collected a vast array of authorities on the subject. (_Origines du
Théâtre_, pp. 445-453.) M. Mongez has devoted an interesting memoir
to “Les animaux promenés ou tués dans le cirque.” (_Mém. de l’Acad.
des Inscrip. et Belles-lettres_, tome x.) See, too, Friedlænder.
Pliny rarely gives an account of any wild animal without
accompanying it by statistics about its appearances in the arena.
The first instance of a wild beast hunt in the amphitheatre is said
to be that recorded by Livy (xxxix. 22), which took place about 80
B.C.
493 Capitolinus, _Gordiani_.
494 Vopiscus, _Aurelian_.
495 Xiphilin, lxviii. 15.
496 Tacit. _Annal._ xv. 44.
497 Xiphilin, lxvii. 8; Statius, _Sylv._ i. 6.
498 During the Republic, a rich man ordered in his will that some women
he had purchased for the purpose should fight in the funeral games
to his memory, but the people annulled the clause. (Athenæeus, iv.
39.) Under Nero and Domitian, female gladiators seem to have been
not uncommon. See Statius, _Sylv._ i. 6; Sueton. _Domitian_, iv.;
Xiphilin, lxvii. 8. Juvenal describes the enthusiasm with which
Roman ladies practised with the gladiatorial weapons (_Sat._ vi.
248, &c.), and Martial (_De Spectac._ vi.) mentions the combats of
women with wild beasts. One, he says, killed a lion. A combat of
female gladiators, under Severus, created some tumult, and it was
decreed that they should no longer be permitted. (Xiphilin, lxxv.
16.) See Magnin, pp. 434-435.
499 Martial, _De Spectac._ vii.
500 Ibid. _Ep._ viii. 30.
501 Tertullian, _Ad Nation._ i. 10. One of the most ghastly features of
the games was the comic aspect they sometimes assumed. This was the
case in the combats of dwarfs. There were also combats by
blind-folded men. Petronius (_Satyricon_, c. xlv.) has given us a
horrible description of the maimed and feeble men who were sometimes
compelled to fight. People afflicted with epilepsy were accustomed
to drink the blood of the wounded gladiators, which they believed to
be a sovereign remedy. (Pliny, _Hist. Nat._ xxviii. 2; Tertul.
_Apol._ ix.)
502 “Nec unquam sine humano cruore cœnabat”—Lactan. _De Mort. Persec._
Much the same thing is told of the Christian emperor Justinian II.,
who lived at the end of the seventh century. (Sismondi, _Hist. de la
Chute de l’Empire Romain_, tome ii. p. 85.)
503 Winckelmann says the statue called “The Dying Gladiator” does not
represent a gladiator. At a later period, however, statues of
gladiators were not uncommon, and Pliny notices (_Hist. Nat._ xxxv.
33) paintings of them. A fine specimen of mosaic portraits of
gladiators is now in the Lateran Museum.
504 Plutarch’s _Life of Cæsar_.
505 Dion Cassius, li. 7.
506 Faustina, the wife of Marcus Aurelius, was especially accused of
this weakness. (Capitolinus, _Marcus Aurelius_.)
507 Seneca, _De Provident._ iv.
508 Arrian’s _Epictetus_, i. 29.
509 Seneca, _De Provident._ iii.
510 Aulus Gellius, xii. 5.
511 Cicero, _Tusc._ lib. ii.
512 Some Equites fought under Julius Cæsar, and a senator named Fulvius
Setinus wished to fight, but Cæsar prevented him. (Suet. _Cæsar_,
xxxix.; Dion Cassius, xliii. 23.) Nero, according to Suetonius,
compelled men of the highest rank to fight. Laws prohibiting
patricians from fighting were several times made and violated.
(Friedlænder, pp. 39-41.) Commodus is said to have been himself
passionately fond of fighting as a gladiator. Much, however, of what
Lampridius relates on this point is perfectly incredible. On the
other hand, the profession of the gladiator was constantly spoken of
as infamous; but this oscillation between extreme admiration and
contempt will surprise no one who has noticed the tone continually
adopted about prize-fighters in England, and about the members of
some other professions on the Continent. Juvenal dwells (_Sat._
viii. 197-210) with great indignation on an instance of a patrician
fighting.
513 “Quis mediocris gladiator ingemuit, quis vultum mutavit
unquam?”—Cic. _Tusc. Quæst._ lib. ii.
514 E.g. Clem. Alex. _Strom._ iii. There is a well-known passage of this
kind in Horace, _Ars Poet._ 412-415. The comparison of the good man
to an athlete or gladiator, which St. Paul employed, occurs also in
Seneca and Epictetus, from which some have inferred that they must
have known the writings of the Apostle. M. Denis, however, has shown
(_Idées morales dans l’Antiquité_, tome ii. p. 240) that the same
comparison had been used, before the rise of Christianity, by Plato,
Æschines, and Cicero.
