History Of The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire

Edward Gibbon, Esq.

With notes by the Rev. H. H. Milman

Vol. 2

1782 (Written), 1845 (Revised)

Chapter XVI: Conduct Towards The Christians, From Nero To

Constantine.

Part I.

     Note: The sixteenth chapter I cannot help considering as a

very ingenious and specious, but very disgraceful extenuation of

the cruelties perpetrated by the Roman magistrates against the

Christians.  It is written in the most contemptibly factious

spirit of prejudice against the sufferers; it is unworthy of a

philosopher and of humanity.  Let the narrative of Cyprian's

death be examined.  He had to relate the murder of an innocent

man of advanced age, and in a station deemed venerable by a

considerable body of the provincials of Africa, put to death

because he refused to sacrifice to Jupiter.  Instead of pointing

the indignation of posterity against such an atrocious act of

tyranny, he dwells, with visible art, on the small circumstances

of decorum and politeness which attended this murder, and which

he relates with as much parade as if they were the most important

particulars of the event.

     The Conduct Of The Roman Government Towards The Christians,

From The Reign Of Nero To That Of Constantine.

     Dr. Robertson has been the subject of much blame for his

real or supposed lenity towards the Spanish murderers and tyrants

in America.  That the sixteenth chapter of Mr. G. did not excite

the same or greater disapprobation, is a proof of the

unphilosophical and indeed fanatical animosity against

Christianity, which was so prevalent during the latter part of

the eighteenth century. - Mackintosh: see Life, i. p. 244, 245.]

     If we seriously consider the purity of the Christian

religion, the sanctity of its moral precepts, and the innocent as

well as austere lives of the greater number of those who during

the first ages embraced the faith of the gospel, we should

naturally suppose, that so benevolent a doctrine would have been

received with due reverence, even by the unbelieving world; that

the learned and the polite, however they may deride the miracles,

would have esteemed the virtues, of the new sect; and that the

magistrates, instead of persecuting, would have protected an

order of men who yielded the most passive obedience to the laws,

though they declined the active cares of war and government.  If,

on the other hand, we recollect the universal toleration of

Polytheism, as it was invariably maintained by the faith of the

people, the incredulity of philosophers, and the policy of the

Roman senate and emperors, we are at a loss to discover what new

offence the Christians had committed, what new provocation could

exasperate the mild indifference of antiquity, and what new

motives could urge the Roman princes, who beheld without concern

a thousand forms of religion subsisting in peace under their

gentle sway, to inflict a severe punishment on any part of their

subjects, who had chosen for themselves a singular but an

inoffensive mode of faith and worship.

     The religious policy of the ancient world seems to have

assumed a more stern and intolerant character, to oppose the

progress of Christianity. About fourscore years after the death

of Christ, his innocent disciples were punished with death by the

sentence of a proconsul of the most amiable and philosophic

character, and according to the laws of an emperor distinguished

by the wisdom and justice of his general administration.  The

apologies which were repeatedly addressed to the successors of

Trajan are filled with the most pathetic complaints, that the

Christians, who obeyed the dictates, and solicited the liberty,

of conscience, were alone, among all the subjects of the Roman

empire, excluded from the common benefits of their auspicious

government.  The deaths of a few eminent martyrs have been

recorded with care; and from the time that Christianity was

invested with the supreme power, the governors of the church have

been no less diligently employed in displaying the cruelty, than

in imitating the conduct, of their Pagan adversaries.  To

separate (if it be possible) a few authentic as well as

interesting facts from an undigested mass of fiction and error,

and to relate, in a clear and rational manner, the causes, the

extent, the duration, and the most important circumstances of the

persecutions to which the first Christians were exposed, is the

design of the present chapter. ^*

[Footnote *: The history of the first age of Christianity is only

found in the Acts of the Apostles, and in order to speak of the

first persecutions experienced by the Christians, that book

should naturally have been consulted; those persecutions, then

limited to individuals and to a narrow sphere, interested only

the persecuted, and have been related by them alone.  Gibbon

making the persecutions ascend no higher than Nero, has entirely

omitted those which preceded this epoch, and of which St. Luke

has preserved the memory. The only way to justify this omission

was, to attack the authenticity of the Acts of the Apostles; for,

if authentic, they must necessarily be consulted and quoted.

Now, antiquity has left very few works of which the authenticity

is so well established as that of the Acts of the Apostles.  (See

Lardner's Cred. of Gospel Hist. part iii.) It is therefore,

without sufficient reason, that Gibbon has maintained silence

concerning the narrative of St. Luke, and this omission is not

without importance. - G.]

     The sectaries of a persecuted religion, depressed by fear

animated with resentment, and perhaps heated by enthusiasm, are

seldom in a proper temper of mind calmly to investigate, or

candidly to appreciate, the motives of their enemies, which often

escape the impartial and discerning view even of those who are

placed at a secure distance from the flames of persecution.  A

reason has been assigned for the conduct of the emperors towards

the primitive Christians, which may appear the more specious and

probable as it is drawn from the acknowledged genius of

Polytheism.  It has already been observed, that the religious

concord of the world was principally supported by the implicit

assent and reverence which the nations of antiquity expressed for

their respective traditions and ceremonies.  It might therefore

be expected, that they would unite with indignation against any

sect or people which should separate itself from the communion of

mankind, and claiming the exclusive possession of divine

knowledge, should disdain every form of worship, except its own,

as impious and idolatrous.  The rights of toleration were held by

mutual indulgence: they were justly forfeited by a refusal of the

accustomed tribute.  As the payment of this tribute was

inflexibly refused by the Jews, and by them alone, the

consideration of the treatment which they experienced from the

Roman magistrates, will serve to explain how far these

speculations are justified by facts, and will lead us to discover

the true causes of the persecution of Christianity.

     Without repeating what has already been mentioned of the

reverence of the Roman princes and governors for the temple of

Jerusalem, we shall only observe, that the destruction of the

temple and city was accompanied and followed by every

circumstance that could exasperate the minds of the conquerors,

and authorize religious persecution by the most specious

arguments of political justice and the public safety.  From the

reign of Nero to that of Antoninus Pius, the Jews discovered a

fierce impatience of the dominion of Rome, which repeatedly broke

out in the most furious massacres and insurrections.  Humanity is

shocked at the recital of the horrid cruelties which they

committed in the cities of Egypt, of Cyprus, and of Cyrene, where

they dwelt in treacherous friendship with the unsuspecting

natives; ^1 and we are tempted to applaud the severe retaliation

which was exercised by the arms of the legions against a race of

fanatics, whose dire and credulous superstition seemed to render

them the implacable enemies not only of the Roman government, but

of human kind. ^2 The enthusiasm of the Jews was supported by the

opinion, that it was unlawful for them to pay taxes to an

idolatrous master; and by the flattering promise which they

derived from their ancient oracles, that a conquering Messiah

would soon arise, destined to break their fetters, and to invest

the favorites of heaven with the empire of the earth.  It was by

announcing himself as their long-expected deliverer, and by

calling on all the descendants of Abraham to assert the hope of

Israel, that the famous Barchochebas collected a formidable army,

with which he resisted during two years the power of the emperor

Hadrian. ^3

[Footnote 1: In Cyrene, they massacred 220,000 Greeks; in Cyprus,

240,000; in Egypt, a very great multitude.  Many of these unhappy

victims were sawn asunder, according to a precedent to which

David had given the sanction of his example.  The victorious Jews

devoured the flesh, licked up the blood, and twisted the entrails

like a girdle round their bodies.  See Dion Cassius, l. lxviii.

p. 1145.

     Note: Some commentators, among them Reimar, in his notes on

Dion Cassius think that the hatred of the Romans against the Jews

has led the historian to exaggerate the cruelties committed by

the latter.  Don. Cass. lxviii. p. 1146. - G.]

[Footnote 2: Without repeating the well-known narratives of

Josephus, we may learn from Dion, (l. lxix. p. 1162,) that in

Hadrian's war 580,000 Jews were cut off by the sword, besides an

infinite number which perished by famine, by disease, and by

fire.]

[Footnote 3: For the sect of the Zealots, see Basnage, Histoire

des Juifs, l. i. c. 17; for the characters of the Messiah,

according to the Rabbis, l. v. c. 11, 12, 13; for the actions of

Barchochebas, l. vii. c. 12.  (Hist. of Jews iii. 115, &c.) - M.]

     Notwithstanding these repeated provocations, the resentment

of the Roman princes expired after the victory; nor were their

apprehensions continued beyond the period of war and danger.  By

the general indulgence of polytheism, and by the mild temper of

Antoninus Pius, the Jews were restored to their ancient

privileges, and once more obtained the permission of circumcising

their children, with the easy restraint, that they should never

confer on any foreign proselyte that distinguishing mark of the

Hebrew race. ^4 The numerous remains of that people, though they

were still excluded from the precincts of Jerusalem, were

permitted to form and to maintain considerable establishments

both in Italy and in the provinces, to acquire the freedom of

Rome, to enjoy municipal honors, and to obtain at the same time

an exemption from the burdensome and expensive offices of

society.  The moderation or the contempt of the Romans gave a

legal sanction to the form of ecclesiastical police which was

instituted by the vanquished sect.  The patriarch, who had fixed

his residence at Tiberias, was empowered to appoint his

subordinate ministers and apostles, to exercise a domestic

jurisdiction, and to receive from his dispersed brethren an

annual contribution. ^5 New synagogues were frequently erected in

the principal cities of the empire; and the sabbaths, the fasts,

and the festivals, which were either commanded by the Mosaic law,

or enjoined by the traditions of the Rabbis, were celebrated in

the most solemn and public manner. ^6 Such gentle treatment

insensibly assuaged the stern temper of the Jews.  Awakened from

their dream of prophecy and conquest, they assumed the behavior

of peaceable and industrious subjects.  Their irreconcilable

hatred of mankind, instead of flaming out in acts of blood and

violence, evaporated in less dangerous gratifications.  They

embraced every opportunity of overreaching the idolaters in

trade; and they pronounced secret and ambiguous imprecations

against the haughty kingdom of Edom. ^7

[Footnote 4: It is to Modestinus, a Roman lawyer (l. vi.

regular.) that we are indebted for a distinct knowledge of the

Edict of Antoninus.  See Casaubon ad Hist. August. p. 27.]

[Footnote 5: See Basnage, Histoire des Juifs, l. iii. c. 2, 3.

The office of Patriarch was suppressed by Theodosius the

younger.]

[Footnote 6: We need only mention the Purim, or deliverance of

the Jews from he rage of Haman, which, till the reign of

Theodosius, was celebrated with insolent triumph and riotous

intemperance.  Basnage, Hist. des Juifs, l. vi. c. 17, l. viii.

c. 6.]

[Footnote 7: According to the false Josephus, Tsepho, the

grandson of Esau, conducted into Italy the army of Eneas, king of

Carthage.  Another colony of Idumaeans, flying from the sword of

David, took refuge in the dominions of Romulus.  For these, or

for other reasons of equal weight, the name of Edom was applied

by the Jews to the Roman empire.

     Note: The false Josephus is a romancer of very modern date,

though some of these legends are probably more ancient.  It may

be worth considering whether many of the stories in the Talmud

are not history in a figurative disguise, adopted from prudence.

The Jews might dare to say many things of Rome, under the

significant appellation of Edom, which they feared to utter

publicly.  Later and more ignorant ages took literally, and

perhaps embellished, what was intelligible among the generation

to which it was addressed.  Hist. of Jews, iii. 131.

     The false Josephus has the inauguration of the emperor, with

the seven electors and apparently the pope assisting at the

coronation!  Pref. page xxvi. - M.]

     Since the Jews, who rejected with abhorrence the deities

adored by their sovereign and by their fellow-subjects, enjoyed,

however, the free exercise of their unsocial religion, there must

have existed some other cause, which exposed the disciples of

Christ to those severities from which the posterity of Abraham

was exempt.  The difference between them is simple and obvious;

but, according to the sentiments of antiquity, it was of the

highest importance.  The Jews were a nation; the Christians were

a sect: and if it was natural for every community to respect the

sacred institutions of their neighbors, it was incumbent on them

to persevere in those of their ancestors. The voice of oracles,

the precepts of philosophers, and the authority of the laws,

unanimously enforced this national obligation.  By their lofty

claim of superior sanctity the Jews might provoke the Polytheists

to consider them as an odious and impure race.  By disdaining the

intercourse of other nations, they might deserve their contempt.

The laws of Moses might be for the most part frivolous or absurd;

yet, since they had been received during many ages by a large

society, his followers were justified by the example of mankind;

and it was universally acknowledged, that they had a right to

practise what it would have been criminal in them to neglect.

But this principle, which protected the Jewish synagogue,

afforded not any favor or security to the primitive church.  By

embracing the faith of the gospel, the Christians incurred the

supposed guilt of an unnatural and unpardonable offence.  They

dissolved the sacred ties of custom and education, violated the

religious institutions of their country, and presumptuously

despised whatever their fathers had believed as true, or had

reverenced as sacred.  Nor was this apostasy (if we may use the

expression) merely of a partial or local kind; since the pious

deserter who withdrew himself from the temples of Egypt or Syria,

would equally disdain to seek an asylum in those of Athens or

Carthage. Every Christian rejected with contempt the

superstitions of his family, his city, and his province.  The

whole body of Christians unanimously refused to hold any

communion with the gods of Rome, of the empire, and of mankind.

It was in vain that the oppressed believer asserted the

inalienable rights of conscience and private judgment.  Though

his situation might excite the pity, his arguments could never

reach the understanding, either of the philosophic or of the

believing part of the Pagan world.  To their apprehensions, it

was no less a matter of surprise, that any individuals should

entertain scruples against complying with the established mode of

worship, than if they had conceived a sudden abhorrence to the

manners, the dress, or the language of their native country. ^8

^*

[Footnote 8: From the arguments of Celsus, as they are

represented and refuted by Origen, (l. v. p. 247 - 259,) we may

clearly discover the distinction that was made between the Jewish

people and the Christian sect. See, in the Dialogue of Minucius

Felix, (c. 5, 6,) a fair and not inelegant description of the

popular sentiments, with regard to the desertion of the

established worship.]

[Footnote *: In all this there is doubtless much truth; yet does

not the more important difference lie on the surface?  The

Christians made many converts the Jews but few.  Had the Jewish

been equally a proselyting religion would it not have encountered

as violent persecution? - M.]

     The surprise of the Pagans was soon succeeded by resentment;

and the most pious of men were exposed to the unjust but

dangerous imputation of impiety. Malice and prejudice concurred

in representing the Christians as a society of atheists, who, by

the most daring attack on the religious constitution of the

empire, had merited the severest animadversion of the civil

magistrate.  They had separated themselves (they gloried in the

confession) from every mode of superstition which was received in

any part of the globe by the various temper of polytheism: but it

was not altogether so evident what deity, or what form of

worship, they had substituted to the gods and temples of

antiquity.  The pure and sublime idea which they entertained of

the Supreme Being escaped the gross conception of the Pagan

multitude, who were at a loss to discover a spiritual and

solitary God, that was neither represented under any corporeal

figure or visible symbol, nor was adored with the accustomed pomp

of libations and festivals, of altars and sacrifices. ^9 The

sages of Greece and Rome, who had elevated their minds to the

contemplation of the existence and attributes of the First Cause,

were induced by reason or by vanity to reserve for themselves and

their chosen disciples the privilege of this philosophical

devotion. ^10 They were far from admitting the prejudices of

mankind as the standard of truth, but they considered them as

flowing from the original disposition of human nature; and they

supposed that any popular mode of faith and worship which

presumed to disclaim the assistance of the senses, would, in

proportion as it receded from superstition, find itself incapable

of restraining the wanderings of the fancy, and the visions of

fanaticism. The careless glance which men of wit and learning

condescended to cast on the Christian revelation, served only to

confirm their hasty opinion, and to persuade them that the

principle, which they might have revered, of the Divine Unity,

was defaced by the wild enthusiasm, and annihilated by the airy

speculations, of the new sectaries.  The author of a celebrated

dialogue, which has been attributed to Lucian, whilst he affects

to treat the mysterious subject of the Trinity in a style of

ridicule and contempt, betrays his own ignorance of the weakness

of human reason, and of the inscrutable nature of the divine

perfections. ^11

[Footnote 9: Cur nullas aras habent?  templa nulla?  nulla nota

simulacra! - Unde autem, vel quis ille, aut ubi, Deus unicus,

solitarius, desti tutus? Minucius Felix, c. 10.  The Pagan

interlocutor goes on to make a distinction in favor of the Jews,

who had once a temple, altars, victims, &c.]

[Footnote 10: It is difficult (says Plato) to attain, and

dangerous to publish, the knowledge of the true God.  See the

Theologie des Philosophes, in the Abbe d'Olivet's French

translation of Tully de Natura Deorum, tom. i. p. 275.]

[Footnote 11: The author of the Philopatris perpetually treats

the Christians as a company of dreaming enthusiasts, &c.; and in

one place he manifestly alludes to the vision in which St. Paul

was transported to the third heaven. In another place, Triephon,

who personates a Christian, after deriding the gods of Paganism,

proposes a mysterious oath.]

     It might appear less surprising, that the founder of

Christianity should not only be revered by his disciples as a

sage and a prophet, but that he should be adored as a God.  The

Polytheists were disposed to adopt every article of faith, which

seemed to offer any resemblance, however distant or imperfect,

with the popular mythology; and the legends of Bacchus, of

Hercules, and of Aesculapius, had, in some measure, prepared

their imagination for the appearance of the Son of God under a

human form. ^12 But they were astonished that the Christians

should abandon the temples of those ancient heroes, who, in the

infancy of the world, had invented arts, instituted laws, and

vanquished the tyrants or monsters who infested the earth, in

order to choose for the exclusive object of their religious

worship an obscure teacher, who, in a recent age, and among a

barbarous people, had fallen a sacrifice either to the malice of

his own countrymen, or to the jealousy of the Roman government.

The Pagan multitude, reserving their gratitude for temporal

benefits alone, rejected the inestimable present of life and

immortality, which was offered to mankind by Jesus of Nazareth.

His mild constancy in the midst of cruel and voluntary

sufferings, his universal benevolence, and the sublime simplicity

of his actions and character, were insufficient, in the opinion

of those carnal men, to compensate for the want of fame, of

empire, and of success; and whilst they refused to acknowledge

his stupendous triumph over the powers of darkness and of the

grave, they misrepresented, or they insulted, the equivocal

birth, wandering life, and ignominious death, of the divine

Author of Christianity. ^13

[Footnote 12: According to Justin Martyr, (Apolog. Major, c.

70-85,) the daemon who had gained some imperfect knowledge of the

prophecies, purposely contrived this resemblance, which might

deter, though by different means, both the people and the

philosophers from embracing the faith of Christ.]

[Footnote 13: In the first and second books of Origen, Celsus

treats the birth and character of our Savior with the most

impious contempt.  The orator Libanius praises Porphyry and

Julian for confuting the folly of a sect., which styles a dead

man of Palestine, God, and the Son of God. Socrates, Hist.

Ecclesiast. iii. 23.]

     The personal guilt which every Christian had contracted, in

thus preferring his private sentiment to the national religion,

was aggravated in a very high degree by the number and union of

the criminals.  It is well known, and has been already observed,

that Roman policy viewed with the utmost jealousy and distrust

any association among its subjects; and that the privileges of

private corporations, though formed for the most harmless or

beneficial purposes, were bestowed with a very sparing hand. ^14

The religious assemblies of the Christians who had separated

themselves from the public worship, appeared of a much less

innocent nature; they were illegal in their principle, and in

their consequences might become dangerous; nor were the emperors

conscious that they violated the laws of justice, when, for the

peace of society, they prohibited those secret and sometimes

nocturnal meetings. ^15 The pious disobedience of the Christians

made their conduct, or perhaps their designs, appear in a much

more serious and criminal light; and the Roman princes, who might

perhaps have suffered themselves to be disarmed by a ready

submission, deeming their honor concerned in the execution of

their commands, sometimes attempted, by rigorous punishments, to

subdue this independent spirit, which boldly acknowledged an

authority superior to that of the magistrate.  The extent and

duration of this spiritual conspiracy seemed to render it

everyday more deserving of his animadversion.  We have already

seen that the active and successful zeal of the Christians had

insensibly diffused them through every province and almost every

city of the empire.  The new converts seemed to renounce their

family and country, that they might connect themselves in an

indissoluble band of union with a peculiar society, which every

where assumed a different character from the rest of mankind.

Their gloomy and austere aspect, their abhorrence of the common

business and pleasures of life, and their frequent predictions of

impending calamities, ^16 inspired the Pagans with the

apprehension of some danger, which would arise from the new sect,

the more alarming as it was the more obscure. "Whatever," says

Pliny, "may be the principle of their conduct, their inflexible

obstinacy appeared deserving of punishment." ^17

[Footnote 14: The emperor Trajan refused to incorporate a company

of 150 firemen, for the use of the city of Nicomedia.  He

disliked all associations. See Plin. Epist. x. 42, 43.]

[Footnote 15: The proconsul Pliny had published a general edict

against unlawful meetings.  The prudence of the Christians

suspended their Agapae; but it was impossible for them to omit

the exercise of public worship.]

[Footnote 16: As the prophecies of the Antichrist, approaching

conflagration, &c., provoked those Pagans whom they did not

convert, they were mentioned with caution and reserve; and the

Montanists were censured for disclosing too freely the dangerous

secret.  See Mosheim, 413.]

[Footnote 17: Neque enim dubitabam, quodcunque esset quod

faterentur, (such are the words of Pliny,) pervicacian certe et

inflexibilem obstinationem lebere puniri.]

     The precautions with which the disciples of Christ performed

the offices of religion were at first dictated by fear and

necessity; but they were continued from choice.  By imitating the

awful secrecy which reigned in the Eleusinian mysteries, the

Christians had flattered themselves that they should render their

sacred institutions more respectable in the eyes of the Pagan

world. ^18 But the event, as it often happens to the operations

of subtile policy, deceived their wishes and their expectations.

It was concluded, that they only concealed what they would have

blushed to disclose.  Their mistaken prudence afforded an

opportunity for malice to invent, and for suspicious credulity to

believe, the horrid tales which described the Christians as the

most wicked of human kind, who practised in their dark recesses

every abomination that a depraved fancy could suggest, and who

solicited the favor of their unknown God by the sacrifice of

every moral virtue.  There were many who pretended to confess or

to relate the ceremonies of this abhorred society. It was

asserted, "that a new-born infant, entirely covered over with

flour, was presented, like some mystic symbol of initiation, to

the knife of the proselyte, who unknowingly inflicted many a

secret and mortal wound on the innocent victim of his error; that

as soon as the cruel deed was perpetrated, the sectaries drank up

the blood, greedily tore asunder the quivering members, and

pledged themselves to eternal secrecy, by a mutual consciousness

of guilt. It was as confidently affirmed, that this inhuman

sacrifice was succeeded by a suitable entertainment, in which

intemperance served as a provocative to brutal lust; till, at the

appointed moment, the lights were suddenly extinguished, shame

was banished, nature was forgotten; and, as accident might

direct, the darkness of the night was polluted by the incestuous

commerce of sisters and brothers, of sons and of mothers." ^19

[Footnote 18: See Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History, vol. i. p.

101, and Spanheim, Remarques sur les Caesars de Julien, p. 468,

&c.]

[Footnote 19: See Justin Martyr, Apolog. i. 35, ii. 14.

Athenagoras, in Legation, c. 27.  Tertullian, Apolog. c. 7, 8, 9.

Minucius Felix, c. 9, 10, 80, 31.  The last of these writers

relates the accusation in the most elegant and circumstantial

manner.  The answer of Tertullian is the boldest and most

vigorous.]

     But the perusal of the ancient apologies was sufficient to

remove even the slightest suspicion from the mind of a candid

adversary.  The Christians, with the intrepid security of

innocence, appeal from the voice of rumor to the equity of the

magistrates.  They acknowledge, that if any proof can be produced

of the crimes which calumny has imputed to them, they are worthy

of the most severe punishment.  They provoke the punishment, and

they challenge the proof.  At the same time they urge, with equal

truth and propriety, that the charge is not less devoid of

probability, than it is destitute of evidence; they ask, whether

any one can seriously believe that the pure and holy precepts of

the gospel, which so frequently restrain the use of the most

lawful enjoyments, should inculcate the practice of the most

abominable crimes; that a large society should resolve to

dishonor itself in the eyes of its own members; and that a great

number of persons of either sex, and every age and character,

insensible to the fear of death or infamy, should consent to

violate those principles which nature and education had imprinted

most deeply in their minds. ^20 Nothing, it should seem, could

weaken the force or destroy the effect of so unanswerable a

justification, unless it were the injudicious conduct of the

apologists themselves, who betrayed the common cause of religion,

to gratify their devout hatred to the domestic enemies of the

church.  It was sometimes faintly insinuated, and sometimes

boldly asserted, that the same bloody sacrifices, and the same

incestuous festivals, which were so falsely ascribed to the

orthodox believers, were in reality celebrated by the

Marcionites, by the Carpocratians, and by several other sects of

the Gnostics, who, notwithstanding they might deviate into the

paths of heresy, were still actuated by the sentiments of men,

and still governed by the precepts of Christianity. ^21

Accusations of a similar kind were retorted upon the church by

the schismatics who had departed from its communion, ^22 and it

was confessed on all sides, that the most scandalous

licentiousness of manners prevailed among great numbers of those

who affected the name of Christians.  A Pagan magistrate, who

possessed neither leisure nor abilities to discern the almost

imperceptible line which divides the orthodox faith from

heretical pravity, might easily have imagined that their mutual

animosity had extorted the discovery of their common guilt. It

was fortunate for the repose, or at least for the reputation, of

the first Christians, that the magistrates sometimes proceeded

with more temper and moderation than is usually consistent with

religious zeal, and that they reported, as the impartial result

of their judicial inquiry, that the sectaries, who had deserted

the established worship, appeared to them sincere in their

professions, and blameless in their manners; however they might

incur, by their absurd and excessive superstition, the censure of

the laws. ^23

[Footnote 20: In the persecution of Lyons, some Gentile slaves

were compelled, by the fear of tortures, to accuse their

Christian master.  The church of Lyons, writing to their brethren

of Asia, treat the horrid charge with proper indignation and

contempt.  Euseb. Hist. Eccles. v. i.]

[Footnote 21: See Justin Martyr, Apolog. i. 35.  Irenaeus adv.

Haeres. i. 24. Clemens. Alexandrin. Stromat. l. iii. p. 438.

Euseb. iv. 8.  It would be tedious and disgusting to relate all

that the succeeding writers have imagined, all that Epiphanius

has received, and all that Tillemont has copied. M. de Beausobre

(Hist. du Manicheisme, l. ix. c. 8, 9) has exposed, with great

spirit, the disingenuous arts of Augustin and Pope Leo I.]

[Footnote 22: When Tertullian became a Montanist, he aspersed the

morals of the church which he had so resolutely defended. "Sed

majoris est Agape, quia per hanc adolescentes tui cum sororibus

dormiunt, appendices scilicet gulae lascivia et luxuria." De

Jejuniis c. 17.  The 85th canon of the council of Illiberis

provides against the scandals which too often polluted the vigils

of the church, and disgraced the Christian name in the eyes of

unbelievers.]

[Footnote 23: Tertullian (Apolog. c. 2) expatiates on the fair

and honorable testimony of Pliny, with much reason and some

declamation.]

Chapter XVI: Conduct Towards The Christians, From Nero To

Constantine.

Part II.

     History, which undertakes to record the transactions of the

past, for the instruction of future ages, would ill deserve that

honorable office, if she condescended to plead the cause of

tyrants, or to justify the maxims of persecution.  It must,

however, be acknowledged, that the conduct of the emperors who

appeared the least favorable to the primitive church, is by no

means so criminal as that of modern sovereigns, who have employed

the arm of violence and terror against the religious opinions of

any part of their subjects.  From their reflections, or even from

their own feelings, a Charles V. or a Lewis XIV. might have

acquired a just knowledge of the rights of conscience, of the

obligation of faith, and of the innocence of error.  But the

princes and magistrates of ancient Rome were strangers to those

principles which inspired and authorized the inflexible obstinacy

of the Christians in the cause of truth, nor could they

themselves discover in their own breasts any motive which would

have prompted them to refuse a legal, and as it were a natural,

submission to the sacred institutions of their country.  The same

reason which contributes to alleviate the guilt, must have tended

to abate the vigor, of their persecutions.  As they were

actuated, not by the furious zeal of bigots, but by the temperate

policy of legislators, contempt must often have relaxed, and

humanity must frequently have suspended, the execution of those

laws which they enacted against the humble and obscure followers

of Christ.  From the general view of their character and motives

we might naturally conclude: I.  That a considerable time elapsed

before they considered the new sectaries as an object deserving

of the attention of government.  II.  That in the conviction of

any of their subjects who were accused of so very singular a

crime, they proceeded with caution and reluctance.  III.  That

they were moderate in the use of punishments; and, IV. That the

afflicted church enjoyed many intervals of peace and tranquility.

Notwithstanding the careless indifference which the most copious

and the most minute of the Pagan writers have shown to the

affairs of the Christians, ^24 it may still be in our power to

confirm each of these probable suppositions, by the evidence of

authentic facts.

[Footnote 24: In the various compilation of the Augustan History,

(a part of which was composed under the reign of Constantine,)

there are not six lines which relate to the Christians; nor has

the diligence of Xiphilin discovered their name in the large

history of Dion Cassius.

     Note: The greater part of the Augustan History is dedicated

to Diocletian.  This may account for the silence of its authors

concerning Christianity.  The notices that occur are almost all

in the lives composed under the reign of Constantine.  It may

fairly be concluded, from the language which he had into the

mouth of Maecenas, that Dion was an enemy to all innovations in

religion.  (See Gibbon, infra, note 105.) In fact, when the

silence of Pagan historians is noticed, it should be remembered

how meagre and mutilated are all the extant histories of the

period -M.]

