord were named one by one. Of course among these wasRavenna. 

The Polentani appear first in the story of Ravenna in or about theyear 1167, when we find them acting as vicars for the archbishops. Wenext hear of them as Podesta, their long rule really beginning, as Ihave said, in 1275, when Guido il Vecchio, a rather formidablesoldier, appears as captain of the people and victor over Cervia, whose territory he added to the dominion of Ravenna. It was indeedthis man who first in the Ravenna of the Middle Ages attempted toestablish an independent or semi-independent state, by addingterritory to territory and thus creating a lordship. For this end heallied himself with the Malatesta of Rimini--a master stroke, for thePolentani of Ravenna and the Malatesta of Rimini had long been bitterfoes. 

The alliance was cemented by a marriage which all the world knows asan immortal tragedy. Guido Vecchio had a beautiful daughter, Francesca. Malatesta had two sons, the elder Giovanni called, for hewas a cripple, _lo Sciancato_, the younger, for he was very fair, known as Paolo _il Bello_. To secure their alliance Polenta marriedhis daughter Francesca to Malatesta's elder son Giovanni; but she hadalready learned to love, or she soon came to love, his brother Paoloil Bella. Giovanni came upon them one night in Rimini and killed themboth with one thrust of his sword. The tragedy, however, should onlybe told in the immortal words of Dante, who recounts the taleFrancesca told him in the second circle of the Inferno. For seeingFrancesca and her lover floating for ever in each other arms "lightbefore the wind, " as the wind swayed them towards Virgil and himselfthe Florentine addressed them:

 "O wearied spirits come, and hold discourse With us, if by none else restrained. ' As doves By fond desire invited, on wide wings And firm, to their sweet nest returning home, Cleave the air, wafted by their will along, Thus issued, from that troop where Dido ranks, They, through the ill air speeding, with such force My cry prevailed, by strong affection urged. 'O gracious creature and benign! who go'st Visiting, through this element obscure, Us, who the world with bloody stain imbrued, If, for a friend, the King of all, we own'd, Our prayer to him should for thy peace arise, Since thou hast pity on our evil plight Of whatsoe'er to hear or to discourse It pleases thee, that will we hear, of that Freely with thee discourse, while e'er the wind As now is mute The land that gave me birth Is situate on the coast, where Po descends To rest in ocean with his sequent streams 'Love that in gentle heart is quickly learnt Entangled him by that fair form, from me Ta'en in such cruel sort, as grieves me still, Love that denial takes from none beloved Caught me with pleasing him so passing well That as thou seest, he yet deserts me not 'Love brought us to one death, Caina waits The soul who spilt our life' Such were their words, At hearing which downward I bent my looks And held them there so long that the bard cried 'What art thou pondering?' I in answer thus 'Alas' by what sweet thoughts, what fond desire Must they at length to that ill pass have reached' Then turning, I to them my speech address'd, And thus began 'Francesca! your sad fate Even to tears my grief and pity moves But tell me, in the time of your sweet sighs, By what, and how Love granted, that ye knew Your yet uncertain wishes?' She replied 'No greater grief then to remember days Of joy when misery is at hand That kens Thy learn'd instructor Yet so eagerly If thou art bent to know the primal root From whence our love gat being, I will do As one who weeps and tells his tale One day For our delight we read of Lancelot, How him love thrall'd Alone we were and no Suspicion near us Oft-times by that reading Our eyes were drawn together, and the hue Fled from our altered cheek But at one point Alone we fell When of that smile we read, That wished smile, so rapturously kissed By one so deep in love, then he, who ne'er From me shall separate, at once my lips All trembling kissed The book and writer both Were love's purveyors In its leaves that day We read no more' While thus one spirit spake The other wailed so sorely, that heart-struck I, through compassion fainting, seem'd not far From death and like a corse fell to the ground"

With the name of Dante we come to the real importance Ravenna has forus in the Middle Age. Dante, however, was not the guest of GuidoVecchio. That great lord ruled in Ravenna as perpetual captain tillhis death in 1310, when he was succeeded by his son Lamberto who hadfor some time been the leading spirit in the city. He altogetherabolished the so-called democratic government, that is to say, theconsulship which was filled in turn by two consuls, the one succeedingthe other every fifteen days. Lamberto made himself lord and reignedtill 1316, when he was succeeded by his nephew Guido Novello, theconsul of Cesena, who thus brought Cesena into the lordship. It iswith this man that a universal interest in Ravenna may be said for amoment to revive, for it was he who had the honour to be the host ofDante Alighieri. 

Guido Novello was not a mere adventurer like Guido Vecchio, he was aman of considerable culture, with a love of learning and of the arts. It was, as we shall see, at his earnest solicitation that Dante cameto visit him, and if we may believe Vasari it was at the poet'ssuggestion he invited Giotto to his court. "As it had come to the earsof Dante that Giotto was in Ferrara, he so contrived that the latterwas induced to visit Ravenna, where the poet was then in exile, andwhere Giotto painted some frescoes which are moderately good ... Forthe Signori da Polenta. "

Dante as we may think spent the last four years of his life inRavenna. Those four years we shall consider presently. Here it will beenough to note that he met his death at last in the service of hishost and benefactor Guido Novello. The most disastrous action of hislife was, it will be remembered, the embassy he made on behalf of hisown city of Florence to pope Boniface VIII. That business cost him hishome and the city he loved with so cruel a passion; it made him anexile. It was upon the longest journey of all that his last embassysent him. He set out it seems as ambassador of Guido Novello forVenice, which so far as the sea and all its business are concerned hadlong replaced Ravenna as mistress of the Adriatic. The recentacquisition of the city and the salt flats of Cervia by Ravenna hadbecome a grievance with the Venetians who desired that monopoly forthemselves. It seems that in some local quarrel at Cervia certainVenetian sailors had been killed and Dante went on Guide's behalf toclear the matter up. He was to be as it happened as unsuccessful inhis last embassy as he had been in his first. The old doge, accordingto the legend which I am bound to say is now generally regarded as afable, received him coldly and, so the tale runs, invited him todinner upon a fast day. "In front of the envoys of other princes whowere of greater account than the Polentani of Ravenna, and were servedbefore Dante, the larger fish were placed, while in front of Dante wasplaced the smallest. This difference of treatment nettled Dante whotook up one of the little fish in his hand and held it to his ear asthough expecting it to say something. The doge observing this askedhim what his strange behaviour meant. To which Dante replied: 'As Iknew that the father of this fish met his death in these waters I wasasking him news of his father. '

"'Well, ' said the doge, 'and what did he answer?' Dante replied: 'Hetold me that he and his companions were too little to remember muchabout him; but that I might learn what I wanted to know from the olderfish, who would be able to give me the news I asked for. '

"Thereupon the doge at once ordered Dante to be served with a finelarge fish. "

[Illustration: Colour Plate S. GIOVANNI BATTISTA]

Thus Dante called attention to his great achievement, by which Isuppose he hoped at once to vindicate his dignity as a great man, certainly greater than any one present, and by this means to lendimportance to his mission. Whatever may have been the personal resultof his sally, it did his mission no good at all. When the officialinterview took place Dante, if we may believe something of theapocryphal "Letter of Dante to Guido da Polenta, " began to address thedoge in Latin and was bidden to speak in Italian or to obtain aninterpreter. His mission was a failure and Venice, who in the personof her doge did her best to show either her ignorance of the greatpoet who did her the honour of crossing her Piazza or of herphilistine contempt of him, lives in the _Divine Comedy_ only as anillustration of Hell. 

 "Thus we from bridge to bridge ... Pass'd on, and to the summit reaching, stood To view another gap, within the round Of Malebolge, other bootless pangs. Marvellous darkness shadow'd o'er the place. In the Venetian arsenal as boils Through wintry months tenacious pitch, to smear Their unbound vessels ... So not by force of fire but art divine Boiled here a glutinous thick mass, that round Limed all the shore. "

On his way back to Ravenna by land, for the Venetians added to theirshame by refusing him the sea passage, he caught a fever in themarshes and returned to Ravenna only to die: the mightiest of allthose--emperors and kings--who lie in that "_generale sepolcro disantissimi corpi_. "

That was in 1321; and with the death of Dante our interest in Ravennaagain becomes cold. Guido Novello soon fell, driven out of Ravenna, never to return, by Ostasio who had assassinated Guide's brother thearchbishop-elect Rinaldo. Ostasio ruled with the title of vicar whichhe received both from Lewis the Bavarian and from pope Benedict XII. This vicious and cruel despot was succeeded by his equally cruel sonBernardino. He ruled for fourteen years, 1345-1359, not, however, without mishap, for his brothers conspired against him and flung himinto prison at Cervia. He contrived, however, to turn the tables uponthem and to hold them in the same dungeon where he himself had beentheir prisoner. He was succeeded at last by Guido Lucio, a man of someintegrity; but he too was the victim of his family, his own sonsrising up against him in his old age and in 1389 flinging him intoprison where he died. 

He was followed in the lordship of Ravenna by his son Ostasio. Thisman died in 1431, that is to say, in the midst of all the confusion, here in Romagna and the Marches, of the fifteenth century, when thecondottieri were one and all looking for thrones and such ambitions asthose of the Visconti, of Francesco Sforza, of Sigismondo Malatesta, of Federigo of Urbino and of a host of _parvenus_ were struggling fordominion and mastery. Thus it was that Ostasio's successor, Ostasio, in 1438 was compelled to make alliance with duke Filippo Maria ofMilan. Venice, ever watchful, saw Visconti's game, remembered Cervia, and insisted upon Ostasio coming to Venice. While there he learnedthat Venice had annexed his dominion. Nor are we surprised to learnthat he ended his days in a Franciscan convent, where he wasmysteriously assassinated, probably by order of Venice. But with theentry of Venice into Ravenna the Middle Age, even in that far place, comes to an end. The Polentani were done with. A new and vigorousgovernment ushered the old imperial city into the Renaissance. 

XV

DANTE IN RAVENNA

Before following the fortunes of Ravenna under that new and aliengovernment into the Renaissance and the modern world, it will be wellif we turn to examine more closely her one great moment in the MiddleAge, the moment in which Dante found in her a last refuge, and thenlinger a little among such of her mediaeval buildings as the modernworld has left her. 

In any attempt to deal, however briefly, with Dante's sojourn inRavenna we must first find out what we really know concerning it anddistinguish this from what is mere conjecture or deduction. Now thefirst authority for Dante's life generally, is undoubtedly Boccaccio, and as it happens he was in Ravenna, where he had relations, certainlyin 1350 and perhaps in 1346. In 1350 he was the envoy of the Or SanMichele Society, who by his hand sent Beatrice, the daughter of Dante, then a nun in the convent of S. Stefano dell' Uliva in Ravenna, tengold florins He was thus in communication with Dante's daughter sothat when he came to write the Vita di Dante, probably in 1356-1357, he was certainly in possession of facts. It will be well then if westate to begin with in his own words what he has told us of the yearsDante spent in Ravenna. 

But first as to the date of Dante's coming to Ravenna. Boccaccio wouldseem to place it immediately after the death of Henry VII. In 1313. Tomodern scholarship this has seemed incredible for various reasons, andit prefers to allow Dante to visit Verona first and to come to Ravennain 1317. Yet let us hear Boccaccio. 

He begins by telling us that the too early death of the emperor, whowas poisoned, as is thought, at Buonconvento in southern Tuscany on S. Bartholomew's day in 1313, cast every one of his faction into despair"and Dante most of all; wherefore no longer going about to seek hisown return from exile he passed the heights of the Apennines anddeparted to Romagna where his last day, that was to put an end to allhis toils, awaited him. 

"In those times was Lord of Ravenna (a famous and ancient city ofRomagna) a noble cavalier whose name was Guido Novello da Polenta; hewas well skilled in the liberal arts and held men of worth in thehighest honour, especially such as excelled others in knowledge. Andwhen it came to his ears that Dante, beyond all expectation, was nowin Romagna and in such desperate plight, he, who had long time beforeknown his worth by fame, resolved to receive him and do him honour. Nor did he wait to be requested by him to do this, but consideringwith how great shame men of worth ask such favours, with liberal mindand with free proffers he approached him, requesting from Dante ofspecial grace that which he knew Dante must needs have begged of him, to wit, that it might please him to abide with him. The two wills, therefore, of him who received and of him who made the request thusuniting on one same end, Dante, being highly pleased by the liberalityof the noble cavalier, and on the other side constrained by hisnecessities, awaited no further invitation but the first, and took hisway to Ravenna, where he was honourably received by the lord thereof, who revived his fallen hope by kindly festerings; and giving himabundantly such things as were fitting, he kept him with him there formany years, yea, even to the last year of his life. 

"Never had his amorous longings, nor his grieving tears, nor hisdomestic anxieties, nor the seducing glory of public offices, nor hismiserable exile, nor his unendurable poverty, been able with all theirforce to turn Dante aside from his main intent, to wit, from sacredstudies; for as will be seen hereafter, when mention shall be madeseverally of the works that he composed, he will be found to haveexercised himself in writing in the midst of all that is fiercestamong these passions. And if in the teeth of such and so manyadversaries as have been set forth above, he became by force of geniusand of perseverance so illustrious as we see, what may we suppose hewould have been if, like many another, he had had even as manysupports; or, at least, had had no foes; or but few? Indeed I knownot. But were it lawful so to say, I would declare that he had surelybecome a God upon the earth. 