_ 515 Confess._ vi. 8.
516 “[Servi] etsi per fortunam in omnia obnoxii, tamen quasi secundum
hominum genus sunt.”—Florus, _Hist._ iii. 20.
517 Macrinus, however, punished fugitive slaves by compelling them to
fight as gladiators. (Capitolinus, _Macrinus_.)
518 Tacit. _Annal._ xii. 56. According to Friedlænder, however, there
were two classes of criminals. One class were condemned only to
fight, and pardoned if they conquered; the others were condemned to
fight till death, and this was considered an aggravation of capital
punishment.
519 “Ad conciliandum plebis favorem effusa largitio, quum spectaculis
indulget, supplicia quondam hostium artem facit.”—Florus, iii. 12.
_ 520 Tusc. Quæst._ ii. 17.
521 See his magnificent letter on the subject. (_Ep._ vii.)
522 In his two treatises _De Esu Carnium_.
523 Pliny. _Ep._ iv. 22.
524 Xiphilin, lxxi. 29. Capitolinus, _M. Aurelius_. The emperor also
once carried off the gladiators to a war with his army, much to the
indignation of the people. (Capit.) He has himself noticed the
extreme weariness he felt at the public amusements he was obliged to
attend. (vii. 3.)
525 Sueton. _Titus_, viii.
526 “Visum est spectaculum inde non enerve nec fluxum, nec quod animos
virorum molliret et frangeret, sed quod ad pulchra vulnera
contemptumque mortis accenderet.”—Pliny, _Paneg._ xxxiii.
527 “Præterea tanto consensu rogabaris, ut negare non constans sed durum
videretur.”—Plin. _Epist._ vi. 34.
528 Symmach. _Epist._ ii. 46.
529 Sueton. _Domitian_, iii. It is very curious that the same emperor,
about the same time (the beginning of his reign), had such a horror
of bloodshed that he resolved to prohibit the sacrifice of oxen.
(Suet. _Dom._ ix.)
530 “Pendant qu’il restait au logis, il n’était incommode à personne; il
y passait la meilleure partie de son temps tranquillement dans sa
chambre.... Il se divertissait aussi quelquefois à fumer une pipe de
tabac; ou bien lorsqu’il voulait se relâcher l’esprit un peu plus
longtemps, il cherchait des araignées qu’il faisait battre ensemble,
ou des mouches qu’il jetait dans la toile d’araignée, et regardait
ensuite cette bataille avec tant de plaisir qu’il éclatait
quelquefois de rire.”—Colerus, _Vie de Spinoza_.
531 This is noticed by George Duval in a curious passage of his
_Souvenirs de la Terreur_, quoted by Lord Lytton in a note to his
_Zanoni_.
_ 532 Essay on Goodness._
533 This contrast has been noticed by Archbishop Whately in a lecture on
Egypt. See, too, Legendre, _Traité de l’Opinion_, tome ii. p. 374.
534 Tacit. _Annal._ xiv. 45.
535 Senec. _De Clemen._ i. 14.
536 Val. Max. ii. 9. This writer speaks of “the eyes of a mistress
delighting in human blood” with as much horror as if the
gladiatorial games were unknown. Livy gives a rather different
version of this story.
537 Tacit. _Annal._ i. 76.
538 Sueton. _Calig._ xi.
539 Spartian. _Caracalla._ Tertullian mentions that his nurse was a
Christian.
540 Capitolinus, _Marcus Aurelius_. Capitolinus, who wrote under
Diocletian, says that in his time the custom of spreading a net
under the rope-dancer still continued. I do not know when it ceased
at Rome, but St. Chrysostom mentions that in his time it had been
abolished in the East.—Jortin’s _Remarks on Ecclesiastical History_,
ii. 71 (ed. 1846).
541 Tacit. _Ann._ iii. 55.
542 Champagny, _Les Antonins_, tome ii. pp. 179-200.
543 πολιτεύεσθαι.—Diog. Laërt. _Zeno_.
544 Thus Tigellinus spoke of “Stoicorum arrogantia sectaque quæ turbidos
et negotiorum appetentes faciat.”—Tacit. _Ann._ xiv. 57. The
accusation does not appear to have been quite untrue, for Vespasian,
who was a very moderate emperor, thought it necessary to banish
nearly all the philosophers from Rome on account of their
factiousness. Sometimes the Stoics showed their independence by a
rather gratuitous insolence. Dion Cassius relates that, when Nero
was thinking of writing a poem in 400 books, he asked the advice of
the Stoic Cornutus, who said, that no one would read so long a work.
“But,” answered Nero, “your favourite Chrysippus wrote still more
numerous books.” “True,” rejoined Cornutus, “but then they were of
use to humanity.” On the other hand, Seneca is justly accused of
condescending too much to the vices of Nero in his efforts to
mitigate their effects.
