The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1855-07-03
Bancroft ON sIavery-Wnas Caused the Fan
or Rounel

that he fall OF the Roman Empire was chiefly
caused ny the institution Of slavery. A. vast
smo unit Of cheap .erudition il brought to bear
on the point; the corpus juris civ.lis has been
carefully cODpn'sed; Condolences are con
founded with cause and effect; brilliant Ian
guage il thrown like CANDY cloak over loose
reasoning and uDscbOlarlike logic and when
the writer has involved both himself aud his
readers in maze of confusion he attempts IL
burst headloDg into day light again by the
bread assertion that all the calami.ies he paints
were obviously the fruit of slavery. just SO
the temperance men trace every human infic
pity to the use Of alcohol; just so the manu-
fac,urers declare with their hands on their
hearts that all our troubles, from the
Schuyler fraud to the high price of flour, are
caused by British free 'trade;" just SO our
ance stors used to cay that the " bloody minded
mass priests were the authors of all the mis-
chief in the world just SO every fanatic, 10
every age, has trained himself, after more or
less labor, to regard his own mania as the one
thing of Importance in the world, and to con-
meet it more and more with passin events un-
til it appear in his eyes to be the real centre
round which the world gyrates. Such is the
inevitable tendency of study and philosophic
attempts at generalization in plastic tickle
minds
1t would be quite possible, we undertake to
say, for an ingenious and well read man to set
up half dozen separate theories for each lead
ing event in history, and to clothe each with
sufficient plausibility to ensure for it some
general attention. From the days of Plato to
Monsieur Comte men have never ceased to
generalize and find out the causes Of striking
events: each philosopbic theory has had its
day and its partisans; but how many of them
survive? Not more than Sodom contained of
righteous men. Take the fall Of Rome. One
writer shows plainly that the corruption of
morals was the cause. Another traces it d.
rectly to the overthrow of republican prlnci-
pies. Governor Gardiner, of Massachusetts,,
thinks it was due to the indiscreet naturaliza-
ton Of foreigners. Many writer's use it as their
grand argument against standing armies We
are taught at school to believe that it was &C.
casioned by the the exorbitant expansion of the
empire, which fell to pieces from its own bulk.
And now Mr.. Bancroft tells us the true cause
was slavery.
1t would be far easier to prove that Chris
tianity was the destroyer. If any reliance
may be placed in chronology, the history of
the Roman empire consists Of two epochs--its
rise and growth, covering rather more
than eight centuries, and its decline
and fall, covering say three. During the first
period the Romans were the incarnation Of q
theory according to which courage, manliness,
ard iortitude were the highest OF the mora,
virtues, and ply steal strength one of the high
est prizes that could fall to mans lot. The best
man among the old Romans was the braves,
ard the strongest. Hence it was that whenever
this Roman nation came into contact with races
where strength and courage were less priced
and less cultivated, the latter went to the wall
One by one the Latin tribes were subdued
Ingenious Carthage could not resist the sturdy
and undaunted bands of Rome. Polished Greece
succumbed; and even such races as the Gauls
who were equal in point of strength to the Ro-
mans, could not stand against men who had
been trained for centuries to despise death or
to court it in battle. The Gauls were brave,
no doubt; but it was the natural bravery Of
human nature, untutored. The Romano brave
~, on the contrary, was the chief part of his
education us well. His theogony all pointed
to that one subject. His gods were venerable
because they were brave. While two frstclass
deities presided especially over war, goddess
was held quite sufficient for wisdom, and even
she carried spear. All the Roman heroes had
been fighting men. Every freeman was SO still.
Even women had been deified for acts of cour-
age, though Roman literature contains no praise
of the feminine virtues. In short, to fight the
foe manfally, never to forget wrong, never
to yield with life, to train the body to endu-
rance, and the soul to imperturbable cool
ligion, customs and laws directed the Roman
youth. And II is undeniable that az long as
this was the case, so long were the Romans sue
cess'ul In all their military and political enter.
prises, and SO long did the empire grow.
With Christianity came new principle. As
Gibbon tells us, "the first Christians knew not
how to reconcile the defence of person and pro.
perty with the patient doctrine which enjoined
an unlimited forgiveness Of past injuries aud
commended them to invite the repetition of fresh
insults. =. Their humane ignorance could
not be convinced that il was lawful Oh any coca.
zion to she'd the blood of fellow creature.
While they inculcated the maxim of passive
obedience, they refused to take any part in the
military defence Of the empire" Nor could
they consistently act otherwise. We in later
days have shaped Christianity to suit our pur.
pose; but nothing flows more clearly from the
Gofpel than that it is wrong to fight, wrong to
revenge, wrong to shed blood This is how the
early Christians viewed it.
Hence when in the course OF the never end.
ing Roman wars, defeat allowed the " barba-
riars' to penetrate the peninsula, and an attack
nror Donna itsalf haca mo imminent tho or.