[Illustration: Casa Polentana]

"Dante then, having lost all hope of a return to Florence, though heretained the longing for it, dwelt in Ravenna for a number of years, under the protection of its gracious lord. And here by his teachingshe trained many scholars in poetry, especially in the vernacular, which vernacular to my thinking he first exalted and brought intorepute amongst us Italians no otherwise than did Homer his amongst theGreeks or Virgil his amongst the Latins. Before him, though it issupposed that it had already been practised some short space of years, yet was there none who by the numbering of the syllables and by theconsonance of the terminal parts had the feeling or the courage tomake it the instrument of any matter dealt with by the rules of art;or rather it was only in the lightest of love poems that theyexercised themselves therein. But he showed by the effect that everylofty matter may be treated in it; and made our vernacular gloriousabove every other. 

"But since his hour is assigned to every man, Dante when already inthe middle or thereabout of his fifty-sixth year fell sick and inaccordance with the Christian religion received every Sacrament of theChurch humbly, and devoutly, and reconciled himself with God bycontrition for everything, that, being but man, he had done againstHis pleasure; and in the month of September in the year of Christ onethousand three hundred and twenty-one, on the day whereon theExaltation of the Holy Cross is celebrated by the Church, not withoutgreatest grief on the part of the aforesaid Guido and generally allthe other Ravennese citizens, he rendered up to his Creator histoil-worn spirit, the which I doubt not was received into the arms ofhis most noble Beatrice, with whom, in the sight of Him who is thesupreme good, the miseries of this present life left behind, he nowlives most joyously in that life the felicity of which expects no end. 

"The magnanimous cavalier placed the dead body of Dante, adorned withpoetic insignia, upon a funeral bier, and had it borne on theshoulders of his most distinguished citizens to the place of the MinorFriars in Ravenna, with such honour as he deemed worthy of such acorpse And here, public lamentations as it were having followed him sofar, he had him placed in a stone chest, wherein he still lieth. Andreturning to the house in which Dante lately lived, according to theRavennese custom he himself delivered an ornate and long discourseboth in commendation of the profound knowledge and the virtue of thedeceased, and in consolation of his friends whom he had left inbitterest grief. He purposed, had his estate and his life endured, tohonour him with so choice a tomb that if never another merit of hishad made him memorable to those to come, this tomb should haveaccomplished it. 

"This laudable intent was in brief space of time made known to certainwho in those days were most famous for poetry in Ravenna; whereon eachone for himself, to show his own power and to bear witness to thegoodwill he had to the dead poet, and to win the grace and love of thesignore, who was known to have it at heart, made verses which, ifplaced as epitaph on the tomb that was to be, should with due praisesteach posterity who lay therein. And these verses they sent to theglorious signore, who, by great guilt of Fortune, in short space oftime lost his estate, and died at Bologna; wherefore the making of thetomb and the placing of the verses thereon were left undone. Now whenthese verses were shown to me long afterward, perceiving that they hadnever been put in their place, by reason of the chance already spokenof, and pondering on the present work that I am writing, how that itis not indeed a material tomb, but is none the less--as that was tohave been--a perpetual preserver of his memory, I imagined that itwould not be unfitting to add them to this work. But in as much as nomore than the words of some one of them (for there were several) wouldhave been cut upon the marble, so I held that only the words of oneshould be written here; wherefore on examining them all I judged thatthe most worthy for art and for matter were fourteen verses made byMesser Giovanni del Virgilio the Bolognese, a most illustrious andgreat poet of those days, and one who had been a most especial friendof Dante. And the verses are these hereafter written:

 "'Theologus Dantes, nullius dogmatis expers, Quod foveat claro philosophia sinu, Gloria musarum, vulgo gratissimus auctor, Hic iacet, et fama pulsat utrumque polum, Qui loca defunctis, gladiis regnumque gemellis, Distribuit, laicis rhetoricisque modis. Pascua Pieriis demum resonabat avenis, Atropos heu letum livida rupit opus Huic ingrata tulit tristem Florentia fructum, Exilium, vati patria cruda suo. Quem pia Guidonis gremio Ravenna Novelli Gaudet honorati continuisse ducis. Mille trecentenis ter septem Numinis annis, Ad sua septembris idibus astra redit. '"[1]

[Footnote 1: The translation is Mr. Wicksteed's The Early Lives ofDante. He adds a translation of the verses "Theologic Dante, astranger to no teaching that philosophy may cherish in her illustriousbosom; glory of the Muses, author most acceptable to the commonalty, lieth here and smiteth either pole with his fame, who assigned theirplaces to the dead, and their jurisdictions to the twin swords, inlaic and rhetoric modes. And lastly, with Pierian pipe he was makingthe pasture lands resound, black Atropos, alas, broke off the work ofjoy. For him ungrateful Florence bore the dismal fruit of exile, harshfatherland to her own bard. But Ravenna's piety rejoices to havegathered him into the bosom of Guido Novello, her illustrious chief. In one thousand three hundred and three times seven years of theDeity, he went back on September's Ides to his own stars. "]

So far Boccaccio. Though his account tells us much it certainly doesnot permit us to make many definite statements as to Dante's life inRavenna. One of the first things, for instance, that any modernbiographer would have noted with accuracy would have been the house inwhich Dante lived. Something definite, too, we might have expected asto his friends and correspondents, as to his occupations and habits. Of all this there is almost nothing. It will, however, especially benoted that Boccaccio speaks of Dante as "training many scholars inpoetry especially in the vernacular. " What can this mean?

It has been suggested and with some authority that Dante was notentirely dependent upon his host Guido Novello, that he was able togain a livelihood, at least, by lectures either in his own house or insome public place, and that it is even probable that he occupied anofficial position in Ravenna of a very honourable sort, that he was, in fact, professor of Rhetoric in that city. There is no evidence tosupport such a theory. It is true that though we know the names of theprofessors of Grammar or Rhetoric in the very ancient schools ofRavenna, schools which date from the time of Theodosius the Great, wedo not find the name of him who filled that chair during the time ofDante's sojourn in Ravenna. In 1268 Pasio della Noce was lecturing onJurisprudence in Ravenna; in 1298 Ugo di Riccio was professor of CivilLaw there; in 1304 Leone da Verona is teaching Grammar and Logic inthe city. Then we hear no more till we come to the year 1333, when acertain Giovanni Giacomo del Bando is professor. [1] The mere absenceof names--a silence which does not coincide in any way with Dante'sadvent or with Dante's death--is, certainly, not enough to allow us toassert the probability of the great poet's having filled the office oflecturer or professor of Civil Law in the school of Ravenna. It istrue that Saviozzo da Siena tells us:

 "Qui comincio a leggere Dante in pria Retorica vulgare e molti aperti Fece di sua Poetica armonia"

and that Manetti, an early biographer, seems to support the theory. But the best evidence, if evidence it can be called, which we have forthis theory is to be found in a codex in the Laurentian Library, quoted by Bandini and cited by Dr. Ricci, which says: "It is commonlyreported that Dante, being in Ravenna, studying and giving lectures asa doctor to his pupils upon various works, the schools became theresort of many learned men. " This statement upon hearsay, however, does little more than confirm the definite assertion of Boccaccio thatDante "trained many scholars, " not in civil law, but in "poetry, especially in the vernacular. "

[Footnote 1: For a full discussion of all that may be known of Danteat the Poleata court see Dr. Ricci's large work, _L'Ultimo Rifugio diDante_ (1891). A charming book in English, _Dante in Ravenna_ (1898), by Catherine Mary Phillimore, is to a great extent based upon Dr. Ricci's work. A valuable book that should be consulted is the morerecent volume by P. H. Wicksteed and E. G. Gardner, _Dante and Giovannidel Virgilio_ (1902). ]

It is quite unproved then that Dante lectured in Ravenna as aprofessor of Civil Law. It might seem equally certain that he didlecture upon Poetry and the vulgar tongue, and it seems likely that wehave the text of his lectures in the latter if not in the earlier partof the _De Vulgari Eloquentia_ "in which in masterly and polishedLatin he reproves all the vulgar dialects of Italy. " Boccaccio tellsus he composed this when he was "already nigh his death, " and thoughmodern criticism seems inclined to date its composition not later than1306 the evidence of Boccaccio is not lightly to be set aside[1]. 

[Footnote 1: The first part of this work was certainly not writtenlater than 1306 the second part may well have been later. ]

Lonely as he doubtless was in Ravenna he was not alone there. With himit would seem was his daughter Beatrice, who became a nun in S. Stefano dell' Uliva, and his sons Pietro and Jacopo. The latter, though a lawyer and not in holy orders, held two benefices in Ravenna, but most of his time seems to have been spent in Verona where Jacopo, his brother, later held a canonry. And then there were his friends. 

In his lectures upon Poetry one of his most eager pupils would seem tohave been his best friend and host, Guido Novello, who evidently knewwell at least those parts of the _Divine Comedy_, chiefly the_Inferno_ be it noted, which deal with his ancestors, for he quotesone of the most famous of them--an unforgettable line spoken by hisaunt Francesca da Rimini:

 "Questi che mai da me non fia diviso. "

in a sonnet of his own[2]. 

[Footnote 2: Cf. _Ultimo Rifugio_, p. 384, where the sonnet is givenin full. ]

After the lord Guido Novello, we must name the archbishop of Ravenna, Rainaldo Concorreggio, as among Dante's friends. It is possible thathe had known Dante at the University of Bologna and he had been achaplain of Boniface VIII. He was a brave man, learned in theology, law, and music, and devoted to his religion, an eager student, and hehad composed a treatise which has come down to us upon Galla Placidiaand her church. 

And then there was Giotto who came to paint if not in S. Maria inPorto fuori, certainly in S. Giovanni Evangelista. He was Dante's dearfriend and it was probably at the poet's suggestion he had beeninvited to Ravenna. We do not know whether these two men attendedDante's lectures. But the true audience there which came simply tohear was probably various, consisting of poets, notaries, and allsorts of men, some of whom were Dante's friends and companions. Therewas Ser Dino Perini, Ser Pietro di Messer Giardino--he was anotary--and Fiduccio dei Milotti, who walked with Dante in the Pineta. All these names have come down to us in the Latin eclogues written byDante while in Ravenna to his friend Giovanni del Virgilio--delVirgilio because he could so well imitate Virgil. 

These eclogues are full of shrewd and curious thought, a realcorrespondence, and they help us to see the men who surrounded thepoet in Ravenna. They do not, however, give us so extraordinary animpression of the strength and keenness of Dante's powers ofobservation as many a passage in the _Divine Comedy_ in which Ravennaand the rude and fierce world of the Romagna of that day live forever. It is in answer to the inquiries of the great _Guido ofMontefeltro_ that Dante speaks of Romagna in the _Inferno_. Feeble andanaemic though the great lines become in any translation, even so alltheir virtue is not lost:

 "Never was thy Romagna without war In her proud tyrants' bosoms, nor is now; But open war there left I none. The state Ravenna hath maintained this many a year Is steadfast. There Polenta's eagle[1] broods, And in his broad circumference of plume O'ershadows Cervia[2]. The green talons[3] grasp The land, that stood e'erwhile the proof so long And piled in bloody heap the host of France. The old mastiff of Verrucchio and the young[4] That tore Montagna[5] in their wrath still make Where they are wont, an augre of their fangs, Lamone's[6] city and Santerno's[7] range Under the lion of the snowy lair[8], Inconstant partisan, that changeth sides Or ever summer yields to winter's frost. And she whose flank is washed of Savio's wave[9] As 'twixt the level and the steep she lies, Lives so 'twixt tyrant power and liberty. "

[Footnote 1: The coat of the Polenta. ]

[Footnote 2: Cervia, the least secure of the Polenta possessions. ]

[Footnote 3: The green lion of the Ordelaffi of Forli. ]

[Footnote 4: Malatesta and Malatestino, lords of Rimini, deriving fromVerrucchio, a castle in the hills. ]

[Footnote 5: The Malatesta were Guelfs, Montagna de' Parcitati, whomthey murdered, was the leader of the Ghibelline party in Rimini. ]

[Footnote 6: Faenza. ]

[Footnote 7: Imola. ]

[Footnote 8: Maghinardo Pagano, whose arms were a blue lion in a whitefield. ]

[Footnote 9: Cesena. ]

All Romagna with its untamable fierceness and confusion lies in theselines which, as Dante wrote them, seem as unalterable as those inwhich the creation of the world is described. 

Nor is Dante forgetful of the great destiny that had been Ravenna's. In the sixth canto of the _Paradiso_ it is Justinian himself, "_Cesarefui e son Giustiniano_" who recounts to Dante the victories of theRoman eagle:

 "When from Ravenna it came forth and leap'd The Rubicon, "

or when

 "with Belisarius Heaven's high hand was linked, "

or when

 "The Lombard tooth with fang impure Did gore the bosom of the Holy Church Under its wings, victorious, Charlemagne Sped to her rescue. "

Nor is Dante forgetful of Ravenna's other claims to glory. In theseventh heaven, which is the planet Saturn, led by Beatrice, he findsS. Romualdo, and speaks of S. Peter Damiano, and blessed Peter _IlPeccatore_, the founder of the church of S. Maria in Porto fuori, twoof them of the Onesti house of Ravenna. 

 "In that place was I Peter Damiano And Peter the sinner dwelt in the house Of our blest Lady on the Adriatic shore. "

Of the earlier Podesta, too, he is not unmindful:

 "Arrigo Mainardi, Pier Traversaro, ... Wonder not, Tuscan, if thou seest me weep When I recall those once loved names ... With Traversaro's house and Anastagio's, Each race disinherited. "

With the pitiful story of Francesca da Polenta we have seen how hedealt and how he spoke of Guido Vecchio. These people live because ofhim, and Ravenna in the Middle Age still holds our interest and ourlove because he dwelt there and she harboured him. 

