« PrethodnaNastavi »
THE CITY OF ROME:
STRUCTURES AND MONUMENTS.
FROM ITS FOUNDATION TO THE END OF THE MIDDLE AGES.
THE DESIGN of the present work is to describe within a moderate compass the rise, progress, and decline of the city of Rome, the origin and story of its more famous monuments, and, without entering into their political causes, the vicissitudes of the city, either through domestic discord or the attacks of external enemies. Even during the Middle Ages, ancient Rome, or rather its remains, is principally kept in view. For it would have been impossible, within the prescribed limits, to give a description of the modern city, or what may be called Christian, in contradistinction to pagan, Rome. On this head only a few of the principal churches have been noticed, which, as they date their origin from the time of Constantine I., or shortly after, may be considered to belong as much to the ancient as to the modern city. With a view to add interest to the subject, a description of some of the more striking scenes of which Rome was the theatre has been attempted; and, when it was possible, brief allusions have been made to the lives and residences of those who
have adorned it by their genius, or illustrated it by the prominent part which they played in its affairs.
As the present attempt to give a connected history of the Roman city is, to the best of the writer's knowledge, the first that has been made in the English language, he hopes that this circumstance may not only be a recommendation of his book to the reader's notice, but that it will also serve to excuse some of the defects which may be observed in it. The sources from which the author drew are noted at the foot of the pages; but he is here bound to acknowledge his obligations generally to the works of Dr. Papencordt, Herr Gregorovius, and the late M. Ampère.
The author has ventured in the Introduction to adduce some reasons why the early history of Rome may not be so utterly fictitious as it seems to be now esteemed. He is painfully conscious that an attempt even partially to reopen a conclusion generally accepted by scholars may subject him to a charge of rashness and presumption; but he was unwilling to suppress some objections to that conclusion, which, so far as they go, appear to him to deserve consideration. If he is mistaken in that opinion, the refutation of these objections will at all events serve still more firmly to establish the results of modern criticism. The author's only object is to discover the truth; in pursuit of which, if he has ventured some remarks that