     1. By the wise dispensation of Providence, a mysterious veil

was cast over the infancy of the church, which, till the faith of

the Christians was matured, and their numbers were multiplied,

served to protect them not only from the malice but even from the

knowledge of the Pagan world.  The slow and gradual abolition of

the Mosaic ceremonies afforded a safe and innocent disguise to

the more early proselytes of the gospel.  As they were, for the

greater part, of the race of Abraham, they were distinguished by

the peculiar mark of circumcision, offered up their devotions in

the Temple of Jerusalem till its final destruction, and received

both the Law and the Prophets as the genuine inspirations of the

Deity.  The Gentile converts, who by a spiritual adoption had

been associated to the hope of Israel, were likewise confounded

under the garb and appearance of Jews, ^25 and as the Polytheists

paid less regard to articles of faith than to the external

worship, the new sect, which carefully concealed, or faintly

announced, its future greatness and ambition, was permitted to

shelter itself under the general toleration which was granted to

an ancient and celebrated people in the Roman empire.  It was not

long, perhaps, before the Jews themselves, animated with a

fiercer zeal and a more jealous faith, perceived the gradual

separation of their Nazarene brethren from the doctrine of the

synagogue; and they would gladly have extinguished the dangerous

heresy in the blood of its adherents.  But the decrees of Heaven

had already disarmed their malice; and though they might

sometimes exert the licentious privilege of sedition, they no

longer possessed the administration of criminal justice; nor did

they find it easy to infuse into the calm breast of a Roman

magistrate the rancor of their own zeal and prejudice.  The

provincial governors declared themselves ready to listen to any

accusation that might affect the public safety; but as soon as

they were informed that it was a question not of facts but of

words, a dispute relating only to the interpretation of the

Jewish laws and prophecies, they deemed it unworthy of the

majesty of Rome seriously to discuss the obscure differences

which might arise among a barbarous and superstitious people.

The innocence of the first Christians was protected by ignorance

and contempt; and the tribunal of the Pagan magistrate often

proved their most assured refuge against the fury of the

synagogue. ^26 If indeed we were disposed to adopt the traditions

of a too credulous antiquity, we might relate the distant

peregrinations, the wonderful achievements, and the various

deaths of the twelve apostles: but a more accurate inquiry will

induce us to doubt, whether any of those persons who had been

witnesses to the miracles of Christ were permitted, beyond the

limits of Palestine, to seal with their blood the truth of their

testimony. ^27 From the ordinary term of human life, it may very

naturally be presumed that most of them were deceased before the

discontent of the Jews broke out into that furious war, which was

terminated only by the ruin of Jerusalem.  During a long period,

from the death of Christ to that memorable rebellion, we cannot

discover any traces of Roman intolerance, unless they are to be

found in the sudden, the transient, but the cruel persecution,

which was exercised by Nero against the Christians of the

capital, thirty-five years after the former, and only two years

before the latter, of those great events.  The character of the

philosophic historian, to whom we are principally indebted for

the knowledge of this singular transaction, would alone be

sufficient to recommend it to our most attentive consideration.

[Footnote 25: An obscure passage of Suetonius (in Claud. c. 25)

may seem to offer a proof how strangely the Jews and Christians

of Rome were confounded with each other.]

[Footnote 26: See, in the xviiith and xxvth chapters of the Acts

of the Apostles, the behavior of Gallio, proconsul of Achaia, and

of Festus, procurator of Judea.]

[Footnote 27: In the time of Tertullian and Clemens of

Alexandria, the glory of martyrdom was confined to St. Peter, St.

Paul, and St. James.  It was gradually bestowed on the rest of

the apostles, by the more recent Greeks, who prudently selected

for the theatre of their preaching and sufferings some remote

country beyond the limits of the Roman empire.  See Mosheim, p.

81; and Tillemont, Memoires Ecclesiastiques, tom. i. part iii.]

     In the tenth year of the reign of Nero, the capital of the

empire was afflicted by a fire which raged beyond the memory or

example of former ages. ^28 The monuments of Grecian art and of

Roman virtue, the trophies of the Punic and Gallic wars, the most

holy temples, and the most splendid palaces, were involved in one

common destruction.  Of the fourteen regions or quarters into

which Rome was divided, four only subsisted entire, three were

levelled with the ground, and the remaining seven, which had

experienced the fury of the flames, displayed a melancholy

prospect of ruin and desolation.  The vigilance of government

appears not to have neglected any of the precautions which might

alleviate the sense of so dreadful a calamity.  The Imperial

gardens were thrown open to the distressed multitude, temporary

buildings were erected for their accommodation, and a plentiful

supply of corn and provisions was distributed at a very moderate

price. ^29 The most generous policy seemed to have dictated the

edicts which regulated the disposition of the streets and the

construction of private houses; and as it usually happens, in an

age of prosperity, the conflagration of Rome, in the course of a

few years, produced a new city, more regular and more beautiful

than the former.  But all the prudence and humanity affected by

Nero on this occasion were insufficient to preserve him from the

popular suspicion.  Every crime might be imputed to the assassin

of his wife and mother; nor could the prince who prostituted his

person and dignity on the theatre be deemed incapable of the most

extravagant folly.  The voice of rumor accused the emperor as the

incendiary of his own capital; and as the most incredible stories

are the best adapted to the genius of an enraged people, it was

gravely reported, and firmly believed, that Nero, enjoying the

calamity which he had occasioned, amused himself with singing to

his lyre the destruction of ancient Troy. ^30 To divert a

suspicion, which the power of despotism was unable to suppress,

the emperor resolved to substitute in his own place some

fictitious criminals.  "With this view," continues Tacitus, "he

inflicted the most exquisite tortures on those men, who, under

the vulgar appellation of Christians, were already branded with

deserved infamy.  They derived their name and origin from Christ,

who in the reign of Tiberius had suffered death by the sentence

of the procurator Pontius Pilate. ^31 For a while this dire

superstition was checked; but it again burst forth; ^* and not

only spread itself over Judaea, the first seat of this

mischievous sect, but was even introduced into Rome, the common

asylum which receives and protects whatever is impure, whatever

is atrocious.  The confessions of those who were seized

discovered a great multitude of their accomplices, and they were

all convicted, not so much for the crime of setting fire to the

city, as for their hatred of human kind. ^32 They died in

torments, and their torments were imbittered by insult and

derision.  Some were nailed on crosses; others sewn up in the

skins of wild beasts, and exposed to the fury of dogs; others

again, smeared over with combustible materials, were used as

torches to illuminate the darkness of the night.  The gardens of

Nero were destined for the melancholy spectacle, which was

accompanied with a horse-race and honored with the presence of

the emperor, who mingled with the populace in the dress and

attitude of a charioteer.  The guilt of the Christians deserved

indeed the most exemplary punishment, but the public abhorrence

was changed into commiseration, from the opinion that those

unhappy wretches were sacrificed, not so much to the public

welfare, as to the cruelty of a jealous tyrant." ^33 Those who

survey with a curious eye the revolutions of mankind, may

observe, that the gardens and circus of Nero on the Vatican,

which were polluted with the blood of the first Christians, have

been rendered still more famous by the triumph and by the abuse

of the persecuted religion.  On the same spot, ^34 a temple,

which far surpasses the ancient glories of the Capitol, has been

since erected by the Christian Pontiffs, who, deriving their

claim of universal dominion from an humble fisherman of Galilee,

have succeeded to the throne of the Caesars, given laws to the

barbarian conquerors of Rome, and extended their spiritual

jurisdiction from the coast of the Baltic to the shores of the

Pacific Ocean.

[Footnote 28: Tacit. Annal. xv. 38 - 44.  Sueton in Neron. c. 38.

Dion Cassius, l. lxii. p. 1014. Orosius, vii. 7.]

[Footnote 29: The price of wheat (probably of the modius,) was

reduced as low as terni Nummi; which would be equivalent to about

fifteen shillings the English quarter.]

[Footnote 30: We may observe, that the rumor is mentioned by

Tacitus with a very becoming distrust and hesitation, whilst it

is greedily transcribed by Suetonius, and solemnly confirmed by

Dion.]

[Footnote 31: This testimony is alone sufficient to expose the

anachronism of the Jews, who place the birth of Christ near a

century sooner. (Basnage, Histoire des Juifs, l. v. c. 14, 15.)

We may learn from Josephus, (Antiquitat. xviii. 3,) that the

procuratorship of Pilate corresponded with the last ten years of

Tiberius, A. D. 27 - 37.  As to the particular time of the death

of Christ, a very early tradition fixed it to the 25th of March,

A. D. 29, under the consulship of the two Gemini. (Tertullian

adv. Judaeos, c. 8.) This date, which is adopted by Pagi,

Cardinal Norris, and Le Clerc, seems at least as probable as the

vulgar aera, which is placed (I know not from what conjectures)

four years later.]

[Footnote *: This single phrase, Repressa in praesens exitiabilis

superstitio rursus erumpebat, proves that the Christians had

already attracted the attention of the government; and that Nero

was not the first to persecute them.  I am surprised that more

stress has not been laid on the confirmation which the Acts of

the Apostles derive from these words of Tacitus, Repressa in

praesens, and rursus erumpebat. - G.

     I have been unwilling to suppress this note, but surely the

expression of Tacitus refers to the expected extirpation of the

religion by the death of its founder, Christ. - M.]

[Footnote 32: Odio humani generis convicti.  These words may

either signify the hatred of mankind towards the Christians, or

the hatred of the Christians towards mankind.  I have preferred

the latter sense, as the most agreeable to the style of Tacitus,

and to the popular error, of which a precept of the gospel (see

Luke xiv. 26) had been, perhaps, the innocent occasion.  My

interpretation is justified by the authority of Lipsius; of the

Italian, the French, and the English translators of Tacitus; of

Mosheim, (p. 102,) of Le Clerc, (Historia Ecclesiast. p. 427,) of

Dr. Lardner, (Testimonies, vol. i. p. 345,) and of the Bishop of

Gloucester, (Divine Legation, vol. iii. p. 38.) But as the word

convicti does not unite very happily with the rest of the

sentence, James Gronovius has preferred the reading of conjuncti,

which is authorized by the valuable MS. of Florence.]

[Footnote 33: Tacit. Annal xv. 44.]

[Footnote 34: Nardini Roma Antica, p. 487. Donatus de Roma

Antiqua, l. iii. p. 449.]

     But it would be improper to dismiss this account of Nero's

persecution, till we have made some observations that may serve

to remove the difficulties with which it is perplexed, and to

throw some light on the subsequent history of the church.

     1. The most sceptical criticism is obliged to respect the

truth of this extraordinary fact, and the integrity of this

celebrated passage of Tacitus. The former is confirmed by the

diligent and accurate Suetonius, who mentions the punishment

which Nero inflicted on the Christians, a sect of men who had

embraced a new and criminal superstition. ^35 The latter may be

proved by the consent of the most ancient manuscripts; by the

inimitable character of the style of Tacitus by his reputation,

which guarded his text from the interpolations of pious fraud;

and by the purport of his narration, which accused the first

Christians of the most atrocious crimes, without insinuating that

they possessed any miraculous or even magical powers above the

rest of mankind. ^36 2. Notwithstanding it is probable that

Tacitus was born some years before the fire of Rome, ^37 he could

derive only from reading and conversation the knowledge of an

event which happened during his infancy. Before he gave himself

to the public, he calmly waited till his genius had attained its

full maturity, and he was more than forty years of age, when a

grateful regard for the memory of the virtuous Agricola extorted

from him the most early of those historical compositions which

will delight and instruct the most distant posterity. After

making a trial of his strength in the life of Agricola and the

description of Germany, he conceived, and at length executed, a

more arduous work; the history of Rome, in thirty books, from the

fall of Nero to the accession of Nerva.  The administration of

Nerva introduced an age of justice and propriety, which Tacitus

had destined for the occupation of his old age; ^38 but when he

took a nearer view of his subject, judging, perhaps, that it was

a more honorable or a less invidious office to record the vices

of past tyrants, than to celebrate the virtues of a reigning

monarch, he chose rather to relate, under the form of annals, the

actions of the four immediate successors of Augustus.  To

collect, to dispose, and to adorn a series of fourscore years, in

an immortal work, every sentence of which is pregnant with the

deepest observations and the most lively images, was an

undertaking sufficient to exercise the genius of Tacitus himself

during the greatest part of his life.  In the last years of the

reign of Trajan, whilst the victorious monarch extended the power

of Rome beyond its ancient limits, the historian was describing,

in the second and fourth books of his annals, the tyranny of

Tiberius; ^39 and the emperor Hadrian must have succeeded to the

throne, before Tacitus, in the regular prosecution of his work,

could relate the fire of the capital, and the cruelty of Nero

towards the unfortunate Christians.  At the distance of sixty

years, it was the duty of the annalist to adopt the narratives of

contemporaries; but it was natural for the philosopher to indulge

himself in the description of the origin, the progress, and the

character of the new sect, not so much according to the knowledge

or prejudices of the age of Nero, as according to those of the

time of Hadrian.  3 Tacitus very frequently trusts to the

curiosity or reflection of his readers to supply those

intermediate circumstances and ideas, which, in his extreme

conciseness, he has thought proper to suppress.  We may therefore

presume to imagine some probable cause which could direct the

cruelty of Nero against the Christians of Rome, whose obscurity,

as well as innocence, should have shielded them from his

indignation, and even from his notice. The Jews, who were

numerous in the capital, and oppressed in their own country, were

a much fitter object for the suspicions of the emperor and of the

people: nor did it seem unlikely that a vanquished nation, who

already discovered their abhorrence of the Roman yoke, might have

recourse to the most atrocious means of gratifying their

implacable revenge.  But the Jews possessed very powerful

advocates in the palace, and even in the heart of the tyrant; his

wife and mistress, the beautiful Poppaea, and a favorite player

of the race of Abraham, who had already employed their

intercession in behalf of the obnoxious people. ^40 In their room

it was necessary to offer some other victims, and it might easily

be suggested that, although the genuine followers of Moses were

innocent of the fire of Rome, there had arisen among them a new

and pernicious sect of Galilaeans, which was capable of the most

horrid crimes.  Under the appellation of Galilaeans, two

distinctions of men were confounded, the most opposite to each

other in their manners and principles; the disciples who had

embraced the faith of Jesus of Nazareth, ^41 and the zealots who

had followed the standard of Judas the Gaulonite. ^42 The former

were the friends, the latter were the enemies, of human kind; and

the only resemblance between them consisted in the same

inflexible constancy, which, in the defence of their cause,

rendered them insensible of death and tortures.  The followers of

Judas, who impelled their countrymen into rebellion, were soon

buried under the ruins of Jerusalem; whilst those of Jesus, known

by the more celebrated name of Christians, diffused themselves

over the Roman empire.  How natural was it for Tacitus, in the

time of Hadrian, to appropriate to the Christians the guilt and

the sufferings, ^* which he might, with far greater truth and

justice, have attributed to a sect whose odious memory was almost

extinguished!  4. Whatever opinion may be entertained of this

conjecture, (for it is no more than a conjecture,) it is evident

that the effect, as well as the cause, of Nero's persecution, was

confined to the walls of Rome, ^43 ^! that the religious tenets

of the Galilaeans or Christians, were never made a subject of

punishment, or even of inquiry; and that, as the idea of their

sufferings was for a long time connected with the idea of cruelty

and injustice, the moderation of succeeding princes inclined them

to spare a sect, oppressed by a tyrant, whose rage had been

usually directed against virtue and innocence.

[Footnote 35: Sueton. in Nerone, c. 16.  The epithet of malefica,

which some sagacious commentators have translated magical, is

considered by the more rational Mosheim as only synonymous to the

exitiabilis of Tacitus.]

[Footnote 36: The passage concerning Jesus Christ, which was

inserted into the text of Josephus, between the time of Origen

and that of Eusebius, may furnish an example of no vulgar

forgery.  The accomplishment of the prophecies, the virtues,

miracles, and resurrection of Jesus, are distinctly related.

Josephus acknowledges that he was the Messiah, and hesitates

whether he should call him a man.  If any doubt can still remain

concerning this celebrated passage, the reader may examine the

pointed objections of Le Fevre, (Havercamp. Joseph. tom. ii. p.

267-273, the labored answers of Daubuz, (p. 187-232, and the

masterly reply (Bibliotheque Ancienne et Moderne, tom. vii. p.

237-288) of an anonymous critic, whom I believe to have been the

learned Abbe de Longuerue.

     Note: The modern editor of Eusebius, Heinichen, has adopted,

and ably supported, a notion, which had before suggested itself

to the editor, that this passage is not altogether a forgery, but

interpolated with many additional clauses.  Heinichen has

endeavored to disengage the original text from the foreign and

more recent matter. - M.]

[Footnote 37: See the lives of Tacitus by Lipsius and the Abbe de

la Bleterie, Dictionnaire de Bayle a l'article Particle Tacite,

and Fabricius, Biblioth. Latin tem. Latin. tom. ii. p. 386, edit.

Ernest. Ernst.]

[Footnote 38: Principatum Divi Nervae, et imperium Trajani,

uberiorem, securioremque materiam senectuti seposui.  Tacit.

Hist. i.]

[Footnote 39: See Tacit. Annal. ii. 61, iv. 4.

     Note: The perusal of this passage of Tacitus alone is

sufficient, as I have already said, to show that the Christian

sect was not so obscure as not already to have been repressed,

(repressa,) and that it did not pass for innocent in the eyes of

the Romans. - G.]

[Footnote 40: The player's name was Aliturus.  Through the same

channel, Josephus, (de vita sua, c. 2,) about two years before,

had obtained the pardon and release of some Jewish priests, who

were prisoners at Rome.]

[Footnote 41: The learned Dr. Lardner (Jewish and Heathen

Testimonies, vol ii. p. 102, 103) has proved that the name of

Galilaeans was a very ancient, and perhaps the primitive

appellation of the Christians.]

[Footnote 42: Joseph. Antiquitat. xviii. 1, 2.  Tillemont, Ruine

des Juifs, p. 742 The sons of Judas were crucified in the time of

Claudius.  His grandson Eleazar, after Jerusalem was taken,

defended a strong fortress with 960 of his most desperate

followers.  When the battering ram had made a breach, they turned

their swords against their wives their children, and at length

against their own breasts.  They dies to the last man.

[Footnote *: This conjecture is entirely devoid, not merely of

verisimilitude, but even of possibility.  Tacitus could not be

deceived in appropriating to the Christians of Rome the guilt and

the sufferings which he might have attributed with far greater

truth to the followers of Judas the Gaulonite, for the latter

never went to Rome.  Their revolt, their attempts, their

opinions, their wars, their punishment, had no other theatre but

Judaea (Basn. Hist. des. Juifs, t. i. p. 491.) Moreover the name

of Christians had long been given in Rome to the disciples of

Jesus; and Tacitus affirms too positively, refers too distinctly

to its etymology, to allow us to suspect any mistake on his part.

- G.

     M. Guizot's expressions are not in the least too strong

against this strange imagination of Gibbon; it may be doubted

whether the followers of Judas were known as a sect under the

name of Galilaeans. - M.]

[Footnote 43: See Dodwell. Paucitat. Mart. l. xiii.  The Spanish

Inscription in Gruter. p. 238, No. 9, is a manifest and

acknowledged forgery contrived by that noted imposter.  Cyriacus

of Ancona, to flatter the pride and prejudices of the Spaniards.

See Ferreras, Histoire D'Espagne, tom. i. p. 192.]

[Footnote !: M. Guizot, on the authority of Sulpicius Severus,

ii. 37, and of Orosius, viii. 5, inclines to the opinion of those

who extend the persecution to the provinces.  Mosheim rather

leans to that side on this much disputed question, (c. xxxv.)

Neander takes the view of Gibbon, which is in general that of the

most learned writers.  There is indeed no evidence, which I can

discover, of its reaching the provinces; and the apparent

security, at least as regards his life, with which St. Paul

pursued his travels during this period, affords at least a strong

inference against a rigid and general inquisition against the

Christians in other parts of the empire. - M.]

     It is somewhat remarkable that the flames of war consumed,

almost at the same time, the temple of Jerusalem and the Capitol

of Rome; ^44 and it appears no less singular, that the tribute

which devotion had destined to the former, should have been

converted by the power of an assaulting victor to restore and

adorn the splendor of the latter. ^45 The emperors levied a

general capitation tax on the Jewish people; and although the sum

assessed on the head of each individual was inconsiderable, the

use for which it was designed, and the severity with which it was

exacted, were considered as an intolerable grievance. ^46 Since

the officers of the revenue extended their unjust claim to many

persons who were strangers to the blood or religion of the Jews,

it was impossible that the Christians, who had so often sheltered

themselves under the shade of the synagogue, should now escape

this rapacious persecution.  Anxious as they were to avoid the

slightest infection of idolatry, their conscience forbade them to

contribute to the honor of that daemon who had assumed the

character of the Capitoline Jupiter.  As a very numerous though

declining party among the Christians still adhered to the law of

Moses, their efforts to dissemble their Jewish origin were

detected by the decisive test of circumcision; ^47 nor were the

Roman magistrates at leisure to inquire into the difference of

their religious tenets.  Among the Christians who were brought

before the tribunal of the emperor, or, as it seems more

probable, before that of the procurator of Judaea, two persons

are said to have appeared, distinguished by their extraction,

which was more truly noble than that of the greatest monarchs.

These were the grandsons of St. Jude the apostle, who himself was

the brother of Jesus Christ. ^48 Their natural pretensions to the

throne of David might perhaps attract the respect of the people,

and excite the jealousy of the governor; but the meanness of

their garb, and the simplicity of their answers, soon convinced

him that they were neither desirous nor capable of disturbing the

peace of the Roman empire. They frankly confessed their royal

origin, and their near relation to the Messiah; but they

disclaimed any temporal views, and professed that his kingdom,

which they devoutly expected, was purely of a spiritual and

angelic nature.  When they were examined concerning their fortune

and occupation, they showed their hands, hardened with daily

labor, and declared that they derived their whole subsistence

from the cultivation of a farm near the village of Cocaba, of the

extent of about twenty-four English acres, ^49 and of the value

of nine thousand drachms, or three hundred pounds sterling.  The

grandsons of St. Jude were dismissed with compassion and

contempt. ^50

[Footnote 44: The Capitol was burnt during the civil war between

Vitellius and Vespasian, the 19th of December, A. D. 69.  On the

10th of August, A. D. 70, the temple of Jerusalem was destroyed

by the hands of the Jews themselves, rather than by those of the

Romans.]

[Footnote 45: The new Capitol was dedicated by Domitian.  Sueton.

in Domitian. c. 5.  Plutarch in Poplicola, tom. i. p. 230, edit.

Bryant.  The gilding alone cost 12,000 talents (above two

millions and a half.) It was the opinion of Martial, (l. ix.

Epigram 3,) that if the emperor had called in his debts, Jupiter

himself, even though he had made a general auction of Olympus,

would have been unable to pay two shillings in the pound.]

[Footnote 46: With regard to the tribute, see Dion Cassius, l.

lxvi. p. 1082, with Reimarus's notes.  Spanheim, de Usu

Numismatum, tom. ii. p. 571; and Basnage, Histoire des Juifs, l.

vii. c. 2.]

[Footnote 47: Suetonius (in Domitian. c. 12) had seen an old man

of ninety publicly examined before the procurator's tribunal.

This is what Martial calls, Mentula tributis damnata.]

[Footnote 48: This appellation was at first understood in the

most obvious sense, and it was supposed, that the brothers of

Jesus were the lawful issue of Joseph and Mary.  A devout respect

for the virginity of the mother of God suggested to the Gnostics,

and afterwards to the orthodox Greeks, the expedient of bestowing

a second wife on Joseph.  The Latins (from the time of Jerome)

improved on that hint, asserted the perpetual celibacy of Joseph,

and justified by many similar examples the new interpretation

that Jude, as well as Simon and James, who were styled the

brothers of Jesus Christ, were only his first cousins.  See

Tillemont, Mem. Ecclesiat. tom. i. part iii.: and Beausobre,

Hist. Critique du Manicheisme, l. ii. c. 2.]

[Footnote 49: Thirty-nine, squares of a hundred feet each, which,

if strictly computed, would scarcely amount to nine acres.]

[Footnote 50: Eusebius, iii. 20.  The story is taken from

Hegesippus.]

     But although the obscurity of the house of David might

protect them from the suspicions of a tyrant, the present

greatness of his own family alarmed the pusillanimous temper of

Domitian, which could only be appeased by the blood of those

Romans whom he either feared, or hated, or esteemed. Of the two

sons of his uncle Flavius Sabinus, ^51 the elder was soon

convicted of treasonable intentions, and the younger, who bore

the name of Flavius Clemens, was indebted for his safety to his

want of courage and ability. ^52 The emperor for a long time,

distinguished so harmless a kinsman by his favor and protection,

bestowed on him his own niece Domitilla, adopted the children of

that marriage to the hope of the succession, and invested their

father with the honors of the consulship.

[Footnote 51: See the death and character of Sabinus in Tacitus,

(Hist. iii. 74 ) Sabinus was the elder brother, and, till the

accession of Vespasian, had been considered as the principal

support of the Flavium family]

[Footnote 52: Flavium Clementem patruelem suum contemptissimoe

inertice . . ex tenuissima suspicione interemit.  Sueton. in

Domitian. c. 15.]

     But he had scarcely finished the term of his annual

magistracy, when, on a slight pretence, he was condemned and

executed; Domitilla was banished to a desolate island on the

coast of Campania; ^53 and sentences either of death or of

confiscation were pronounced against a great number of who were

involved in the same accusation.  The guilt imputed to their

charge was that of Atheism and Jewish manners; ^54 a singular

association of ideas, which cannot with any propriety be applied

except to the Christians, as they were obscurely and imperfectly

viewed by the magistrates and by the writers of that period.  On

the strength of so probable an interpretation, and too eagerly

admitting the suspicions of a tyrant as an evidence of their

honorable crime, the church has placed both Clemens and Domitilla

among its first martyrs, and has branded the cruelty of Domitian

with the name of the second persecution.  But this persecution

(if it deserves that epithet) was of no long duration.  A few

months after the death of Clemens, and the banishment of

Domitilla, Stephen, a freedman belonging to the latter, who had

enjoyed the favor, but who had not surely embraced the faith, of

his mistress, ^* assassinated the emperor in his palace. ^55 The

memory of Domitian was condemned by the senate; his acts were

rescinded; his exiles recalled; and under the gentle

administration of Nerva, while the innocent were restored to

their rank and fortunes, even the most guilty either obtained

pardon or escaped punishment. ^56

[Footnote 53: The Isle of Pandataria, according to Dion.

Bruttius Praesens (apud Euseb. iii. 18) banishes her to that of

Pontia, which was not far distant from the other.  That

difference, and a mistake, either of Eusebius or of his

transcribers, have given occasion to suppose two Domitillas, the

wife and the niece of Clemens.  See Tillemont, Memoires

Ecclesiastiques, tom. ii. p. 224.]

[Footnote 54: Dion. l. lxvii. p. 1112.  If the Bruttius Praesens,

from whom it is probable that he collected this account, was the

correspondent of Pliny, (Epistol. vii. 3,) we may consider him as

a contemporary writer.]

[Footnote *: This is an uncandid sarcasm.  There is nothing to

connect Stephen with the religion of Domitilla.  He was a knave

detected in the malversation of money - interceptarum pecuniaram

reus. - M.]

[Footnote 55: Suet. in Domit. c. 17.  Philostratus in Vit.

Apollon. l. viii.]

[Footnote 56: Dion. l. lxviii. p. 1118.  Plin. Epistol. iv. 22.]

     II.  About ten years afterwards, under the reign of Trajan,

the younger Pliny was intrusted by his friend and master with the

government of Bithynia and Pontus.  He soon found himself at a

loss to determine by what rule of justice or of law he should

direct his conduct in the execution of an office the most

repugnant to his humanity.  Pliny had never assisted at any

judicial proceedings against the Christians, with whose lame

alone he seems to be acquainted; and he was totally uninformed

with regard to the nature of their guilt, the method of their

conviction, and the degree of their punishment.  In this

perplexity he had recourse to his usual expedient, of submitting

to the wisdom of Trajan an impartial, and, in some respects, a

favorable account of the new superstition, requesting the

emperor, that he would condescend to resolve his doubts, and to

instruct his ignorance. ^57 The life of Pliny had been employed

in the acquisition of learning, and in the business of the world.

Since the age of nineteen he had pleaded with distinction in the

tribunals of Rome, ^58 filled a place in the senate, had been

invested with the honors of the consulship, and had formed very

numerous connections with every order of men, both in Italy and

in the provinces.  From his ignorance therefore we may derive

some useful information.  We may assure ourselves, that when he

accepted the government of Bithynia, there were no general laws

or decrees of the senate in force against the Christians; that

neither Trajan nor any of his virtuous predecessors, whose edicts

were received into the civil and criminal jurisprudence, had

publicly declared their intentions concerning the new sect; and

that whatever proceedings had been carried on against the

Christians, there were none of sufficient weight and authority to

establish a precedent for the conduct of a Roman magistrate.

[Footnote 57: Plin. Epistol. x. 97.  The learned Mosheim

expresses himself (p. 147, 232) with the highest approbation of

Pliny's moderate and candid temper. Notwithstanding Dr. Lardner's

suspicions (see Jewish and Heathen Testimonies, vol. ii. p. 46,)

I am unable to discover any bigotry in his language or

proceedings.

     Note: Yet the humane Pliny put two female attendants,

probably deaconesses to the torture, in order to ascertain the

real nature of these suspicious meetings: necessarium credidi, ex

duabus ancillis, quae ministrae dicebantor quid asset veri et per

tormenta quaerere. - M.]

[Footnote 58: Plin. Epist. v. 8.  He pleaded his first cause A.

D. 81; the year after the famous eruptions of Mount Vesuvius, in

which his uncle lost his life.]