It was in her service, too, he met his death as we have seen, and inher church of the Friars Minor that he was laid to rest by GuidoNovello. 

Nine months later the lord of Ravenna received the first complete copyof the _Divina Commedia_, made by Jacopo Alighieri from his father'sautograph. A very curious incident is related by Boccaccio inconnection with this. It was Dante's custom, Boccaccio tell us, "whenever he had done six or eight cantos, more or less, to send themfrom whatever place he was in before any other had seen them to MesserCane della Scala, whom he held in reverence above all other men; andwhen he had seen them, Dante gave access to them to whoso desired. Andhaving sent to him in this fashion all save the last thirteen cantos, which he had finished, but had not yet sent him, it came to pass that, without bearing it in his mind that he was abandoning them, he died. And when they who were left behind, children and disciples, hadsearched many times, in the course of many months, amongst all hispapers, if haply he had composed a conclusion to his work, and couldby no means find the remaining cantos; and when every admirer of hisin general was enraged that God had not at least lent him to the worldso long that he might have had opportunity to finish what littleremained of his work; they had abandoned further search in despairsince they could by no means find them. 

[Illustration: DANTE'S TOMB]

"So Jacopo and Piero, sons of Dante, both of them poets in rhyme, moved thereto by certain of their friends, had taken it into theirminds to attempt to supplement the parental work, as far as in themlay, that it might not remain imperfect, when to Jacopo, who was farmore zealous than the other in this work, there appeared a wondrousvision, which not only checked his foolish presumption but showed himwhere were the thirteen cantos which were wanting to this DivineComedy and which they had not known where to find. A worthy man ofRavenna whose name was Piero Giardino, long time a disciple ofDante's, related how, when eight months had passed after the death ofhis master, the aforesaid Jacopo came to him one night near to thehour that we call matins, and told him that that same night a littlebefore that hour he, in his sleep, had seen his father, Dante, approach him, clad in whitest garment, and his face shining with anunwonted light; whom he seemed to ask if he were yet living, and tohear in reply that he was, but in the true life, not in ours. Whereonhe seemed further to ask him if he had finished his work or ever hepassed to that true life; and if he had finished it, where was themissing part, which they had never been able to find. To this heseemed to hear again in answer, 'Yea! I finished it. ' Whereon itseemed that he took him by the hand and led him to that chamber wherehe was wont to sleep when he was living in this life; and touching acertain spot said, 'Here is that which ye so long have sought. ' And nosooner was uttered that word than it seemed that both Dante and sleepdeparted from him at the same moment. Wherefore he averred that hecould not hold but come and signify what he had seen, that they mightgo together and search in the place indicated to him, which he heldmost perfectly stamped in his memory, to see whether a true spirit ora false delusion had shown it him. Wherefore since a great piece ofthe night still remained, they departed together and went to the placeindicated, and there found a mat fixed to the wall, which they lightlyraised and found a recess in the wall which neither of them had everseen, nor knew that it was there; and there they found certainwritings all mouldy with the damp of the wall and ready to rot hadthey stayed there much longer; and when they had carefully removed themould and read, they saw that they contained the thirteen cantos solong sought by them. Wherefore, in great joy, they copied them out, and after the author's wont sent them first to Messer Cane and thenjoined them on, as was meet, to the imperfect work. In such a mannerdid the work of so many years see its completion. "

As Boccaccio tells us, Guido Novello had scarce buried Dante in thattemporary tomb in the church of the Friars Minor when he lost hislordship. On April 1, 1322, he was elected captain of the people inBologna, and when he was about to return to Ravenna he suddenly heardthat the archbishop had been murdered and that the city was in thehands of his enemies. Do what he would he never returned to his owncity, and thus his intentions with regard to the tomb of the poet werenever carried out. The noble sepulchre which Guido had planned was notbuilt and the body of Dante reposed in the ancient sarcophagus inwhich it had been first placed. There it remained when Boccaccio cameto Ravenna, probably in 1346 and certainly in 1350, as the bearer of agift from the Or San Michele Society to Beatrice di Dante, then a nunin S. Stefano dell' Uliva. 

Boccaccio, it will be remembered, had in his life of Dante bitterlyupbraided Florence for her treatment of her greatest son, and to hisblame had added a prophecy that she would soon repent of her shamefulingratitude and would envy Ravenna "the body of him whose works haveheld the admiration of the whole world. " This prophecy fulfilleditself many times and first in 1396. In that year, upon December 22, Florence made the first of her many demands for the body of Dante, which she now wished to bury in S. Maria del Fiore. The demand, asBoccaccio had foreseen, was refused. It was repeated in 1429 and againrefused. By 1476, when her next attempt was made, Ravenna had passedinto the power of the Venetian Republic. It was therefore to Venicethat Florence now turned through the Venetian ambassador, who is saidto have been none other than Bernardo Bembo. 

Bembo's request on behalf of Florence was, of course, a failure, buthe seems to have himself repaired the tomb and to have placed upon itan epitaph. 

 "Exigua tumuli Dantes hic sorte jacebas Squallenti nulli cognite pene situ. At nunc marmoreo subnixus conderis arcu Omnibus et cultu splendidiore nites Nimirum Bembus musis incensus ethruscis Hoc tibi quem in primis hoc coluere dedit. 

 Ann Sal. Mcccclxxxiii. Vi. Kal. Jvn. Bernardus Bemb. Praet. Aere suo Posuit. "

His work of reparation and of adornment was carried out by PietroLombardo who was already at work in Ravenna for the Venetian republic, the sculptured effigy of Dante in relief being also from his hand. 

But Florence was by no means at the end of her resources. In 1509Ravenna had passed into the hands of the pope. In 1519 Leo X. , aMedici, being on the throne of Peter, the Accademia Medicea ofFlorence petitioned the pope (among the signatories of the petitionwas Michelangelo, who offered to "make a worthy sepulchre for thedivine poet in an honoured place" in Florence), to be allowed to carryaway the bones of Dante from Ravenna to the City of Flowers. The popegave the Florentine envoys the permission they required as wasexpected. They proceeded to Ravenna and opened the sarcophagus; butwhen they lifted the lid, they found it empty, save for "a fragment ofbone and a few withered leaves of the laurel which had adorned thepoet's head. " From that time till our own day the resting place ofDante's bones has been a complete mystery. 

It is recorded that in the middle of the seventeenth century theFranciscans rebuilt and repaired the so-called chapel of Braccioforteat S. Francesco, which till then had been joined by a portico to thetomb of Dante. In 1658 this portico among other alterations wasremoved, and the exterior of the tomb itself was reconstructed with anentrance into the Piazza, as we see it. The interior of the tomb was, however, left in some confusion so that the papal legate determinedhimself to repair it. In this he met with much opposition from thefriars who claimed, as of old, jurisdiction over the sepulchre. Nevertheless he completed the work, and in 1692 placed the followingupon the tomb:

 Exulem a Florentia Dantem Liberalissime Excepit Ravenna. Vivo fruens Mortuum colens Magnis cineribus licet in parvo magnifici parentarunt Polentani Principes erigendo Bembus Praetor Luculentissime extruendo Praetiosum Musis et Apollini Mausoleum Quod injuria temporum pene squallens E. Mo Dominico Maria Cursio Legato Joanne Salviato Prolegato Magni civis cineres Patriae reconciliare Cultus perpetuitate curantibus S. P. Q. R. Jure Ac Aere suo Tanquam Thesaurum suum munivit Instauravit ornavit A. D. MDCXCII. 

Outside the tomb he placed his coat-of-arms, and on either side thatof the legate of the province and that of the Franciscan Order. In1760 the third restoration was undertaken and the tomb assumed theform we now see and was given yet another inscription:

 Danti Aleghiero Poetae sui temporis primo Restitutori Politioris humanitatis Guido et Hostasius Polentiani clienti et hospiti peregre defuncto monumentum fecerunt Bernardus Bembus Praetor Venet. Ravenn. Pro meritis eius ornatu excoluit. Aloysius Valentius Gonzaga Card. Leg. Prov. Aemil. Superiorum Temporum negligentia corruptum Operibus ampliatis Munificentia sua restituendum curavit Anno M DCC LXXX. 

At the same time the tomb was opened again and was found to be empty. In spite of this fact in 1864 the municipal authorities in Florencewrote to Ravenna again demanding the body of the poet, only to beagain refused. This, however, was the sixth centenary of Dante's birthand the sarcophagus was again to be opened to "verify the remains. "The workmen were indeed at work upon some necessary repairs anddraining, when it was found that a part of the wall of theBraccioforte chapel would have to be removed. In setting to work uponthis--little more than the removal of a few stones--the pickaxe of oneof the workmen struck against wood, and presently a wooden boxappeared which partly fell to pieces, revealing a human skeleton. Within the box was found this inscription:

 Dantis ossa Denuper revisa die 3 Junu 1677

 Dantis ossa A me Fre Antonio Santi hic posita Ano 1677 die 18 Octobris

Medical experts were summoned. They made, Miss Phillimore tells us, "acareful examination of the bones, and proceeded to reconstruct theskeleton.... The stature answered to that of the poet as nearly as themeasurement of a skeleton can represent the living form, and the skullfound in the chest corresponded exactly with the mask taken fromDante's face immediately after his death, which was brought fromFlorence for the purpose of making this comparison. "

What seems to have happened has been made clear for us by Dr. Ricci. Between 1483, when Bembo reconstructed the tomb, and 1520, when theFlorentines again claimed the body, and for the first time with acertainty of success, the body of Dante disappeared. It seems that in1520 the Franciscans entered the mausoleum, abstracted the body, andhid it to save it for Ravenna. In June 1677 Fra Antonio visited thebones in their hiding place and verified them. In October of the sameyear they were built into the new wall where the old entrance to theBraccioforte chapel had been; to be discovered by chance in 1865. 

It is curious that even as the last cantos of the _Divine Comedy_ werediscovered by means of a dream, so a dream went before the discoveryof the bones of Dante. 

"The sacristan of the Franciscan confraternity, " we read, "called LaConfraternita della Mercede, was wont to sleep in the damp recesses ofthe ancient chapel of Braccioforte. " His name was Angelo Grillo ... This sacristan declared himself to have seen in a dream a shade issuefrom the spot where the body was found, clad in red, that it passedthrough the chapel into the adjoining cemetery. It approached him, andon being asked who it was, replied, 'I am Dante. ' The sacristan diedin May 1865, a few days before the discovery of the bones on the 27thof that month. Upon June 26, 1865, the bones of Dante were replaced intheir original sarcophagus, ornamented by Pietro Lombardi, afterhaving lain in state for three days, during which thousands from allover Italy passed before them. There it is to be hoped they willremain. 

[Illustration: CAMPANILE OF S. FRANCESCO]

XVI

MEDIAEVAL RAVENNA

THE CHURCHES

When we come to examine what is left to us of mediaeval Ravenna, ofthe buildings which were erected there during the Middle Age, we shallfind, as we might expect, very little that is either great orsplendid, for, as we have seen, after the first year of the ninthcentury Ravenna fell from her great position and became nothing morethan a provincial city, perhaps more inaccessible than any other inthe peninsula. Her achievement such as it was in the earlier mediaevalperiod consisted in the production of three men of real importance, S. Romuald of the Onesti family of Ravenna, who was born in the cityabout the year 956 and who founded, as we know, the Order ofCamaldoli; S. Peter Damian, who was born there about 988; and BlessedPeter of Ravenna, Pietro degli Onesti, called _Il Peccatore_, of thesame stock as S. Romuald. 

The work of S. Romuald was a reform of the Benedictine Order. TheOrder of Camaldoli which he founded was the second reform which hadcome out of the great brotherhood of S. Benedict; it was younger thanthe Cluniac but older than the Cistercian reform, and it was begun in1012. In that year S. Romuald, who was a Benedictine abbot, havingbeen dismissed by all the houses over which he had successively ruled, for they would not bear the penitential strictness of his government, founded a hermitage at Camaldoli above the upper valley of the Arnocalled the Casentino. There each monk lived in a separate dwelling, all being enclosed in a great wall some five hundred and thirty yardsabout, beyond which the monks were forbidden to go. They followed theRule of S. Benedict, kept two Lents in the year, and never tastedmeat. They had, of course, a church in common where they were bound torecite the divine office, for this is of the essence of the Rule of S. Benedict, but certain among them--and this is the essence of thereform of Camaldoli--never quitted their cells, their food beingbrought to them in their huts, where, if the lecluse were a priest, hesaid his Mass, assisted by some one close by but not in the same room. Thus we see the monks and the hermits living side by side, butscarcely together, and so they continued from the year 1012 till ourown day, which has seen the great Camaldoli suppressed. The device ofthe order was a cup or chalice out of which two doves drank, representing thus the two classes of hermits and monks, thecontemplative and the active life. 

