Page:Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire vol 3 (1897).djvu/444

 424 THE DECLINE AND FALL incident soon became the motive, or pretence, of a destructive war.^^ Under the faith of the treaty of Margus, a free market was held on the northern side of the Danube, which was protected by a Roman fortress surnamed Constantia. A troop of Barbarians violated the commercial security, killed, or dis- persed, the unsuspecting traders, and levelled the fortress with the ground. The Huns justified this outrage as an act of reprisal ; alleged that the bishop of Margus had entered their teiTitories, to discover and steal a seci-et treasure of their kings ; and sternly demanded the guilty prelate, the sacrilegious spoil, and the fugitive subjects, who had escaped from the justice of Attila. The refusal of the Byzantine court was the signal of war ; and the Maesians at first applauded the generous firmness of their sovereign. But they were soon intimidated by [Kortoiatz] the destruction of Viminacium and the adjacent towns ; and the people were persuaded to adopt the convenient maxim that a private citizen, however innocent or respectable, may be justly sacrificed to the safety of his country. The bishop of Margus, who did not possess the spirit of a martyr, resolved to prevent the designs which he suspected. He boldly treated with the princes of the Huns ; secured, by solemn oaths, his pardon and reward ; posted a numerous detachment of Barbarians, in silent ambush, on the banks of the Danube ; and at the appointed hour opened, with his own hand, the gates of his episcopal city. This advantage, which had been obtained by treacheiy, sened as a prelude to more honourable and decisive victories. The Illyrian frontier was covered by a line of castles and fortresses ; and, though the greatest part of them consisted only of a single tower, with a small garrison, they were commonly sufficient to repel, or to intercept, the inroads of an enemy who was ignorant of the art, and impatient of the delay, of a regular siege. But these slight obstacles were instantly swept away by the inunda- tion of the Huns.'-*^ They destroyed, with fire and sword, the 19 Priscus, p. 331 [/eg. p. 33, fr. i ; F. H. G. iv. p. 72, fr. 2]. His history con- tained a copious and elegant account of the war (Evagrius, 1. i. c. 17), but the extracts which relate to the embassies are the only parts that have reached our times. The original work was accessible, however, to the writers from whom we borrow our imperfect knowledge : Jornandes, Theophanes, Count Marcellinus, Prosper-Tiro, and the author of the .Alexandrian, or Paschal, Chronicle. M. de Buat (Hist, des Peuples de I'Europe, torn. vii. c. .v. ) has examined the cause, the circumstances, and the duration, of this war ; and will not allow it to extend beyond the year four hundred and forty-four. ™ Procopius, de .itdificiis, 1. iv. c. 5. These fortresses were afterwards restored, strengthened, and enlarged, by the emperor Justinian ; but they were soon destroyed by the Abarcs, who succeeded to the power and possessions of the Huns.