Chapter XVI: Conduct Towards The Christians, From Nero To

Constantine.

Part III.

     The answer of Trajan, to which the Christians of the

succeeding age have frequently appealed, discovers as much regard

for justice and humanity as could be reconciled with his mistaken

notions of religious policy. ^59 Instead of displaying the

implacable zeal of an inquisitor, anxious to discover the most

minute particles of heresy, and exulting in the number of his

victims, the emperor expresses much more solicitude to protect

the security of the innocent, than to prevent the escape of the

guilty.  He acknowledged the difficulty of fixing any general

plan; but he lays down two salutary rules, which often afforded

relief and support to the distressed Christians.  Though he

directs the magistrates to punish such persons as are legally

convicted, he prohibits them, with a very humane inconsistency,

from making any inquiries concerning the supposed criminals. Nor

was the magistrate allowed to proceed on every kind of

information. Anonymous charges the emperor rejects, as too

repugnant to the equity of his government; and he strictly

requires, for the conviction of those to whom the guilt of

Christianity is imputed, the positive evidence of a fair and open

accuser.  It is likewise probable, that the persons who assumed

so invidiuous an office, were obliged to declare the grounds of

their suspicions, to specify (both in respect to time and place)

the secret assemblies, which their Christian adversary had

frequented, and to disclose a great number of circumstances,

which were concealed with the most vigilant jealousy from the eye

of the profane.  If they succeeded in their prosecution, they

were exposed to the resentment of a considerable and active

party, to the censure of the more liberal portion of mankind, and

to the ignominy which, in every age and country, has attended the

character of an informer.  If, on the contrary, they failed in

their proofs, they incurred the severe and perhaps capital

penalty, which, according to a law published by the emperor

Hadrian, was inflicted on those who falsely attributed to their

fellow-citizens the crime of Christianity.  The violence of

personal or superstitious animosity might sometimes prevail over

the most natural apprehensions of disgrace and danger but it

cannot surely be imagined, that accusations of so unpromising an

appearance were either lightly or frequently undertaken by the

Pagan subjects of the Roman empire. ^60 ^*

[Footnote 59: Plin. Epist. x. 98.  Tertullian (Apolog. c. 5)

considers this rescript as a relaxation of the ancient penal

laws, "quas Trajanus exparte frustratus est: " and yet

Tertullian, in another part of his Apology, exposes the

inconsistency of prohibiting inquiries, and enjoining

punishments.]

[Footnote 60: Eusebius (Hist. Ecclesiast. l. iv. c. 9) has

preserved the edict of Hadrian.  He has likewise (c. 13) given us

one still more favorable, under the name of Antoninus; the

authenticity of which is not so universally allowed.  The second

Apology of Justin contains some curious particulars relative to

the accusations of Christians.

     Note: Professor Hegelmayer has proved the authenticity of

the edict of Antoninus, in his Comm. Hist. Theol. in Edict. Imp.

Antonini. Tubing. 1777, in 4to. - G.

     Neander doubts its authenticity, (vol. i. p. 152.) In my

opinion, the internal evidence is decisive against it. - M]

[Footnote *: The enactment of this law affords strong

presumption, that accusations of the "crime of Christianity,"

were by no means so uncommon, nor received with so much mistrust

and caution by the ruling authorities, as Gibbon would insinuate.

- M.]

     The expedient which was employed to elude the prudence of

the laws, affords a sufficient proof how effectually they

disappointed the mischievous designs of private malice or

superstitious zeal.  In a large and tumultuous assembly, the

restraints of fear and shame, so forcible on the minds of

individuals, are deprived of the greatest part of their

influence.  The pious Christian, as he was desirous to obtain, or

to escape, the glory of martyrdom, expected, either with

impatience or with terror, the stated returns of the public games

and festivals.  On those occasions the inhabitants of the great

cities of the empire were collected in the circus or the theatre,

where every circumstance of the place, as well as of the

ceremony, contributed to kindle their devotion, and to extinguish

their humanity.  Whilst the numerous spectators, crowned with

garlands, perfumed with incense, purified with the blood of

victims, and surrounded with the altars and statues of their

tutelar deities, resigned themselves to the enjoyment of

pleasures, which they considered as an essential part of their

religious worship, they recollected, that the Christians alone

abhorred the gods of mankind, and by their absence and melancholy

on these solemn festivals, seemed to insult or to lament the

public felicity.  If the empire had been afflicted by any recent

calamity, by a plague, a famine, or an unsuccessful war; if the

Tyber had, or if the Nile had not, risen beyond its banks; if the

earth had shaken, or if the temperate order of the seasons had

been interrupted, the superstitious Pagans were convinced that

the crimes and the impiety of the Christians, who were spared by

the excessive lenity of the government, had at length provoked

the divine justice.  It was not among a licentious and

exasperated populace, that the forms of legal proceedings could

be observed; it was not in an amphitheatre, stained with the

blood of wild beasts and gladiators, that the voice of compassion

could be heard.  The impatient clamors of the multitude denounced

the Christians as the enemies of gods and men, doomed them to the

severest tortures, and venturing to accuse by name some of the

most distinguished of the new sectaries, required with

irresistible vehemence that they should be instantly apprehended

and cast to the lions. ^61 The provincial governors and

magistrates who presided in the public spectacles were usually

inclined to gratify the inclinations, and to appease the rage, of

the people, by the sacrifice of a few obnoxious victims.  But the

wisdom of the emperors protected the church from the danger of

these tumultuous clamors and irregular accusations, which they

justly censured as repugnant both to the firmness and to the

equity of their administration.  The edicts of Hadrian and of

Antoninus Pius expressly declared, that the voice of the

multitude should never be admitted as legal evidence to convict

or to punish those unfortunate persons who had embraced the

enthusiasm of the Christians. ^62

[Footnote 61: See Tertullian, (Apolog. c. 40.) The acts of the

martyrdom of Polycarp exhibit a lively picture of these tumults,

which were usually fomented by the malice of the Jews.]

[Footnote 62: These regulations are inserted in the above

mentioned document of Hadrian and Pius.  See the apology of

Melito, (apud Euseb. l iv 26)]

     III.  Punishment was not the inevitable consequence of

conviction, and the Christians, whose guilt was the most clearly

proved by the testimony of witnesses, or even by their voluntary

confession, still retained in their own power the alternative of

life or death.  It was not so much the past offence, as the

actual resistance, which excited the indignation of the

magistrate.  He was persuaded that he offered them an easy

pardon, since, if they consented to cast a few grains of incense

upon the altar, they were dismissed from the tribunal in safety

and with applause.  It was esteemed the duty of a humane judge to

endeavor to reclaim, rather than to punish, those deluded

enthusiasts.  Varying his tone according to the age, the sex, or

the situation of the prisoners, he frequently condescended to set

before their eyes every circumstance which could render life more

pleasing, or death more terrible; and to solicit, nay, to

entreat, them, that they would show some compassion to

themselves, to their families, and to their friends. ^63 If

threats and persuasions proved ineffectual, he had often recourse

to violence; the scourge and the rack were called in to supply

the deficiency of argument, and every art of cruelty was employed

to subdue such inflexible, and, as it appeared to the Pagans,

such criminal, obstinacy.  The ancient apologists of Christianity

have censured, with equal truth and severity, the irregular

conduct of their persecutors who, contrary to every principle of

judicial proceeding, admitted the use of torture, in order to

obtain, not a confession, but a denial, of the crime which was

the object of their inquiry. ^64 The monks of succeeding ages,

who, in their peaceful solitudes, entertained themselves with

diversifying the deaths and sufferings of the primitive martyrs,

have frequently invented torments of a much more refined and

ingenious nature.  In particular, it has pleased them to suppose,

that the zeal of the Roman magistrates, disdaining every

consideration of moral virtue or public decency, endeavored to

seduce those whom they were unable to vanquish, and that by their

orders the most brutal violence was offered to those whom they

found it impossible to seduce. It is related, that females, who

were prepared to despise death, were sometimes condemned to a

more severe trial, ^! and called upon to determine whether they

set a higher value on their religion or on their chastity.  The

youths to whose licentious embraces they were abandoned, received

a solemn exhortation from the judge, to exert their most

strenuous efforts to maintain the honor of Venus against the

impious virgin who refused to burn incense on her altars. Their

violence, however, was commonly disappointed, and the seasonable

interposition of some miraculous power preserved the chaste

spouses of Christ from the dishonor even of an involuntary

defeat.  We should not indeed neglect to remark, that the more

ancient as well as authentic memorials of the church are seldom

polluted with these extravagant and indecent fictions. ^65

[Footnote 63: See the rescript of Trajan, and the conduct of

Pliny.  The most authentic acts of the martyrs abound in these

exhortations.

     Note: Pliny's test was the worship of the gods, offerings to

the statue of the emperor, and blaspheming Christ - praeterea

maledicerent Christo. - M.]

[Footnote 64: In particular, see Tertullian, (Apolog. c. 2, 3,)

and Lactantius, (Institut. Divin. v. 9.) Their reasonings are

almost the same; but we may discover, that one of these

apologists had been a lawyer, and the other a rhetorician.]

[Footnote !: The more ancient as well as authentic memorials of

the church, relate many examples of the fact, (of these severe

trials,) which there is nothing to contradict.  Tertullian, among

others, says, Nam proxime ad lenonem damnando Christianam, potius

quam ad leonem, confessi estis labem pudicitiae apud nos

atrociorem omni poena et omni morte reputari, Apol. cap. ult.

Eusebius likewise says, "Other virgins, dragged to brothels, have

lost their life rather than defile their virtue." Euseb. Hist.

Ecc. viii. 14. - G.

     The miraculous interpositions were the offspring of the

coarse imaginations of the monks. - M.]

[Footnote 65: See two instances of this kind of torture in the

Acta Sincere Martyrum, published by Ruinart, p. 160, 399.

Jerome, in his Legend of Paul the Hermit, tells a strange story

of a young man, who was chained naked on a bed of flowers, and

assaulted by a beautiful and wanton courtesan.  He quelled the

rising temptation by biting off his tongue.]

     The total disregard of truth and probability in the

representation of these primitive martyrdoms was occasioned by a

very natural mistake.  The ecclesiastical writers of the fourth

or fifth centuries ascribed to the magistrates of Rome the same

degree of implacable and unrelenting zeal which filled their own

breasts against the heretics or the idolaters of their own times.

It is not improbable that some of those persons who were raised

to the dignities of the empire, might have imbibed the prejudices

of the populace, and that the cruel disposition of others might

occasionally be stimulated by motives of avarice or of personal

resentment. ^66 But it is certain, and we may appeal to the

grateful confessions of the first Christians, that the greatest

part of those magistrates who exercised in the provinces the

authority of the emperor, or of the senate, and to whose hands

alone the jurisdiction of life and death was intrusted, behaved

like men of polished manners and liberal education, who respected

the rules of justice, and who were conversant with the precepts

of philosophy.  They frequently declined the odious task of

persecution, dismissed the charge with contempt, or suggested to

the accused Christian some legal evasion, by which he might elude

the severity of the laws. ^67 Whenever they were invested with a

discretionary power, ^68 they used it much less for the

oppression, than for the relief and benefit of the afflicted

church.  They were far from condemning all the Christians who

were accused before their tribunal, and very far from punishing

with death all those who were convicted of an obstinate adherence

to the new superstition.  Contenting themselves, for the most

part, with the milder chastisements of imprisonment, exile, or

slavery in the mines, ^69 they left the unhappy victims of their

justice some reason to hope, that a prosperous event, the

accession, the marriage, or the triumph of an emperor, might

speedily restore them, by a general pardon, to their former

state.  The martyrs, devoted to immediate execution by the Roman

magistrates, appear to have been selected from the most opposite

extremes.  They were either bishops and presbyters, the persons

the most distinguished among the Christians by their rank and

influence, and whose example might strike terror into the whole

sect; ^70 or else they were the meanest and most abject among

them, particularly those of the servile condition, whose lives

were esteemed of little value, and whose sufferings were viewed

by the ancients with too careless an indifference. ^71 The

learned Origen, who, from his experience as well as reading, was

intimately acquainted with the history of the Christians,

declares, in the most express terms, that the number of martyrs

was very inconsiderable. ^72 His authority would alone be

sufficient to annihilate that formidable army of martyrs, whose

relics, drawn for the most part from the catacombs of Rome, have

replenished so many churches, ^73 and whose marvellous

achievements have been the subject of so many volumes of Holy

Romance. ^74 But the general assertion of Origen may be explained

and confirmed by the particular testimony of his friend

Dionysius, who, in the immense city of Alexandria, and under the

rigorous persecution of Decius, reckons only ten men and seven

women who suffered for the profession of the Christian name. ^75

[Footnote 66: The conversion of his wife provoked Claudius

Herminianus, governor of Cappadocia, to treat the Christians with

uncommon severity. Tertullian ad Scapulam, c. 3.]

[Footnote 67: Tertullian, in his epistle to the governor of

Africa, mentions several remarkable instances of lenity and

forbearance, which had happened within his knowledge.]

[Footnote 68: Neque enim in universum aliquid quod quasi certam

formam habeat, constitui potest; an expression of Trajan, which

gave a very great latitude to the governors of provinces.

     Note: Gibbon altogether forgets that Trajan fully approved

of the course pursued by Pliny.  That course was, to order all

who persevered in their faith to be led to execution:

perseverantes duci jussi. - M.]

[Footnote 69: In Metalla damnamur, in insulas relegamur.

Tertullian, Apolog. c. 12.  The mines of Numidia contained nine

bishops, with a proportionable number of their clergy and people,

to whom Cyprian addressed a pious epistle of praise and comfort.

See Cyprian. Epistol. 76, 77.]

[Footnote 70: Though we cannot receive with entire confidence

either the epistles, or the acts, of Ignatius, (they may be found

in the 2d volume of the Apostolic Fathers,) yet we may quote that

bishop of Antioch as one of these exemplary martyrs.  He was sent

in chains to Rome as a public spectacle, and when he arrived at

Troas, he received the pleasing intelligence, that the

persecution of Antioch was already at an end.

     Note: The acts of Ignatius are generally received as

authentic, as are seven of his letters.  Eusebius and St. Jerome

mention them: there are two editions; in one, the letters are

longer, and many passages appear to have been interpolated; the

other edition is that which contains the real letters of St.

Ignatius; such at least is the opinion of the wisest and most

enlightened critics.  (See Lardner. Cred. of Gospel Hist.) Less,

uber dis Religion, v. i. p. 529.  Usser.  Diss. de Ign. Epist.

Pearson, Vindic, Ignatianae.  It should be remarked, that it was

under the reign of Trajan that the bishop Ignatius was carried

from Antioch to Rome, to be exposed to the lions in the

amphitheatre, the year of J. C. 107, according to some; of 116,

according to others. - G.]

[Footnote 71: Among the martyrs of Lyons, (Euseb. l. v. c. 1,)

the slave Blandina was distinguished by more exquisite tortures.

Of the five martyrs so much celebrated in the acts of Felicitas

and Perpetua, two were of a servile, and two others of a very

mean, condition.]

[Footnote 72: Origen. advers. Celsum, l. iii. p. 116.  His words

deserve to be transcribed.

     Note: The words that follow should be quoted.  "God not

permitting that all his class of men should be exterminated: "

which appears to indicate that Origen thought the number put to

death inconsiderable only when compared to the numbers who had

survived.  Besides this, he is speaking of the state of the

religion under Caracalla, Elagabalus, Alexander Severus, and

Philip, who had not persecuted the Christians.  It was during the

reign of the latter that Origen wrote his books against Celsus. -

G.]

[Footnote 73: If we recollect that all the Plebeians of Rome were

not Christians, and that all the Christians were not saints and

martyrs, we may judge with how much safety religious honors can

be ascribed to bones or urns, indiscriminately taken from the

public burial-place.  After ten centuries of a very free and open

trade, some suspicions have arisen among the more learned

Catholics.  They now require as a proof of sanctity and

martyrdom, the letters B.M., a vial full of red liquor supposed

to be blood, or the figure of a palm-tree.  But the two former

signs are of little weight, and with regard to the last, it is

observed by the critics, 1. That the figure, as it is called, of

a palm, is perhaps a cypress, and perhaps only a stop, the

flourish of a comma used in the monumental inscriptions.  2. That

the palm was the symbol of victory among the Pagans. 3. That

among the Christians it served as the emblem, not only of

martyrdom, but in general of a joyful resurrection.  See the

epistle of P. Mabillon, on the worship of unknown saints, and

Muratori sopra le Antichita Italiane, Dissertat. lviii.]

[Footnote 74: As a specimen of these legends, we may be satisfied

with 10,000 Christian soldiers crucified in one day, either by

Trajan or Hadrian on Mount Ararat.  See Baronius ad Martyrologium

Romanum; Tille mont, Mem. Ecclesiast. tom. ii. part ii. p. 438;

and Geddes's Miscellanies, vol. ii. p. 203.  The abbreviation of

Mil., which may signify either soldiers or thousands, is said to

have occasioned some extraordinary mistakes.]

[Footnote 75: Dionysius ap. Euseb l. vi. c. 41 One of the

seventeen was likewise accused of robbery.

     Note: Gibbon ought to have said, was falsely accused of

robbery, for so it is in the Greek text.  This Christian, named

Nemesion, falsely accused of robbery before the centurion, was

acquitted of a crime altogether foreign to his character, but he

was led before the governor as guilty of being a Christian, and

the governor inflicted upon him a double torture.  (Euseb. loc.

cit.) It must be added, that Saint Dionysius only makes

particular mention of the principal martyrs, [this is very

doubtful. - M.] and that he says, in general, that the fury of

the Pagans against the Christians gave to Alexandria the

appearance of a city taken by storm. [This refers to plunder and

ill usage, not to actual slaughter. - M.] Finally it should be

observed that Origen wrote before the persecution of the emperor

Decius. - G.]

     During the same period of persecution, the zealous, the

eloquent, the ambitious Cyprian governed the church, not only of

Carthage, but even of Africa.  He possessed every quality which

could engage the reverence of the faithful, or provoke the

suspicions and resentment of the Pagan magistrates. His character

as well as his station seemed to mark out that holy prelate as

the most distinguished object of envy and danger. ^76 The

experience, however, of the life of Cyprian, is sufficient to

prove that our fancy has exaggerated the perilous situation of a

Christian bishop; and the dangers to which he was exposed were

less imminent than those which temporal ambition is always

prepared to encounter in the pursuit of honors. Four Roman

emperors, with their families, their favorites, and their

adherents, perished by the sword in the space of ten years,

during which the bishop of Carthage guided by his authority and

eloquence the councils of the African church.  It was only in the

third year of his administration, that he had reason, during a

few months, to apprehend the severe edicts of Decius, the

vigilance of the magistrate and the clamors of the multitude, who

loudly demanded, that Cyprian, the leader of the Christians,

should be thrown to the lions.  Prudence suggested the necessity

of a temporary retreat, and the voice of prudence was obeyed.  He

withdrew himself into an obscure solitude, from whence he could

maintain a constant correspondence with the clergy and people of

Carthage; and, concealing himself till the tempest was past, he

preserved his life, without relinquishing either his power or his

reputation.  His extreme caution did not, however, escape the

censure of the more rigid Christians, who lamented, or the

reproaches of his personal enemies, who insulted, a conduct which

they considered as a pusillanimous and criminal desertion of the

most sacred duty. ^77 The propriety of reserving himself for the

future exigencies of the church, the example of several holy

bishops, ^78 and the divine admonitions, which, as he declares

himself, he frequently received in visions and ecstacies, were

the reasons alleged in his justification. ^79 But his best

apology may be found in the cheerful resolution, with which,

about eight years afterwards, he suffered death in the cause of

religion.  The authentic history of his martyrdom has been

recorded with unusual candor and impartiality.  A short abstract,

therefore, of its most important circumstances, will convey the

clearest information of the spirit, and of the forms, of the

Roman persecutions. ^80

[Footnote 76: The letters of Cyprian exhibit a very curious and

original picture both of the man and of the times.  See likewise

the two lives of Cyprian, composed with equal accuracy, though

with very different views; the one by Le Clerc (Bibliotheque

Universelle, tom. xii. p. 208-378,) the other by Tillemont,

Memoires Ecclesiastiques, tom. iv part i. p. 76-459.]

[Footnote 77: See the polite but severe epistle of the clergy of

Rome to the bishop of Carthage.  (Cyprian. Epist. 8, 9.) Pontius

labors with the greatest care and diligence to justify his master

against the general censure.]

[Footnote 78: In particular those of Dionysius of Alexandria, and

Gregory Thaumaturgus, of Neo-Caesarea.  See Euseb. Hist.

Ecclesiast. l. vi. c. 40; and Memoires de Tillemont, tom. iv.

part ii. p. 685.]

[Footnote 79: See Cyprian. Epist. 16, and his life by Pontius.]

[Footnote 80: We have an original life of Cyprian by the deacon

Pontius, the companion of his exile, and the spectator of his

death; and we likewise possess the ancient proconsular acts of

his martyrdom.  These two relations are consistent with each

other, and with probability; and what is somewhat remarkable,

they are both unsullied by any miraculous circumstances.]

Chapter XVI: Conduct Towards The Christians, From Nero To

Constantine.

Part IV.

     When Valerian was consul for the third, and Gallienus for

the fourth time, Paternus, proconsul of Africa, summoned Cyprian

to appear in his private council-chamber.  He there acquainted

him with the Imperial mandate which he had just received, ^81

that those who had abandoned the Roman religion should

immediately return to the practice of the ceremonies of their

ancestors. Cyprian replied without hesitation, that he was a

Christian and a bishop, devoted to the worship of the true and

only Deity, to whom he offered up his daily supplications for the

safety and prosperity of the two emperors, his lawful sovereigns.

With modest confidence he pleaded the privilege of a citizen, in

refusing to give any answer to some invidious and indeed illegal

questions which the proconsul had proposed.  A sentence of

banishment was pronounced as the penalty of Cyprian's

disobedience; and he was conducted without delay to Curubis, a

free and maritime city of Zeugitania, in a pleasant situation, a

fertile territory, and at the distance of about forty miles from

Carthage. ^82 The exiled bishop enjoyed the conveniences of life

and the consciousness of virtue. His reputation was diffused over

Africa and Italy; an account of his behavior was published for

the edification of the Christian world; ^83 and his solitude was

frequently interrupted by the letters, the visits, and the

congratulations of the faithful.  On the arrival of a new

proconsul in the province the fortune of Cyprian appeared for

some time to wear a still more favorable aspect.  He was recalled

from banishment; and though not yet permitted to return to

Carthage, his own gardens in the neighborhood of the capital were

assigned for the place of his residence. ^84

[Footnote 81: It should seem that these were circular orders,

sent at the same time to all the governors.  Dionysius (ap.

Euseb. l. vii. c. 11) relates the history of his own banishment

from Alexandria almost in the same manner.  But as he escaped and

survived the persecution, we must account him either more or less

fortunate than Cyprian.]

[Footnote 82: See Plin. Hist. Natur. v. 3. Cellarius, Geograph.

Antiq. part iii. p. 96.  Shaw's Travels, p. 90; and for the

adjacent country, (which is terminated by Cape Bona, or the

promontory of Mercury,) l'Afrique de Marmol. tom. ii. p. 494.

There are the remains of an aqueduct near Curubis, or Curbis, at

present altered into Gurbes; and Dr. Shaw read an inscription,

which styles that city Colonia Fulvia.  The deacon Pontius (in

Vit. Cyprian. c. 12) calls it "Apricum et competentem locum,

hospitium pro voluntate secretum, et quicquid apponi eis ante

promissum est, qui regnum et justitiam Dei quaerunt."]

[Footnote 83: See Cyprian. Epistol. 77, edit. Fell.]

[Footnote 84: Upon his conversion, he had sold those gardens for

the benefit of the poor.  The indulgence of God (most probably

the liberality of some Christian friend) restored them to

Cyprian.  See Pontius, c. 15.]

     At length, exactly one year ^85 after Cyprian was first

apprehended, Galerius Maximus, proconsul of Africa, received the

Imperial warrant for the execution of the Christian teachers.

The bishop of Carthage was sensible that he should be singled out

for one of the first victims; and the frailty of nature tempted

him to withdraw himself, by a secret flight, from the danger and

the honor of martyrdom; ^* but soon recovering that fortitude

which his character required, he returned to his gardens, and

patiently expected the ministers of death.  Two officers of rank,

who were intrusted with that commission, placed Cyprian between

them in a chariot, and as the proconsul was not then at leisure,

they conducted him, not to a prison, but to a private house in

Carthage, which belonged to one of them. An elegant supper was

provided for the entertainment of the bishop, and his Christian

friends were permitted for the last time to enjoy his society,

whilst the streets were filled with a multitude of the faithful,

anxious and alarmed at the approaching fate of their spiritual

father. ^86 In the morning he appeared before the tribunal of the

proconsul, who, after informing himself of the name and situation

of Cyprian, commanded him to offer sacrifice, and pressed him to

reflect on the consequences of his disobedience.  The refusal of

Cyprian was firm and decisive; and the magistrate, when he had

taken the opinion of his council, pronounced with some reluctance

the sentence of death.  It was conceived in the following terms:

"That Thascius Cyprianus should be immediately beheaded, as the

enemy of the gods of Rome, and as the chief and ringleader of a

criminal association, which he had seduced into an impious

resistance against the laws of the most holy emperors, Valerian

and Gallienus." ^87 The manner of his execution was the mildest

and least painful that could be inflicted on a person convicted

of any capital offence; nor was the use of torture admitted to

obtain from the bishop of Carthage either the recantation of his

principles or the discovery of his accomplices.

[Footnote 85: When Cyprian; a twelvemonth before, was sent into

exile, he dreamt that he should be put to death the next day.

The event made it necessary to explain that word, as signifying a

year.  Pontius, c. 12.]

[Footnote *: This was not, as it appears, the motive which

induced St. Cyprian to conceal himself for a short time; he was

threatened to be carried to Utica; he preferred remaining at

Carthage, in order to suffer martyrdom in the midst of his flock,

and in order that his death might conduce to the edification of

those whom he had guided during life.  Such, at least, is his own

explanation of his conduct in one of his letters: Cum perlatum ad

nos fuisset, fratres carissimi, frumentarios esse missos qui me

Uticam per ducerent, consilioque carissimorum persuasum est, ut

de hortis interim recederemus, justa interveniente causa,

consensi; eo quod congruat episcopum in ea civitate, in qua

Ecclesiae dominicae praeest, illie. Dominum confiteri et plebem

universam praepositi praesentis confessione clarificari Ep. 83. -

G]

[Footnote 86: Pontius (c. 15) acknowledges that Cyprian, with

whom he supped, passed the night custodia delicata.  The bishop

exercised a last and very proper act of jurisdiction, by

directing that the younger females, who watched in the streets,

should be removed from the dangers and temptations of a nocturnal

crowd.  Act. Preconsularia, c. 2.]

[Footnote 87: See the original sentence in the Acts, c. 4; and in

Pontius, c. 17 The latter expresses it in a more rhetorical

manner.]

     As soon as the sentence was proclaimed, a general cry of "We

will die with him," arose at once among the listening multitude

of Christians who waited before the palace gates.  The generous

effusions of their zeal and their affection were neither

serviceable to Cyprian nor dangerous to themselves.  He was led

away under a guard of tribunes and centurions, without resistance

and without insult, to the place of his execution, a spacious and

level plain near the city, which was already filled with great

numbers of spectators.  His faithful presbyters and deacons were

permitted to accompany their holy bishop. ^* They assisted him in

laying aside his upper garment, spread linen on the ground to

catch the precious relics of his blood, and received his orders

to bestow five-and-twenty pieces of gold on the executioner.  The

martyr then covered his face with his hands, and at one blow his

head was separated from his body.  His corpse remained during

some hours exposed to the curiosity of the Gentiles: but in the

night it was removed, and transported in a triumphal procession,

and with a splendid illumination, to the burial-place of the

Christians.  The funeral of Cyprian was publicly celebrated

without receiving any interruption from the Roman magistrates;

and those among the faithful, who had performed the last offices

to his person and his memory, were secure from the danger of

inquiry or of punishment.  It is remarkable, that of so great a

multitude of bishops in the province of Africa, Cyprian was the

first who was esteemed worthy to obtain the crown of martyrdom.

^88

[Footnote *: There is nothing in the life of St. Cyprian, by

Pontius, nor in the ancient manuscripts, which can make us

suppose that the presbyters and deacons in their clerical

character, and known to be such, had the permission to attend

their holy bishop.  Setting aside all religious considerations,

it is impossible not to be surprised at the kind of complaisance

with which the historian here insists, in favor of the

persecutors, on some mitigating circumstances allowed at the

death of a man whose only crime was maintaining his own opinions

with frankness and courage. - G.]

[Footnote 88: Pontius, c. 19.  M. de Tillemont (Memoires, tom.

iv. part i. p. 450, note 50) is not pleased with so positive an

exclusion of any former martyr of the episcopal rank.

     Note: M. de. Tillemont, as an honest writer, explains the

difficulties which he felt about the text of Pontius, and

concludes by distinctly stating, that without doubt there is some

mistake, and that Pontius must have meant only Africa Minor or

Carthage; for St. Cyprian, in his 58th (69th) letter addressed to

Pupianus, speaks expressly of many bishops his colleagues, qui

proscripti sunt, vel apprehensi in carcere et catenis fuerunt;

aut qui in exilium relegati, illustri itinere ed Dominum profecti

sunt; aut qui quibusdam locis animadversi, coeleses coronas de

Domini clarificatione sumpserunt. - G.]

     It was in the choice of Cyprian, either to die a martyr, or

to live an apostate; but on the choice depended the alternative

of honor or infamy. Could we suppose that the bishop of Carthage

had employed the profession of the Christian faith only as the

instrument of his avarice or ambition, it was still incumbent on

him to support the character he had assumed; ^89 and if he

possessed the smallest degree of manly fortitude, rather to

expose himself to the most cruel tortures, than by a single act

to exchange the reputation of a whole life, for the abhorrence of

his Christian brethren, and the contempt of the Gentile world.