[Illustration: Colour Plate S. MARIA IN PORTO]

The second great Ravennese of the Middle Age, S. Peter Damian, who wasborn about 988 in Ravenna, of a good but at that time poor family, wasthe youngest of many children. He was early left an orphan, and livingin his brother's house was treated, it would appear, rather as a beastthan a man. Presently, however, another brother, then archpriest ofRavenna, took pity on him and had him educated, first at Faenza butafter at Parma, where he studied under a famous master. Here he becameimmersed in the religious life so that when two monks belonging toFonte Avellana, "a desert at the foot of the Apennines in Umbria, "happened to call at the place of his abode he followed them. After alife of penitence and hardship, in 1057 pope Stephen IX. Prevailedupon him to quit his desert and made him cardinal-bishop of Ostia, andlater pope Nicholas II. Sent him to Milan as his legate, till in 1062the successor of Nicholas allowed him to return to his solitude; butin 1063 he was sent to France as papal legate. Later we find him aspapal ambassador in Ravenna--this in 1072. He was then a very old man, and on his way back to Rome he died at Faenza. 

This famous saint has often been confused with the third greatRavennese of this time, Pietro degli Onesti, called Pietro _IlPeccatore_[1] This confusion, which Dante disposes of in thewell-known passage of the _Paradiso_:

 "In quel loco fui 10, Pier Damiano, e Pietro Peccator fu nella casa Di nostra Donna in sul lito Adriano, "[2]

is commented upon in one of Boccaccio's letters to his friendPetrarch. [3] It is true both Peters were of Ravenna, but whereasBlessed Pietro _Il Peccatore_ was of the Onesti family, as was S. Romuald, S. Pietro Damiano was not; the last died in 1072 at Faenza aswe have seen, the first as we may think in 1119. 

[Footnote 1: It is I confess doubtful whether Pietro degli Onesti wasever called _Il Peccatore_ till a later epoch. The authenticity of theletters in which he so styles himself is open to question and theinscription on his tomb is it seems of the fifteenth century. ]

[Footnote 2: _Paradiso_, xxi. 121-123. "In quel loco" refers to FonteAvellana. ]

[Footnote 3: Cf. Corazzini, _Lettere edite ed inedite di GiovanniBoccaccio_ (Firenze, 1877), p. 307. ]

Now though all were famous and all were of Ravenna it is the last andI suppose the least of them who is most closely connected with thecity. The others went away and won, not only great place in the world, but an everlasting fame. Blessed Pietro _Il Peccatore_ stayed inRavenna and built there outside the walls in the marsh between Ravennaand Classe the great home of Our Lady, S. Maria in Porto fuori. Aboutthe middle of the eleventh century, Dr Ricci tells us, certainreligious retired into the solitude by the shore of the Adriatic andthere built a little church or oratory that was called S. Maria _infossula_. In this act we may certainly see the example of S. Romuald. But about 1096 there joined himself to them Pietro degli Onesti called_Il Peccatore_, and perhaps because he was of the Onesti he builtthere a new and a larger church, it is said in fulfilment of a vowmade, as was Galla Placidia's, in a storm at sea. It is this churchwhich in great part we still see, with additions of the thirteenthcentury, a lonely and beautiful thing in the emptiness of the soddenfields to the south-east of Ravenna between the Canale del Molino andthe Fiumi Uniti. 

The lonely and melancholy church of S. Maria in Porto fuori is abasilica consisting of three naves which formed a part of the originalchurch of the Blessed Pietro, and a presbytery, apse, and chapelswhich are of the thirteenth century. There we see some frescoes of avery beautiful and early character which have been erroneouslyattributed to Giotto, and as erroneously it might seem to Peter ofRimini. 

[Illustration: INTERIOR OF S. MARIA IN PORTO FUORI]

They were the gift of a certain Graziadeo, a notary who in 1246provided the cost of the work, which was carried out it would seem byMaso da Faenza (1314), Rastello da Forll (1350-60), Giovanni daRavenna (1368-96), and other painters of the Romagnuol school. [1]These works, which are among the loveliest we have of the school, maybe noted as follows: in the nave to the left we see the Madonna andChild with four saints; here, too, is S. Julian. Upon the triumphalarch we see in the midst the Saviour and on the one side Antichristand the martyrdom of the saints, on the other the defeat and end ofAntichrist who is beheaded by angels. Beneath are scenes of Paradiseand Hell. On the roof of the choir we see the Evangelists with theirsymbols and the Doctors of the Church. Upon the right the Death, Assumption, and Coronation of the Blessed Virgin, together with theMassacre of the Innocents and the Last Supper and perhaps S. Francisand S. Clare. Upon the left we have the Birth and Presentation of theBlessed Virgin in the Temple. The last two figures upon the right hereare said to be portraits of Giotto and Guido da Polenta by those whoattribute these works to the Florentine master. In the chapel on theleft we see pope John I. Before Theodoric, pope John in prison, and inthe lunette the martyrdom of a saint. Close by are other frescoesrepainted of S. Apollinaris and S. Antony Abbot. In the chapel on theright we see perhaps S. John baptising a king, S. John preaching, andBlessed Pietro _Il Peccatore_ healing the blind and sick. Here toowould appear to be scenes from the life of S. Matthew, but unhappilythe subjects are all of them obscure and difficult to interpret. Atthe end of the apse we see the three Maries at the Sepulchre and theIncredulity of S. Thomas. 

[Footnote 1: Cf. Dr. Ricci, _Guida di Ravenna_ (Bologna, fourthedition), and see Anselmi, _Memorie del Pittore Trecentista Petrus daRimini_ in _La Romagna_ (1906), vol. III. Fasc. Settembre. ]

Of these majestic but spoilt works undoubtedly the noblest in designis that of the Death of the Blessed Virgin. The Last Supper is alsoexceedingly beautiful, and the Incredulity of S. Thomas is a splendidpiece of work. But in the course of ages these latter works especiallyhave suffered grievously, as of course has the whole church. 

Built in the marsh it has sunk so deeply into it that its pillars arecovered half way up, and the church seems always about to be whollyengulfed. It was called S. Maria in Porto because it was originallybuilt near to the famous Port that Augustus Casar had established andwhich for so long was the headquarters of the eastern fleet. In thesixteenth century when the Canons Regular of the Lateran, who thenserved it, were compelled to abandon it, they built within the city ofRavenna another church which they named after that they had left, S. Maria in Porto. Thereafter the old church without the walls was knownas S. Maria in Porto fuori. 

The mighty tower which rises beside S. Maria in Porto fuori has beenthought to be in part the famous Pharos of which Pliny speaks. [1] Itis almost certainly founded upon it, but the lower part in its hugestrength is, as we see it, a work of the end of the twelfth century, as is the lofty campanile which rises from it. 

[Footnote 1: See _supra_, p. 24. ]

S. Maria in Porto fuori is undoubtedly the greatest monument thatremains to Ravenna of the Middle Age; nothing really comparable withit is to be found in the city itself. 

The earliest of the friars' churches, those great monuments of theMiddle Age in Italy, is S. Chiara which with its convent is nowsuppressed and lost in the Recovero di Mendicita (Corso Garibaldi, 19). This convent, which dates certainly from 1255, was founded byChiara da Polenta and was rebuilt in 1794. It is from its garden thatwe get our best idea of the church which within possesses frescoes ofthe Romagnuol school, where in the vault we see the four Evangelistswith their symbols and the four Doctors of the Church. Upon the wallswe see a spoiled fresco of the Presepio, that peculiarly Franciscansubject, and again the Annunciation, the Adoration of the Magi, theBaptism of Our Lord, Christ in the Garden, the Crucifixion, andvarious saints. These frescoes are the work of the men who painted inS. Maria in Porto fuori. 

It cannot have been much later that the church of S. Pier Maggiore, ofwhich I have already spoken, [2] came into Franciscan hands, andcertainly from 1261 it was called S. Francesco, when the archbishopFilippo Fontana handed it over to the Conventuals who held it till1810. Its chief mediseval interest lies for us of course in the factthat Dante was buried, probably at his own desire, within itsprecincts. But there are other things too. Close to the entrance dooris a slab of red Verona marble dated 1396, which is the tomb ofOstasio da Polenta who was a Tertiary of the Franciscan Order, and wastherefore buried in the habit of the friars. The figure carved therein relief to represent Ostasio is evidently a portrait and a very fineand noble piece of work. To the left, again, is another slab of redVerona marble which marks the tomb of the General of the FranciscanOrder, Padre Enrico Alfieri, who died of fever in Ravenna in 1405. Thefine Renaissance pilasters in the Cappella del Crocefisso should benoted, and the beautiful sixteenth-century monument of Luffo Numai byTommaso Flamberti at the end of the left aisle. 

[Footnote 2: See _supra_, pp. 174 _et seq_. ]

The Dominicans have not been more fortunate than the Franciscans. Somewhat to the north of the Piazza Venti Settembre in the Via Cavourwe find their church S. Domenico. It is said that originally therestood here a Byzantine church dedicated in honour of S. MariaCallopes, but this Dr. Ricci denies. S. Domenico was built from itsfoundations it seems in October 1269 for the Dominicans and wasenlarged in 1374 according to an inscription in the sacristy; but itwas almost entirely rebuilt in the beginning of the eighteenthcentury. The facade and the side portico are perhaps now the mostgenuine parts of the church. The chief treasure is, however, not ofthe Middle Age at all, but of the Renaissance, and consists of fourlarge pictures painted in tempera, probably organ shutters, representing the Annunciation, S. Peter Martyr, and S. Dominic. Theyare the excellent work of Niccold Rondinelli the pupil of GiovanniBellini. [1]

[Footnote 1: See _infra_, pp. 267 _et seq_. ]

[Illustration: TORRE DEL COMUNE]

From S. Domenico we pass again to S. Giovanni Evangelista if only tonote the beautiful Gothic portal of the fourteenth century, of which Ihave already spoken, [2] and the spoiled frescoes by Giotto in thevaulting of the fourth chapel on the left. Giotto, according toVasari, came to Ravenna at the instigation of Dante and painted in S. Francesco, but whatever he may have done there has utterly perished, and there only remains in Ravenna his spoilt work in this littlechapel in S. Giovanni Evangelista. Here we see in a ceiling divided bytwo diagonals, at the centre of which the Lamb and Cross are paintedon a medallion, the four Evangelists enthroned with their symbols andthe four Doctors of the Church, a subject common everywhere andespecially so in Ravenna. These works have suffered very greatly fromrestoration, but they seem indeed to be the work of the master in sofar as the design is concerned, all surely that is left after therepaintings that have befallen them. 

[Footnote 2: See _supra_, pp. 175 _et seq_. ]

The mosaic pavements of 1213, representing scenes from the thirdcrusade, in the chapel to the left of the choir should be noted. 

We must not leave S. Giovanni Evangelista without a look at the greattower of the eleventh century which overshadows it. It might seem tobe contemporary with the greater Torre Comunale in the Via TrediciGiugno as the street is now absurdly named. Nor should any one omit tovisit the Casa Polentana near Porta Ursicina and the Casa Traversariin the Via S. Vitale, grand old thirteenth-century houses that speakto us, not certainly of Ravenna's great days, but of a greater daythan ours, and one, too, in which the most tragic of Italians wanderedup and down these windy ways eating his heart out for Florence. IndeedDante consumes all our thoughts in mediaeval Ravenna. 

There is a tale told by Franco Sacchetti that I will set down here, for it expresses what in part we must all feel, and what in theconfusion of philosophy at the end of the Middle Age was felt far morekeenly by men who visited this strange city. 

"Maestro Antonio of Ferrara was a man of very great parts, almost apoet, and as entertaining as a jester, but he was very vicious andsinful. Being in Ravenna during the time that Messer Bernardino ofPolenta held the lordship, it chanced that this Messer Antonio, whowas a very great gambler, had been gambling one day and had lostnearly all he possessed. Being in despair, he entered the church ofthe Friars Minor, where there is the tomb which holds the body of theFlorentine poet Dante, and having seen an antique Crucifix half-burnedand smoked by the great number of lights placed around it, and findingjust then many candles lighted there, he immediately went and took allthe tapers and candles which were burning there and going to the tombof Dante he placed them before it saying, 'Take them, for thou art farmore worthy of them than it is. ' The people beholding this andmarvelling greatly said, 'What doth this man?' And they all looked atone another.... "

[Illustration: PORTAL OF S. GIOVANNI EVANGELISTA]

Sacchetti does not answer the question asked by the astonished peopleof Ravenna, but goes on to tell us of the lord "who delighted in suchthings as do all lords. " He could not have answered it for he did notknow himself what it meant. We are in better case, I think, and knowthat what that wild and half--blasphemous act meant was that theRenaissance had made an end of the Middle Age here in Ravenna aselsewhere. 

XVII

RAVENNA IN THE RENAISSANCE

THE BATTLE OF 1512

When in the year 1438 duke Filippo Maria Visconti of Milan forcedOstasio da Polenta, the fifth of that name, into an alliance and theVenetians thereupon invited him to visit them, Venice had decided forher own safety to annex Ravenna and Ostasio soon learned that the newgovernment had proclaimed itself in his old capital. He, as I havesaid, presently disappeared, the victim of a mysterious assassination;and Venice governed Ravenna by _provveditori_ and _podesta_, ashappily and successfully, it might seem, as she governed Venetia and apart of Lombardy. For her doubtless the acquisition of Ravenna was nota very great thing, nor does it seem to have changed in any very greatdegree the half-stagnant life of the city itself, which, as we maysuppose, had for so long ceased to play any great part in the life ofItaly, that a change of government there was not of much importance toany one except the Holy See, the true over-lord. 

The Holy See, however, had no intention of submitting to the incursionof the republic into its long established territories without aprotest. In the war of Ferrara, Venice had come into collision withthe pope and had in reality been worsted, though the peace of Bagnolo(1484) gave her Rovigo, the Polesine, and Ravenna. But she had adopteda fatal policy in appealing to the French, a policy which led straighton to Cambray, which, as we may think, so unfortunately crippled herfor ever. 

