little sought by all politicians. Mommsen, after the remark above
quoted, proceeds to say, that, whenever Caesarism "appears under other
social conditions, it is at once a usurpation and a caricature. History,
however, will not consent to curtail the honor due to the true Caesar,
because her decision, in the presence of false Caesars, may give occasion
to simplicity to play the fool and to villany to play the rogue. She,
too, is a Bible, and if she can as little prevent herself from being
misunderstood by the fool and quoted by the Devil, she ought as little
to be prejudiced by either." Strong words, but very natural as coming
from a learned German who finds his own theory turned to account by the
supporters of a house which Germany once helped to overthrow, and which
she would gladly aid in overthrowing again. Perhaps Dr. Mommsen will
soon have an opportunity to speak more at length of French Caesarism, for
the first two volumes of Napoleon III.'s "Life of Julius Caesar" are
announced as nearly ready for publication, and their appearance cannot
fail to be the signal for a battle royal, as few scholars, we presume,
will be content to take historical law from an Emperor. The modern
master of forty legions will not be as fortunate as Hadrian in finding
philosophers disinclined to question his authority in letters; and he
may fare even worse at their hands than he fared at those of Mr.
Kinglake. The republic of letters is not to be mastered by a _coup
d'etat_.

The opponents of Caesarism have not been silent, and it would be neither
uninteresting nor unprofitable, did time permit, to show how well they
have disposed of most of the arguments of their foes. The question is
not the old one, whether the party of Caesar or that of Pompeius was the
better one, for at bottom the two were very much the same, the struggle
being for supremacy over the whole Roman dominion; and it is certain
that there would have been no essential change of political procedure,
had the decision at Pharsalia been reversed. On that field Caesar was the
nominal champion of the liberal faction, and Pompeius was the nominal
champion of the _optimates_. Had Caesar lost the day, the plebeian
Pompeian house would have furnished an imperial line, instead of that
line proceeding from the patrician Julii. Pompeius would have been as
little inclined to abandon the fruits of his victory to the aristocrats
as Caesar showed himself to set up the rule of the Forum-po