But if the zeal of Cyprian was supported by the sincere

conviction of the truth of those doctrines which he preached, the

crown of martyrdom must have appeared to him as an object of

desire rather than of terror.  It is not easy to extract any

distinct ideas from the vague though eloquent declamations of the

Fathers, or to ascertain the degree of immortal glory and

happiness which they confidently promised to those who were so

fortunate as to shed their blood in the cause of religion. ^90

They inculcated with becoming diligence, that the fire of

martyrdom supplied every defect and expiated every sin; that

while the souls of ordinary Christians were obliged to pass

through a slow and painful purification, the triumphant sufferers

entered into the immediate fruition of eternal bliss, where, in

the society of the patriarchs, the apostles, and the prophets,

they reigned with Christ, and acted as his assessors in the

universal judgment of mankind.  The assurance of a lasting

reputation upon earth, a motive so congenial to the vanity of

human nature, often served to animate the courage of the martyrs.

The honors which Rome or Athens bestowed on those citizens who

had fallen in the cause of their country, were cold and unmeaning

demonstrations of respect, when compared with the ardent

gratitude and devotion which the primitive church expressed

towards the victorious champions of the faith.  The annual

commemoration of their virtues and sufferings was observed as a

sacred ceremony, and at length terminated in religious worship.

Among the Christians who had publicly confessed their religious

principles, those who (as it very frequently happened) had been

dismissed from the tribunal or the prisons of the Pagan

magistrates, obtained such honors as were justly due to their

imperfect martyrdom and their generous resolution.  The most

pious females courted the permission of imprinting kisses on the

fetters which they had worn, and on the wounds which they had

received.  Their persons were esteemed holy, their decisions were

admitted with deference, and they too often abused, by their

spiritual pride and licentious manners, the preeminence which

their zeal and intrepidity had acquired. ^91 Distinctions like

these, whilst they display the exalted merit, betray the

inconsiderable number of those who suffered, and of those who

died, for the profession of Christianity.

[Footnote 89: Whatever opinion we may entertain of the character

or principles of Thomas Becket, we must acknowledge that he

suffered death with a constancy not unworthy of the primitive

martyrs.  See Lord Lyttleton's History of Henry II. vol. ii. p.

592, &c.]

[Footnote 90: See in particular the treatise of Cyprian de

Lapsis, p. 87- 98, edit. Fell.  The learning of Dodwell

(Dissertat. Cyprianic. xii. xiii.,) and the ingenuity of

Middleton, (Free Inquiry, p. 162, &c.,) have left scarcely any

thing to add concerning the merit, the honors, and the motives of

the martyrs.]

[Footnote 91: Cyprian. Epistol. 5, 6, 7, 22, 24; and de Unitat.

Ecclesiae. The number of pretended martyrs has been very much

multiplied, by the custom which was introduced of bestowing that

honorable name on confessors.

     Note: M. Guizot denies that the letters of Cyprian, to which

he refers, bear out the statement in the text.  I cannot scruple

to admit the accuracy of Gibbon's quotation.  To take only the

fifth letter, we find this passage: Doleo enim quando audio

quosdam improbe et insolenter discurrere, et ad ineptian vel ad

discordias vacare, Christi membra et jam Christum confessa per

concubitus illicitos inquinari, nec a diaconis aut presbyteris

regi posse, sed id agere ut per paucorum pravos et malos mores,

multorum et bonorum confessorum gloria honesta maculetur.

Gibbon's misrepresentation lies in the ambiguous expression "too

often." Were the epistles arranged in a different manner in the

edition consulted by M. Guizot? - M.]

     The sober discretion of the present age will more readily

censure than admire, but can more easily admire than imitate, the

fervor of the first Christians, who, according to the lively

expressions of Sulpicius Severus, desired martyrdom with more

eagerness than his own contemporaries solicited a bishopric. ^92

The epistles which Ignatius composed as he was carried in chains

through the cities of Asia, breathe sentiments the most repugnant

to the ordinary feelings of human nature.  He earnestly beseeches

the Romans, that when he should be exposed in the amphitheatre,

they would not, by their kind but unseasonable intercession,

deprive him of the crown of glory; and he declares his resolution

to provoke and irritate the wild beasts which might be employed

as the instruments of his death. ^93 Some stories are related of

the courage of martyrs, who actually performed what Ignatius had

intended; who exasperated the fury of the lions, pressed the

executioner to hasten his office, cheerfully leaped into the

fires which were kindled to consume them, and discovered a

sensation of joy and pleasure in the midst of the most exquisite

tortures.  Several examples have been preserved of a zeal

impatient of those restraints which the emperors had provided for

the security of the church.  The Christians sometimes supplied by

their voluntary declaration the want of an accuser, rudely

disturbed the public service of paganism, ^94 and rushing in

crowds round the tribunal of the magistrates, called upon them to

pronounce and to inflict the sentence of the law.  The behavior

of the Christians was too remarkable to escape the notice of the

ancient philosophers; but they seem to have considered it with

much less admiration than astonishment. Incapable of conceiving

the motives which sometimes transported the fortitude of

believers beyond the bounds of prudence or reason, they treated

such an eagerness to die as the strange result of obstinate

despair, of stupid insensibility, or of superstitious frenzy. ^95

"Unhappy men!" exclaimed the proconsul Antoninus to the

Christians of Asia; "unhappy men! if you are thus weary of your

lives, is it so difficult for you to find ropes and precipices?"

^96 He was extremely cautious (as it is observed by a learned and

picus historian) of punishing men who had found no accusers but

themselves, the Imperial laws not having made any provision for

so unexpected a case: condemning therefore a few as a warning to

their brethren, he dismissed the multitude with indignation and

contempt. ^97 Notwithstanding this real or affected disdain, the

intrepid constancy of the faithful was productive of more

salutary effects on those minds which nature or grace had

disposed for the easy reception of religious truth.  On these

melancholy occasions, there were many among the Gentiles who

pitied, who admired, and who were converted.  The generous

enthusiasm was communicated from the sufferer to the spectators;

and the blood of martyrs, according to a well-known observation,

became the seed of the church.

[Footnote 92: Certatim gloriosa in certamina ruebatur; multique

avidius tum martyria gloriosis mortibus quaerebantur, quam nunc

Episcopatus pravis ambitionibus appetuntur.  Sulpicius Severus,

l. ii.  He might have omitted the word nunc.]

[Footnote 93: See Epist. ad Roman. c. 4, 5, ap. Patres Apostol.

tom. ii. p. 27.  It suited the purpose of Bishop Pearson (see

Vindiciae Ignatianae, part ii. c. 9) to justify, by a profusion

of examples and authorities, the sentiments of Ignatius.]

[Footnote 94: The story of Polyeuctes, on which Corneille has

founded a very beautiful tragedy, is one of the most celebrated,

though not perhaps the most authentic, instances of this

excessive zeal.  We should observe, that the 60th canon of the

council of Illiberis refuses the title of martyrs to those who

exposed themselves to death, by publicly destroying the idols.]

[Footnote 95: See Epictetus, l. iv. c. 7, (though there is some

doubt whether he alludes to the Christians.) Marcus Antoninus de

Rebus suis, l. xi. c. 3 Lucian in Peregrin.]

[Footnote 96: Tertullian ad Scapul. c. 5.  The learned are

divided between three persons of the same name, who were all

proconsuls of Asia.  I am inclined to ascribe this story to

Antoninus Pius, who was afterwards emperor; and who may have

governed Asia under the reign of Trajan.]

[Footnote 97: Mosheim, de Rebus Christ, ante Constantin. p. 235.]

     But although devotion had raised, and eloquence continued to

inflame, this fever of the mind, it insensibly gave way to the

more natural hopes and fears of the human heart, to the love of

life, the apprehension of pain, and the horror of dissolution.

The more prudent rulers of the church found themselves obliged to

restrain the indiscreet ardor of their followers, and to distrust

a constancy which too often abandoned them in the hour of trial.

^98 As the lives of the faithful became less mortified and

austere, they were every day less ambitious of the honors of

martyrdom; and the soldiers of Christ, instead of distinguishing

themselves by voluntary deeds of heroism, frequently deserted

their post, and fled in confusion before the enemy whom it was

their duty to resist.  There were three methods, however, of

escaping the flames of persecution, which were not attended with

an equal degree of guilt: first, indeed, was generally allowed to

be innocent; the second was of a doubtful, or at least of a

venial, nature; but the third implied a direct and criminal

apostasy from the Christian faith.

[Footnote 98: See the Epistle of the Church of Smyrna, ap. Euseb.

Hist. Eccles. Liv. c. 15

     Note: The 15th chapter of the 10th book of the Eccles.

History of Eusebius treats principally of the martyrdom of St.

Polycarp, and mentions some other martyrs.  A single example of

weakness is related; it is that of a Phrygian named Quintus, who,

appalled at the sight of the wild beasts and the tortures,

renounced his faith.  This example proves little against the mass

of Christians, and this chapter of Eusebius furnished much

stronger evidence of their courage than of their timidity. - G

     This Quintus had, however, rashly and of his own accord

appeared before the tribunal; and the church of Smyrna condemn

"his indiscreet ardor," coupled as it was with weakness in the

hour of trial. - M.]

     I.  A modern inquisitor would hear with surprise, that

whenever an information was given to a Roman magistrate of any

person within his jurisdiction who had embraced the sect of the

Christians, the charge was communicated to the party accused, and

that a convenient time was allowed him to settle his domestic

concerns, and to prepare an answer to the crime which was imputed

to him. ^99 If he entertained any doubt of his own constancy,

such a delay afforded him the opportunity of preserving his life

and honor by flight, of withdrawing himself into some obscure

retirement or some distant province, and of patiently expecting

the return of peace and security.  A measure so consonant to

reason was soon authorized by the advice and example of the most

holy prelates; and seems to have been censured by few except by

the Montanists, who deviated into heresy by their strict and

obstinate adherence to the rigor of ancient discipline. ^100 II.

The provincial governors, whose zeal was less prevalent than

their avarice, had countenanced the practice of selling

certificates, (or libels, as they were called,) which attested,

that the persons therein mentioned had complied with the laws,

and sacrificed to the Roman deities.  By producing these false

declarations, the opulent and timid Christians were enabled to

silence the malice of an informer, and to reconcile in some

measure their safety with their religion. A slight penance atoned

for this profane dissimulation. ^101 ^* III.  In every

persecution there were great numbers of unworthy Christians who

publicly disowned or renounced the faith which they had

professed; and who confirmed the sincerity of their abjuration,

by the legal acts of burning incense or of offering sacrifices.

Some of these apostates had yielded on the first menace or

exhortation of the magistrate; whilst the patience of others had

been subdued by the length and repetition of tortures.  The

affrighted countenances of some betrayed their inward remorse,

while others advanced with confidence and alacrity to the altars

of the gods. ^102 But the disguise which fear had imposed,

subsisted no longer than the present danger.  As soon as the

severity of the persecution was abated, the doors of the churches

were assailed by the returning multitude of penitents who

detested their idolatrous submission, and who solicited with

equal ardor, but with various success, their readmission into the

society of Christians. ^103 ^!

[Footnote 99: In the second apology of Justin, there is a

particular and very curious instance of this legal delay.  The

same indulgence was granted to accused Christians, in the

persecution of Decius: and Cyprian (de Lapsis) expressly mentions

the "Dies negantibus praestitutus."

     Note: The examples drawn by the historian from Justin Martyr

and Cyprian relate altogether to particular cases, and prove

nothing as to the general practice adopted towards the accused;

it is evident, on the contrary, from the same apology of St.

Justin, that they hardly ever obtained delay.  "A man named

Lucius, himself a Christian, present at an unjust sentence passed

against a Christian by the judge Urbicus, asked him why he thus

punished a man who was neither adulterer nor robber, nor guilty

of any other crime but that of avowing himself a Christian."

Urbicus answered only in these words: "Thou also hast the

appearance of being a Christian." "Yes, without doubt," replied

Lucius.  The judge ordered that he should be put to death on the

instant.  A third, who came up, was condemned to be beaten with

rods.  Here, then, are three examples where no delay was granted.

[Surely these acts of a single passionate and irritated judge

prove the general practice as little as those quoted by Gibbon. -

M.] There exist a multitude of others, such as those of Ptolemy,

Marcellus, &c. Justin expressly charges the judges with ordering

the accused to be executed without hearing the cause.  The words

of St. Cyprian are as particular, and simply say, that he had

appointed a day by which the Christians must have renounced their

faith; those who had not done it by that time were condemned. -

G.  This confirms the statement in the text. - M.]

[Footnote 100: Tertullian considers flight from persecution as an

imperfect, but very criminal, apostasy, as an impious attempt to

elude the will of God, &c., &c.  He has written a treatise on

this subject, (see p. 536 - 544, edit. Rigalt.,) which is filled

with the wildest fanaticism and the most incoherent declamation.

It is, however, somewhat remarkable, that Tertullian did not

suffer martyrdom himself.]

[Footnote 101: The libellatici, who are chiefly known by the

writings of Cyprian, are described with the utmost precision, in

the copious commentary of Mosheim, p. 483 - 489.]

[Footnote *: The penance was not so slight, for it was exactly

the same with that of apostates who had sacrificed to idols; it

lasted several years.  See Fleun Hist. Ecc. v. ii. p. 171. - G.]

[Footnote 102: Plin. Epist. x. 97.  Dionysius Alexandrin. ap.

Euseb. l. vi. c. 41.  Ad prima statim verba minantis inimici

maximus fratrum numerus fidem suam prodidit: nec prostratus est

persecutionis impetu, sed voluntario lapsu seipsum prostravit.

Cyprian. Opera, p. 89.  Among these deserters were many priests,

and even bishops.]

[Footnote 103: It was on this occasion that Cyprian wrote his

treatise De Lapsis, and many of his epistles.  The controversy

concerning the treatment of penitent apostates, does not occur

among the Christians of the preceding century.  Shall we ascribe

this to the superiority of their faith and courage, or to our

less intimate knowledge of their history!]

[Footnote !: Pliny says, that the greater part of the Christians

persisted in avowing themselves to be so; the reason for his

consulting Trajan was the periclitantium numerus.  Eusebius (l.

vi. c. 41) does not permit us to doubt that the number of those

who renounced their faith was infinitely below the number of

those who boldly confessed it.  The prefect, he says and his

assessors present at the council, were alarmed at seeing the

crowd of Christians; the judges themselves trembled.  Lastly, St.

Cyprian informs us, that the greater part of those who had

appeared weak brethren in the persecution of Decius, signalized

their courage in that of Gallius. Steterunt fortes, et ipso

dolore poenitentiae facti ad praelium fortiores Epist. lx. p.

142. - G.]

     IV.  Notwithstanding the general rules established for the

conviction and punishment of the Christians, the fate of those

sectaries, in an extensive and arbitrary government, must still

in a great measure, have depended on their own behavior, the

circumstances of the times, and the temper of their supreme as

well as subordinate rulers.  Zeal might sometimes provoke, and

prudence might sometimes avert or assuage, the superstitious fury

of the Pagans.  A variety of motives might dispose the provincial

governors either to enforce or to relax the execution of the

laws; and of these motives the most forcible was their regard not

only for the public edicts, but for the secret intentions of the

emperor, a glance from whose eye was sufficient to kindle or to

extinguish the flames of persecution.  As often as any occasional

severities were exercised in the different parts of the empire,

the primitive Christians lamented and perhaps magnified their own

sufferings; but the celebrated number of ten persecutions has

been determined by the ecclesiastical writers of the fifth

century, who possessed a more distinct view of the prosperous or

adverse fortunes of the church, from the age of Nero to that of

Diocletian.  The ingenious parallels of the ten plagues of Egypt,

and of the ten horns of the Apocalypse, first suggested this

calculation to their minds; and in their application of the faith

of prophecy to the truth of history, they were careful to select

those reigns which were indeed the most hostile to the Christian

cause. ^104 But these transient persecutions served only to

revive the zeal and to restore the discipline of the faithful;

and the moments of extraordinary rigor were compensated by much

longer intervals of peace and security.  The indifference of some

princes, and the indulgence of others, permitted the Christians

to enjoy, though not perhaps a legal, yet an actual and public,

toleration of their religion.

[Footnote 104: See Mosheim, p. 97.  Sulpicius Severus was the

first author of this computation; though he seemed desirous of

reserving the tenth and greatest persecution for the coming of

the Antichrist.]

Chapter XVI: Conduct Towards The Christians, From Nero To

Constantine.

Part V.

     The apology of Tertullian contains two very ancient, very

singular, but at the same time very suspicious, instances of

Imperial clemency; the edicts published by Tiberius, and by

Marcus Antoninus, and designed not only to protect the innocence

of the Christians, but even to proclaim those stupendous miracles

which had attested the truth of their doctrine.  The first of

these examples is attended with some difficulties which might

perplex a sceptical mind. ^105 We are required to believe, that

Pontius Pilate informed the emperor of the unjust sentence of

death which he had pronounced against an innocent, and, as it

appeared, a divine, person; and that, without acquiring the

merit, he exposed himself to the danger of martyrdom; that

Tiberius, who avowed his contempt for all religion, immediately

conceived the design of placing the Jewish Messiah among the gods

of Rome; that his servile senate ventured to disobey the commands

of their master; that Tiberius, instead of resenting their

refusal, contented himself with protecting the Christians from

the severity of the laws, many years before such laws were

enacted, or before the church had assumed any distinct name or

existence; and lastly, that the memory of this extraordinary

transaction was preserved in the most public and authentic

records, which escaped the knowledge of the historians of Greece

and Rome, and were only visible to the eyes of an African

Christian, who composed his apology one hundred and sixty years

after the death of Tiberius.  The edict of Marcus Antoninus is

supposed to have been the effect of his devotion and gratitude

for the miraculous deliverance which he had obtained in the

Marcomannic war.  The distress of the legions, the seasonable

tempest of rain and hail, of thunder and of lightning, and the

dismay and defeat of the barbarians, have been celebrated by the

eloquence of several Pagan writers. If there were any Christians

in that army, it was natural that they should ascribe some merit

to the fervent prayers, which, in the moment of danger, they had

offered up for their own and the public safety.  But we are still

assured by monuments of brass and marble, by the Imperial medals,

and by the Antonine column, that neither the prince nor the

people entertained any sense of this signal obligation, since

they unanimously attribute their deliverance to the providence of

Jupiter, and to the interposition of Mercury.  During the whole

course of his reign, Marcus despised the Christians as a

philosopher, and punished them as a sovereign. ^106 ^*

[Footnote 105: The testimony given by Pontius Pilate is first

mentioned by Justin.  The successive improvements which the story

acquired (as if has passed through the hands of Tertullian,

Eusebius, Epiphanius, Chrysostom, Orosius, Gregory of Tours, and

the authors of the several editions of the acts of Pilate) are

very fairly stated by Dom Calmet Dissertat. sur l'Ecriture, tom.

iii. p. 651, &c.]

[Footnote 106: On this miracle, as it is commonly called, of the

thundering legion, see the admirable criticism of Mr. Moyle, in

his Works, vol. ii. p. 81 - 390.]

[Footnote *: Gibbon, with this phrase, and that below, which

admits the injustice of Marcus, has dexterously glossed over one

of the most remarkable facts in the early Christian history, that

the reign of the wisest and most humane of the heathen emperors

was the most fatal to the Christians.  Most writers have ascribed

the persecutions under Marcus to the latent bigotry of his

character; Mosheim, to the influence of the philosophic party;

but the fact is admitted by all.  A late writer (Mr. Waddington,

Hist. of the Church, p. 47) has not scrupled to assert, that

"this prince polluted every year of a long reign with innocent

blood;" but the causes as well as the date of the persecutions

authorized or permitted by Marcus are equally uncertain.

     Of the Asiatic edict recorded by Melito. the date is

unknown, nor is it quite clear that it was an Imperial edict.  If

it was the act under which Polycarp suffered, his martyrdom is

placed by Ruinart in the sixth, by Mosheim in the ninth, year of

the reign of Marcus.  The martyrs of Vienne and Lyons are

assigned by Dodwell to the seventh, by most writers to the

seventeenth. In fact, the commencement of the persecutions of the

Christians appears to synchronize exactly with the period of the

breaking out of the Marcomannic war, which seems to have alarmed

the whole empire, and the emperor himself, into a paroxysm of

returning piety to their gods, of which the Christians were the

victims.  See Jul, Capit. Script. Hist August. p. 181, edit.

1661.  It is remarkable that Tertullian [Apologet. c. v.)

distinctly asserts that Verus (M. Aurelius) issued no edicts

against the Christians, and almost positively exempts him from

the charge of persecution. - M.

     This remarkable synchronism, which explains the persecutions

under M Aurelius, is shown at length in Milman's History of

Christianity, book ii. v. - M. 1845.]

     By a singular fatality, the hardships which they had endured

under the government of a virtuous prince, immediately ceased on

the accession of a tyrant; and as none except themselves had

experienced the injustice of Marcus, so they alone were protected

by the lenity of Commodus.  The celebrated Marcia, the most

favored of his concubines, and who at length contrived the murder

of her Imperial lover, entertained a singular affection for the

oppressed church; and though it was impossible that she could

reconcile the practice of vice with the precepts of the gospel,

she might hope to atone for the frailties of her sex and

profession by declaring herself the patroness of the Christians.

^107 Under the gracious protection of Marcia, they passed in

safety the thirteen years of a cruel tyranny; and when the empire

was established in the house of Severus, they formed a domestic

but more honorable connection with the new court.  The emperor

was persuaded, that in a dangerous sickness, he had derived some

benefit, either spiritual or physical, from the holy oil, with

which one of his slaves had anointed him.  He always treated with

peculiar distinction several persons of both sexes who had

embraced the new religion.  The nurse as well as the preceptor of

Caracalla were Christians; ^* and if that young prince ever

betrayed a sentiment of humanity, it was occasioned by an

incident, which, however trifling, bore some relation to the

cause of Christianity. ^108 Under the reign of Severus, the fury

of the populace was checked; the rigor of ancient laws was for

some time suspended; and the provincial governors were satisfied

with receiving an annual present from the churches within their

jurisdiction, as the price, or as the reward, of their

moderation. ^109 The controversy concerning the precise time of

the celebration of Easter, armed the bishops of Asia and Italy

against each other, and was considered as the most important

business of this period of leisure and tranquillity. ^110 Nor was

the peace of the church interrupted, till the increasing numbers

of proselytes seem at length to have attracted the attention, and

to have alienated the mind of Severus.  With the design of

restraining the progress of Christianity, he published an edict,

which, though it was designed to affect only the new converts,

could not be carried into strict execution, without exposing to

danger and punishment the most zealous of their teachers and

missionaries.  In this mitigated persecution we may still

discover the indulgent spirit of Rome and of Polytheism, which so

readily admitted every excuse in favor of those who practised the

religious ceremonies of their fathers. ^111

[Footnote 107: Dion Cassius, or rather his abbreviator Xiphilin,

l. lxxii. p. 1206.  Mr. Moyle (p. 266) has explained the

condition of the church under the reign of Commodus.]

[Footnote *: The Jews and Christians contest the honor of having

furnished a nurse is the fratricide son of Severus Caracalla.

Hist. of Jews, iii. 158. - M.]

[Footnote 108: Compare the life of Caracalla in the Augustan

History, with the epistle of Tertullian to Scapula.  Dr. Jortin

(Remarks on Ecclesiastical History, vol. ii. p. 5, &c.) considers

the cure of Severus by the means of holy oil, with a strong

desire to convert it into a miracle.]

[Footnote 109: Tertullian de Fuga, c. 13.  The present was made

during the feast of the Saturnalia; and it is a matter of serious

concern to Tertullian, that the faithful should be confounded

with the most infamous professions which purchased the connivance

of the government.]

[Footnote 110: Euseb. l. v. c. 23, 24.  Mosheim, p. 435 - 447.]

[Footnote 111: Judaeos fieri sub gravi poena vetuit.  Idem etiam

de Christianis sanxit.  Hist. August. p. 70.]

     But the laws which Severus had enacted soon expired with the

authority of that emperor; and the Christians, after this

accidental tempest, enjoyed a calm of thirty-eight years. ^112

Till this period they had usually held their assemblies in

private houses and sequestered places.  They were now permitted

to erect and consecrate convenient edifices for the purpose of

religious worship; ^113 to purchase lands, even at Rome itself,

for the use of the community; and to conduct the elections of

their ecclesiastical ministers in so public, but at the same time

in so exemplary a manner, as to deserve the respectful attention

of the Gentiles. ^114 This long repose of the church was

accompanied with dignity.  The reigns of those princes who

derived their extraction from the Asiatic provinces, proved the

most favorable to the Christians; the eminent persons of the

sect, instead of being reduced to implore the protection of a

slave or concubine, were admitted into the palace in the

honorable characters of priests and philosophers; and their

mysterious doctrines, which were already diffused among the

people, insensibly attracted the curiosity of their sovereign.

When the empress Mammaea passed through Antioch, she expressed a

desire of conversing with the celebrated Origen, the fame of

whose piety and learning was spread over the East.  Origen obeyed

so flattering an invitation, and though he could not expect to

succeed in the conversion of an artful and ambitious woman, she

listened with pleasure to his eloquent exhortations, and

honorably dismissed him to his retirement in Palestine. ^115 The

sentiments of Mammaea were adopted by her son Alexander, and the

philosophic devotion of that emperor was marked by a singular but

injudicious regard for the Christian religion.  In his domestic

chapel he placed the statues of Abraham, of Orpheus, of

Apollonius, and of Christ, as an honor justly due to those

respectable sages who had instructed mankind in the various modes

of addressing their homage to the supreme and universal Deity.

^116 A purer faith, as well as worship, was openly professed and

practised among his household.  Bishops, perhaps for the first

time, were seen at court; and, after the death of Alexander, when

the inhuman Maximin discharged his fury on the favorites and

servants of his unfortunate benefactor, a great number of

Christians of every rank and of both sexes, were involved the

promiscuous massacre, which, on their account, has improperly

received the name of Persecution. ^117 ^*

[Footnote 112: Sulpicius Severus, l. ii. p. 384.  This

computation (allowing for a single exception) is confirmed by the

history of Eusebius, and by the writings of Cyprian.]

[Footnote 113: The antiquity of Christian churches is discussed

by Tillemont, (Memoires Ecclesiastiques, tom. iii. part ii. p.

68-72,) and by Mr. Moyle, (vol. i. p. 378-398.) The former refers

the first construction of them to the peace of Alexander Severus;

the latter, to the peace of Gallienus.]

[Footnote 114: See the Augustan History, p. 130.  The emperor

Alexander adopted their method of publicly proposing the names of

those persons who were candidates for ordination.  It is true

that the honor of this practice is likewise attributed to the

Jews.]

[Footnote 115: Euseb. Hist. Ecclesiast. l. vi. c. 21.  Hieronym.

de Script. Eccles. c. 54.  Mammaea was styled a holy and pious

woman, both by the Christians and the Pagans.  From the former,

therefore, it was impossible that she should deserve that

honorable epithet.]

[Footnote 116: See the Augustan History, p. 123.  Mosheim (p.

465) seems to refine too much on the domestic religion of

Alexander.  His design of building a public temple to Christ,

(Hist. August. p. 129,) and the objection which was suggested

either to him, or in similar circumstances to Hadrian, appear to

have no other foundation than an improbable report, invented by

the Christians, and credulously adopted by an historian of the

age of Constantine.]

[Footnote 117: Euseb. l. vi. c. 28.  It may be presumed that the

success of the Christians had exasperated the increasing bigotry

of the Pagans.  Dion Cassius, who composed his history under the

former reign, had most probably intended for the use of his

master those counsels of persecution, which he ascribes to a

better age, and to and to the favorite of Augustus. Concerning

this oration of Maecenas, or rather of Dion, I may refer to my

own unbiased opinion, (vol. i. c. 1, note 25,) and to the Abbe de

la Bleterie (Memoires de l'Academie, tom. xxiv. p. 303 tom xxv.

p. 432.)

     Note: If this be the case, Dion Cassius must have known the

Christians they must have been the subject of his particular

attention, since the author supposes that he wished his master to

profit by these "counsels of persecution." How are we to

reconcile this necessary consequence with what Gibbon has said of

the ignorance of Dion Cassius even of the name of the Christians?

(c. xvi. n. 24.) [Gibbon speaks of Dion's silence, not of his

ignorance. - M] The supposition in this note is supported by no

proof; it is probable that Dion Cassius has often designated the

Christians by the name of Jews.  See Dion Cassius, l. lxvii. c

14, lxviii. l - G.

     On this point I should adopt the view of Gibbon rather than

that of M Guizot. - M]

[Footnote *: It is with good reason that this massacre has been

called a persecution, for it lasted during the whole reign of

Maximin, as may be seen in Eusebius. (l. vi. c. 28.) Rufinus

expressly confirms it: Tribus annis a Maximino persecutione

commota, in quibus finem et persecutionis fecit et vitas Hist. l.

vi. c. 19. - G.]