The descent of the French was successful at least in this, that itaroused the cupidity and ambition of the king of Spain and of theemperor. Italy was proved to be any one's prize at Fornovo, and whenLouis XII. Succeeded Charles VIII. In 1498 and combined in his ownperson the claim of the French crown to Naples and to Genoa and theOrleans claim to Milan, Venice, instead of being doubly on guard, thought she saw a chance of extending her Lombard dominions. Sherefused the alliance Sforza offered and promised to assist Louis inreturn for Cremona and its _contado_. In other words, she committedtreason to Italy and thus justified, if anything could justify, theLeague of Cambray. 

Sforza's first act was to urge the Turk, who needed no invitation, toattack the republic, whose fleet in 1499 was utterly defeated at seaby the Orientals, who presently raided into Friuli. Venice was forcedto accept a humiliating peace. It was in these circumstances that, with all Italy alienated from her, the papacy began to act againsther. 

Its first and most splendid effort to create a reality out of thefiction of the States of the Church was the attempt of Cesare Borgia, who actually made himself master of the whole of the Romagna. Venicewatched him with the greatest alarm, but chance saved her, for withthe death of Alexander VI. , Cesare and his dream came to nothing. Venice acted at once, for indeed even in her decline she was the mostsplendid force in Italy. She induced by a most swift and masterlystroke the leading cities of the Romagna to place themselves under herprotection. It was a great stroke, the last blow of a great anddesperate man; that it failed does not make it less to be admired. 

The rock which broke the stroke as it fell and shattered the swordwhich dealt it was Pope Julius II. 

Louis and the emperor had come together, and when in June 1508 a trucewas made they would have been content to leave Venice alone; it wasthe pope who refused, and by the end of the year had formed theEuropean League for the purpose of "putting a stop to losses, injuries, rapine, and damage which Venice had inflicted not merely onthe Holy See, but also on the Holy Roman Empire, the House of Austria, the Duchy of Milan, the King of Naples and other princes, seizing andtyrannically occupying their territories, cities, and castles asthough she were conspiring to the common ill.... " So ran the preambleof the League of Cambray. It contemplated among other things thereturn of Ravenna, Faenza, Rimini, and the rest of the Romagna to theHoly See; Istria, Fruili, Treviso, Padua, Vicenza, and Verona beinghanded to the emperor; Brescia, Bergamo, Crema, and Cremona passing toFrance, and the sea-coast towns in Apulia to the king of Spain;Dalmatia was to go to the king of Hungary and Cyprus to the duke ofSavoy. 

[Illustration: ROCCA VENIZIANA]

In the spring of 1507, Julius launched his bull of excommunicationagainst Venice; Ravenna, which was held by the podesta Marcello and byZeno, was attacked by the pope's general, the duke of Urbino, andafter the disastrous defeat of the Venetians by the French andMilanese, at Aguadello, on the Adda, the republic ordered therestoration of Ravenna to the Holy See, together with the other citiesof the Romagna. 

The pope was now content, but France and the emperor were not, andVenice was forced to ally herself first with one side and then withthe other. 

In the brutal struggle of the foreigner for Cisalpine Gaul there weretwo desperate battles, that of Ravenna in 1512, in which the French, though victorious, lost their best leader, Gaston de Foix, and that ofNovara in 1513, which induced the French to leave Italy. As the firstof these battles concerns Ravenna we must consider it more closely. 

At this time Venice was in alliance with Spain and the pope againstthe French, who were commanded by Gaston de Foix, Duke of Nemours, anephew of the French king. The combined Spanish and papal troops, about 20, 000 strong, were led by Raimondo da Cardona. The French weresouth of the Apennines when the Papal-Spanish force swung round fromMilan into the Ferrarese, seized the territory south of the Po, andlaid siege to Bologna. A Venetian force was hurrying to aid them. 

Gaston de Foix did not hesitate. On February 5, he flung himself overthe ice-bound Apennine and hastened to relieve Bologna. Cardonaretreated before him down the Aemilian Way; but Brescia opened itsgates to the Venetians, and this, which hindered Gaston, so enragedhim that when he had taken the city he gave it up to a pillage inwhich more than eight thousand were slain and his men "were so ladenwith spoil that they returned to France forthwith to enjoy it. "

Gaston was compelled to return to Milan to re-form his troops, for hewas determined both by necessity and by his own nature, which loveddecision, to force a battle with the allies. The truth was that theposition of France was precarious, her career in Italy was deeplythreatened by the allies, Henry VIII. Of England contemplated adescent upon Normandy, and until the enemy in Italy was disposed ofher way was barred to Naples. 

So Gaston set out with some 7000 cavalry and 17, 000 infantry, French, Italian, German, to pursue and to defeat Cardona, who did not wish tofight. The army of the allies was chiefly Spanish and it numbered some6000 cavalry and 16, 000 infantry of most excellent fighting quality. 

As the French advanced along the Via Aemilia, Cardona withdrew toFaenza. Gaston went on to Ravenna, which he besieged. Cardona wasforced to intervene and try to save the city. He, too, approachedRavenna. Upon Easter Day, 1512, the two armies met in the marshbetween Ravenna and the sea; and, in the words of Guicciardini, "therethen began a very great battle, without doubt one of the greatest thatItaly had seen for these many years.... All the troops wereintermingled in a battle fought thus on a plain without impedimentssuch as water or banks, and where both armies fought, each obstinatelybent on death or victory, and inflamed not only with danger, glory, and hope, but also with the hatred of nation against nation. It was amemorable spectacle in the hot engagement between the German andSpanish infantry to see two very noted officers, Jacopo Empser, aGerman, and Zamudio, a Spaniard, advance before their battalions andencounter one another as if it were by challenge, in which combat theSpaniard went off conqueror by killing his adversary. The cavalry ofthe army of the League was not at best equal to that of the French, and having been shattered and torn by the artillery was become muchinferior. Wherefore after they had sustained for some time, more bystoutness of heart than by strength of arms, the fury of the enemy, Yves d'Allegre with the rearguard and a thousand foot that were leftat the Montone under Paliose and now recalled charging them in flank, and Fabrizio Colonna, fighting valiantly, being taken prisoner by thesoldiers of the Duke of Ferrara, they turned their backs, in whichthey did no more than follow the example of their generals; for theViceroy and Carvagiale, without making the utmost proof of the valourof their troops, betook themselves to flight, carrying off with themthe third division or rearguard almost entire with Antonio da Leva, aman of that time of low rank though afterwards by a continual exerciseof arms for many years, rising through all the military degrees, hebecame a very famous general. The whole body of light horse had beenalready broken, and the Marchese di Pescara, their commander, takenprisoner, covered with blood and wounds. And the Marchese dellaPalude, who had led up the second division, or main battle, through afield full of ditches and brambles in great disorder to the fight, wasalso taken. The ground was covered with dead men and horses, and yetthe Spanish infantry, though abandoned by the horse, continuedfighting with incredible fierceness; and though, at the firstencounter with the German foot, they had received some damage from thefirm and close order of the pikes, yet afterwards getting theirenemies within the length of their swords, and many of them, coveredwith targets, pushing with daggers between the legs of the Germans, they had penetrated with very great slaughter almost to the centre oftheir battalions. The Gascon foot who were posted by the Germans onthe ground between the river and a rising bank had attacked theItalian infantry, which, though they had greatly suffered by theartillery, would have repulsed them highly to their honour, had notYves d'Allegre entered among them with a squadron of horse. But thefortune of that general did not answer his valour, for his sonViverais being almost immediately killed before his eyes, the father, unwilling to survive so great a loss, threw himself with his horseinto the thickest of the enemies, where, fighting like a most valiantcaptain and killing several, he was at last cut to pieces. The Italianfoot, unable to resist so great a multitude, gave way; but part of theSpanish infantry hastening to support them, they rallied. On the otherside, the German infantry, being sorely pressed by the other part ofthe Spaniards, were hardly capable of making any resistance; but thecavalry of the confederates being all fled out of the field, Foix witha great body of horse turned to fall upon them. The Spaniards, therefore, rather retiring than driven out of the field, without theleast disorder in their ranks, took their way between the river andthe bank, marching slowly and with a close front, by the strength ofwhich they beat off the French and began to disengage themselves; atwhich time Navarre, choosing rather to die than to save himself, andtherefore refusing to leave the field, was made a prisoner. But Foix, thinking it intolerable that this Spanish infantry should march off inbattle array like conquerors and knowing that the victory was notperfect if these were not broken and dispersed like the rest, wentfuriously to attack them with a squadron of horse and did executionupon the hindmost; but being surrounded and thrown from his horse, or, as some say, his horse falling upon him, while he was fighting, hereceived a mortal thrust with a pike in his side. And if it bedesirable, as it is believed, for a man to die in the height of hisprosperity, it is certain that he met with a most happy death in dyingafter he had obtained so great a victory. He died very young, butfamous through the world, having in less than three months, and beinga general almost before he was a soldier, with incredible ardour andexpedition obtained so many victories. Near him lay on the ground fordead Lautrec, having received twenty wounds; but being carried toFerrara he was by diligent care of the surgeons recovered. 

"By the death of Foix, the Spanish infantry were suffered to pass offunmolested, the remainder of the army being already dispersed and putto flight, and the baggage, colours, and cannons taken. The pope'slegate was also taken by the Stradiotti and carried to Federigo daBozzolo, who made a present of him to the legate of the council. Therewere taken also Fabrizio Colonna, Pietro Navarra, the Marchese dellaPalude, the Marchese di Bitonto, and the Marchese di Pescara, withmany other lords, barons, and honourable gentlemen, Spaniards andNeapolitans. Nothing is more uncertain than the number of the killedin battles; but amidst the variety of accounts it is the most commonopinion that there died of both armies at least 10, 000, of which athird was of the French and two-thirds of their enemies: some talk ofmany more, but they were without question almost all of them of themost valiant and choice soldiers, among whom, belonging to the papalforces, was Raffaello de' Pazzi, an officer of high reputation; andgreat numbers were wounded. But in this respect the loss of theconqueror was without comparison much the greater by the death ofFoix, Yves d'Allegre, and many of the French nobility, and many otherbrave officers of the German infantry, by whose valour, though at vastexpense of their blood, the victory was in a great measure acquired. Molard also fell with many other officers of the Gascons and Picards, which nation lost all their glory that day among the French. But theirloss was exceeded by the death of Foix, with whom perished the verysinews and spirits of that army. Of the vanquished that escaped out ofthe field of battle the greater part fled towards Cesena, whence theycontinued their flight to more distant places; nor did the Viceroystop till he came to Ancona where he arrived with a very few horse. Many were stripped and murdered in their flight; for the peasantsscoured all the roads and the Duke of Urbino, who from his sendingsome time before Baldassare da Castiglione to the King of France, andemploying some trusty persons as his agents with Foix, was supposed tohave entered into a private agreement against his uncle, not onlyraised the country against those that fled, but sent his soldiers tointercept them in the territories of Pesaro; so that only those whotook their flight through the dominions of the Florentines were byorders of the magistrates, confirmed by the republic, suffered to passunmolested. 

"The victorious army was no sooner returned to camp than the people ofRavenna sent deputies to treat of surrendering their city; but whenthey had agreed or were upon the point of agreement, and theinhabitants being employed in preparing provisions to be sent to thecamp were negligent in guarding the walls, the German and Gascon footentered through the breach that had been made and plundered the townin a most barbarous manner, their cruelty being exasperated not onlyby their natural hatred to the name of the Italians, but by a spiritof revenge for the loss they had sustained in the battle. On thefourth day after this, Marcantonio Colonna gave up the citadel, intowhich he had retired, on condition of safety to their persons andeffects, but obliging himself on the other hand, together with therest of the officers, not to bear arms against the King of France northe Pisan Council till the next festival of S. Mary Magdalen; and notmany days after, Bishop Vitello, who commanded in the castle with ahundred and fifty men, agreed to surrender it on terms of safety forlife and goods. The cities of Imola, Forli, Cesena, and Rimini, andall the castles of the Romagna, except those of Forli and Imola, followed the fortune of the victory and were received by the legate inthe name of the council. "

The site of this great battle is marked by a monument, a squarepilaster of marble, called the Colonna dei Francesi, adorned withbas-reliefs and inscriptions, raised in 1557 by the President of theRomagna, Pier Donato Cesi, on the right bank of the Ronco, some threemiles from the city. We may recall Ariosto's verses:

 "Io venni dove le campagne rosse eran del sangue barbaro e latino che fiera stella dianzi a furor mosse. 

 "E vidi un morto all' altro si vicino che, senza premer lor, quasi il terreno a molte miglia non dava il cammino. 

 "E da chi alberga fra Garonna e Reno vidi uscir crudelta, che ne dovria tutto il mondo d'orror rimaner pieno. "

The League of Cambray had succeeded in breaking the real security andconfidence of Venice; the death of Gaston de Foix, "the hero boy whodied too soon, " destroyed the energy of her ally, the French army, inItaly; and the battle of Novara, as I have said, in 1513, inducingthat ally to withdraw from the peninsula, left the republic to bemenaced by Cardona, who failed only to take Venice itself. 

Nor was that great government more fortunate in the long struggleswhich followed between Francis I. And Charles V. In 1523, seeing thatthe French were failing, Venice came to terms with the emperor, bythat time the real arbiter of Italy. In 1527, though then in alliancewith pope Clement VII, she seized once more Ravenna and the Romagna, but the emperor intervened, and by the peace of Cambray in 1529, whichon payment of a fine confirmed Venice in her Lombard possessions asfar as the Adda, she was compelled to restore Ravenna and the Romagnato the pope. 

