ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS

p. 24 note, for latest read later.

p. 32 line 7 from bottom, for see read say.

p. 220 1. 20, for Fifth read Third.

p. 224 1. 15, dele comma after enough.

p. 234 1. 4 from bottom, for isle read island.

p. 253 note 1. 5, for has read had.

p. 262 1. 2, after he read means.

p. 324 1. 16, put semicolon after Portreeves.

p. 347, after 1. 12 read during the vacancy of the archbishopric, and in the next line dele Archbishop.

p. 353 note, for horrors read horror.

p. 361 1. 7 from bottom. It may be said that something of this kind was done in the appointment of the decemvirs. But it is hardly safe to speak positively. It seems more likely that the decemvirate was originally only a temporary commission, whose holders contrived to make themselves into something like a δυναστεία.

p. 416 1. 7 from bottom. While speaking of the creation of nobility from outside in France and elsewhere, I ought perhaps to have spoken more distinctly of cases in which nobility could be gained by some process other than the direct act of the sovereign. Such was the nobility conferred in France by the possession of certain offices and by the purchase of a noble' estate. But I suppose that a lawyer would say that both of these ways of reaching nobility were grants from the Crown, general instead of particular grants. Nobility by purchase of a noble' estate is something like our barony by tenure, of which I speak in the last essay in the volume.

p. 444 1. 11, put comma after identity.

p. 454 1. 10, dele the year from which so many things parliamentary date. p. 463 1. 12 from bottom, for cause, read causes.

THERE is no spot on which one more keenly feels the mischief that has come of cutting up the study of history into arbitrary fragments than on the site of Carthage. There is no spot which the Unity of History may more rightly claim as one of its choicest possessions. In the history of the neighbouring land of Sicily the main charm lies in the fact that the same tale has to be told twice, that the same struggle has been fought twice. And so it is with the city which so long played a great and fearful part in the affairs of Sicily. Carthage has had a double life, a double history; and we do not take in what Carthage has really been in the history of the world if we look at one of those lives only. It is pardonable if, standing on the site of Carthage, with the two lives of Carthage in our memory, we go on to dream that a third life may perhaps be still in store for her. It was at least a piece of news which might call up many thoughts when we read the other day that a successor of Cyprian had just dedicated his newly built metropolitan church on the height which is at once the Bozrah of Dido and the hill of Saint Lewis, the spot from which Gaiseric ruled the seas, the spot to which Heraclius dreamed of translating the dominion of the elder and the younger Rome. We fail to take in the greatness of the story of which we stand on the central scene, unless we call up all its associations, and not the earliest group only. Mighty men have trod the soil on

B

which we stand, and not in one age only. If Hannibal set forth from the first Carthage to deal his heavy blows on the elder Rome, Belisarius came from the younger Rome to bring back the second Carthage to her dominion. If the first Carthage bowed to no foe till the elder Scipio had learned the arts of Hannibal, it was from the second Carthage that Heraclius went forth to practise those arts on a third continent. We feel the greatness of the site when we think of Phoenician Carthage ruling in Sardinia and Sicily and carrying her arms to the gates of Rome. But the feeling of its greatness comes home to us with a twofold strength when we think how, as soon as Carthage was again the seat of an independent power, that power at once sprang to a position which well nigh rivalled that which the city had held in its elder days. Teutonic Carthage was but for a moment; but Teutonic Carthage too ruled in Sicily and Sardinia, and carried her arms not only to the gates of Rome but within her walls. If the bull of Phalaris was carried as plunder to the first Carthage, the candlestick of Solomon was carried as plunder to the second. If one conqueror restored the bull to Agrigentum, another restored the candlestick to Jerusalem. The tale loses half its grandeur, it loses all its completeness, if we stop at the end of its first chapter. Let it be, no one will deny it, that Phoenician Carthage was greater than Roman Carthage. But that Roman Carthage, once planted on the same site, rose to no small measure of renewed greatness, is surely the best of witnesses to the greatness of Phoenician Carthage and to the wisdom of those who chose the site for its first planting.

But, while we must not let the greatness of the first Carthage blind our eyes to the existence or to the greatness of the second, we must freely allow that the second Carthage is something, not only second in time, but in everything secondary to the first. The charm of the second Carthage, of the acts that were done in it or by its masters, comes

largely from the fact that the first Carthage and its acts

I.]

THE FIRST AND THE SECOND CARTHAGE.

3

went before them. It is not always so with the second state of a city. Megarian Byzantium has its own place in history; but its main interest is that it was the forerunner of Constantinople. Within the world of Carthage itself, Phoenician and Roman Panormos counts for something; but it counts for little beside the glories of Saracen and Norman Palermo. But the second Carthage lives in a manner by the life of the first. As a power, its greatest, indeed its only, day is its Vandal day. And the most striking thing about the Vandal day of Carthage is that it so wonderfully recalls its Phoenician day. It is the purely Christian associations only that stand on a real level with the associations of the oldest time. Cyprian would be the same if Hamilkar and Hannibal had never trod the ground of the Bozrah before him. Gaiseric hardly would be.

The old Phoenician Carthage holds a place in the history of the world which is all her own. Phoenicia stands alone among nations, and Carthage stands alone among Phoenician commonwealths. That last is a word to be noticed. In a glance across the historic nations it strikes us at once that the Phoenicians are the only people beyond the bounds of Europe who rank as the political peers of the European nations. Aristotle, to whom the name of Rome was barely known, whose thoughts had been in no wise drawn to the polity of Rome, thought the constitution of Carthage worthy of careful study, and he gives it the tribute of no small praise. Polybios, with his wider range of vision, makes the constitutions of Sparta, of Rome, and of Carthage the subject of an elaborate comparison. One is tempted to think that the Phoenicians, settled within the Western world, within the bounds of Europe itself or of that Africa which is truly a part of Europe, had drunk in something of the spirit of the West, and had almost parted company with the barbaric kingdoms of Asia. We seem to see the change taking place by degrees. The