     Notwithstanding the cruel disposition of Maximin, the

effects of his resentment against the Christians were of a very

local and temporary nature, and the pious Origen, who had been

proscribed as a devoted victim, was still reserved to convey the

truths of the gospel to the ear of monarchs. ^118 He addressed

several edifying letters to the emperor Philip, to his wife, and

to his mother; and as soon as that prince, who was born in the

neighborhood of Palestine, had usurped the Imperial sceptre, the

Christians acquired a friend and a protector.  The public and

even partial favor of Philip towards the sectaries of the new

religion, and his constant reverence for the ministers of the

church, gave some color to the suspicion, which prevailed in his

own times, that the emperor himself was become a convert to the

faith; ^119 and afforded some grounds for a fable which was

afterwards invented, that he had been purified by confession and

penance from the guilt contracted by the murder of his innocent

predecessor. ^120 the fall of Philip introduced, with the change

of masters, a new system of government, so oppressive to the

Christians, that their former condition, ever since the time of

Domitian, was represented as a state of perfect freedom and

security, if compared with the rigorous treatment which they

experienced under the short reign of Decius. ^121 The virtues of

that prince will scarcely allow us to suspect that he was

actuated by a mean resentment against the favorites of his

predecessor; and it is more reasonable to believe, that in the

prosecution of his general design to restore the purity of Roman

manners, he was desirous of delivering the empire from what he

condemned as a recent and criminal superstition.  The bishops of

the most considerable cities were removed by exile or death: the

vigilance of the magistrates prevented the clergy of Rome during

sixteen months from proceeding to a new election; and it was the

opinion of the Christians, that the emperor would more patiently

endure a competitor for the purple, than a bishop in the capital.

^122 Were it possible to suppose that the penetration of Decius

had discovered pride under the disguise of humility, or that he

could foresee the temporal dominion which might insensibly arise

from the claims of spiritual authority, we might be less

surprised, that he should consider the successors of St. Peter,

as the most formidable rivals to those of Augustus.

[Footnote 118: Orosius, l. vii. c. 19, mentions Origen as the

object of Maximin's resentment; and Firmilianus, a Cappadocian

bishop of that age, gives a just and confined idea of this

persecution, (apud Cyprian Epist. 75.)]

[Footnote 119: The mention of those princes who were publicly

supposed to be Christians, as we find it in an epistle of

Dionysius of Alexandria, (ap. Euseb. l. vii. c. 10,) evidently

alludes to Philip and his family, and forms a contemporary

evidence, that such a report had prevailed; but the Egyptian

bishop, who lived at an humble distance from the court of Rome,

expresses himself with a becoming diffidence concerning the truth

of the fact.  The epistles of Origen (which were extant in the

time of Eusebius, see l. vi. c. 36) would most probably decide

this curious rather than important question.]

[Footnote 120: Euseb. l. vi. c. 34.  The story, as is usual, has

been embellished by succeeding writers, and is confuted, with

much superfluous learning, by Frederick Spanheim, (Opera Varia,

tom. ii. p. 400, &c.)]

[Footnote 121: Lactantius, de Mortibus Persecutorum, c. 3, 4.

After celebrating the felicity and increase of the church, under

a long succession of good princes, he adds, "Extitit post annos

plurimos, execrabile animal, Decius, qui vexaret Ecclesiam."]

[Footnote 122: Euseb. l. vi. c. 39.  Cyprian. Epistol. 55.  The

see of Rome remained vacant from the martyrdom of Fabianus, the

20th of January, A. D. 259, till the election of Cornelius, the

4th of June, A. D. 251 Decius had probably left Rome, since he

was killed before the end of that year.]

     The administration of Valerian was distinguished by a levity

and inconstancy ill suited to the gravity of the Roman Censor.

In the first part of his reign, he surpassed in clemency those

princes who had been suspected of an attachment to the Christian

faith.  In the last three years and a half, listening to the

insinuations of a minister addicted to the superstitions of

Egypt, he adopted the maxims, and imitated the severity, of his

predecessor Decius. ^123 The accession of Gallienus, which

increased the calamities of the empire, restored peace to the

church; and the Christians obtained the free exercise of their

religion by an edict addressed to the bishops, and conceived in

such terms as seemed to acknowledge their office and public

character. ^124 The ancient laws, without being formally

repealed, were suffered to sink into oblivion; and (excepting

only some hostile intentions which are attributed to the emperor

Aurelian ^125) the disciples of Christ passed above forty years

in a state of prosperity, far more dangerous to their virtue than

the severest trials of persecution.

[Footnote 123: Euseb. l. vii. c. 10.  Mosheim (p. 548) has very

clearly shown that the praefect Macrianus, and the Egyptian

Magus, are one and the same person.]

[Footnote 124: Eusebius (l. vii. c. 13) gives us a Greek version

of this Latin edict, which seems to have been very concise.  By

another edict, he directed that the Coemeteria should be restored

to the Christians.]

[Footnote 125: Euseb. l. vii. c. 30.  Lactantius de M. P. c. 6.

Hieronym. in Chron. p. 177.  Orosius, l. vii. c. 23.  Their

language is in general so ambiguous and incorrect, that we are at

a loss to determine how far Aurelian had carried his intentions

before he was assassinated.  Most of the moderns (except Dodwell,

Dissertat. Cyprian. vi. 64) have seized the occasion of gaining a

few extraordinary martyrs.

     Note: Dr. Lardner has detailed, with his usual impartiality,

all that has come down to us relating to the persecution of

Aurelian, and concludes by saying, "Upon more carefully examining

the words of Eusebius, and observing the accounts of other

authors, learned men have generally, and, as I think, very

judiciously, determined, that Aurelian not only intended, but did

actually persecute: but his persecution was short, he having died

soon after the publication of his edicts." Heathen Test. c.

xxxvi. - Basmage positively pronounces the same opinion: Non

intentatum modo, sed executum quoque brevissimo tempore mandatum,

nobis infixum est in aniasis.  Basn. Ann. 275, No. 2 and compare

Pagi Ann. 272, Nos. 4, 12, 27 - G.]

     The story of Paul of Samosata, who filled the metropolitan

see of Antioch, while the East was in the hands of Odenathus and

Zenobia, may serve to illustrate the condition and character of

the times.  The wealth of that prelate was a sufficient evidence

of his guilt, since it was neither derived from the inheritance

of his fathers, nor acquired by the arts of honest industry.  But

Paul considered the service of the church as a very lucrative

profession. ^126 His ecclesiastical jurisdiction was venal and

rapacious; he extorted frequent contributions from the most

opulent of the faithful, and converted to his own use a

considerable part of the public revenue.  By his pride and

luxury, the Christian religion was rendered odious in the eyes of

the Gentiles.  His council chamber and his throne, the splendor

with which he appeared in public, the suppliant crowd who

solicited his attention, the multitude of letters and petitions

to which he dictated his answers, and the perpetual hurry of

business in which he was involved, were circumstances much better

suited to the state of a civil magistrate, ^127 than to the

humility of a primitive bishop.  When he harangued his people

from the pulpit, Paul affected the figurative style and the

theatrical gestures of an Asiatic sophist, while the cathedral

resounded with the loudest and most extravagant acclamations in

the praise of his divine eloquence.  Against those who resisted

his power, or refused to flatter his vanity, the prelate of

Antioch was arrogant, rigid, and inexorable; but he relaxed the

discipline, and lavished the treasures of the church on his

dependent clergy, who were permitted to imitate their master in

the gratification of every sensual appetite.  For Paul indulged

himself very freely in the pleasures of the table, and he had

received into the episcopal palace two young and beautiful women

as the constant companions of his leisure moments. ^128

[Footnote 126: Paul was better pleased with the title of

Ducenarius, than with that of bishop.  The Ducenarius was an

Imperial procurator, so called from his salary of two hundred

Sestertia, or 1600l. a year.  (See Salmatius ad Hist. August. p.

124.) Some critics suppose that the bishop of Antioch had

actually obtained such an office from Zenobia, while others

consider it only as a figurative expression of his pomp and

insolence.]

[Footnote 127: Simony was not unknown in those times; and the

clergy some times bought what they intended to sell.  It appears

that the bishopric of Carthage was purchased by a wealthy matron,

named Lucilla, for her servant Majorinus.  The price was 400

Folles.  (Monument. Antiq. ad calcem Optati, p. 263.) Every

Follis contained 125 pieces of silver, and the whole sum may be

computed at about 2400l.]

[Footnote 128: If we are desirous of extenuating the vices of

Paul, we must suspect the assembled bishops of the East of

publishing the most malicious calumnies in circular epistles

addressed to all the churches of the empire, (ap. Euseb. l. vii.

c. 30.)]

     Notwithstanding these scandalous vices, if Paul of Samosata

had preserved the purity of the orthodox faith, his reign over

the capital of Syria would have ended only with his life; and had

a seasonable persecution intervened, an effort of courage might

perhaps have placed him in the rank of saints and martyrs. ^*

Some nice and subtle errors, which he imprudently adopted and

obstinately maintained, concerning the doctrine of the Trinity,

excited the zeal and indignation of the Eastern churches. ^129

From Egypt to the Euxine Sea, the bishops were in arms and in

motion.  Several councils were held, confutations were published,

excommunications were pronounced, ambiguous explanations were by

turns accepted and refused, treaties were concluded and violated,

and at length Paul of Samosata was degraded from his episcopal

character, by the sentence of seventy or eighty bishops, who

assembled for that purpose at Antioch, and who, without

consulting the rights of the clergy or people, appointed a

successor by their own authority.  The manifest irregularity of

this proceeding increased the numbers of the discontented

faction; and as Paul, who was no stranger to the arts of courts,

had insinuated himself into the favor of Zenobia, he maintained

above four years the possession of the episcopal house and

office. ^* The victory of Aurelian changed the face of the East,

and the two contending parties, who applied to each other the

epithets of schism and heresy, were either commanded or permitted

to plead their cause before the tribunal of the conqueror.  This

public and very singular trial affords a convincing proof that

the existence, the property, the privileges, and the internal

policy of the Christians, were acknowledged, if not by the laws,

at least by the magistrates, of the empire. As a Pagan and as a

soldier, it could scarcely be expected that Aurelian should enter

into the discussion, whether the sentiments of Paul or those of

his adversaries were most agreeable to the true standard of the

orthodox faith. His determination, however, was founded on the

general principles of equity and reason.  He considered the

bishops of Italy as the most impartial and respectable judges

among the Christians, and as soon as he was informed that they

had unanimously approved the sentence of the council, he

acquiesced in their opinion, and immediately gave orders that

Paul should be compelled to relinquish the temporal possessions

belonging to an office, of which, in the judgment of his

brethren, he had been regularly deprived. But while we applaud

the justice, we should not overlook the policy, of Aurelian, who

was desirous of restoring and cementing the dependence of the

provinces on the capital, by every means which could bind the

interest or prejudices of any part of his subjects. ^130

[Footnote *: It appears, nevertheless, that the vices and

immoralities of Paul of Samosata had much weight in the sentence

pronounced against him by the bishops.  The object of the letter,

addressed by the synod to the bishops of Rome and Alexandria, was

to inform them of the change in the faith of Paul, the

altercations and discussions to which it had given rise, as well

as of his morals and the whole of his conduct.  Euseb. Hist.

Eccl. l. vii c. xxx - G.]

[Footnote 129: His heresy (like those of Noetus and Sabellius, in

the same century) tended to confound the mysterious distinction

of the divine persons. See Mosheim, p. 702, &c.]

[Footnote *: "Her favorite, (Zenobia's,) Paul of Samosata, seems

to have entertained some views of attempting a union between

Judaism and Christianity; both parties rejected the unnatural

alliance." Hist. of Jews, iii. 175, and Jost. Geschichte der

Israeliter, iv. 167.  The protection of the severe Zenobia is the

only circumstance which may raise a doubt of the notorious

immorality of Paul. - M.]

[Footnote 130: Euseb. Hist. Ecclesiast. l. vii. c. 30.  We are

entirely indebted to him for the curious story of Paul of

Samosata.]

     Amidst the frequent revolutions of the empire, the

Christians still flourished in peace and prosperity; and

notwithstanding a celebrated aera of martyrs has been deduced

from the accession of Diocletian, ^131 the new system of policy,

introduced and maintained by the wisdom of that prince,

continued, during more than eighteen years, to breathe the

mildest and most liberal spirit of religious toleration.  The

mind of Diocletian himself was less adapted indeed to speculative

inquiries, than to the active labors of war and government.  His

prudence rendered him averse to any great innovation, and though

his temper was not very susceptible of zeal or enthusiasm, he

always maintained an habitual regard for the ancient deities of

the empire.  But the leisure of the two empresses, of his wife

Prisca, and of Valeria, his daughter, permitted them to listen

with more attention and respect to the truths of Christianity,

which in every age has acknowledged its important obligations to

female devotion. ^132 The principal eunuchs, Lucian ^133 and

Dorotheus, Gorgonius and Andrew, who attended the person,

possessed the favor, and governed the household of Diocletian,

protected by their powerful influence the faith which they had

embraced.  Their example was imitated by many of the most

considerable officers of the palace, who, in their respective

stations, had the care of the Imperial ornaments, of the robes,

of the furniture, of the jewels, and even of the private

treasury; and, though it might sometimes be incumbent on them to

accompany the emperor when he sacrificed in the temple, ^134 they

enjoyed, with their wives, their children, and their slaves, the

free exercise of the Christian religion.  Diocletian and his

colleagues frequently conferred the most important offices on

those persons who avowed their abhorrence for the worship of the

gods, but who had displayed abilities proper for the service of

the state.  The bishops held an honorable rank in their

respective provinces, and were treated with distinction and

respect, not only by the people, but by the magistrates

themselves.  Almost in every city, the ancient churches were

found insufficient to contain the increasing multitude of

proselytes; and in their place more stately and capacious

edifices were erected for the public worship of the faithful.

The corruption of manners and principles, so forcibly lamented by

Eusebius, ^135 may be considered, not only as a consequence, but

as a proof, of the liberty which the Christians enjoyed and

abused under the reign of Diocletian.  Prosperity had relaxed the

nerves of discipline.  Fraud, envy, and malice prevailed in every

congregation.  The presbyters aspired to the episcopal office,

which every day became an object more worthy of their ambition.

The bishops, who contended with each other for ecclesiastical

preeminence, appeared by their conduct to claim a secular and

tyrannical power in the church; and the lively faith which still

distinguished the Christians from the Gentiles, was shown much

less in their lives, than in their controversial writings.

[Footnote 131: The Aera of Martyrs, which is still in use among

the Copts and the Abyssinians, must be reckoned from the 29th of

August, A. D. 284; as the beginning of the Egyptian year was

nineteen days earlier than the real accession of Diocletian.  See

Dissertation Preliminaire a l'Art de verifier les Dates.

     Note: On the aera of martyrs see the very curious

dissertations of Mons Letronne on some recently discovered

inscriptions in Egypt and Nubis, p. 102, &c. - M.]

[Footnote 132: The expression of Lactantius, (de M. P. c. 15,)

"sacrificio pollui coegit," implies their antecedent conversion

to the faith, but does not seem to justify the assertion of

Mosheim, (p. 912,) that they had been privately baptized.]

[Footnote 133: M. de Tillemont (Memoires Ecclesiastiques, tom. v.

part i. p. 11, 12) has quoted from the Spicilegium of Dom Luc

d'Archeri a very curious instruction which Bishop Theonas

composed for the use of Lucian.]

[Footnote 134: Lactantius, de M. P. c. 10.]

[Footnote 135: Eusebius, Hist. Ecclesiast. l. viii. c. 1.  The

reader who consults the original will not accuse me of

heightening the picture. Eusebius was about sixteen years of age

at the accession of the emperor Diocletian.]

     Notwithstanding this seeming security, an attentive observer

might discern some symptoms that threatened the church with a

more violent persecution than any which she had yet endured.  The

zeal and rapid progress of the Christians awakened the

Polytheists from their supine indifference in the cause of those

deities, whom custom and education had taught them to revere.

The mutual provocations of a religious war, which had already

continued above two hundred years, exasperated the animosity of

the contending parties.  The Pagans were incensed at the rashness

of a recent and obscure sect, which presumed to accuse their

countrymen of error, and to devote their ancestors to eternal

misery.  The habits of justifying the popular mythology against

the invectives of an implacable enemy, produced in their minds

some sentiments of faith and reverence for a system which they

had been accustomed to consider with the most careless levity.

The supernatural powers assumed by the church inspired at the

same time terror and emulation.  The followers of the established

religion intrenched themselves behind a similar fortification of

prodigies; invented new modes of sacrifice, of expiation, and of

initiation; ^136 attempted to revive the credit of their expiring

oracles; ^137 and listened with eager credulity to every

impostor, who flattered their prejudices by a tale of wonders.

^138 Both parties seemed to acknowledge the truth of those

miracles which were claimed by their adversaries; and while they

were contented with ascribing them to the arts of magic, and to

the power of daemons, they mutually concurred in restoring and

establishing the reign of superstition. ^139 Philosophy, her most

dangerous enemy, was now converted into her most useful ally.

The groves of the academy, the gardens of Epicurus, and even the

portico of the Stoics, were almost deserted, as so many different

schools of scepticism or impiety; ^140 and many among the Romans

were desirous that the writings of Cicero should be condemned and

suppressed by the authority of the senate. ^141 The prevailing

sect of the new Platonicians judged it prudent to connect

themselves with the priests, whom perhaps they despised, against

the Christians, whom they had reason to fear. These fashionable

Philosophers prosecuted the design of extracting allegorical

wisdom from the fictions of the Greek poets; instituted

mysterious rites of devotion for the use of their chosen

disciples; recommended the worship of the ancient gods as the

emblems or ministers of the Supreme Deity, and composed against

the faith of the gospel many elaborate treatises, ^142 which have

since been committed to the flames by the prudence of orthodox

emperors. ^143

[Footnote 136: We might quote, among a great number of instances,

the mysterious worship of Mythras, and the Taurobolia; the latter

of which became fashionable in the time of the Antonines, (see a

Dissertation of M. de Boze, in the Memoires de l'Academie des

Inscriptions, tom. ii. p. 443.) The romance of Apuleius is as

full of devotion as of satire.

     Note: On the extraordinary progress of the Mahriac rites, in

the West, see De Guigniaud's translation of Creuzer, vol. i. p.

365, and Note 9, tom. i. part 2, p. 738, &c. - M.]

[Footnote 137: The impostor Alexander very strongly recommended

the oracle of Trophonius at Mallos, and those of Apollo at Claros

and Miletus, (Lucian, tom. ii. p. 236, edit. Reitz.) The last of

these, whose singular history would furnish a very curious

episode, was consulted by Diocletian before he published his

edicts of persecution, (Lactantius, de M. P. c. 11.)]

[Footnote 138: Besides the ancient stories of Pythagoras and

Aristeas, the cures performed at the shrine of Aesculapius, and

the fables related of Apollonius of Tyana, were frequently

opposed to the miracles of Christ; though I agree with Dr.

Lardner, (see Testimonies, vol. iii. p. 253, 352,) that when

Philostratus composed the life of Apollonius, he had no such

intention.]

[Footnote 139: It is seriously to be lamented, that the Christian

fathers, by acknowledging the supernatural, or, as they deem it,

the infernal part of Paganism, destroy with their own hands the

great advantage which we might otherwise derive from the liberal

concessions of our adversaries.]

[Footnote 140: Julian (p. 301, edit. Spanheim) expresses a pious

joy, that the providence of the gods had extinguished the impious

sects, and for the most part destroyed the books of the

Pyrrhonians and Epicuraeans, which had been very numerous, since

Epicurus himself composed no less than 300 volumes.  See Diogenes

Laertius, l. x. c. 26.]

[Footnote 141: Cumque alios audiam mussitare indignanter, et

dicere opportere statui per Senatum, aboleantur ut haec scripta,

quibus Christiana Religio comprobetur, et vetustatis opprimatur

auctoritas.  Arnobius adversus Gentes, l. iii. p. 103, 104.  He

adds very properly, Erroris convincite Ciceronem . . . nam

intercipere scripta, et publicatam velle submergere lectionem,

non est Deum defendere sed veritatis testificationem timere.]

[Footnote 142: Lactantius (Divin. Institut. l. v. c. 2, 3) gives

a very clear and spirited account of two of these philosophic

adversaries of the faith. The large treatise of Porphyry against

the Christians consisted of thirty books, and was composed in

Sicily about the year 270.]

[Footnote 143: See Socrates, Hist. Ecclesiast. l. i. c. 9, and

Codex Justinian. l. i. i. l. s.]

Chapter XVI: Conduct Towards The Christians, From Nero To

Constantine.

Part VI.

     Although the policy of Diocletian and the humanity of

Constantius inclined them to preserve inviolate the maxims of

toleration, it was soon discovered that their two associates,

Maximian and Galerius, entertained the most implacable aversion

for the name and religion of the Christians. The minds of those

princes had never been enlightened by science; education had

never softened their temper.  They owed their greatness to their

swords, and in their most elevated fortune they still retained

their superstitious prejudices of soldiers and peasants.  In the

general administration of the provinces they obeyed the laws

which their benefactor had established; but they frequently found

occasions of exercising within their camp and palaces a secret

persecution, ^144 for which the imprudent zeal of the Christians

sometimes offered the most specious pretences.  A sentence of

death was executed upon Maximilianus, an African youth, who had

been produced by his own father ^* before the magistrate as a

sufficient and legal recruit, but who obstinately persisted in

declaring, that his conscience would not permit him to embrace

the profession of a soldier. ^145 It could scarcely be expected

that any government should suffer the action of Marcellus the

Centurion to pass with impunity.  On the day of a public

festival, that officer threw away his belt, his arms, and the

ensigns of his office, and exclaimed with a loud voice, that he

would obey none but Jesus Christ the eternal King, and that he

renounced forever the use of carnal weapons, and the service of

an idolatrous master.  The soldiers, as soon as they recovered

from their astonishment, secured the person of Marcellus.  He was

examined in the city of Tingi by the president of that part of

Mauritania; and as he was convicted by his own confession, he was

condemned and beheaded for the crime of desertion. ^146 Examples

of such a nature savor much less of religious persecution than of

martial or even civil law; but they served to alienate the mind

of the emperors, to justify the severity of Galerius, who

dismissed a great number of Christian officers from their

employments; and to authorize the opinion, that a sect of

enthusiastics, which avowed principles so repugnant to the public

safety, must either remain useless, or would soon become

dangerous, subjects of the empire.

[Footnote 144: Eusebius, l. viii. c. 4, c. 17.  He limits the

number of military martyrs, by a remarkable expression, of which

neither his Latin nor French translator have rendered the energy.

Notwithstanding the authority of Eusebius, and the silence of

Lactantius, Ambrose, Sulpicius, Orosius, &c., it has been long

believed, that the Thebaean legion, consisting of 6000

Christians, suffered martyrdom by the order of Maximian, in the

valley of the Pennine Alps.  The story was first published about

the middle of the 5th century, by Eucherius, bishop of Lyons, who

received it from certain persons, who received it from Isaac,

bishop of Geneva, who is said to have received it from Theodore,

bishop of Octodurum. The abbey of St. Maurice still subsists, a

rich monument of the credulity of Sigismund, king of Burgundy.

See an excellent Dissertation in xxxvith volume of the

Bibliotheque Raisonnee, p. 427-454.]

[Footnote *: M. Guizot criticizes Gibbon's account of this

incident.  He supposes that Maximilian was not "produced by his

father as a recruit," but was obliged to appear by the law, which

compelled the sons of soldiers to serve at 21 years old.  Was not

this a law of Constantine?  Neither does this circumstance appear

in the acts.  His father had clearly expected him to serve, as he

had bought him a new dress for the occasion; yet he refused to

force the conscience of his son. and when Maximilian was

condemned to death, the father returned home in joy, blessing God

for having bestowed upon him such a son. - M.]

[Footnote 145: See the Acta Sincera, p. 299.  The accounts of his

martyrdom and that of Marcellus, bear every mark of truth and

authenticity.]

[Footnote 146: Acta Sincera, p. 302.

     Note: M. Guizot here justly observes, that it was the

necessity of sacrificing to the gods, which induced Marcellus to

act in this manner. - M.]

     After the success of the Persian war had raised the hopes

and the reputation of Galerius, he passed a winter with

Diocletian in the palace of Nicomedia; and the fate of

Christianity became the object of their secret consultations.

^147 The experienced emperor was still inclined to pursue

measures of lenity; and though he readily consented to exclude

the Christians from holding any employments in the household or

the army, he urged in the strongest terms the danger as well as

cruelty of shedding the blood of those deluded fanatics.

Galerius at length extorted ^!! from him the permission of

summoning a council, composed of a few persons the most

distinguished in the civil and military departments of the state.

The important question was agitated in their presence, and those

ambitious courtiers easily discerned, that it was incumbent on

them to second, by their eloquence, the importunate violence of

the Caesar.  It may be presumed, that they insisted on every

topic which might interest the pride, the piety, or the fears, of

their sovereign in the destruction of Christianity.  Perhaps they

represented, that the glorious work of the deliverance of the

empire was left imperfect, as long as an independent people was

permitted to subsist and multiply in the heart of the provinces.

The Christians, (it might specially be alleged,) renouncing the

gods and the institutions of Rome, had constituted a distinct

republic, which might yet be suppressed before it had acquired

any military force; but which was already governed by its own

laws and magistrates, was possessed of a public treasure, and was

intimately connected in all its parts by the frequent assemblies

of the bishops, to whose decrees their numerous and opulent

congregations yielded an implicit obedience.  Arguments like

these may seem to have determined the reluctant mind of

Diocletian to embrace a new system of persecution; but though we

may suspect, it is not in our power to relate, the secret

intrigues of the palace, the private views and resentments, the

jealousy of women or eunuchs, and all those trifling but decisive

causes which so often influence the fate of empires, and the

councils of the wisest monarchs. ^148

[Footnote 147: De M. P. c. 11.  Lactantius (or whoever was the

author of this little treatise) was, at that time, an inhabitant

of Nicomedia; but it seems difficult to conceive how he could

acquire so accurate a knowledge of what passed in the Imperial

cabinet.

     Note: Lactantius, who was subsequently chosen by Constantine

to educate Crispus, might easily have learned these details from

Constantine himself, already of sufficient age to interest

himself in the affairs of the government, and in a position to

obtain the best information. - G.

     This assumes the doubtful point of the authorship of the

Treatise. - M.]

[Footnote !!: This permission was not extorted from Diocletian;

he took the step of his own accord.  Lactantius says, in truth,

Nec tamen deflectere potuit (Diocletianus) praecipitis hominis

insaniam; placuit ergo amicorum sententiam experiri.  (De Mort.

Pers. c. 11.) But this measure was in accordance with the

artificial character of Diocletian, who wished to have the

appearance of doing good by his own impulse and evil by the

impulse of others. Nam erat hujus malitiae, cum bonum quid facere

decrevisse sine consilio faciebat, ut ipse laudaretur.  Cum autem

malum. quoniam id reprehendendum sciebat, in consilium multos

advocabat, ut alioram culpao adscriberetur quicquid ipse

deliquerat.  Lact. ib. Eutropius says likewise, Miratus callide

fuit, sagax praeterea et admodum subtilis ingenio, et qui

severitatem suam aliena invidia vellet explere. Eutrop. ix. c.

26. - G.

     The manner in which the coarse and unfriendly pencil of the

author of the Treatise de Mort. Pers. has drawn the character of

Diocletian, seems inconsistent with this profound subtilty.  Many

readers will perhaps agree with Gibbon. - M.]

[Footnote 148: The only circumstance which we can discover, is

the devotion and jealousy of the mother of Galerius.  She is

described by Lactantius, as Deorum montium cultrix; mulier

admodum superstitiosa.  She had a great influence over her son,

and was offended by the disregard of some of her Christian

servants.

     Note: This disregard consisted in the Christians fasting and

praying instead of participating in the banquets and sacrifices

which she celebrated with the Pagans.  Dapibus sacrificabat poene

quotidie ac vicariis suis epulis exhibebat.  Christiani

abstinebant, et illa cum gentibus epulante, jejuniis hi et

oratiomibus insisteban; hine concepit odium Lact de Hist. Pers.

c. 11. - G.]

     The pleasure of the emperors was at length signified to the

Christians, who, during the course of this melancholy winter, had

expected, with anxiety, the result of so many secret

consultations.  The twenty-third of February, which coincided

with the Roman festival of the Terminalia, ^149 was appointed

(whether from accident or design) to set bounds to the progress

of Christianity.  At the earliest dawn of day, the Praetorian

praefect, ^150 accompanied by several generals, tribunes, and

officers of the revenue, repaired to the principal church of

Nicomedia, which was situated on an eminence in the most populous

and beautiful part of the city.  The doors were instantly broke

open; they rushed into the sanctuary; and as they searched in

vain for some visible object of worship, they were obliged to

content themselves with committing to the flames the volumes of

the holy Scripture. The ministers of Diocletian were followed by

a numerous body of guards and pioneers, who marched in order of

battle, and were provided with all the instruments used in the

destruction of fortified cities.  By their incessant labor, a

sacred edifice, which towered above the Imperial palace, and had

long excited the indignation and envy of the Gentiles, was in a

few hours levelled with the ground. ^151

[Footnote 149: The worship and festival of the god Terminus are

elegantly illustrated by M. de Boze, Mem. de l'Academie des

Inscriptions, tom. i. p. 50.]

[Footnote 150: In our only MS. of Lactantius, we read profectus;

but reason, and the authority of all the critics, allow us,

instead of that word, which destroys the sense of the passage, to

substitute proefectus.]

[Footnote 151: Lactantius, de M. P. c. 12, gives a very lively

picture of the destruction of the church.]