The treaty of Cambray had so far as Ravenna was concerned a certainfinality about it. Thenceforth the popes ruled the city through acardinal legate, and an era of a certain social and artistic splendourbegan; the city was adorned with at least one new church, S. Maria inPorto, with many monuments and palaces, and some great public workswere undertaken. 

So Ravenna in the arms of the Church slumbered till, in 1797, thegreat soldier of the Revolution descended upon Italy in thatmarvellous campaign which so closely recalls the achievement ofCaesar. Ravenna then became a part first of the Cispadan and later ofthe Cisalpine republic. Then, as we know, came the Austrians who tookRavenna from the French, but were in their turn expelled in 1800, whenthe city was incorporated into the short-lived kingdom of Italy. Butit was again attacked by the Austrians, and later restored once againto the pope. A period of uncertainty and confusion followed in whichvarious provisional governments were established for Ravenna, but atlast in 1860 the city and its province were, by a vote of the people, included in the kingdom of United Italy. 

[Illustration: MONUMENT OF GASTON DE FOIX]

XVIII

RENAISSANCE RAVENNA

CHURCHES AND PALACES

The period of the Renaissance which saw the papal governmentre-established in Ravenna in 1529, has left its mark upon the city inmany a fine monument, indelibly stamped with the style of thatfruitful period. Among such monuments we must note the beautiful tombsof Guidarello Guidarelli, by Tullio Lombardi, erected in 1557, now inthe Accademia, and of Luffo Numai by Tommaso Flamberti in S. Francesco, erected about fifty years earlier (1509). Above all, however, must be named the great church of S. Maria in Porto (1553)and the palaces of Minzoni, Graziani, and others, with the Loggia delGiardino at S. Maria in Porto. And there is, too, the work of thepainters Niccolo Rondinelli, Cotignola, Luca Longhi and his sons, Guido Reni, and others. 

Later the papal government undertook many great public works. TheVenetians had, as we shall see, re-fortified Ravenna; thesefortifications the papal government enlarged, and in the middle of theseventeenth century undertook the digging and construction of theCanale Pamfilio, so named in honour of Innocent X. , and in thefollowing century of the Canale Corsini. These works were necessary, it is said, not only for the maritime commerce of the city, which onemay think was scarcely large enough to have excused them, but for thepreservation of Ravenna from inundation consequent upon the silting upof the rivers. 

But the earliest work done in Ravenna after the close of the MiddleAge was that undertaken by the Venetians. It was in 1457 that theybegan to build the really tremendous fortification or Rocca, the ruinsof which we may still see. They were engaged during some ten yearsupon this great fortress, the master of the works being GiovanniFrancesco da Massa. They employed as material the ruins of the churchof S. Andrea dei Goti, built by Theodoric, which they had beencompelled to destroy to make room for the fortress, as well as thematerials of a palace of the Polentani. The Rocca with its greatcitadel played a considerable part in the battle of 1512, and thesubsequent sack of the city. But when Ravenna came again into thegovernment of the Holy See, though the fortifications of the city as awhole were enlarged, the Rocca itself soon fell into a decay and wasindeed in great part destroyed in the middle of the seventeenthcentury, the monastery and the church of Classe being repaired andenlarged with its ruins and the Ponte Nuovo over the Fiumi Uniti, according to Dr. Ricci, being also constructed from its remains, aswere other buildings in Ravenna. Then like the Rocca Malatestiana atRimini it came to be used as a mere prison, and when it failed toprove useful for that purpose it was allowed to become the picturesqueruin we see. 

Upon the Torre del Ponte of old were set two great reliefs; on highthe Madonna and Child and beneath the Lion of S. Mark. The Madonna andChild, a mediocre work, remains, but when Venice was turned out ofRavenna the Lion was taken down and behind it were carved the papalarms. Both Madonna and Lion would seem to have been the work of Marinodi Marco Ceprini. 

Another work undertaken and achieved by the Venetians was theenlargement and the adornment of the Piazza Maggiore. There in 1483, when their work was finished, they raised two columns which stillstand before the Palazzo del Comune. They stand upon circular bases inthree tiers, sculptured in relief by Pietro Lombardi with the signs ofthe Zodiac and other symbols and ornaments. The capitals of both thecolumns are beautiful. Upon the northern column of old stood a statueof S. Apollinaris, the true patron of the city, while upon thesouthern column stood the Lion of S. Mark. But when in 1509 Ravennacame into the hands of Julius II. The Lion was removed and in 1640 thestatue of S. Apollinaris from the northern column took its place, while there, where of old S. Apollinaris had stood, a statue of S. Vitalis was set as we see to-day. The Palazzo del Comune was entirelyreconstructed in 1681, while the Palazzo Governativo was built in 1696by the Cardinal Legate Francesco Barberini and the Orologio Pubblico, originally dating from 1483, was transformed, as we see it, in 1785 Ofthe Portico Antico I have already spoken. [1]

[Footnote 1: See _supra_, p. 192. ]

One of the most interesting and accessible fifteenth-century houses inRavenna is to be found in the Albergo del Cappello, with its fineoriginal windows in the Via Rattazzi, not far from S. Domenico; it maystand as an example of many other old houses in the Via Arcivescovado, but I must especially name that beautiful Venetian house in the ViaPonte Marino--it is No. 15--the Casa Graziani with its lovely balcony, the Casa Baldim (Via Mazzini, 31) with its double loggia in the_cortile_, the Casa Fabbri next door (No. 33), the Casa Zirardini (ViaBelle Arti, No. I), the Casa Baromo (Via Romolo Gessi, Nos. 6 and 16), and the Casa Ghigi with its lovely door and portico (No. 7 of the samestreet). 

[Illustration: THE CLOISTER OF S. GIOVANNI EVANGELISTA]

Undoubtedly the greatest monument which the sixteenth century has leftus in Ravenna is the church of S. Maria in Porto. This was built bythe Canons Regular of the Lateran, the most ancient community ofcanons still extant, in the year 1553, when for about fifty years theyhad been compelled to abandon the church of S. Maria in Porto fuorioutside the city, in the marsh. They not only furnished their newchurch, but to a considerable extent built it, out of the materials ofS. Lorenzo in Cesarea, which they thus destroyed. 

[Illustration: Colour Plate PORTA SERRATA]

S. Maria in Porto as we see it has suffered from restoration, and thefacade is a work of the eighteenth century, but the church itselfremains a noble sixteenth-century building divided within into threenaves by huge pilasters and columns and covered at the crossing with agreat octagonal cupola. There is, however, little that is veryprecious to be seen, a few fine marbles and the beautiful marblerelief of the Madonna in prayer in the transept, called the MadonnaGreca, a Byzantine work probably brought to Ravenna, according to Dr. Ricci, at the time of the crusades. It was originally in S. Maria inPorto fuori. The noble choir should also be noticed and the beautifulciborio. 

Close by the church is the Monastero of the Canons, within which thereremains the lovely cloister which should be compared with those at S. Vitale and S. Giovanni Evangelista of the same period. This of S. Maria in Porto, however, is the finest, having doubled storied logge. Above all the exquisite Loggia del Giardino should not be missed. Itwas built in 1508, and looks on to a piece of the sixth-century wallof Ravenna. 

Not far away in the Via Girotto Guaccimanni near the Hotel Byron isthe church of S. Maria delle Croci, founded in the tenth century, butentirely rebuilt in the sixteenth. The rose in terracotta of thefacade is a work of this time, as is the exquisite baldacchino overthe high altar within, upheld by two pilasters and two columns ofGreek marble. The picture, too, of the Assumption over the altar is bya master, perhaps Gaspare Sacch' of Imola, of the sixteenth century. Of the same period is the massive Porta Serrata at the north end ofthe Corso Garibaldi. 

The best monument of later times left in Ravenna is the fine PalazzoRasponi in Via S. Agnese (No. 2) built in or about 1700. 

XIX

THE GALLERY AND THE MUSEUM

Ravenna isolated in her marsh and altogether, both geographically andpolitically, out of the Italian world that began to flower sowonderfully in Tuscany, then in Umbria, and later still in Venice inthe fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth centuries, is the last cityin which to look for pictures. Nevertheless a few delightful piecesamong much that is negligible are to be found in the Accademia delleBelle Arti in the Via Alfredo Baccarini. The collection was begunabout 1827, and though what is to be seen there is never of the firstimportance it is certainly more than we had the right to expect. 

The first two rooms upon the upper floor are devoted to the Romagnuoland Bolognese painters, the best of them here pupils or disciples ofthe one master Ravenna can boast, Niccolo Rondinelli. 

We have seen Rondinelli's organ shutters in S. Domenico, here we havesomething better. This really fine pupil of Giovanni Bellini was bornit seems in Ravenna in the middle of the fifteenth century. Vasaritells us that "there also flourished in Romagna an excellent paintercalled Rondinello.... Giovanni Bellini, whose disciple he had been, had availed himself to a considerable extent of his services invarious works. But after Rondinello had left Giovanni Bellini hecontinued to practise his art and in such a manner that, beingexceedingly diligent, he produced numerous works which are highlydeserving of and have obtained considerable praise.... For the altarof S. Maria Maddalena in the cathedral of Ravenna this master painteda picture in oil, wherein he portrayed the figure of that saint only;but in the predella he executed three stories, the small figures ofwhich are very gracefully depicted. In one of these is our SaviourChrist appearing to Mary Magdalen in the form of the gardener; anothershows S. Peter leaving the ship and walking upon the waves of the sea, and between them is the Baptism of Christ. All these representationsare executed in an exceedingly beautiful manner. [1] Rondinellolikewise painted two pictures in the church of S. Giovanni Evangelistain the same city. One of these portrays the Consecration of the churchby S. Giovanni[2] and the other exhibits three martyrs, S. Cancio, S. Canciano, and S. Cancianilla, all very beautiful figures. [3] For thechurch of S. Apollinare also in Ravenna this master painted twopictures, each containing a single figure, S. Giovanni Battista and S. Sebastiano, namely, both highly extolled. [4] There is a picture by thehand of Rondinello in the church of S. Spirito likewise; the subject, Our Lady between S. Jerome and the virgin martyr S. Catherine. [5] InS. Francesco, Rondinello painted two pictures, in one of which are S. Catherine and S. Francesco; while in the other our artist depicted theMadonna accompanied by many figures, as well as by the apostle S. James and by S. Francesco. [6] For the church of S. Domenico, Rondinello painted two pictures; one is to the left of the high altarand exhibits Our Lady with numerous figures; the other is on thefagade of the church and is very beautiful. [7] In the church of S. Niccolo, a monastery of Augustinians, this master painted a picturewith S. Lorenzo and S. Francesco, a work which was most highlycommended, in so much that it caused Rondinello to be held in theutmost esteem for the remainder of his life, not in Ravenna only, butin all Romagna. [8] The painter here in question lived to the age ofsixty years, and was buried in S. Francesco at Ravenna. "[9]

[Footnote 1: This picture would seem to be lost. ]

[Footnote 2: This picture is now in the Brera at Milan, No. 452. ]

[Footnote 3: This picture would seem to be lost. Milanesi says it wastaken to Milan. _Vas_. V. 254, n. 2. ]

[Footnote 4: There is a Sebastian by this master in the Duomo atForli; the S. Giovanni panel seems to be lost. ]

[Footnote 5: This is now in the Accademia of Ravenna, No. 6. ]

[Footnote 6: This would seem to have disappeared; but cf. Brera, 455. ]

[Footnote 7: The first of these remains in S. Domenico, the other is, I think, now in the Accademia, No. 7. ]

[Footnote 8: This picture, too, seems to be lost. ]

[Footnote 9: Vasari (trs. Foster), vol. III. Pp 382-384. ]

In another place, Vasari tells us that the pupil who copied GiovanniBellini most closely and did him most honour was "Rondinello ofRavenna, of whose aid the master availed himself much in all hisworks.... Rondinello painted his best work for the church of S. Giovanni Battista in Ravenna. The church belongs to the CarmeliteFriars and in the painting, besides a figure of Our Lady, Rondinellodepicted that of S. Alberto, a brother of their order;[10] the head ofthe saint is extremely beautiful, and the whole work very highlycommended. "[11]

[Footnote 10: Now in the Accademia, unnumbered; it represents theMadonna between S. Alberto and S. Sebastian. ]

[Footnote 11: Vasari (trs. Foster), vol. II. Pp. 171-172. ]

Of all the works thus named by Vasari as painted by Rondinelli inRavenna only four remain, three in the Accademia and one in S. Domenico. I have already spoken of the tempera pieces in S. Domenico. [12] Of the three pieces in the Accademia, the Madonna andChild between S. Catherine and S. Jerome (No. 6) comes from S. Spirito; the Madonna and Child between SS. Catherine, Mary Magdalen, John Baptist, and Thomas Aquinas comes from S. Domenico, and is, I amconvinced, the picture spoken of by Vasari rather than thesixteenth-century work that still hangs there, which is, according toDr. Ricci, perhaps the mediocre work of Ragazzini. The third pictureby Rondinelli in the Accademia, the Madonna and Child between S. Alberto and S. Sebastian, comes from the church of the Carmelites, S. Giovanni Battista. 

