the Eastern and Western empires; and the two
royal youths, Arcadius and Honorius, who had already obtained, from the
tenderness of their father, the title of Augustus, were destined to
fill the thrones of Constantinople and of Rome. Those princes were not
permitted to share the danger and glory of the civil war; [123] but as
soon as Theodosius had triumphed over his unworthy rivals, he called
his younger son, Honorius, to enjoy the fruits of the victory, and to
receive the sceptre of the West from the hands of his dying father. The
arrival of Honorius at Milan was welcomed by a splendid exhibition of
the games of the Circus; and the emperor, though he was oppressed by the
weight of his disorder, contributed by his presence to the public joy.
But the remains of his strength were exhausted by the painful effort
which he made to assist at the spectacles of the morning. Honorius
supplied, during the rest of the day, the place of his father; and
the great Theodosius expired in the ensuing night. Notwithstanding the
recent animosities of a civil war, his death was universally lamented.
The Barbarians, whom he had vanquished and the churchmen, by whom he had
been subdued, celebrated, with loud and sincere applause, the qualities
of the deceased emperor, which appeared the most valuable in their
eyes. The Romans were terrified by the impending dangers of a feeble and
divided administration, and every disgraceful moment of the unfortunate
reigns of Arcadius and Honorius revived the memory of their irreparable
loss.

[Footnote 122: This disease, ascribed by Socrates (l. v. c. 26) to the
fatigues of war, is represented by Philostorgius (l. xi. c. 2) as
the effect of sloth and intemperance; for which Photius calls him an
impudent liar, (Godefroy, Dissert. p. 438.)]

[Footnote 123: Zosimus supposes, that the boy Honorius accompanied his
father, (l. iv. p. 280.) Yet the quanto flagrabrant pectora voto is all
that flattery would allow to a contemporary poet; who clearly describes
the emperor's refusal, and the journey of Honorius, after the victory
(Claudian in iii. Cons. 78-125.)]

In the faithful picture of the virtues of Theodosius, his imperfections
have not been dissembled; the act of cruelty, and the habits of
indolence, which tarnished the glory of one of the greatest of the Roman
princes. An historian, perpetually adverse to the fame of Theodosius,
has exaggerated his vices, and their pernicious effects; he boldly
asserts,