     The next day the general edict of persecution was published;

^152 and though Diocletian, still averse to the effusion of

blood, had moderated the fury of Galerius, who proposed, that

every one refusing to offer sacrifice should immediately be burnt

alive, the penalties inflicted on the obstinacy of the Christians

might be deemed sufficiently rigorous and effectual.  It was

enacted, that their churches, in all the provinces of the empire,

should be demolished to their foundations; and the punishment of

death was denounced against all who should presume to hold any

secret assemblies for the purpose of religious worship.  The

philosophers, who now assumed the unworthy office of directing

the blind zeal of persecution, had diligently studied the nature

and genius of the Christian religion; and as they were not

ignorant that the speculative doctrines of the faith were

supposed to be contained in the writings of the prophets, of the

evangelists, and of the apostles, they most probably suggested

the order, that the bishops and presbyters should deliver all

their sacred books into the hands of the magistrates; who were

commanded, under the severest penalties, to burn them in a public

and solemn manner.  By the same edict, the property of the church

was at once confiscated; and the several parts of which it might

consist were either sold to the highest bidder, united to the

Imperial domain, bestowed on the cities and corporations, or

granted to the solicitations of rapacious courtiers.  After

taking such effectual measures to abolish the worship, and to

dissolve the government of the Christians, it was thought

necessary to subject to the most intolerable hardships the

condition of those perverse individuals who should still reject

the religion of nature, of Rome, and of their ancestors.  Persons

of a liberal birth were declared incapable of holding any honors

or employments; slaves were forever deprived of the hopes of

freedom, and the whole body of the people were put out of the

protection of the law.  The judges were authorized to hear and to

determine every action that was brought against a Christian.  But

the Christians were not permitted to complain of any injury which

they themselves had suffered; and thus those unfortunate

sectaries were exposed to the severity, while they were excluded

from the benefits, of public justice.  This new species of

martyrdom, so painful and lingering, so obscure and ignominious,

was, perhaps, the most proper to weary the constancy of the

faithful: nor can it be doubted that the passions and interest of

mankind were disposed on this occasion to second the designs of

the emperors.  But the policy of a well-ordered government must

sometimes have interposed in behalf of the oppressed Christians;

^* nor was it possible for the Roman princes entirely to remove

the apprehension of punishment, or to connive at every act of

fraud and violence, without exposing their own authority and the

rest of their subjects to the most alarming dangers. ^153

[Footnote 152: Mosheim, (p. 922 - 926,) from man scattered

passages of Lactantius and Eusebius, has collected a very just

and accurate notion of this edict though he sometimes deviates

into conjecture and refinement.]

[Footnote *: This wants proof.  The edict of Diocletian was

executed in all its right during the rest of his reign.  Euseb.

Hist. Eccl. l viii. c. 13. - G.]

[Footnote 153: Many ages afterwards, Edward J. practised, with

great success, the same mode of persecution against the clergy of

England.  See Hume's History of England, vol. ii. p. 300, last

4to edition.]

     This edict was scarcely exhibited to the public view, in the

most conspicuous place of Nicomedia, before it was torn down by

the hands of a Christian, who expressed at the same time, by the

bitterest invectives, his contempt as well as abhorrence for such

impious and tyrannical governors. His offence, according to the

mildest laws, amounted to treason, and deserved death.  And if it

be true that he was a person of rank and education, those

circumstances could serve only to aggravate his guilt.  He was

burnt, or rather roasted, by a slow fire; and his executioners,

zealous to revenge the personal insult which had been offered to

the emperors, exhausted every refinement of cruelty, without

being able to subdue his patience, or to alter the steady and

insulting smile which in his dying agonies he still preserved in

his countenance.  The Christians, though they confessed that his

conduct had not been strictly conformable to the laws of

prudence, admired the divine fervor of his zeal; and the

excessive commendations which they lavished on the memory of

their hero and martyr, contributed to fix a deep impression of

terror and hatred in the mind of Diocletian. ^154

[Footnote 154: Lactantius only calls him quidam, et si non recte,

magno tamer animo, &c., c. 12. Eusebius (l. viii. c. 5) adorns

him with secular honora Neither have condescended to mention his

name; but the Greeks celebrate his memory under that of John.

See Tillemont, Memones Ecclesiastiques, tom. v. part ii. p. 320.]

     His fears were soon alarmed by the view of a danger from

which he very narrowly escaped.  Within fifteen days the palace

of Nicomedia, and even the bed-chamber of Diocletian, were twice

in flames; and though both times they were extinguished without

any material damage, the singular repetition of the fire was

justly considered as an evident proof that it had not been the

effect of chance or negligence.  The suspicion naturally fell on

the Christians; and it was suggested, with some degree of

probability, that those desperate fanatics, provoked by their

present sufferings, and apprehensive of impending calamities, had

entered into a conspiracy with their faithful brethren, the

eunuchs of the palace, against the lives of two emperors, whom

they detested as the irreconcilable enemies of the church of God.

Jealousy and resentment prevailed in every breast, but especially

in that of Diocletian.  A great number of persons, distinguished

either by the offices which they had filled, or by the favor

which they had enjoyed, were thrown into prison.  Every mode of

torture was put in practice, and the court, as well as city, was

polluted with many bloody executions. ^155 But as it was found

impossible to extort any discovery of this mysterious

transaction, it seems incumbent on us either to presume the

innocence, or to admire the resolution, of the sufferers.  A few

days afterwards Galerius hastily withdrew himself from Nicomedia,

declaring, that if he delayed his departure from that devoted

palace, he should fall a sacrifice to the rage of the Christians.

The ecclesiastical historians, from whom alone we derive a

partial and imperfect knowledge of this persecution, are at a

loss how to account for the fears and dangers of the emperors.

Two of these writers, a prince and a rhetorician, were eye-

witnesses of the fire of Nicomedia.  The one ascribes it to

lightning, and the divine wrath; the other affirms, that it was

kindled by the malice of Galerius himself. ^156

[Footnote 155: Lactantius de M. P. c. 13, 14.  Potentissimi

quondam Eunuchi necati, per quos Palatium et ipse constabat.

Eusebius (l. viii. c. 6) mentions the cruel executions of the

eunuchs, Gorgonius and Dorotheus, and of Anthimius, bishop of

Nicomedia; and both those writers describe, in a vague but

tragical manner, the horrid scenes which were acted even in the

Imperial presence.]

[Footnote 156: See Lactantius, Eusebius, and Constantine, ad

Coetum Sanctorum, c. xxv.  Eusebius confesses his ignorance of

the cause of this fire.

     Note: As the history of these times affords us no example of

any attempts made by the Christians against their persecutors, we

have no reason, not the slightest probability, to attribute to

them the fire in the palace; and the authority of Constantine and

Lactantius remains to explain it.  M. de Tillemont has shown how

they can be reconciled.  Hist. des Empereurs, Vie de Diocletian,

xix. - G.  Had it been done by a Christian, it would probably

have been a fanatic, who would have avowed and gloried in it.

Tillemont's supposition that the fire was first caused by

lightning, and fed and increased by the malice of Galerius, seems

singularly improbable. - M.]

     As the edict against the Christians was designed for a

general law of the whole empire, and as Diocletian and Galerius,

though they might not wait for the consent, were assured of the

concurrence, of the Western princes, it would appear more

consonant to our ideas of policy, that the governors of all the

provinces should have received secret instructions to publish, on

one and the same day, this declaration of war within their

respective departments.  It was at least to be expected, that the

convenience of the public highways and established posts would

have enabled the emperors to transmit their orders with the

utmost despatch from the palace of Nicomedia to the extremities

of the Roman world; and that they would not have suffered fifty

days to elapse, before the edict was published in Syria, and near

four months before it was signified to the cities of Africa. ^157

This delay may perhaps be imputed to the cautious temper of

Diocletian, who had yielded a reluctant consent to the measures

of persecution, and who was desirous of trying the experiment

under his more immediate eye, before he gave way to the disorders

and discontent which it must inevitably occasion in the distant

provinces.  At first, indeed, the magistrates were restrained

from the effusion of blood; but the use of every other severity

was permitted, and even recommended to their zeal; nor could the

Christians, though they cheerfully resigned the ornaments of

their churches, resolve to interrupt their religious assemblies,

or to deliver their sacred books to the flames.  The pious

obstinacy of Felix, an African bishop, appears to have

embarrassed the subordinate ministers of the government.  The

curator of his city sent him in chains to the proconsul.  The

proconsul transmitted him to the Praetorian praefect of Italy;

and Felix, who disdained even to give an evasive answer, was at

length beheaded at Venusia, in Lucania, a place on which the

birth of Horace has conferred fame. ^158 This precedent, and

perhaps some Imperial rescript, which was issued in consequence

of it, appeared to authorize the governors of provinces, in

punishing with death the refusal of the Christians to deliver up

their sacred books.  There were undoubtedly many persons who

embraced this opportunity of obtaining the crown of martyrdom;

but there were likewise too many who purchased an ignominious

life, by discovering and betraying the holy Scripture into the

hands of infidels.  A great number even of bishops and presbyters

acquired, by this criminal compliance, the opprobrious epithet of

Traditors; and their offence was productive of much present

scandal and of much future discord in the African church. ^159

[Footnote 157: Tillemont, Memoires Ecclesiast. tom. v. part i. p.

43.]

[Footnote 158: See the Acta Sincera of Ruinart, p. 353; those of

Felix of Thibara, or Tibiur, appear much less corrupted than in

the other editions, which afford a lively specimen of legendary

license.]

[Footnote 159: See the first book of Optatus of Milevis against

the Donatiste, Paris, 1700, edit. Dupin.  He lived under the

reign of Valens.]

     The copies as well as the versions of Scripture, were

already so multiplied in the empire, that the most severe

inquisition could no longer be attended with any fatal

consequences; and even the sacrifice of those volumes, which, in

every congregation, were preserved for public use, required the

consent of some treacherous and unworthy Christians.  But the

ruin of the churches was easily effected by the authority of the

government, and by the labor of the Pagans.  In some provinces,

however, the magistrates contented themselves with shutting up

the places of religious worship.  In others, they more literally

complied with the terms of the edict; and after taking away the

doors, the benches, and the pulpit, which they burnt as it were

in a funeral pile, they completely demolished the remainder of

the edifice. ^160 It is perhaps to this melancholy occasion that

we should apply a very remarkable story, which is related with so

many circumstances of variety and improbability, that it serves

rather to excite than to satisfy our curiosity. In a small town

in Phrygia, of whose names as well as situation we are left

ignorant, it should seem that the magistrates and the body of the

people had embraced the Christian faith; and as some resistance

might be apprehended to the execution of the edict, the governor

of the province was supported by a numerous detachment of

legionaries.  On their approach the citizens threw themselves

into the church, with the resolution either of defending by arms

that sacred edifice, or of perishing in its ruins.  They

indignantly rejected the notice and permission which was given

them to retire, till the soldiers, provoked by their obstinate

refusal, set fire to the building on all sides, and consumed, by

this extraordinary kind of martyrdom, a great number of

Phrygians, with their wives and children. ^161

[Footnote 160: The ancient monuments, published at the end of

Optatus, p. 261, &c. describe, in a very circumstantial manner,

the proceedings of the governors in the destruction of churches.

They made a minute inventory of the plate, &c., which they found

in them.  That of the church of Cirta, in Numidia, is still

extant.  It consisted of two chalices of gold, and six of silver;

six urns, one kettle, seven lamps, all likewise of silver;

besides a large quantity of brass utensils, and wearing apparel.]

[Footnote 161: Lactantius (Institut. Divin. v. 11) confines the

calamity to the conventiculum, with its congregation.  Eusebius

(viii. 11) extends it to a whole city, and introduces something

very like a regular siege. His ancient Latin translator, Rufinus,

adds the important circumstance of the permission given to the

inhabitants of retiring from thence.  As Phrygia reached to the

confines of Isauria, it is possible that the restless temper of

those independent barbarians may have contributed to this

misfortune.

     Note: Universum populum.  Lact. Inst. Div. v. 11. - G.]

     Some slight disturbances, though they were suppressed almost

as soon as excited, in Syria and the frontiers of Armenia,

afforded the enemies of the church a very plausible occasion to

insinuate, that those troubles had been secretly fomented by the

intrigues of the bishops, who had already forgotten their

ostentatious professions of passive and unlimited obedience. ^162

The resentment, or the fears, of Diocletian, at length

transported him beyond the bounds of moderation, which he had

hitherto preserved, and he declared, in a series of cruel edicts,

^! his intention of abolishing the Christian name.  By the first

of these edicts, the governors of the provinces were directed to

apprehend all persons of the ecclesiastical order; and the

prisons, destined for the vilest criminals, were soon filled with

a multitude of bishops, presbyters, deacons, readers, and

exorcists.  By a second edict, the magistrates were commanded to

employ every method of severity, which might reclaim them from

their odious superstition, and oblige them to return to the

established worship of the gods.  This rigorous order was

extended, by a subsequent edict, to the whole body of Christians,

who were exposed to a violent and general persecution. ^163

Instead of those salutary restraints, which had required the

direct and solemn testimony of an accuser, it became the duty as

well as the interest of the Imperial officers to discover, to

pursue, and to torment the most obnoxious among the faithful.

Heavy penalties were denounced against all who should presume to

save a prescribed sectary from the just indignation of the gods,

and of the emperors.  Yet, notwithstanding the severity of this

law, the virtuous courage of many of the Pagans, in concealing

their friends or relations, affords an honorable proof, that the

rage of superstition had not extinguished in their minds the

sentiments of nature and humanity. ^164

[Footnote 162: Eusebius, l. viii. c. 6.  M. de Valois (with some

probability) thinks that he has discovered the Syrian rebellion

in an oration of Libanius; and that it was a rash attempt of the

tribune Eugenius, who with only five hundred men seized Antioch,

and might perhaps allure the Christians by the promise of

religious toleration.  From Eusebius, (l. ix. c. 8,) as well as

from Moses of Chorene, (Hist. Armen. l. ii. 77, &c.,) it may be

inferred, that Christianity was already introduced into Armenia.]

[Footnote !: He had already passed them in his first edict.  It

does not appear that resentment or fear had any share in the new

persecutions: perhaps they originated in superstition, and a

specious apparent respect for its ministers.  The oracle of

Apollo, consulted by Diocletian, gave no answer; and said that

just men hindered it from speaking.  Constantine, who assisted at

the ceremony, affirms, with an oath, that when questioned about

these men, the high priest named the Christians.  "The Emperor

eagerly seized on this answer; and drew against the innocent a

sword, destined only to punish the guilty: he instantly issued

edicts, written, if I may use the expression, with a poniard; and

ordered the judges to employ all their skill to invent new modes

of punishment.  Euseb. Vit Constant. l. ii c 54." - G.]

[Footnote 163: See Mosheim, p. 938: the text of Eusebius very

plainly shows that the governors, whose powers were enlarged, not

restrained, by the new laws, could punish with death the most

obstinate Christians as an example to their brethren.]

[Footnote 164: Athanasius, p. 833, ap. Tillemont, Mem.

Ecclesiast. tom v part i. 90.]

Chapter XVI: Conduct Towards The Christians, From Nero To

Constantine.

Part VII.

     Diocletian had no sooner published his edicts against the

Christians, than, as if he had been desirous of committing to

other hands the work of persecution, he divested himself of the

Imperial purple.  The character and situation of his colleagues

and successors sometimes urged them to enforce and sometimes

inclined them to suspend, the execution of these rigorous laws;

nor can we acquire a just and distinct idea of this important

period of ecclesiastical history, unless we separately consider

the state of Christianity, in the different parts of the empire,

during the space of ten years, which elapsed between the first

edicts of Diocletian and the final peace of the church.

     The mild and humane temper of Constantius was averse to the

oppression of any part of his subjects.  The principal offices of

his palace were exercised by Christians.  He loved their persons,

esteemed their fidelity, and entertained not any dislike to their

religious principles.  But as long as Constantius remained in the

subordinate station of Caesar, it was not in his power openly to

reject the edicts of Diocletian, or to disobey the commands of

Maximian.  His authority contributed, however, to alleviate the

sufferings which he pitied and abhorred.  He consented with

reluctance to the ruin of the churches; but he ventured to

protect the Christians themselves from the fury of the populace,

and from the rigor of the laws. The provinces of Gaul (under

which we may probably include those of Britain) were indebted for

the singular tranquillity which they enjoyed, to the gentle

interposition of their sovereign. ^165 But Datianus, the

president or governor of Spain, actuated either by zeal or

policy, chose rather to execute the public edicts of the

emperors, than to understand the secret intentions of

Constantius; and it can scarcely be doubted, that his provincial

administration was stained with the blood of a few martyrs. ^166

The elevation of Constantius to the supreme and independent

dignity of Augustus, gave a free scope to the exercise of his

virtues, and the shortness of his reign did not prevent him from

establishing a system of toleration, of which he left the precept

and the example to his son Constantine.  His fortunate son, from

the first moment of his accession, declaring himself the

protector of the church, at length deserved the appellation of

the first emperor who publicly professed and established the

Christian religion.  The motives of his conversion, as they may

variously be deduced from benevolence, from policy, from

conviction, or from remorse, and the progress of the revolution,

which, under his powerful influence and that of his sons,

rendered Christianity the reigning religion of the Roman empire,

will form a very interesting and important chapter in the present

volume of this history.  At present it may be sufficient to

observe, that every victory of Constantine was productive of some

relief or benefit to the church.

[Footnote 165: Eusebius, l. viii. c. 13.  Lactantius de M. P. c.

15. Dodwell (Dissertat. Cyprian. xi. 75) represents them as

inconsistent with each other. But the former evidently speaks of

Constantius in the station of Caesar, and the latter of the same

prince in the rank of Augustus.]

[Footnote 166: Datianus is mentioned, in Gruter's Inscriptions,

as having determined the limits between the territories of Pax

Julia, and those of Ebora, both cities in the southern part of

Lusitania.  If we recollect the neighborhood of those places to

Cape St. Vincent, we may suspect that the celebrated deacon and

martyr of that name had been inaccurately assigned by Prudentius,

&c., to Saragossa, or Valentia.  See the pompous history of his

sufferings, in the Memoires de Tillemont, tom. v. part ii. p.

58-85.  Some critics are of opinion, that the department of

Constantius, as Caesar, did not include Spain, which still

continued under the immediate jurisdiction of Maximian.]

     The provinces of Italy and Africa experienced a short but

violent persecution.  The rigorous edicts of Diocletian were

strictly and cheerfully executed by his associate Maximian, who

had long hated the Christians, and who delighted in acts of blood

and violence.  In the autumn of the first year of the

persecution, the two emperors met at Rome to celebrate their

triumph; several oppressive laws appear to have issued from their

secret consultations, and the diligence of the magistrates was

animated by the presence of their sovereigns., After Diocletian

had divested himself of the purple, Italy and Africa were

administered under the name of Severus, and were exposed, without

defence, to the implacable resentment of his master Galerius.

Among the martyrs of Rome, Adauctus deserves the notice of

posterity.  He was of a noble family in Italy, and had raised

himself, through the successive honors of the palace, to the

important office of treasurer of the private Jemesnes. Adauctus

is the more remarkable for being the only person of rank and

distinction who appears to have suffered death, during the whole

course of this general persecution. ^167

[Footnote 167: Eusebius, l. viii. c. 11.  Gruter, Inscrip. p.

1171, No. 18. Rufinus has mistaken the office of Adauctus, as

well as the place of his martyrdom.

     Note: M. Guizot suggests the powerful cunuchs of the palace.

Dorotheus, Gorgonius, and Andrew, admitted by Gibbon himself to

have been put to death, p. 66.]

     The revolt of Maxentius immediately restored peace to the

churches of Italy and Africa; and the same tyrant who oppressed

every other class of his subjects, showed himself just, humane,

and even partial, towards the afflicted Christians.  He depended

on their gratitude and affection, and very naturally presumed,

that the injuries which they had suffered, and the dangers which

they still apprehended from his most inveterate enemy, would

secure the fidelity of a party already considerable by their

numbers and opulence. ^168 Even the conduct of Maxentius towards

the bishops of Rome and Carthage may be considered as the proof

of his toleration, since it is probable that the most orthodox

princes would adopt the same measures with regard to their

established clergy.  Marcellus, the former of these prelates, had

thrown the capital into confusion, by the severe penance which he

imposed on a great number of Christians, who, during the late

persecution, had renounced or dissembled their religion.  The

rage of faction broke out in frequent and violent seditions; the

blood of the faithful was shed by each other's hands, and the

exile of Marcellus, whose prudence seems to have been less

eminent than his zeal, was found to be the only measure capable

of restoring peace to the distracted church of Rome. ^169 The

behavior of Mensurius, bishop of Carthage, appears to have been

still more reprehensible.  A deacon of that city had published a

libel against the emperor.  The offender took refuge in the

episcopal palace; and though it was somewhat early to advance any

claims of ecclesiastical immunities, the bishop refused to

deliver him up to the officers of justice.  For this treasonable

resistance, Mensurius was summoned to court, and instead of

receiving a legal sentence of death or banishment, he was

permitted, after a short examination, to return to his diocese.

^170 Such was the happy condition of the Christian subjects of

Maxentius, that whenever they were desirous of procuring for

their own use any bodies of martyrs, they were obliged to

purchase them from the most distant provinces of the East.  A

story is related of Aglae, a Roman lady, descended from a

consular family, and possessed of so ample an estate, that it

required the management of seventy-three stewards.  Among these

Boniface was the favorite of his mistress; and as Aglae mixed

love with devotion, it is reported that he was admitted to share

her bed.  Her fortune enabled her to gratify the pious desire of

obtaining some sacred relics from the East. She intrusted

Boniface with a considerable sum of gold, and a large quantity of

aromatics; and her lover, attended by twelve horsemen and three

covered chariots, undertook a remote pilgrimage, as far as Tarsus

in Cilicia. ^171

[Footnote 168: Eusebius, l. viii. c. 14.  But as Maxentius was

vanquished by Constantine, it suited the purpose of Lactantius to

place his death among those of the persecutors.

     Note: M. Guizot directly contradicts this statement of

Gibbon, and appeals to Eusebius.  Maxentius, who assumed the

power in Italy, pretended at first to be a Christian, to gain the

favor of the Roman people; he ordered his ministers to cease to

persecute the Christians, affecting a hypocritical piety, in

order to appear more mild than his predecessors; but his actions

soon proved that he was very different from what they had at

first hoped." The actions of Maxentius were those of a cruel

tyrant,but not those of a persecutor: the Christians, like the

rest of his subjects, suffered from his vices, but they were not

oppressed as a sect.  Christian females were exposed to his

lusts, as well as to the brutal violence of his colleague

Maximian, but they were not selected as Christians. - M.]

[Footnote 169: The epitaph of Marcellus is to be found in Gruter,

Inscrip. p 1172, No. 3, and it contains all that we know of his

history. Marcellinus and Marcellus, whose names follow in the

list of popes, are supposed by many critics to be different

persons; but the learned Abbe de Longuerue was convinced that

they were one and the same.

     Veridicus rector lapsis quia crimina flere

     Praedixit miseris, fuit omnibus hostis amarus.

     Hinc furor, hinc odium; sequitur discordia, lites,

     Seditio, caedes; solvuntur foedera pacis.

     Crimen ob alterius, Christum qui in pace negavit

     Finibus expulsus patriae est feritate Tyranni.

     Haec breviter Damasus voluit comperta referre:

     Marcelli populus meritum cognoscere posset.

We may observe that Damasus was made Bishop of Rome, A. D. 366.]

[Footnote 170: Optatus contr. Donatist. l. i. c. 17, 18.

     Note: The words of Optatus are, Profectus (Roman) causam

dixit; jussus con reverti Carthaginem; perhaps, in pleading his

cause, he exculpated himself, since he received an order to

return to Carthage. - G.]

[Footnote 171: The Acts of the Passion of St. Boniface, which

abound in miracles and declamation, are published by Ruinart, (p.

283 - 291,) both in Greek and Latin, from the authority of very

ancient manuscripts.

     Note: We are ignorant whether Aglae and Boniface were

Christians at the time of their unlawful connection.  See

Tillemont.  Mem, Eccles.  Note on the Persecution of Domitian,

tom. v. note 82.  M. de Tillemont proves also that the history is

doubtful. - G.

     Sir D. Dalrymple (Lord Hailes) calls the story of Aglae and

Boniface as of equal authority with our popular histories of

Whittington and Hickathrift. Christian Antiquities, ii. 64. - M.]

     The sanguinary temper of Galerius, the first and principal

author of the persecution, was formidable to those Christians

whom their misfortunes had placed within the limits of his

dominions; and it may fairly be presumed that many persons of a

middle rank, who were not confined by the chains either of wealth

or of poverty, very frequently deserted their native country, and

sought a refuge in the milder climate of the West. ^! As long as

he commanded only the armies and provinces of Illyricum, he could

with difficulty either find or make a considerable number of

martyrs, in a warlike country, which had entertained the

missionaries of the gospel with more coldness and reluctance than

any other part of the empire. ^172 But when Galerius had obtained

the supreme power, and the government of the East, he indulged in

their fullest extent his zeal and cruelty, not only in the

provinces of Thrace and Asia, which acknowledged his immediate

jurisdiction, but in those of Syria, Palestine, and Egypt, where

Maximin gratified his own inclination, by yielding a rigorous

obedience to the stern commands of his benefactor. ^173 The

frequent disappointments of his ambitious views, the experience

of six years of persecution, and the salutary reflections which a

lingering and painful distemper suggested to the mind of

Galerius, at length convinced him that the most violent efforts

of despotism are insufficient to extirpate a whole people, or to

subdue their religious prejudices.  Desirous of repairing the

mischief that he had occasioned, he published in his own name,

and in those of Licinius and Constantine, a general edict, which,

after a pompous recital of the Imperial titles, proceeded in the

following manner: -

[Footnote !: A little after this, Christianity was propagated to

the north of the Roman provinces, among the tribes of Germany: a

multitude of Christians, forced by the persecutions of the

Emperors to take refuge among the Barbarians, were received with

kindness.  Euseb. de Vit. Constant. ii. 53. Semler Select. cap.

H. E. p. 115.  The Goths owed their first knowledge of

Christianity to a young girl, a prisoner of war; she continued in

the midst of them her exercises of piety; she fasted, prayed, and

praised God day and night.  When she was asked what good would

come of so much painful trouble she answered, "It is thus that

Christ, the Son of God, is to be honored." Sozomen, ii. c. 6. -

G.]

[Footnote 172: During the four first centuries, there exist few

traces of either bishops or bishoprics in the western Illyricum.

It has been thought probable that the primate of Milan extended

his jurisdiction over Sirmium, the capital of that great

province.  See the Geographia Sacra of Charles de St. Paul, p.

68-76, with the observations of Lucas Holstenius.]

[Footnote 173: The viiith book of Eusebius, as well as the

supplement concerning the martyrs of Palestine, principally

relate to the persecution of Galerius and Maximin.  The general

lamentations with which Lactantius opens the vth book of his

Divine Institutions allude to their cruelty.]

     "Among the important cares which have occupied our mind for

the utility and preservation of the empire, it was our intention

to correct and reestablish all things according to the ancient

laws and public discipline of the Romans.  We were particularly

desirous of reclaiming into the way of reason and nature, the

deluded Christians who had renounced the religion and ceremonies

instituted by their fathers; and presumptuously despising the

practice of antiquity, had invented extravagant laws and

opinions, according to the dictates of their fancy, and had

collected a various society from the different provinces of our

empire.  The edicts, which we have published to enforce the

worship of the gods, having exposed many of the Christians to

danger and distress, many having suffered death, and many more,

who still persist in their impious folly, being left destitute of

any public exercise of religion, we are disposed to extend to

those unhappy men the effects of our wonted clemency.  We permit

them therefore freely to profess their private opinions, and to

assemble in their conventicles without fear or molestation,

provided always that they preserve a due respect to the

established laws and government.  By another rescript we shall

signify our intentions to the judges and magistrates; and we hope

that our indulgence will engage the Christians to offer up their

prayers to the Deity whom they adore, for our safety and

prosperity for their own, and for that of the republic." ^174 It

is not usually in the language of edicts and manifestos that we

should search for the real character or the secret motives of

princes; but as these were the words of a dying emperor, his

situation, perhaps, may be admitted as a pledge of his sincerity.

[Footnote 174: Eusebius (l. viii. c. 17) has given us a Greek

version, and Lactantius (de M. P. c. 34) the Latin original, of

this memorable edict. Neither of these writers seems to recollect

how directly it contradicts whatever they have just affirmed of

the remorse and repentance of Galerius.

     Note: But Gibbon has answered this by his just observation,

that it is not in the language of edicts and manifestos that we

should search * * for the secre motives of princes. - M.]

     When Galerius subscribed this edict of toleration, he was

well assured that Licinius would readily comply with the

inclinations of his friend and benefactor, and that any measures

in favor of the Christians would obtain the approbation of

Constantine.  But the emperor would not venture to insert in the

preamble the name of Maximin, whose consent was of the greatest

importance, and who succeeded a few days afterwards to the

provinces of Asia. In the first six months, however, of his new

reign, Maximin affected to adopt the prudent counsels of his

predecessor; and though he never condescended to secure the

tranquillity of the church by a public edict, Sabinus, his

Praetorian praefect, addressed a circular letter to all the

governors and magistrates of the provinces, expatiating on the

Imperial clemency, acknowledging the invincible obstinacy of the

Christians, and directing the officers of justice to cease their

ineffectual prosecutions, and to connive at the secret assemblies

of those enthusiasts.  In consequence of these orders, great

numbers of Christians were released from prison, or delivered

from the mines.  The confessors, singing hymns of triumph,

returned into their own countries; and those who had yielded to

the violence of the tempest, solicited with tears of repentance

their readmission into the bosom of the church. ^175

[Footnote 175: Eusebius, l. ix. c. 1.  He inserts the epistle of

the praefect.]

     But this treacherous calm was of short duration; nor could

the Christians of the East place any confidence in the character

of their sovereign.  Cruelty and superstition were the ruling

passions of the soul of Maximin.  The former suggested the means,

the latter pointed out the objects of persecution.  The emperor

was devoted to the worship of the gods, to the study of magic,

and to the belief of oracles.  The prophets or philosophers, whom

he revered as the favorites of Heaven, were frequently raised to

the government of provinces, and admitted into his most secret

councils.  They easily convinced him that the Christians had been

indebted for their victories to their regular discipline, and

that the weakness of polytheism had principally flowed from a

want of union and subordination among the ministers of religion.