[Footnote 12: See _supra_, p. 246. ]

Beside these three fine works of Rondinelli hangs the work of a man hestrongly influenced, Francesco Zaganelli da Cotignola. When Vasaritells us that Rondinelli was buried in S. Francesco at Ravenna, hegoes on to say that "after him came Francesco da Cotignola, who wasalso greatly esteemed in that city and painted numerous picturesthere. On the high altar of the church which belongs to the Abbey ofClasse, for example, there is one from his hand of tolerably largesize, representing the Raising of Lazarus with many figures[1]. Opposite to this work in the year 1548 Giorgio Vasari painted anotherfor Don Romualdo da Verona, the abbot of that place. This represents aDeposition of Christ from the Cross, and has also a large number offigures[2]. Francesco Cotignola painted a picture in S. Niccolo, likewise a very large one, the subject of which is the Birth ofChrist, with two in S. Sebastiano exhibiting numerous figures[3]. Forthe hospital of S. Caterina, Francesco painted a picture of Our Lady, S. Caterina, and many other figures[4]; and in S. Agata, he painted afigure of our Saviour Christ on the Cross, the Madonna being at thefoot thereof, with a considerable number of other figures; this workalso has received commendation[5]. In the church of S. Apollinare inthe same city are three pictures by this artist, one at the high altarwith Our Lady, S. Giovanni Battista, S. Apollinare, S. Jerome, andother saints; in the second is also the Madonna with S. Peter and S. Catherine[6]; and in the third and last is Jesus Christ bearing hisCross, but this Francesco could not finish having been overtaken bydeath before its completion[7]. Francesco coloured in a very pleasingmanner, but had not such power of design as Rondinello; he wasnevertheless held in great account by the people of Ravenna. It washis desire to be buried in S. Apollinare, where he had painted certainfigures, as we have said, wishing that in the place where he had livedand laboured his remains might find their repose after his death. "

[Footnote 1: This is in the ex-church of S. Romuald in Classe in thesacristy, now part of the Museo]

[Footnote 2: This is now in the Accademia, No 40]

[Footnote 3: The first of these is in the Accademia (No. 10), as Isuppose are the two other undescribed pictures]

[Footnote 4: Is this a Marriage of S. Catherine in S. Girolamo inRavenna?]

[Footnote 5: Now in the Accademia, No 13. ]

[Footnote 6: Of these I know nothing]

[Footnote 7: Now in the canonica of S. Croce in Ravenna]

To-day in Ravenna there remain the three works described by Vasari, one in the ex-church S. Romualdo di Classe, the other, as I think, once in the Hospital of S. Catherine and now in S. Girolamo, andanother at S. Croce. In the Accademia there are nine of his works, ofwhich the S. Niccolo Presepio (No. 10) and the S. Agata Crucifixion(No. 13) are the better. A S. Sebastian (No. 12) and a S. Catherine(No. 11) should also be noticed. By his brother and assistant, Bernardino, there is one picture in the Accademia, the Agony in theGarden (No. 194). 

Another master of the Romagnuol school, Marco Palmezzano, the pupil ofMelozza da Forli, a contemporary of Rondinelli, who influenced him tosome small extent, is represented in the Accademia by two works inSala II. , the Nativity and the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin(Nos. 189 and 190); in the Vescovado there is a Madonna and Child withfour saints from his hand. Vasari says nothing of him, but onlymentions his name, yet he has a good deal to tell us of perhaps alesser man, Luca Longhi (1507-1580), who was born in Ravenna. 

"Maestro Luca de' Longhi of Ravenna, " he says, "a man of studioushabits and quiet reserved character, has painted many beautifulpictures in oil, with numerous portraits from the life in his nativecity and its neighbourhood. Among other productions of Longhi are twosufficiently graceful little pictures which the reverend Don Antonioda Pisa, then abbot of the monastery, caused him to paint no long timesince for the monks of Classe; many other works have also beenexecuted by this painter. It is certain that Luca Longhi, beingstudious, diligent, and of admirable judgment as he is, would havebecome an excellent master had he not always confined himself toRavenna where he still remains with his family; his works areaccomplished with much patience and study; and of this I can beartestimony since I know the progress which he made during the time ofmy stay in Ravenna both in the practise and comprehension of art. Norwill I omit to mention that a daughter of his, called Barbara, stillbut a little child, draws very well and has begun to paint also in avery good manner and with much grace. "

There are five pictures by Luca Longhi in the Accademia besides threeportraits. In Sala I. We have an early work painted at the age oftwenty-two, the Marriage of S. Catherine (No. 14); a Madonna and Childwith S. Benedict, S. Apollinaris, S. Barbara, and S. Paul (No. 23). InSala II. The Dead Christ between S. Bartholomew and Don Antonio daPisa, abbot of the monastery of Classe (No. 17), and two pictures ofthe Adoration of the Shepherds (Nos. 15, 16). Here, too, are the threeportraits from his hand which represent Raffaele Rasponi (No. 22), Giovanni Arrigoni (No. 21), and Girolamo Rossi (No. 20). By Luca's sonFrancesco there is a feeble Crucifixion (No. 29) in Sala I. ;[1] andhappily in Sala II. Three pictures by Barbara, Luca's daughter, ofwhom Vasari speaks; a S. Catherine, which is really a portrait of thepainter (No. 81), a Madonna and Child (No. 27), and a Judith (No. 28). [2]

[Footnote 1: There is another work, an Annunciation, by FrancescoLonghi in S. Croce. ]

[Footnote 2: Another work by Barbara Longhi, S. Peter visiting S. Agata in Prison, may be seen in S. Maria Maggiore. ]

Only one picture by a Bolognese master is really worthy of much noticehere; I mean the S. Romuald of Guercino (No. 33) in Sala I. In thefloor of this first room there is set a fine mosaic from S. Apollinarein Classe which should be noted. 

The third room in the Accademia, filled with various works of littlemerit of the sundry schools of Italy, may be neglected. The fourthroom, however, is devoted to the beautiful tomb of GuidarelloGuidarelli, the very glorious work of Tullio Lombardi. Of old thisexquisite tomb stood in the Cappella Braccioforte at S. Francesco. Guidarello of Ravenna was killed in battle at Imola in 1501, andTullio Lombardi, the son of Pietro, was employed to make his tomb. "Idoubt, " says M. De Vogue, "whether, apart from the work of Donatello, the early Renaissance produced anything more beautiful. " Guidarellothe knight is represented in marble, a life-size figure, lying on hisback, his body encased in armour, his helmet on his head, his visorraised, his gloved hands crossed over his sword which lies along hisbody. He seems, weary of fighting at last, to be sleeping, but thesweet expression upon the tired face makes us think rather of a monkthan a soldier. In truth he was a knight of the olden time. 

We leave the room in which he sleeps for ever in his marble, reluctantly, and, passing Sala V. , which is full of late pictures ofno interest, come to Sala VI. Where there are several delightful earlyItalian works. One would not certainly expect to find in Ravenna apicture of the most exquisite school in Tuscany, the school of Siena. Yet here is a delightful Madonna and Child with S. Peter and S. Barbara (No. 191) by Matteo di Giovanni (1435-1495); and afourteenth-century Annunciation (No. 176) from Tuscany. In theCrucifixion (No. 225) we seem to have an early Venetian work, andanother Crucifixion (No. 181) might almost be from the hand of LorenzoMonaco. It is probable that we see a work of Antonio da Fabriano inthe S. Peter Damiano (No. 188), and certainly an Umbrian work in theS. Francis receiving the Stigmata (216). But the most remarkableUmbrian picture here is the Christ with the Cross between two angels(No. 202), the work of Niccolo da Foligno. A few early works by themediocre masters of the Romagnuol school (Nos. 174, 171, 172, 182) areto be seen here also. 

Sala VI. Is entirely devoted to an immense number of pictures in theByzantine manner, of considerable interest and much beauty, but notyet to be discussed. 

We leave the Accademia for the Museo close by. The building in whichthe collections are housed is the old Camaldulensian monastery ofClasse built in 1515 by the monks of S. Apollinare in Classe, andsince S. Romuald, the founder of the order, was a Ravennese one maythink the monastery might have been left in the hands of the monks. Even as it is it has considerably more interest for us than thecollections gathered within it. The beautiful seventeenth-centurycloisters, the old convent church of S. Romualdo in the baroque styleof 1630, and the convent itself are delightful. The collections aremediocre. But here we may see all that is to be seen of the Ravenna ofAugustus and of the great years of the empire, fragments andinscriptions and reliefs now and then of real interest, as in therelief representing the Apotheosis of Augustus, in the eastern walk ofthe cloisters, and in the remains of that suit of gold armour thoughtto be Theodoric's in the old sacristy. But for the most part thecollection is without much attraction, yet certainly not to remainunvisited. 

[Illustration: THE PINETA]

XX

THE PINETA

Ravenna has so much that is rare and precious to show us that fewamong the many who spend a day or two within her walls have theinclination to explore the melancholy marshes in which she stands. Nodoubt most of us drive out to S. Apollinare in Classe, but the roadthither does not encourage a further journey, for it is rude and roughand the country over which it passes is among the most featureless inItaly. Nevertheless he does himself a wrong who leaves Ravenna forgood without having spent one day at any rate in the Pineta which, ruined though it now be, is still one of the loveliest and mostmysterious places in the Romagna. 

But lovely though it is, and full of memories, what can be said ofthis vast ruined forest of stone pines with its mystery of mere andfen, its coolness and shadow, its astonishing silence? Only this Ithink, that if once you find it, nothing else in Ravenna will seemhalf so precious as this green wood. You will love it always and forits own sake more than anything else in Ravenna, and in this you willnot be alone; every one who has come to it these thousand years hasfelt the same, Dante, Boccaccio, Byron, Carducci, the Pineta knows thefootsteps of them all and they seem to haunt it still. 

Dante would seem to have loved it best in the morning; out of it heconjures his _Paradiso Terrestre_ in the twenty-eighth canto of the_Purgatorio_:

 "Through that celestial forest, whose thick shade With lively greenness the new-springing day Attemper'd, eager now to roam, and search Its limits round, forthwith I left the bank; Along the champain leisurely my way Pursuing, o'er the ground, that on all sides Delicious odour breathed. A pleasant air That intermitted never, never veer'd, Smote on my temples, gently as a wind Of softest influence, at which the sprays, Obedient all, lean'd trembling to that part Where first the holy mountain casts his shade, Yet were not so disordered, but that still Upon their top the feathered quiristers Applied their wonted art, and with full joy Welcomed those hours of prime, and warbled shrill Amid the leaves that to their jocund lays Kept tenour; even as from branch to branch Along the piny forests on the shore Of Chiassi rolls the gathering melody When Eolus hath from his cavern loosed The dripping south. Already had my steps, Though slow, so far into that ancient wood Transported me, I could not ken the place Where I had entered; when, behold, my path Was bounded by a rill which to the left With little rippling waters bent the grass That issued from its brink. On earth no wave How clear so'er that would not seem to have Some mixture in itself, compared with this Transpicuous clear; yet darkly on it rolled, Darkly beneath perpetual gloom, which ne'er Admits or sun or moon-light there to shine. "

Well, is not it the very place? And did not Dante, who knew Italy asfew have known it, do well to remember it when he would describe forus the Earthly Paradise? In the forest the morning is sacred to himand there one should turn, with less misunderstanding than anywhereelse, the precious pages of that poem which is in itself a universe. 

But if the clear morning there is Dante's, when we may still hear thevoice he heard pass by there, in the stillness, singing, _Beati quorumtecta sunt peccata_, the long noon belongs to Boccaccio, for it isfull of the most tragic and pitiful of his tales. 

[Illustration: THE PINETA]

"Ravenna being a very ancient City in Romania, there dwelt sometime agreat number of worthy Gentlemen, among whom I am to speake of onemore especially, named Anastasio, descended from the Family of theHonesti, who by the death of his Father, and an Unckle of his, wasleft extraordinarily abounding in riches, and growing to yearesfitting for marriage, (as young Gallants are easily apt enough to do)he became enamored of a very bountifull Gentlewoman, who was Daughterto Signior Paulo Traversario, one of the most ancient and nobleFamilies in all the Countrey. Nor made he any doubt, but by his meanesand industrious endeavour, to derive affection from her againe; for hecarried himselfe like a brave-minded Gentleman, liberall in hisexpences, honest and affable in all his actions, which commonly arethe true notes of a good nature, and highly to be commended in anyman. But, howsoever Fortune became his enemy, these laudable parts ofmanhood did not any way friend him, but rather appeared hurtfull tohimselfe: so cruell, unkind, and almost meerely savage did she shewher self to him; perhaps in pride of her singular beauty, or presumingon her nobility by birth, both which are rather blemishes, thenornaments in a woman, especially when they be abused. 

"The harsh and uncivill usage in her, grew very distastefull toAnastasio, and so unsufferable, that after a long time of fruitlesseservice, requited still with nothing but coy disdaine; desperateresolutions entred into his brain, and often he was minded to killhimselfe. But better thoughts supplanting those furious passions, heabstained from any such violent act; and governed by more manlyconsideration, determined, that as shee hated him, he would requiteher with the like, if he could: wherein he became altogether deceived, because as his hopes grew to a dayly decaying, yet his love enlargedit selfe more and more. 

"Thus Anastasio persevering still in his bootlesse affection, and hisexpences not limited within any compasse; it appeared in the judgementof his Kindred and Friends, that he was falne into a mightyconsumption, both of his body and meanes. In which respect, many timesthey advised him to leave the City of Ravenna, and live in some otherplace for such a while; as might set a more moderate stint upon hisspendings, and bridle the indiscreete course of his love, the onelyfuell which fed this furious fire. 