545 The influence of Stoicism on Roman law has been often examined. See,
especially, Degerando, _Hist. de la Philosophie_ (2nd ed.), tome
iii. pp. 202-204; Laferrière, _De l’Influence du Stoïcisme sur les
Jurisconsultes romains_; Denis, _Théories et Idées morales dans
l’Antiquité_, tome ii. pp. 187-217; Troplong, _Influence du
Christianisme sur le Droit civil des Romains_; Merivale, _Conversion
of the Roman Empire_, lec. iv.; and the great work of Gravina, _De
Ortu et Progressu Juris civilis_.
546 Cic. _De Legib._ ii. 4, 23.
547 There were two rival schools, that of Labeo and that of Capito. The
first was remarkable for its strict adherence to the letter of the
law—the second for the latitude of interpretation it admitted.
_ 548 Dig._ lib. i. tit. 17-32.
549 Ibid. i. tit. 1-3.
550 Ibid. i. tit. 1-4.
_ 551 Dig._ lib. i. tit. 4-5.
552 Laferrière, p. 32. Wallon, _Hist. de l’Esclavage dans l’Antiquité_,
tome iii. pp. 71-80. M. Wallon gives many curious instances of legal
decisions on this point.
553 To prove that this is the correct conception of law was the main
object of Cicero’s treatise _De Legibus_. Ulpian defined
jurisprudence as “divinarum atque humanarum rerum notitia, justi
atque injusti scientia.”—_Dig._ lib. i. tit. 1-10. So Paul “Id quod
semper æquum ad bonum est jus dicitur ut est jus naturale.”—_Dig._
lib. i. tit. 1-11. And Gaius, “Quod vero naturalis ratio inter omnes
homines constituit ... vocatur jus gentium.”—_Dig._ lib. i. tit.
1-9. The Stoics had defined true wisdom as “rerum divinarum atque
humanarum scientia.”—Cic. _De Offic._ i. 43.
554 Cicero compares the phraseology of the Stoics with that of the
Peripatetics, maintaining that the precision of the former is well
adapted to legal discussions, and the redundancy of the latter to
oratory. “Omnes fere Stoici prudentissimi in disserendo sint et id
arte faciant, sintque architecti pene verborum; iidem traducti a
disputando ad dicendum, inopes reperiantur: unum excipio Catonem....
Peripateticorum institutis commodius fingeretur oratio ... nam ut
Stoicorum astrictior est oratio, aliquantoque contractior quam aures
populi requirunt: sic illorum liberior et latior quam patitur
consuetudo judiciorum et fori.”—_De Claris Oratoribus._ A very
judicious historian of philosophy observes: “En général à Rome le
petit nombre d’hommes livrés à la méditation et à l’enthousiasme
préférèrent Pythagore et Platon; les hommes du monde et ceux qui
cultivaient les sciences naturelles s’attachèrent à Épicure; les
orateurs et les hommes d’État à la nouvelle Académie; les
juris-consultes au Portique.”—Degerando, _Hist. de la Philos._ tome
iii. p. 196.
555 See a very remarkable passage in Aulus Gellius, _Noct._ ii. 15.
556 “Fere enim nulli alii sunt homines qui talem in filios suos habeant
potestatem qualem nos habemus.”—Gaius.
557 A full statement of these laws is given by Dion. Halicarn. ii. 4. It
was provided that if a father sold his son and if the son was
afterwards enfranchised by the purchaser, he became again the slave
of his father, who might sell him a second, and, if manumission
again ensued, a third time. It was only on the third sale that he
passed for ever out of the parental control. A more merciful law,
attributed to Numa, provided that when the son married (if that
marriage was with the consent of the father), the father lost the
power of selling him. In no other way, however, was his authority
even then abridged.
558 Velleius Paterculus, ii. 67. A great increase of parricide was
noticed during the Empire (Senec. _De Clem._ i. 23). At first, it is
said, there was no law against parricide, for the crime was believed
to be too atrocious to be possible.
559 Numerous instances of these executions are collected by Livy, Val.
Maximus, &c.; their history is fully given by Cornelius van
Bynkershoek, “De Jure occidendi, vendendi, et exponendi liberos apud
veteres Romanos,” in his works (Cologne, 1761).
560 This proceeding of Hadrian, which is related by the lawyer Marcian,
is doubly remarkable, because the father had surprised his son in
adultery with his stepmother. Now a Roman had originally not only
absolute authority over the life of his son, but also the right of
killing any one whom he found committing adultery with his wife. Yet
Marcian praises the severity of Hadrian, “Nam patria potestas in
pietate debet, non atrocitate, consistere.”—_Digest._ lib. xlviii.
tit. 9, § 5.