A system of government was therefore instituted, which was

evidently copied from the policy of the church.  In all the great

cities of the empire, the temples were repaired and beautified by

the order of Maximin, and the officiating priests of the various

deities were subjected to the authority of a superior pontiff

destined to oppose the bishop, and to promote the cause of

paganism.  These pontiffs acknowledged, in their turn, the

supreme jurisdiction of the metropolitans or high priests of the

province, who acted as the immediate vicegerents of the emperor

himself.  A white robe was the ensign of their dignity; and these

new prelates were carefully selected from the most noble and

opulent families.  By the influence of the magistrates, and of

the sacerdotal order, a great number of dutiful addresses were

obtained, particularly from the cities of Nicomedia, Antioch, and

Tyre, which artfully represented the well-known intentions of the

court as the general sense of the people; solicited the emperor

to consult the laws of justice rather than the dictates of his

clemency; expressed their abhorrence of the Christians, and

humbly prayed that those impious sectaries might at least be

excluded from the limits of their respective territories.  The

answer of Maximin to the address which he obtained from the

citizens of Tyre is still extant.  He praises their zeal and

devotion in terms of the highest satisfaction, descants on the

obstinate impiety of the Christians, and betrays, by the

readiness with which he consents to their banishment, that he

considered himself as receiving, rather than as conferring, an

obligation.  The priests as well as the magistrates were

empowered to enforce the execution of his edicts, which were

engraved on tables of brass; and though it was recommended to

them to avoid the effusion of blood, the most cruel and

ignominious punishments were inflicted on the refractory

Christians. ^176

[Footnote 176: See Eusebius, l. viii. c. 14, l. ix. c. 2 - 8.

Lactantius de M. P. c. 36.  These writers agree in representing

the arts of Maximin; but the former relates the execution of

several martyrs, while the latter expressly affirms, occidi

servos Dei vetuit.

     Note: It is easy to reconcile them; it is sufficient to

quote the entire text of Lactantius: Nam cum clementiam specie

tenus profiteretur, occidi servos Dei vetuit, debilitari jussit.

Itaque confessoribus effodiebantur oculi, amputabantur manus,

nares vel auriculae desecabantur. Haec ille moliens Constantini

litteris deterretur. Dissimulavit ergo, et tamen, si quis

inciderit.  mari occulte mergebatur. This detail of torments

inflicted on the Christians easily reconciles Lactantius and

Eusebius.  Those who died in consequence of their tortures, those

who were plunged into the sea, might well pass for martyrs.  The

mutilation of the words of Lactantius has alone given rise to the

apparent contradiction. - G.

     Eusebius. ch. vi., relates the public martyrdom of the aged

bishop of Emesa, with two others, who were thrown to the wild

beasts, the beheading of Peter, bishop of Alexandria, with

several others, and the death of Lucian, presbyter of Antioch,

who was carried to Numidia, and put to death in prison. The

contradiction is direct and undeniable, for although Eusebius may

have misplaced the former martyrdoms, it may be doubted whether

the authority of Maximin extended to Nicomedia till after the

death of Galerius.  The last edict of toleration issued by

Maximin and published by Eusebius himself, Eccl. Hist. ix. 9.

confirms the statement of Lactantius. - M.]

     The Asiatic Christians had every thing to dread from the

severity of a bigoted monarch who prepared his measures of

violence with such deliberate policy.  But a few months had

scarcely elapsed before the edicts published by the two Western

emperors obliged Maximin to suspend the prosecution of his

designs: the civil war which he so rashly undertook against

Licinius employed all his attention; and the defeat and death of

Maximin soon delivered the church from the last and most

implacable of her enemies. ^177

[Footnote 177: A few days before his death, he published a very

ample edict of toleration, in which he imputes all the severities

which the Christians suffered to the judges and governors, who

had misunderstood his intentions.See the edict of Eusebius, l.

ix. c. 10.]

     In this general view of the persecution, which was first

authorized by the edicts of Diocletian, I have purposely

refrained from describing the particular sufferings and deaths of

the Christian martyrs.  It would have been an easy task, from the

history of Eusebius, from the declamations of Lactantius, and

from the most ancient acts, to collect a long series of horrid

and disgustful pictures, and to fill many pages with racks and

scourges, with iron hooks and red-hot beds, and with all the

variety of tortures which fire and steel, savage beasts, and more

savage executioners, could inflict upon the human body.  These

melancholy scenes might be enlivened by a crowd of visions and

miracles destined either to delay the death, to celebrate the

triumph, or to discover the relics of those canonized saints who

suffered for the name of Christ.  But I cannot determine what I

ought to transcribe, till I am satisfied how much I ought to

believe.  The gravest of the ecclesiastical historians, Eusebius

himself, indirectly confesses, that he has related whatever might

redound to the glory, and that he has suppressed all that could

tend to the disgrace, of religion. ^178 Such an acknowledgment

will naturally excite a suspicion that a writer who has so openly

violated one of the fundamental laws of history, has not paid a

very strict regard to the observance of the other; and the

suspicion will derive additional credit from the character of

Eusebius, ^* which was less tinctured with credulity, and more

practised in the arts of courts, than that of almost any of his

contemporaries.  On some particular occasions, when the

magistrates were exasperated by some personal motives of interest

or resentment, the rules of prudence, and perhaps of decency, to

overturn the altars, to pour out imprecations against the

emperors, or to strike the judge as he sat on his tribunal, it

may be presumed, that every mode of torture which cruelty could

invent, or constancy could endure, was exhausted on those devoted

victims. ^179 Two circumstances, however, have been unwarily

mentioned, which insinuate that the general treatment of the

Christians, who had been apprehended by the officers of justice,

was less intolerable than it is usually imagined to have been.

1. The confessors who were condemned to work in the mines were

permitted by the humanity or the negligence of their keepers to

build chapels, and freely to profess their religion in the midst

of those dreary habitations. ^180 2. The bishops were obliged to

check and to censure the forward zeal of the Christians, who

voluntarily threw themselves into the hands of the magistrates.

Some of these were persons oppressed by poverty and debts, who

blindly sought to terminate a miserable existence by a glorious

death.  Others were allured by the hope that a short confinement

would expiate the sins of a whole life; and others again were

actuated by the less honorable motive of deriving a plentiful

subsistence, and perhaps a considerable profit, from the alms

which the charity of the faithful bestowed on the prisoners. ^181

After the church had triumphed over all her enemies, the interest

as well as vanity of the captives prompted them to magnify the

merit of their respective sufferings.  A convenient distance of

time or place gave an ample scope to the progress of fiction; and

the frequent instances which might be alleged of holy martyrs,

whose wounds had been instantly healed, whose strength had been

renewed, and whose lost members had miraculously been restored,

were extremely convenient for the purpose of removing every

difficulty, and of silencing every objection. The most

extravagant legends, as they conduced to the honor of the church,

were applauded by the credulous multitude, countenanced by the

power of the clergy, and attested by the suspicious evidence of

ecclesiastical history.

[Footnote 178: Such is the fair deduction from two remarkable

passages in Eusebius, l. viii. c. 2, and de Martyr.  Palestin. c.

12.  The prudence of the historian has exposed his own character

to censure and suspicion.  It was well known that he himself had

been thrown into prison; and it was suggested that he had

purchased his deliverance by some dishonorable compliance.  The

reproach was urged in his lifetime, and even in his presence, at

the council of Tyre.  See Tillemont, Memoires Ecclesiastiques,

tom. viii. part i. p. 67.]

[Footnote *: Historical criticism does not consist in rejecting

indiscriminately all the facts which do not agree with a

particular system, as Gibbon does in this chapter, in which,

except at the last extremity, he will not consent to believe a

martyrdom.  Authorities are to be weighed, not excluded from

examination.  Now, the Pagan historians justify in many places

the detail which have been transmitted to us by the historians of

the church, concerning the tortures endured by the Christians.

Celsus reproaches the Christians with holding their assemblies in

secret, on account of the fear inspired by their sufferings, "for

when you are arrested," he says, "you are dragged to punishment:

and, before you are put to death, you have to suffer all kinds of

tortures." Origen cont. Cels. l. i. ii. vi. viii. passing.

Libanius, the panegyrist of Julian, says, while speaking of the

Christians.

     Those who followed a corrupt religion were in continual

apprehensions; they feared lest Julian should invent tortures

still more refined than those to which they had been exposed

before, as mutilation, burning alive, &c.; for the emperors had

inflicted upon them all these barbarities." Lib. Parent in

Julian. ap. Fab. Bib. Graec. No. 9, No. 58, p. 283 - G.]

[Footnote *: This sentence of Gibbon has given rise to several

learned dissertation: Moller, de Fide Eusebii Caesar, &c.,

Havniae, 1813.  Danzius, de Eusebio Caes. Hist. Eccl.  Scriptore,

ejusque tide historica recte aestimanda, &c., Jenae, 1815.

Kestner Commentatio de Eusebii Hist. Eccles. conditoris

auctoritate et fide, &c.  See also Reuterdahl, de Fontibus

Historiae Eccles. Eusebianae, Lond. Goth., 1826.  Gibbon's

inference may appear stronger than the text will warrant, yet it

is difficult, after reading the passages, to dismiss all

suspicion of partiality from the mind. - M.]

[Footnote 179: The ancient, and perhaps authentic, account of the

sufferings of Tarachus and his companions, (Acta Sincera Ruinart,

p. 419 - 448,) is filled with strong expressions of resentment

and contempt, which could not fail of irritating the magistrate.

The behavior of Aedesius to Hierocles, praefect of Egypt, was

still more extraordinary. Euseb. de Martyr. Palestin. c. 5.

     Note: M. Guizot states, that the acts of Tarachus and his

companion contain nothing that appears dictated by violent

feelings, (sentiment outre.) Nothing can be more painful than the

constant attempt of Gibbon throughout this discussion, to find

some flaw in the virtue and heroism of the martyrs, some

extenuation for the cruelty of the persecutors.  But truth must

not be sacrificed even to well-grounded moral indignation.

Though the language of these martyrs is in great part that of

calm de fiance, of noble firmness, yet there are many expressions

which betray "resentment and contempt." "Children of Satan,

worshippers of Devils," is their common appellation of the

heathen. One of them calls the judge another, one curses, and

declares that he will curse the Emperors, as pestilential and

bloodthirsty tyrants, whom God will soon visit in his wrath.  On

the other hand, though at first they speak the milder language of

persuasion, the cold barbarity of the judges and officers might

surely have called forth one sentence of abhorrence from Gibbon.

On the first unsatisfactory answer, "Break his jaw," is the order

of the judge.  They direct and witness the most excruciating

tortures; the people, as M. Guizot observers, were so much

revolted by the cruelty of Maximus that when the martyrs appeared

in the amphitheatre, fear seized on all hearts, and general

murmurs against the unjust judge rank through the assembly.  It

is singular, at least, that Gibbon should have quoted "as

probably authentic," acts so much embellished with miracle as

these of Tarachus are, particularly towards the end. - M.

     Note: Scarcely were the authorities informed of this, than

the president of the province, a man, says Eusebius, harsh and

cruel, banished the confessors, some to Cyprus, others to

different parts of Palestine, and ordered them to be tormented by

being set to the most painful labors.  Four of them, whom he

required to abjure their faith and refused, were burnt alive.

Euseb. de Mart. Palest. c. xiii. - G.  Two of these were bishops;

a fifth, Silvanus, bishop of Gaza, was the last martyr; another,

named John was blinded, but used to officiate, and recite from

memory long passages of the sacred writings - M.]

[Footnote 180: Euseb. de Martyr. Palestin. c. 13.]

[Footnote 181: Augustin. Collat. Carthagin. Dei, iii. c. 13, ap.

Tillanant, Memoires Ecclesiastiques, tom. v. part i. p. 46.  The

controversy with the Donatists, has reflected some, though

perhaps a partial, light on the history of the African church.]

Chapter XVI: Conduct Towards The Christians, From Nero To

Constantine.

Part VIII.

     The vague descriptions of exile and imprisonment, of pain

and torture, are so easily exaggerated or softened by the pencil

of an artful orator, ^* that we are naturally induced to inquire

into a fact of a more distinct and stubborn kind; the number of

persons who suffered death in consequence of the edicts published

by Diocletian, his associates, and his successors. The recent

legendaries record whole armies and cities, which were at once

swept away by the undistinguishing rage of persecution.  The more

ancient writers content themselves with pouring out a liberal

effusion of loose and tragical invectives, without condescending

to ascertain the precise number of those persons who were

permitted to seal with their blood their belief of the gospel.

From the history of Eusebius, it may, however, be collected, that

only nine bishops were punished with death; and we are assured,

by his particular enumeration of the martyrs of Palestine, that

no more than ninety-two Christians were entitled to that

honorable appellation. ^182 ^! As we are unacquainted with the

degree of episcopal zeal and courage which prevailed at that

time, it is not in our power to draw any useful inferences from

the former of these facts: but the latter may serve to justify a

very important and probable conclusion. According to the

distribution of Roman provinces, Palestine may be considered as

the sixteenth part of the Eastern empire: ^183 and since there

were some governors, who from a real or affected clemency had

preserved their hands unstained with the blood of the faithful,

^184 it is reasonable to believe, that the country which had

given birth to Christianity, produced at least the sixteenth part

of the martyrs who suffered death within the dominions of

Galerius and Maximin; the whole might consequently amount to

about fifteen hundred, a number which, if it is equally divided

between the ten years of the persecution, will allow an annual

consumption of one hundred and fifty martyrs.  Allotting the same

proportion to the provinces of Italy, Africa, and perhaps Spain,

where, at the end of two or three years, the rigor of the penal

laws was either suspended or abolished, the multitude of

Christians in the Roman empire, on whom a capital punishment was

inflicted by a judicia, sentence, will be reduced to somewhat

less than two thousand persons.  Since it cannot be doubted that

the Christians were more numerous, and their enemies more

exasperated, in the time of Diocletian, than they had ever been

in any former persecution, this probable and moderate computation

may teach us to estimate the number of primitive saints and

martyrs who sacrificed their lives for the important purpose of

introducing Christianity into the world.

[Footnote *: Perhaps there never was an instance of an author

committing so deliberately the fault which he reprobates so

strongly in others.  What is the dexterous management of the more

inartificial historians of Christianity, in exaggerating the

numbers of the martyrs, compared to the unfair address with which

Gibbon here quietly dismisses from the account all the horrible

and excruciating tortures which fell short of death?  The reader

may refer to the xiith chapter (book viii.) of Eusebius for the

description and for the scenes of these tortures. - M.]

[Footnote 182: Eusebius de Martyr. Palestin. c. 13.  He closes

his narration by assuring us that these were the martyrdoms

inflicted in Palestine, during the whole course of the

persecution.  The 9th chapter of his viiith book, which relates

to the province of Thebais in Egypt, may seem to contradict our

moderate computation; but it will only lead us to admire the

artful management of the historian.  Choosing for the scene of

the most exquisite cruelty the most remote and sequestered

country of the Roman empire, he relates that in Thebais from ten

to one hundred persons had frequently suffered martyrdom in the

same day.  But when he proceeds to mention his own journey into

Egypt, his language insensibly becomes more cautious and

moderate.  Instead of a large, but definite number, he speaks of

many Christians, and most artfully selects two ambiguous words,

which may signify either what he had seen, or what he had heard;

either the expectation, or the execution of the punishment.

Having thus provided a secure evasion, he commits the equivocal

passage to his readers and translators; justly conceiving that

their piety would induce them to prefer the most favorable sense.

There was perhaps some malice in the remark of Theodorus

Metochita, that all who, like Eusebius, had been conversant with

the Egyptians, delighted in an obscure and intricate style. (See

Valesius ad loc.)

[Footnote !: This calculation is made from the martyrs, of whom

Eusebius speaks by name; but he recognizes a much greater number.

Thus the ninth and tenth chapters of his work are entitled, "Of

Antoninus, Zebinus, Germanus, and other martyrs; of Peter the

monk.  of Asclepius the Maroionite, and other martyrs." [Are

these vague contents of chapters very good authority? - M.]

Speaking of those who suffered under Diocletian, he says, "I will

only relate the death of one of these, from which, the reader may

divine what befell the rest." Hist. Eccl. viii. 6.  [This relates

only to the martyrs in the royal household. - M.] Dodwell had

made, before Gibbon, this calculation and these objections; but

Ruinart (Act. Mart. Pref p. 27, et seq.) has answered him in a

peremptory manner: Nobis constat Eusebium in historia infinitos

passim martyres admisisse.  quamvis revera paucorum nomina

recensuerit.  Nec alium Eusebii interpretem quam ipsummet

Eusebium proferimus, qui (l. iii. c. 33) ait sub Trajano

plurimosa ex fidelibus martyrii certamen subiisse (l. v. init.)

sub Antonino et Vero innumerabiles prope martyres per universum

orbem enituisse affirmat.  (L. vi. c. 1.) Severum persecutionem

concitasse refert, in qua per omnes ubique locorum Ecclesias, ab

athletis pro pietate certantibus, illustria confecta fuerunt

martyria.  Sic de Decii, sic de Valeriani, persecutionibus

loquitur, quae an Dodwelli faveant conjectionibus judicet aequus

lector. Even in the persecutions which Gibbon has represented as

much more mild than that of Diocletian, the number of martyrs

appears much greater than that to which he limits the martyrs of

the latter: and this number is attested by incontestable

monuments.  I will quote but one example. We find among the

letters of St. Cyprian one from Lucianus to Celerinus, written

from the depth of a prison, in which Lucianus names seventeen of

his brethren dead, some in the quarries, some in the midst of

tortures some of starvation in prison. Jussi sumus (he proceeds)

secundum prae ceptum imperatoris, fame et siti necari, et reclusi

sumus in duabus cellis, ta ut nos afficerent fame et siti et

ignis vapore. - G.]

[Footnote 183: When Palestine was divided into three, the

praefecture of the East contained forty-eight provinces.  As the

ancient distinctions of nations were long since abolished, the

Romans distributed the provinces according to a general

proportion of their extent and opulence.]

[Footnote 184: Ut gloriari possint nullam se innocentium

poremisse, nam et ipse audivi aloquos gloriantes, quia

administratio sua, in hac paris merit incruenta.  Lactant.

Institur. Divin v. 11.]

     We shall conclude this chapter by a melancholy truth, which

obtrudes itself on the reluctant mind; that even admitting,

without hesitation or inquiry, all that history has recorded, or

devotion has feigned, on the subject of martyrdoms, it must still

be acknowledged, that the Christians, in the course of their

intestine dissensions, have inflicted far greater severities on

each other, than they had experienced from the zeal of infidels.

During the ages of ignorance which followed the subversion of the

Roman empire in the West, the bishops of the Imperial city

extended their dominion over the laity as well as clergy of the

Latin church.  The fabric of superstition which they had erected,

and which might long have defied the feeble efforts of reason,

was at length assaulted by a crowd of daring fanatics, who from

the twelfth to the sixteenth century assumed the popular

character of reformers. The church of Rome defended by violence

the empire which she had acquired by fraud; a system of peace and

benevolence was soon disgraced by proscriptions, war, massacres,

and the institution of the holy office.  And as the reformers

were animated by the love of civil as well as of religious

freedom, the Catholic princes connected their own interest with

that of the clergy, and enforced by fire and the sword the

terrors of spiritual censures.  In the Netherlands alone, more

than one hundred thousand of the subjects of Charles V. are said

to have suffered by the hand of the executioner; and this

extraordinary number is attested by Grotius, ^185 a man of genius

and learning, who preserved his moderation amidst the fury of

contending sects, and who composed the annals of his own age and

country, at a time when the invention of printing had facilitated

the means of intelligence, and increased the danger of detection.

If we are obliged to submit our belief to the authority of

Grotius, it must be allowed, that the number of Protestants, who

were executed in a single province and a single reign, far

exceeded that of the primitive martyrs in the space of three

centuries, and of the Roman empire. But if the improbability of

the fact itself should prevail over the weight of evidence; if

Grotius should be convicted of exaggerating the merit and

sufferings of the Reformers; ^186 we shall be naturally led to

inquire what confidence can be placed in the doubtful and

imperfect monuments of ancient credulity; what degree of credit

can be assigned to a courtly bishop, and a passionate declaimer,

^* who, under the protection of Constantine, enjoyed the

exclusive privilege of recording the persecutions inflicted on

the Christians by the vanquished rivals or disregarded

predecessors of their gracious sovereign.

[Footnote 185: Grot. Annal. de Rebus Belgicis, l. i. p. 12, edit.

fol.]

[Footnote 186: Fra Paola (Istoria del Concilio Tridentino, l.

iii.) reduces the number of the Belgic martyrs to 50,000.  In

learning and moderation Fra Paola was not inferior to Grotius.

The priority of time gives some advantage to the evidence of the

former, which he loses, on the other hand, by the distance of

Venice from the Netherlands.]

[Footnote *: Eusebius and the author of the Treatise de Mortibus

Persecutorum. It is deeply to be regretted that the history of

this period rest so much on the loose and, it must be admitted,

by no means scrupulous authority of Eusebius.  Ecclesiastical

history is a solemn and melancholy lesson that the best, even the

most sacred, cause will eventually the least departure from

truth! - M.]

Chapter XVII: Foundation Of Constantinople.

Part I.

     Foundation Of Constantinople. - Political System

Constantine, And His Successors. - Military Discipline. - The

Palace. - The Finances.

     The unfortunate Licinius was the last rival who opposed the

greatness, and the last captive who adorned the triumph, of

Constantine.  After a tranquil and prosperous reign, the

conquerer bequeathed to his family the inheritance of the Roman

empire; a new capital, a new policy, and a new religion; and the

innovations which he established have been embraced and

consecrated by succeeding generations.  The age of the great

Constantine and his sons is filled with important events; but the

historian must be oppressed by their number and variety, unless

he diligently separates from each other the scenes which are

connected only by the order of time.  He will describe the

political institutions that gave strength and stability to the

empire, before he proceeds to relate the wars and revolutions

which hastened its decline.  He will adopt the division unknown

to the ancients of civil and ecclesiastical affairs: the victory

of the Christians, and their intestine discord, will supply

copious and distinct materials both for edification and for

scandal.

     After the defeat and abdication of Licinius, his victorious

rival proceeded to lay the foundations of a city destined to

reign in future times, the mistress of the East, and to survive

the empire and religion of Constantine.  The motives, whether of

pride or of policy, which first induced Diocletian to withdraw

himself from the ancient seat of government, had acquired

additional weight by the example of his successors, and the

habits of forty years.  Rome was insensibly confounded with the

dependent kingdoms which had once acknowledged her supremacy; and

the country of the Caesars was viewed with cold indifference by a

martial prince, born in the neighborhood of the Danube, educated

in the courts and armies of Asia, and invested with the purple by

the legions of Britain.  The Italians, who had received

Constantine as their deliverer, submissively obeyed the edicts

which he sometimes condescended to address to the senate and

people of Rome; but they were seldom honored with the presence of

their new sovereign.  During the vigor of his age, Constantine,

according to the various exigencies of peace and war, moved with

slow dignity, or with active diligence, along the frontiers of

his extensive dominions; and was always prepared to take the

field either against a foreign or a domestic enemy.  But as he

gradually reached the summit of prosperity and the decline of

life, he began to meditate the design of fixing in a more

permanent station the strength as well as majesty of the throne.

In the choice of an advantageous situation, he preferred the

confines of Europe and Asia; to curb with a powerful arm the

barbarians who dwelt between the Danube and the Tanais; to watch

with an eye of jealousy the conduct of the Persian monarch, who

indignantly supported the yoke of an ignominious treaty. With

these views, Diocletian had selected and embellished the

residence of Nicomedia: but the memory of Diocletian was justly

abhorred by the protector of the church: and Constantine was not

insensible to the ambition of founding a city which might

perpetuate the glory of his own name.  During the late operations

of the war against Licinius, he had sufficient opportunity to

contemplate, both as a soldier and as a statesman, the

incomparable position of Byzantium; and to observe how strongly

it was guarded by nature against a hostile attack, whilst it was

accessible on every side to the benefits of commercial

intercourse.  Many ages before Constantine, one of the most

judicious historians of antiquity ^1 had described the advantages

of a situation, from whence a feeble colony of Greeks derived the

command of the sea, and the honors of a flourishing and

independent republic. ^2

[Footnote 1: Polybius, l. iv. p. 423, edit. Casaubon.  He

observes that the peace of the Byzantines was frequently

disturbed, and the extent of their territory contracted, by the

inroads of the wild Thracians.]

[Footnote 2: The navigator Byzas, who was styled the son of

Neptune, founded the city 656 years before the Christian aera.

His followers were drawn from Argos and Megara.  Byzantium was

afterwards rebuild and fortified by the Spartan general

Pausanias.  See Scaliger Animadvers. ad Euseb. p. 81. Ducange,

Constantinopolis, l. i part i.  cap 15, 16.  With regard to the

wars of the Byzantines against Philip, the Gauls, and the kings

of Bithynia, we should trust none but the ancient writers who

lived before the greatness of the Imperial city had excited a

spirit of flattery and fiction.]

     If we survey Byzantium in the extent which it acquired with

the august name of Constantinople, the figure of the Imperial

city may be represented under that of an unequal triangle.  The

obtuse point, which advances towards the east and the shores of

Asia, meets and repels the waves of the Thracian Bosphorus.  The

northern side of the city is bounded by the harbor; and the

southern is washed by the Propontis, or Sea of Marmara. The basis

of the triangle is opposed to the west, and terminates the

continent of Europe.  But the admirable form and division of the

circumjacent land and water cannot, without a more ample

explanation, be clearly or sufficiently understood.

     The winding channel through which the waters of the Euxine

flow with a rapid and incessant course towards the Mediterranean,

received the appellation of Bosphorus, a name not less celebrated

in the history, than in the fables, of antiquity. ^3 A crowd of

temples and of votive altars, profusely scattered along its steep

and woody banks, attested the unskilfulness, the terrors, and the

devotion of the Grecian navigators, who, after the example of the

Argonauts, explored the dangers of the inhospitable Euxine.  On

these banks tradition long preserved the memory of the palace of

Phineus, infested by the obscene harpies; ^4 and of the sylvan

reign of Amycus, who defied the son of Leda to the combat of the

cestus. ^5 The straits of the Bosphorus are terminated by the

Cyanean rocks, which, according to the description of the poets,

had once floated on the face of the waters; and were destined by

the gods to protect the entrance of the Euxine against the eye of

profane curiosity. ^6 From the Cyanean rocks to the point and

harbor of Byzantium, the winding length of the Bosphorus extends

about sixteen miles, ^7 and its most ordinary breadth may be

computed at about one mile and a half.  The new castles of Europe

and Asia are constructed, on either continent, upon the

foundations of two celebrated temples, of Serapis and of Jupiter

Urius.  The old castles, a work of the Greek emperors, command

the narrowest part of the channel in a place where the opposite

banks advance within five hundred paces of each other.  These

fortresses were destroyed and strengthened by Mahomet the Second,

when he meditated the siege of Constantinople: ^8 but the Turkish

conqueror was most probably ignorant, that near two thousand

years before his reign, continents by a bridge of boats. ^9 At a

small distance from the old castles we discover the little town

of Chrysopolis, or Scutari, which may almost be considered as the

Asiatic suburb of Constantinople.  The Bosphorus, as it begins to

open into the Propontis, passes between Byzantium and Chalcedon.

The latter of those cities was built by the Greeks, a few years

before the former; and the blindness of its founders, who

overlooked the superior advantages of the opposite coast, has

been stigmatized by a proverbial expression of contempt. ^10

[Footnote 3: The Bosphorus has been very minutely described by

Dionysius of Byzantium, who lived in the time of Domitian,

(Hudson, Geograph Minor, tom. iii.,) and by Gilles or Gyllius, a

French traveller of the XVIth century. Tournefort (Lettre XV.)

seems to have used his own eyes, and the learning of Gyllius.

[Add Von Hammer, Constantinopolis und der Bosphoros, 8vo. - M.]

[Footnote 4: There are very few conjectures so happy as that of

Le Clere, (Bibliotehque Universelle, tom. i. p. 148,) who

supposes that the harpies were only locusts.  The Syriac or

Phoenician name of those insects, their noisy flight, the stench

and devastation which they occasion, and the north wind which

drives them into the sea, all contribute to form the striking

resemblance.]

[Footnote 5: The residence of Amycus was in Asia, between the old

and the new castles, at a place called Laurus Insana.  That of

Phineus was in Europe, near the village of Mauromole and the

Black Sea.  See Gyllius de Bosph. l. ii. c. 23.  Tournefort,

Lettre XV.]

[Footnote 6: The deception was occasioned by several pointed

rocks, alternately sovered and abandoned by the waves.  At

present there are two small islands, one towards either shore;

that of Europe is distinguished by the column of Pompey.]

[Footnote 7: The ancients computed one hundred and twenty stadia,

or fifteen Roman miles.  They measured only from the new castles,

but they carried the straits as far as the town of Chalcedon.]

[Footnote 8: Ducas. Hist. c. 34.  Leunclavius Hist.  Turcica

Mussulmanica, l. xv. p. 577.  Under the Greek empire these

castles were used as state prisons, under the tremendous name of

Lethe, or towers of oblivion.]

[Footnote 9: Darius engraved in Greek and Assyrian letters, on

two marble columns, the names of his subject nations, and the

amazing numbers of his land and sea forces.  The Byzantines

afterwards transported these columns into the city, and used them

for the altars of their tutelar deities. Herodotus, l. iv. c.

87.]

[Footnote 10: Namque arctissimo inter Europam Asiamque divortio

Byzantium in extrema Europa posuere Greci, quibus, Pythium

Apollinem consulentibus ubi conderent urbem, redditum oraculum

est, quaererent sedem oecerum terris adversam.  Ea ambage

Chalcedonii monstrabantur quod priores illuc advecti, praevisa

locorum utilitate pejora legissent Tacit. Annal.  xii. 63.]