"Anastasio held out thus a long time, without lending an eare to suchfriendly counsell: but in the end, he was so neerely followed by them, as being no longer able to deny them, he promised to accomplish theirrequest. Whereupon, making such extraordinary preparation, as if hewere to set thence for France or Spaine, or else into some furtherdistant countrey: he mounted on horsebacke, and accompanied with somefew of his familiar friends, departed from Ravenna, and rode to acountrey dwelling house of his owne, about three or foure milesdistant from the Cittie, which was called Chiasso, and there (upon avery goodly greene) erecting divers Tents and Pavillions, such asgreat persons make use of in the time of a Progresse: he said to hisfriends, which came with him thither, that there he determined to makehis abiding, they all returning backe unto Ravenna, and might come tovisite him againe so often as they pleased. 

"Now, it came to passe, that about the beginning of May, it being thena very milde and serrene season, and he leading there a much moremagnificent life, then ever hee had done before, inviting divers todine with him this day, and as many to morrow, and not to leave himtill after supper: upon the sodaine, falling into remembrance of hiscruell Mistris, hee commanded all his servants to forbeare hiscompany, and suffer him to walke alone by himselfe awhile, because hehad occasion of private meditations, wherein he would not (by anymeanes) be troubled. It was then about the ninth houre of the day, andhe walking on solitary all alone, having gone some halfe milesdistance from his Tents, entred into a Grove of Pine-trees, neverminding dinner time, or any thing else, but onely the unkind requitallof his love. 

"Sodainly he heard the voice of a woman, seeming to make mostmournfull complaints, which breaking off his silent considerations, made him to lift up his head, to know the reason of this noise. Whenhe saw himselfe so farre entred into the Grove, before he couldimagine where he was; hee looked amazedly round about him, and out ofa little thicket of bushes and briars, round engirt with spreadingtrees, hee espyed a young Damosell come running towards him, nakedfrom the middle upward, her haire dishevelled on her shoulders, andher faire skinne rent and torne with the briars and brambles, so thatthe blood ran trickling downe mainely; she weeping, wringing herhands, and crying out for mercy so lowde as she could. Two fierceBlood-hounds also followed swiftly after, and where their teeth tookehold, did most cruelly bite her. Last of all (mounted on a lustyblacke Courser) came galloping a Knight, with a very sterne and angrycountenance, holding a drawne short Sword in his hand, giving her veryvile and dreadful speeches, and threatning every minute to kill her. 

"This strange and uncouth sight, bred in him no meane admiration, asalso kinde compassion to the unfortunate woman; out of whichcompassion, sprung an earnest desire, to deliver her (if he could)from a death so full of anguish and horror: but seeing himselfe to bewithout Armes, he ran and pluckt up the plant of a Tree, whichhandling as if it had bene a staffe, he opposed himselfe against theDogges and the Knight, who seeing him comming, cryed out in thismanner to him. Anastasio, put not thy selfe in any opposition, butreferre to my Hounds and me, to punish this wicked woman as she hathjustly deserved. And in speaking these words, the Hounds tooke fasthold on her body, so staying her, untill the Knight was come neerer toher, and alighted from his horse: when Anastasio (after some otherangry speeches) spake thus unto him: I cannot tell what or who thouart, albeit thou takest such knowledge of me, yet I must say, that itis meere cowardize in a Knight, being armed as thou art, to offer tokill a naked woman, and make thy dogges thus to seize on her, as ifshe were a savage beast; therefore beleeve me, I will defend her sofarre as I am able. 

"Anastasio, answered the Knight, I am of the same City as thou art, and do well remember, that thou wast a little Ladde, when I (who wasthen named Guido Anastasio, and thine Unckle) became as intirely inlove with this woman, as now thou art of Paulo Traversarioes daughter. But through her coy disdaine and cruelty, such was my heavy fate, thatdesperately I slew my selfe with this short sword which thou beholdestin mine hand: for which rash sinfull deede, I was, and am condemned toeternall punishment. This wicked woman, rejoycing immeasurably in mineunhappy death, remained no long time alive after me, and for hermercilesse sinne of cruelty, and taking pleasure in my oppressingtorments; dying unrepentant, and in pride of her scorne, she had thelike sentence of condemnation pronounced on her, and sent to the sameplace where I was tormented. 

"There the three impartiall Judges, imposed this further infliction onus both; namely, that she should flye in this manner before me, and I(who loved her so deerely while I lived) must pursue her as my deadlyenemy, not like a woman that had a taste of love in her. And so oftenas I can overtake her, I am to kill her with this sword, the sameWeapon wherewith I slew my selfe. Then am I enjoyned, therewith toopen her accursed body, and teare out her hard and frozen heart, withher other inwards, as now thou seest me doe, which I give unto myHounds to feede on. Afterward, such is the appointment of the supreamepowers, that she reassumeth life againe, even as if she had not benedead at all, and falling to the same kinde of flight, I with my Houndsam still to follow her; without any respite or intermission. EveryFriday, and just at this houre, our course is this way, where shesuffereth the just punishment inflicted on her. Nor do we rest any ofthe other dayes, but are appointed unto other places, where shecruelly executed her malice against me, being now (of her deareaffectionate friend) ordained to be her endlesse enemy, and to pursueher in this manner for so many yeares, as she exercised moneths ofcruelty towards me. Hinder me not then, in being the executioner ofdivine justice; for all thy interposition is but in vaine, in seekingto crosse the appointment of supreame powers. 

"Anastasio having attentively heard all this discourse, his hairestood upright like Porcupines quils, and his soule was so shaken withthe terror, that he stept backe to suffer the Knight to do what he wasenjoyned, looking yet with milde commisseration on the poore woman. Who kneeling most humbly before the Knight, and stearnely seized on bythe two blood-hounds, he opened her brest with his weapon, drawingfoorth her heart and bowels, which instantly he threw to the dogges, and they devoured them very greedily. Soone after, the Damosell (as ifnone of this punishment had bene inflicted on her) started upsodainly, running amaine towards the Sea shore, and the Hounds swiftlyfollowing her, as the Knight did the like, after he had taken hissword, and was mounted on horse-backe; so that Anastasio had soonelost all sight of them, and could not gesse what was become of them. 

"After he had heard and observed all these things, he stoode a whileas confounded with feare and pitty, like a simple silly man, hoodwinktwith his owne passions, not knowing the subtle enemies cunningillusions in offering false suggestions to the sight, to worke hisowne ends thereby, and encrease the number of his deceived servants. Forthwith he perswaded himselfe, that he might make good use of thiswomans tormenting, so justly imposed on the Knight to prosecute, ifthus it should continue still every Friday. Wherefore, setting a goodnote or marke upon the place, he returned backe to his owne people, and at such time as he thought convenient, sent for divers of hiskindred and friends from Ravenna, who being present with him, thus hespake to them. 

"Deare Kinsmen and Friends, ye have a long while importuned me, todiscontinue my over-doating love to her, whom you all thinke, and Ifind to be my mortall enemy: as also, to give over my lavish expences, wherein I confesse my selfe too prodigall; both which requests ofyours, I will condiscend to, provided, that you will performe onegracious favour for me; Namely, that on Friday next, Signior PauloTraversario, his wife, daughter, with all other women linked in linageto them, and such beside onely as you shall please to appoint, willvouchsafe to accept a dinner heere with me; as for the reason theretomooving me, you shall then more at large be acquainted withall. Thisappeared no difficult matter for them to accomplish: wherefore, beingreturned to Ravenna, and as they found the time answerable to theirpurpose, they invited such as Anastasio had appointed them. Andalthough they found it some-what an hard matter, to gaine her companywhom he so deerely affected; yet notwithstanding, the other women wonher along with them. 

"A most magnificent dinner had Anastasio provided, and the tables werecovered under the Pine-trees, where he saw the cruell Lady so pursuedand slaine: directing the guests so in their seating, that the yongGentlewoman his unkinde Mistresse, sate with her face opposite untothe place, where the dismall spectacle was to be seen. About theclosing up of dinner, they beganne to heare the noise of the pooreprosecuted Woman, which drove them all to much admiration; desiring toknow what it was, and no one resolving them, they arose from theTables, and looking directly as the noise came to them, they espyedthe wofull Woman, the Dogges eagerly pursuing her; and the armedKnight on horsebacke, gallopping fiercely after them with his drawneweapon, and came very nere unto the company, who cryed out with lowdexclaimes against the dogs and the Knight, stepping forth inassistance of the injured woman. 

"The Knight spake unto them, as formerly he had done to Anastasio, (which made them draw backe, possessed with feare and admiration)acting the same cruelty as he did the Friday before, not differing inthe least degree. Most of the Gentlewomen there present, being neereallyed to the unfortunate Woman, and likewise to the Knight, remembring well both his love and death, did shed teares asplentifully, as if it had bin to the very persons themselves, inusuall performance of the action indeede. Which tragicall Scoene beingpassed over, and the Woman and Knight gone out of their sight: allthat had seene this straunge accident, fell into diversity of confusedopinions, yet not daring to disclose them, as doubting some furtherdanger to ensue thereon. 

"But beyond all the rest, none could compare in feare and astonishmentwith the cruell yong Maide affected by Anastasio, who both saw andobserved all with a more inward apprehension, knowing very well, thatthe morall of this dismall spectacle, carried a much neererapplication to her then any other in all the company. For now shecould call to mind, how unkinde and cruell she had shewne her selfe toAnastasio, even as the other Gentlewoman formerly did to her Lover, still flying from him in great contempt and scorne: for which, shethought the Blood-hounds also pursued her at the heeles already, and asword of vengeance to mangle her body. This feare grew so powerfull inher, that to prevent the like heavy doome from falling on her, shestudied (by all her best and commendable meanes, and therein bestowedall the night season) how to change her hatred into kinde love, whichat the length she fully obtained, and then purposed to prosecute inthis manner. 

"Secretly she sent a faithfull Chamber-maide of her owne, to greeteAnastasio on her behalfe; humbly entreating him to come see her:because now she was absolutely determined, to give him satisfaction inall which (with honour) he could request of her. Whereto Anastasioanswered, that he accepted her message thankfully, and desired noother favour at her hand, but that which stood with her owne offer, namely, to be his Wife in honourable marriage. The Maide knowingsufficiently, that he could not be more desirous of the match, thenher Mistresse shewed her selfe to be, made answer in her name, thatthis motion would be most welcome to her. 

"Heereupon, the Gentlewoman her selfe, became the solicitour to herFather and Mother, telling them plainly, that she was willing to bethe Wife of Anastasio: which newes did so highly content them, thatupon the Sunday next following, the marriage was very worthilysolemnized, and they lived and loved together very kindly. Thus thedivine bounty, out of the malignant enemies secret machinations, cancause good effects to arise and succeede. For, from this conceite offearfull imagination in her, not onely happened this long desiredconversion, of a Maide so obstinately scornfull and proud; butlikewise all the women of Ravenna (being admonished by her example)grew afterward more kind and tractable to mens honest motions, thenever they shewed themselves before. And let me make some use hereof(faire Ladies) to you, not to stand over-nicely conceited of yourbeauty and good parts, when men (growing enamored of you by them)solicite you with their best and humblest services. Remember then thisdisdainfull Gentlewoman, but more especially her, who being the deathof so kinde a Lover, was therefore condemned to perpetuall punishment, and he made the minister thereof, whom she had cast off with coydisdaine, from which I wish your minds to be as free, as mine is readyto do you any acceptable service. "[1]

[Footnote 1: This translation is from the English version of _TheDecameron_, first published in 1620, but in 1569 had appeared _ANotable Historye of Nastagto and Traversan_, or rhymed version ofBoccaccio's tale, by C. T. , usually supposed to be Christopher Tye themusician. Dryden used this story for his fable _Theodore and Honoria_. It is curious to note that Anita, Garibaldi's wife, was actuallyhunted to death here in the Pineta by the Austrians. ]

To Dante and to Boccaccio belong of right morning and noon in thePineta; but the evening is ours for it belongs to Byron:

 "Sweet hour of twilight' in the solitude Of the pine forest, and the silent shore Which bounds Ravenna's immemorial wood, Rooted where once the Adrian wave flowed o'er, To where the last Caesarean fortress stood, Evergreen forest I which Boccaccio's lore And Dryden's lay made haunted ground to me How have I loved the twilight hour and thee;

 "The shrill cicalas, people of the pine, Making their summer lives one ceaseless song, Were the sole echoes, save my steed's and mine, And vesper bells that rose the boughs along, The spectre huntsman of Onesti's line, His hell-dogs, and their chase, and the fair throng Which learn'd from this example not to fly From a true lover--shadow'd my mind's eye

 "Soft hour! which wakes the wish and melts the heart Of those who sail the seas, on the first day When they from their sweet friends are torn apart. Or fills with love the pilgrim on his way As the far bell of vesper makes him start, Seeming to weep the dying day's decay, Is this a fancy which our reason scorns? Ah, surely nothing dies but something mourns!"

That "sweet hour of twilight" in the Pineta is the most precious hourof the day, when far off across the marsh softly, softly comes the AveMaria.... 

 "_O tu rinnovellata itala gente da le molte vite rendi la voce

 "de ta preghiera, la campana squilli ammonitrice, il campanil risorto canti di clivo in clivo a la campagna Ave Maria. 

 "Ave Maria! Quando su l'aure corre l'umil saluto, i piccioh mortali scovrono il capo, curvano la fronte Dante ed Aroldo_"

[Illustration: TO PORTO CORSINI]