     The harbor of Constantinople, which may be considered as an

arm of the Bosphorus, obtained, in a very remote period, the

denomination of the Golden Horn.  The curve which it describes

might be compared to the horn of a stag, or as it should seem,

with more propriety, to that of an ox. ^11 The epithet of golden

was expressive of the riches which every wind wafted from the

most distant countries into the secure and capacious port of

Constantinople.  The River Lycus, formed by the conflux of two

little streams, pours into the harbor a perpetual supply of fresh

water, which serves to cleanse the bottom, and to invite the

periodical shoals of fish to seek their retreat in that

convenient recess.  As the vicissitudes of tides are scarcely

felt in those seas, the constant depth of the harbor allows goods

to be landed on the quays without the assistance of boats; and it

has been observed, that in many places the largest vessels may

rest their prows against the houses, while their sterns are

floating in the water. ^12 From the mouth of the Lycus to that of

the harbor, this arm of the Bosphorus is more than seven miles in

length.  The entrance is about five hundred yards broad, and a

strong chain could be occasionally drawn across it, to guard the

port and city from the attack of a hostile navy. ^13

[Footnote 11: Strabo, l. vii. p. 492, [edit. Casaub.] Most of the

antlers are now broken off; or, to speak less figuratively, most

of the recesses of the harbor are filled up.  See Gill.  de

Bosphoro Thracio, l. i. c. 5.]

[Footnote 12: Procopius de Aedificiis, l. i. c. 5.  His

description is confirmed by modern travellers.  See Thevenot,

part i. l. i. c. 15. Tournefort, Lettre XII.  Niebuhr, Voyage

d'Arabie, p. 22.]

[Footnote 13: See Ducange, C. P. l. i. part i. c. 16, and his

Observations sur Villehardouin, p. 289.  The chain was drawn from

the Acropolis near the modern Kiosk, to the tower of Galata; and

was supported at convenient distances by large wooden piles.]

     Between the Bosphorus and the Hellespont, the shores of

Europe and Asia, receding on either side, enclose the sea of

Marmara, which was known to the ancients by the denomination of

Propontis.  The navigation from the issue of the Bosphorus to the

entrance of the Hellespont is about one hundred and twenty miles.

Those who steer their westward course through the middle of the

Propontis, amt at once descry the high lands of Thrace and

Bithynia, and never lose sight of the lofty summit of Mount

Olympus, covered with eternal snows. ^14 They leave on the left a

deep gulf, at the bottom of which Nicomedia was seated, the

Imperial residence of Diocletian; and they pass the small islands

of Cyzicus and Proconnesus before they cast anchor at Gallipoli;

where the sea, which separates Asia from Europe, is again

contracted into a narrow channel.

[Footnote 14: Thevenot (Voyages au Levant, part i. l. i. c. 14)

contracts the measure to 125 small Greek miles.  Belon

(Observations, l. ii. c. 1.) gives a good description of the

Propontis, but contents himself with the vague expression of one

day and one night's sail.  When Sandy's (Travels, p. 21) talks of

150 furlongs in length, as well as breadth we can only suppose

some mistake of the press in the text of that judicious

traveller.]

     The geographers who, with the most skilful accuracy, have

surveyed the form and extent of the Hellespont, assign about

sixty miles for the winding course, and about three miles for the

ordinary breadth of those celebrated straits. ^15 But the

narrowest part of the channel is found to the northward of the

old Turkish castles between the cities of Sestus and Abydus.  It

was here that the adventurous Leander braved the passage of the

flood for the possession of his mistress. ^16 It was here

likewise, in a place where the distance between the opposite

banks cannot exceed five hundred paces, that Xerxes imposed a

stupendous bridge of boats, for the purpose of transporting into

Europe a hundred and seventy myriads of barbarians. ^17 A sea

contracted within such narrow limits may seem but ill to deserve

the singular epithet of broad, which Homer, as well as Orpheus,

has frequently bestowed on the Hellespont. ^* But our ideas of

greatness are of a relative nature: the traveller, and especially

the poet, who sailed along the Hellespont, who pursued the

windings of the stream, and contemplated the rural scenery, which

appeared on every side to terminate the prospect, insensibly lost

the remembrance of the sea; and his fancy painted those

celebrated straits, with all the attributes of a mighty river

flowing with a swift current, in the midst of a woody and inland

country, and at length, through a wide mouth, discharging itself

into the Aegean or Archipelago. ^18 Ancient Troy, ^19 seated on a

an eminence at the foot of Mount Ida, overlooked the mouth of the

Hellespont, which scarcely received an accession of waters from

the tribute of those immortal rivulets the Simois and Scamander.

The Grecian camp had stretched twelve miles along the shore from

the Sigaean to the Rhaetean promontory; and the flanks of the

army were guarded by the bravest chiefs who fought under the

banners of Agamemnon.  The first of those promontories was

occupied by Achilles with his invincible myrmidons, and the

dauntless Ajax pitched his tents on the other.  After Ajax had

fallen a sacrifice to his disappointed pride, and to the

ingratitude of the Greeks, his sepulchre was erected on the

ground where he had defended the navy against the rage of Jove

and of Hector; and the citizens of the rising town of Rhaeteum

celebrated his memory with divine honors. ^20 Before Constantine

gave a just preference to the situation of Byzantium, he had

conceived the design of erecting the seat of empire on this

celebrated spot, from whence the Romans derived their fabulous

origin.  The extensive plain which lies below ancient Troy,

towards the Rhaetean promontory and the tomb of Ajax, was first

chosen for his new capital; and though the undertaking was soon

relinquished the stately remains of unfinished walls and towers

attracted the notice of all who sailed through the straits of the

Hellespont. ^21

[Footnote 15: See an admirable dissertation of M. d'Anville upon

the Hellespont or Dardanelles, in the Memoires tom. xxviii. p.

318 - 346.  Yet even that ingenious geographer is too fond of

supposing new, and perhaps imaginary measures, for the purpose of

rendering ancient writers as accurate as himself.  The stadia

employed by Herodotus in the description of the Euxine, the

Bosphorus, &c., (l. iv. c. 85,) must undoubtedly be all of the

same species; but it seems impossible to reconcile them either

with truth or with each other.]

[Footnote 16: The oblique distance between Sestus and Abydus was

thirty stadia.  The improbable tale of Hero and Leander is

exposed by M. Mahudel, but is defended on the authority of poets

and medals by M. de la Nauze. See the Academie des Inscriptions,

tom. vii. Hist. p. 74. elem. p. 240.

     Note: The practical illustration of the possibility of

Leander's feat by Lord Byron and other English swimmers is too

well known to need particularly reference - M.]

[Footnote 17: See the seventh book of Herodotus, who has erected

an elegant trophy to his own fame and to that of his country.

The review appears to have been made with tolerable accuracy; but

the vanity, first of the Persians, and afterwards of the Greeks,

was interested to magnify the armament and the victory.  I should

much doubt whether the invaders have ever outnumbered the men of

any country which they attacked.]

[Footnote *: Gibbon does not allow greater width between the two

nearest points of the shores of the Hellespont than between those

of the Bosphorus; yet all the ancient writers speak of the

Hellespontic strait as broader than the other: they agree in

giving it seven stadia in its narrowest width, (Herod. in Melp.

c. 85.  Polym. c. 34.  Strabo, p. 591.  Plin. iv. c. 12.) which

make 875 paces.  It is singular that Gibbon, who in the fifteenth

note of this chapter reproaches d'Anville with being fond of

supposing new and perhaps imaginary measures, has here adopted

the peculiar measurement which d'Anville has assigned to the

stadium.  This great geographer believes that the ancients had a

stadium of fifty-one toises, and it is that which he applies to

the walls of Babylon.  Now, seven of these stadia are equal to

about 500 paces, 7 stadia = 2142 feet: 500 paces = 2135 feet 5

inches. - G. See Rennell, Geog. of Herod. p. 121.  Add Ukert,

Geographie der Griechen und Romer, v. i. p. 2, 71. - M.]

[Footnote 18: See Wood's Observations on Homer, p. 320.  I have,

with pleasure, selected this remark from an author who in general

seems to have disappointed the expectation of the public as a

critic, and still more as a traveller.  He had visited the banks

of the Hellespont; and had read Strabo; he ought to have

consulted the Roman itineraries.  How was it possible for him to

confound Ilium and Alexandria Troas, (Observations, p. 340, 341,)

two cities which were sixteen miles distant from each other?

     Note: Compare Walpole's Memoirs on Turkey, v. i. p. 101. Dr.

Clarke adopted Mr. Walpole's interpretation of the salt

Hellespont.  But the old interpretation is more graphic and

Homeric. Clarke's Travels, ii. 70. - M.]

[Footnote 19: Demetrius of Scepsis wrote sixty books on thirty

lines of Homer's catalogue.  The XIIIth Book of Strabo is

sufficient for our curiosity.]

[Footnote 20: Strabo, l. xiii. p. 595, [890, edit. Casaub.] The

disposition of the ships, which were drawn upon dry land, and the

posts of Ajax and Achilles, are very clearly described by Homer.

See Iliad, ix. 220.]

[Footnote 21: Zosim. l. ii. [c. 30,] p. 105.  Sozomen, l. ii. c.

3. Theophanes, p. 18.  Nicephorus Callistus, l. vii. p. 48.

Zonaras, tom. ii. l. xiii. p. 6.  Zosimus places the new city

between Ilium and Alexandria, but this apparent difference may be

reconciled by the large extent of its circumference.  Before the

foundation of Constantinople, Thessalonica is mentioned by

Cedrenus, (p. 283,) and Sardica by Zonaras, as the intended

capital.  They both suppose with very little probability, that

the emperor, if he had not been prevented by a prodigy, would

have repeated the mistake of the blind Chalcedonians.]

     We are at present qualified to view the advantageous

position of Constantinople; which appears to have been formed by

nature for the centre and capital of a great monarchy.  Situated

in the forty-first degree of latitude, the Imperial city

commanded, from her seven hills, ^22 the opposite shores of

Europe and Asia; the climate was healthy and temperate, the soil

fertile, the harbor secure and capacious; and the approach on the

side of the continent was of small extent and easy defence.  The

Bosphorus and the Hellespont may be considered as the two gates

of Constantinople; and the prince who possessed those important

passages could always shut them against a naval enemy, and open

them to the fleets of commerce.  The preservation of the eastern

provinces may, in some degree, be ascribed to the policy of

Constantine, as the barbarians of the Euxine, who in the

preceding age had poured their armaments into the heart of the

Mediterranean, soon desisted from the exercise of piracy, and

despaired of forcing this insurmountable barrier.  When the gates

of the Hellespont and Bosphorus were shut, the capital still

enjoyed within their spacious enclosure every production which

could supply the wants, or gratify the luxury, of its numerous

inhabitants.  The sea-coasts of Thrace and Bithynia, which

languish under the weight of Turkish oppression, still exhibit a

rich prospect of vineyards, of gardens, and of plentiful

harvests; and the Propontis has ever been renowned for an

inexhaustible store of the most exquisite fish, that are taken in

their stated seasons, without skill, and almost without labor.

^23 But when the passages of the straits were thrown open for

trade, they alternately admitted the natural and artificial

riches of the north and south, of the Euxine, and of the

Mediterranean.  Whatever rude commodities were collected in the

forests of Germany and Scythia, and far as the sources of the

Tanais and the Borysthenes; whatsoever was manufactured by the

skill of Europe or Asia; the corn of Egypt, and the gems and

spices of the farthest India, were brought by the varying winds

into the port of Constantinople, which for many ages attracted

the commerce of the ancient world. ^24

[See Basilica Of Constantinople]

[Footnote 22: Pocock's Description of the East, vol. ii. part ii.

p. 127. His plan of the seven hills is clear and accurate.  That

traveller is seldom unsatisfactory.]

[Footnote 23: See Belon, Observations, c. 72 - 76.  Among a

variety of different species, the Pelamides, a sort of Thunnies,

were the most celebrated.  We may learn from Polybius, Strabo,

and Tacitus, that the profits of the fishery constituted the

principal revenue of Byzantium.]

[Footnote 24: See the eloquent description of Busbequius,

epistol. i. p. 64. Est in Europa; habet in conspectu Asiam,

Egyptum. Africamque a dextra: quae tametsi contiguae non sunt,

maris tamen navigandique commoditate veluti junguntur.  A

sinistra vero Pontus est Euxinus, &c.]

     The prospect of beauty, of safety, and of wealth, united in

a single spot, was sufficient to justify the choice of

Constantine.  But as some decent mixture of prodigy and fable

has, in every age, been supposed to reflect a becoming majesty on

the origin of great cities, ^25 the emperor was desirous of

ascribing his resolution, not so much to the uncertain counsels

of human policy, as to the infallible and eternal decrees of

divine wisdom.  In one of his laws he has been careful to

instruct posterity, that in obedience to the commands of God, he

laid the everlasting foundations of Constantinople: ^26 and

though he has not condescended to relate in what manner the

celestial inspiration was communicated to his mind, the defect of

his modest silence has been liberally supplied by the ingenuity

of succeeding writers; who describe the nocturnal vision which

appeared to the fancy of Constantine, as he slept within the

walls of Byzantium.  The tutelar genius of the city, a venerable

matron sinking under the weight of years and infirmities, was

suddenly transformed into a blooming maid, whom his own hands

adorned with all the symbols of Imperial greatness. ^27 The

monarch awoke, interpreted the auspicious omen, and obeyed,

without hesitation, the will of Heaven The day which gave birth

to a city or colony was celebrated by the Romans with such

ceremonies as had been ordained by a generous superstition; ^28

and though Constantine might omit some rites which savored too

strongly of their Pagan origin, yet he was anxious to leave a

deep impression of hope and respect on the minds of the

spectators.  On foot, with a lance in his hand, the emperor

himself led the solemn procession; and directed the line, which

was traced as the boundary of the destined capital: till the

growing circumference was observed with astonishment by the

assistants, who, at length, ventured to observe, that he had

already exceeded the most ample measure of a great city. "I shall

still advance," replied Constantine, "till He, the invisible

guide who marches before me, thinks proper to stop." ^29 Without

presuming to investigate the nature or motives of this

extraordinary conductor, we shall content ourselves with the more

humble task of describing the extent and limits of

Constantinople. ^30

[Footnote 25: Datur haec venia antiquitati, ut miscendo humana

divinis, primordia urbium augustiora faciat.  T. Liv. in prooem.]

[Footnote 26: He says in one of his laws, pro commoditate urbis

quam aeteras nomine, jubente Deo, donavimus.  Cod. Theodos. l.

xiii. tit. v. leg. 7.]

[Footnote 27: The Greeks, Theophanes, Cedrenus, and the author of

the Alexandrian Chronicle, confine themselves to vague and

general expressions. For a more particular account of the vision,

we are obliged to have recourse to such Latin writers as William

of Malmesbury.  See Ducange, C. P. l. i. p. 24, 25.]

[Footnote 28: See Plutarch in Romul. tom. i. p. 49, edit. Bryan.

Among other ceremonies, a large hole, which had been dug for that

purpose, was filled up with handfuls of earth, which each of the

settlers brought from the place of his birth, and thus adopted

his new country.]

[Footnote 29: Philostorgius, l. ii. c. 9.  This incident, though

borrowed from a suspected writer, is characteristic and

probable.]

[Footnote 30: See in the Memoires de l'Academie, tom. xxxv p. 747

- 758, a dissertation of M. d'Anville on the extent of

Constantinople.  He takes the plan inserted in the Imperium

Orientale of Banduri as the most complete; but, by a series of

very nice observations, he reduced the extravagant proportion of

the scale, and instead of 9500, determines the circumference of

the city as consisting of about 7800 French toises.]

     In the actual state of the city, the palace and gardens of

the Seraglio occupy the eastern promontory, the first of the

seven hills, and cover about one hundred and fifty acres of our

own measure.  The seat of Turkish jealousy and despotism is

erected on the foundations of a Grecian republic; but it may be

supposed that the Byzantines were tempted by the conveniency of

the harbor to extend their habitations on that side beyond the

modern limits of the Seraglio.  The new walls of Constantine

stretched from the port to the Propontis across the enlarged

breadth of the triangle, at the distance of fifteen stadia from

the ancient fortification; and with the city of Byzantium they

enclosed five of the seven hills, which, to the eyes of those who

approach Constantinople, appear to rise above each other in

beautiful order. ^31 About a century after the death of the

founder, the new buildings, extending on one side up the harbor,

and on the other along the Propontis, already covered the narrow

ridge of the sixth, and the broad summit of the seventh hill.

The necessity of protecting those suburbs from the incessant

inroads of the barbarians engaged the younger Theodosius to

surround his capital with an adequate and permanent enclosure of

walls. ^32 From the eastern promontory to the golden gate, the

extreme length of Constantinople was about three Roman miles; ^33

the circumference measured between ten and eleven; and the

surface might be computed as equal to about two thousand English

acres.  It is impossible to justify the vain and credulous

exaggerations of modern travellers, who have sometimes stretched

the limits of Constantinople over the adjacent villages of the

European, and even of the Asiatic coast. ^34 But the suburbs of

Pera and Galata, though situate beyond the harbor, may deserve to

be considered as a part of the city; ^35 and this addition may

perhaps authorize the measure of a Byzantine historian, who

assigns sixteen Greek (about fourteen Roman) miles for the

circumference of his native city. ^36 Such an extent may not seem

unworthy of an Imperial residence.  Yet Constantinople must yield

to Babylon and Thebes, ^37 to ancient Rome, to London, and even

to Paris. ^38

[Footnote 31: Codinus, Antiquitat. Const. p. 12.  He assigns the

church of St. Anthony as the boundary on the side of the harbor.

It is mentioned in Ducange, l. iv. c. 6; but I have tried,

without success, to discover the exact place where it was

situated.]

[Footnote 32: The new wall of Theodosius was constructed in the

year 413. In 447 it was thrown down by an earthquake, and rebuilt

in three months by the diligence of the praefect Cyrus.  The

suburb of the Blanchernae was first taken into the city in the

reign of Heraclius Ducange, Const. l. i. c. 10, 11.]

[Footnote 33: The measurement is expressed in the Notitia by

14,075 feet. It is reasonable to suppose that these were Greek

feet, the proportion of which has been ingeniously determined by

M. d'Anville.  He compares the 180 feet with 78 Hashemite cubits,

which in different writers are assigned for the heights of St.

Sophia.  Each of these cubits was equal to 27 French inches.]

[Footnote 34: The accurate Thevenot (l. i. c. 15) walked in one

hour and three quarters round two of the sides of the triangle,

from the Kiosk of the Seraglio to the seven towers.  D'Anville

examines with care, and receives with confidence, this decisive

testimony, which gives a circumference of ten or twelve miles.

The extravagant computation of Tournefort (Lettre XI) of

thirty-tour or thirty miles, without including Scutari, is a

strange departure from his usual character.]

[Footnote 35: The sycae, or fig-trees, formed the thirteenth

region, and were very much embellished by Justinian.  It has

since borne the names of Pera and Galata.  The etymology of the

former is obvious; that of the latter is unknown.  See Ducange,

Const. l. i. c. 22, and Gyllius de Byzant. l. iv. c. 10.]

[Footnote 36: One hundred and eleven stadia, which may be

translated into modern Greek miles each of seven stadia, or 660,

sometimes only 600 French toises.  See D'Anville, Mesures

Itineraires, p. 53.]

[Footnote 37: When the ancient texts, which describe the size of

Babylon and Thebes, are settled, the exaggerations reduced, and

the measures ascertained, we find that those famous cities filled

the great but not incredible circumference of about twenty-five

or thirty miles.  Compare D'Anville, Mem. de l'Academie, tom.

xxviii. p. 235, with his Description de l'Egypte, p. 201, 202.]

[Footnote 38: If we divide Constantinople and Paris into equal

squares of 50 French toises, the former contains 850, and the

latter 1160, of those divisions.]

Chapter XVII: Foundation Of Constantinople.

Part II.

     The master of the Roman world, who aspired to erect an

eternal monument of the glories of his reign could employ in the

prosecution of that great work, the wealth, the labor, and all

that yet remained of the genius of obedient millions.  Some

estimate may be formed of the expense bestowed with Imperial

liberality on the foundation of Constantinople, by the allowance

of about two millions five hundred thousand pounds for the

construction of the walls, the porticos, and the aqueducts. ^39

The forests that overshadowed the shores of the Euxine, and the

celebrated quarries of white marble in the little island of

Proconnesus, supplied an inexhaustible stock of materials, ready

to be conveyed, by the convenience of a short water carriage, to

the harbor of Byzantium. ^40 A multitude of laborers and

artificers urged the conclusion of the work with incessant toil:

but the impatience of Constantine soon discovered, that, in the

decline of the arts, the skill as well as numbers of his

architects bore a very unequal proportion to the greatness of his

designs.  The magistrates of the most distant provinces were

therefore directed to institute schools, to appoint professors,

and by the hopes of rewards and privileges, to engage in the

study and practice of architecture a sufficient number of

ingenious youths, who had received a liberal education. ^41 The

buildings of the new city were executed by such artificers as the

reign of Constantine could afford; but they were decorated by the

hands of the most celebrated masters of the age of Pericles and

Alexander.  To revive the genius of Phidias and Lysippus,

surpassed indeed the power of a Roman emperor; but the immortal

productions which they had bequeathed to posterity were exposed

without defence to the rapacious vanity of a despot.  By his

commands the cities of Greece and Asia were despoiled of their

most valuable ornaments. ^42 The trophies of memorable wars, the

objects of religious veneration, the most finished statues of the

gods and heroes, of the sages and poets, of ancient times,

contributed to the splendid triumph of Constantinople; and gave

occasion to the remark of the historian Cedrenus, ^43 who

observes, with some enthusiasm, that nothing seemed wanting

except the souls of the illustrious men whom these admirable

monuments were intended to represent. But it is not in the city

of Constantine, nor in the declining period of an empire, when

the human mind was depressed by civil and religious slavery, that

we should seek for the souls of Homer and of Demosthenes.

[Footnote 39: Six hundred centenaries, or sixty thousand pounds'

weight of gold.  This sum is taken from Codinus, Antiquit.

Const. p. 11; but unless that contemptible author had derived his

information from some purer sources, he would probably have been

unacquainted with so obsolete a mode of reckoning.]

[Footnote 40: For the forests of the Black Sea, consult

Tournefort, Lettre XVI. for the marble quarries of Proconnesus,

see Strabo, l. xiii. p. 588, (881, edit. Casaub.) The latter had

already furnished the materials of the stately buildings of

Cyzicus.]

[Footnote 41: See the Codex Theodos. l. xiii. tit. iv. leg. 1.

This law is dated in the year 334, and was addressed to the

praefect of Italy, whose jurisdiction extended over Africa.  The

commentary of Godefroy on the whole title well deserves to be

consulted.]

[Footnote 42: Constantinopolis dedicatur poene omnium urbium

nuditate. Hieronym. Chron. p. 181.  See Codinus, p. 8, 9.  The

author of the Antiquitat. Const. l. iii. (apud Banduri Imp.

Orient. tom. i. p. 41) enumerates Rome, Sicily, Antioch, Athens,

and a long list of other cities. The provinces of Greece and Asia

Minor may be supposed to have yielded the richest booty.]

[Footnote 43: Hist. Compend. p. 369.  He describes the statue, or

rather bust, of Homer with a degree of taste which plainly

indicates that Cadrenus copied the style of a more fortunate

age.]

     During the siege of Byzantium, the conqueror had pitched his

tent on the commanding eminence of the second hill.  To

perpetuate the memory of his success, he chose the same

advantageous position for the principal Forum; ^44 which appears

to have been of a circular, or rather elliptical form.  The two

opposite entrances formed triumphal arches; the porticos, which

enclosed it on every side, were filled with statues; and the

centre of the Forum was occupied by a lofty column, of which a

mutilated fragment is now degraded by the appellation of the

burnt pillar.  This column was erected on a pedestal of white

marble twenty feet high; and was composed of ten pieces of

porphyry, each of which measured about ten feet in height, and

about thirty-three in circumference. ^45 On the summit of the

pillar, above one hundred and twenty feet from the ground, stood

the colossal statue of Apollo.  It was a bronze, had been

transported either from Athens or from a town of Phrygia, and was

supposed to be the work of Phidias.  The artist had represented

the god of day, or, as it was afterwards interpreted, the emperor

Constantine himself, with a sceptre in his right hand, the globe

of the world in his left, and a crown of rays glittering on his

head. ^46 The Circus, or Hippodrome, was a stately building about

four hundred paces in length, and one hundred in breadth. ^47 The

space between the two metoe or goals were filled with statues and

obelisks; and we may still remark a very singular fragment of

antiquity; the bodies of three serpents, twisted into one pillar

of brass.  Their triple heads had once supported the golden

tripod which, after the defeat of Xerxes, was consecrated in the

temple of Delphi by the victorious Greeks. ^48 The beauty of the

Hippodrome has been long since defaced by the rude hands of the

Turkish conquerors; ^! but, under the similar appellation of

Atmeidan, it still serves as a place of exercise for their

horses.  From the throne, whence the emperor viewed the

Circensian games, a winding staircase ^49 descended to the

palace; a magnificent edifice, which scarcely yielded to the

residence of Rome itself, and which, together with the dependent

courts, gardens, and porticos, covered a considerable extent of

ground upon the banks of the Propontis between the Hippodrome and

the church of St. Sophia. ^50 We might likewise celebrate the

baths, which still retained the name of Zeuxippus, after they had

been enriched, by the munificence of Constantine, with lofty

columns, various marbles, and above threescore statues of bronze.

^51 But we should deviate from the design of this history, if we

attempted minutely to describe the different buildings or

quarters of the city.  It may be sufficient to observe, that

whatever could adorn the dignity of a great capital, or

contribute to the benefit or pleasure of its numerous

inhabitants, was contained within the walls of Constantinople.  A

particular description, composed about a century after its

foundation, enumerates a capitol or school of learning, a circus,

two theatres, eight public, and one hundred and fifty-three

private baths, fifty-two porticos, five granaries, eight

aqueducts or reservoirs of water, four spacious halls for the

meetings of the senate or courts of justice, fourteen churches,

fourteen palaces, and four thousand three hundred and

eighty-eight houses, which, for their size or beauty, deserved to

be distinguished from the multitude of plebeian inhabitants. ^52

[Footnote 44: Zosim. l. ii. p. 106.  Chron. Alexandrin. vel

Paschal. p. 284, Ducange, Const. l. i. c. 24.  Even the last of

those writers seems to confound the Forum of Constantine with the

Augusteum, or court of the palace.  I am not satisfied whether I

have properly distinguished what belongs to the one and the

other.]

[Footnote 45: The most tolerable account of this column is given

by Pocock. Description of the East, vol. ii. part ii. p. 131.

But it is still in many instances perplexed and unsatisfactory.]

[Footnote 46: Ducange, Const. l. i. c. 24, p. 76, and his notes

ad Alexiad. p. 382.  The statue of Constantine or Apollo was

thrown down under the reign of Alexius Comnenus.

     Note: On this column (says M. von Hammer) Constantine, with

singular shamelessness, placed his own statue with the attributes

of Apollo and Christ. He substituted the nails of the Passion for

the rays of the sun.  Such is the direct testimony of the author

of the Antiquit. Constantinop. apud Banduri. Constantine was

replaced by the "great and religious" Julian, Julian, by

Theodosius. A. D. 1412, the key stone was loosened by an

earthquake.  The statue fell in the reign of Alexius Comnenus,

and was replaced by the cross. The Palladium was said to be

buried under the pillar.  Von Hammer, Constantinopolis und der

Bosporos, i. 162. - M.]

[Footnote 47: Tournefort (Lettre XII.) computes the Atmeidan at

four hundred paces.  If he means geometrical paces of five feet

each, it was three hundred toises in length, about forty more

than the great circus of Rome.  See D'Anville, Mesures

Itineraires, p. 73.]

[Footnote 48: The guardians of the most holy relics would rejoice

if they were able to produce such a chain of evidence as may be

alleged on this occasion. See Banduri ad Antiquitat.  Const. p.

668.  Gyllius de Byzant. l. ii. c. 13. 1. The original

consecration of the tripod and pillar in the temple of Delphi may

be proved from Herodotus and Pausanias.  2. The Pagan Zosimus

agrees with the three ecclesiastical historians, Eusebius,

Socrates, and Sozomen, that the sacred ornaments of the temple of

Delphi were removed to Constantinople by the order of

Constantine; and among these the serpentine pillar of the

Hippodrome is particularly mentioned.  3. All the European

travellers who have visited Constantinople, from Buondelmonte to

Pocock, describe it in the same place, and almost in the same

manner; the differences between them are occasioned only by the

injuries which it has sustained from the Turks.  Mahomet the

Second broke the under jaw of one of the serpents with a stroke

of his battle axe Thevenot, l. i. c. 17.

     Note: See note 75, ch. lxviii. for Dr. Clarke's rejection of

Thevenot's authority.  Von Hammer, however, repeats the story of

Thevenot without questioning its authenticity. - M.]

[Footnote !: In 1808 the Janizaries revolted against the vizier

Mustapha Baisactar, who wished to introduce a new system of

military organization, besieged the quarter of the Hippodrome, in

which stood the palace of the viziers, and the Hippodrome was

consumed in the conflagration. - G.]

[Footnote 49: The Latin name Cochlea was adopted by the Greeks,

and very frequently occurs in the Byzantine history.  Ducange,

Const. i. c. l, p. 104.]

[Footnote 50: There are three topographical points which indicate

the situation of the palace.  1. The staircase which connected it

with the Hippodrome or Atmeidan.  2. A small artificial port on

the Propontis, from whence there was an easy ascent, by a flight

of marble steps, to the gardens of the palace.  3. The Augusteum

was a spacious court, one side of which was occupied by the front

of the palace, and another by the church of St. Sophia.]

[Footnote 51: Zeuxippus was an epithet of Jupiter, and the baths

were a part of old Byzantium.  The difficulty of assigning their

true situation has not been felt by Ducange.  History seems to

connect them with St. Sophia and the palace; but the original

plan inserted in Banduri places them on the other side of the

city, near the harbor.  For their beauties, see Chron. Paschal.

p. 285, and Gyllius de Byzant. l. ii. c. 7. Christodorus (see