561 Valer. Max. vii. 7.
562 See, on all this subject, Gibbon, _Decline and Fall_, ch. xliv.;
Troplong, _Influence du Christianisme sur le Droit_, ch. ix.; Denis,
_Hist. des Idées morales_, tome ii. pp. 107-120; Laferrière,
_Influence du Stoïcisme sur les Jurisconsultes_, pp. 37-44.
563 Ælian, _Hist. Var._ vi. 7.
564 Livy, ii. 36; Cicero, _De Divin._ ii. 26.
565 Cicero, _De Legibus_, ii. 8-12. Cato, however, maintained that
slaves might on those days be employed on work which did not require
oxen.—Wallon, _Hist. de l’Esclavage_, tome ii. p. 215.
566 See the _Saturnalia_ of Macrobius.
567 See his _Life_ by Plutarch, and his book on agriculture.
568 The number of the Roman slaves has been a matter of much
controversy. M. Dureau de la Malle (_Econ. politique des Romains_)
has restricted it more than any other writer. Gibbon (_Decline and
Fall_, chap. ii.) has collected many statistics on the subject, but
the fullest examination is in M. Wallon’s admirable _Hist. de
l’Esclavage_. On the contrast between the character of the slaves of
the Republic and those of the Empire, see _Tac. Ann._ xiv. 44.
569 Tacit. _Annal._ xiii. 32; xiv. 42-45. Wallon, _Hist. de l’Esclav._
ii. 293. I have already noticed the indignant rising of the people
caused by the proposal to execute the 400 slaves of the murdered
Pedanius. Their interposition was, however (as Tacitus informs us),
unavailing, and the slaves, guarded against rescue by a strong band
of soldiers, were executed. It was proposed to banish the freedmen
who were in the house, but Nero interposed and prevented it. Pliny
notices (_Ep._ viii. 14) the banishment of the freedmen of a
murdered man.
570 See all this fully illustrated in Wallon. The plays of Plautus and
the Roman writers on agriculture contain numerous allusions to the
condition of slaves.
571 Wallon, tome ii. pp. 209-210, 357. There were no laws till the time
of the Christian emperors against separating the families of slaves,
but it was a maxim of the jurisconsults that in forced sales they
should not be separated. (Wallon, tome iii. pp. 55-56.)
572 Ibid. tome ii. pp. 211-213.
573 Plin. _Epist._ viii. 16. It was customary to allow the public or
State slaves to dispose of half their goods by will. (Wallon, tome
iii. p. 59.)
574 Wallon, tome ii. p. 419. This appears from an allusion of Cicero,
_Philip._ viii. 11.
575 Senec. _De Clem._ i. 18.
576 Ibid. _Ep._ xlvii.
577 Pliny, _Ep._ viii. 16.
578 Spartianus, _Hadrianus_.
579 Compare Wallon, tome ii. p. 186; tome iii. pp. 65-66. Slaves were
only to be called as witnesses in cases of incest, adultery, murder,
and high treason, and where it was impossible to establish the crime
without their evidence. Hadrian considered that the reality of the
crime must have already acquired a strong probability, and the
jurisconsult Paul laid down that at least two free witnesses should
be heard before slaves were submitted to torture, and that the offer
of an accused person to have his slaves tortured that they might
attest his innocence should not be accepted.
580 Numerous and very noble instances of slave fidelity are given by
Seneca, _De Benefic._ iii. 19-27; Val. Max. vi. 8; and in Appian’s
_History of the Civil Wars_. See, too, Tacit. _Hist._ i. 3.
581 Aristotle had, it is true, declared slavery to be part of the law of
nature—an opinion which, he said, was rejected by some of his
contemporaries; but he advocated humanity to slaves quite as
emphatically as the other philosophers (_Economics_, i. 5). Epicurus
was conspicuous even among Greek philosophers for his kindness to
slaves, and he associated some of his own with his philosophical
labours. (Diog. Laërt. _Epicurus_.)
_ 582 De Benef._ iii. 18-28; _De Vita Beata_, xxiv.; _De Clem._ i. 18,
and especially _Ep._ xlvii. Epictetus, as might be expected from his
history, frequently recurs to the duty. Plutarch writes very
beautifully upon it in his treatise _De Cohibenda Ira_.
583 Diog. Laërt. _Zeno_.
584 Bodin thinks it was promulgated by Nero, and he has been followed by
Troplong and Mr. Merivale. Champagny (_Les Antonins_, tome ii. p.
115) thinks that no law after Tiberius was called _lex_.
585 Sueton. _Claud._ xxv.; Dion Cass. lx. 29.
586 See Dumas, _Secours publics chez les Anciens_ (Paris, 1813), pp.
125-130.
587 Senec. _De Clem._ i. 18.
588 Senec. _De Benef._ iii. 22.
589 Spartian. _Hadrianus._ Hadrian exiled a Roman lady for five years
for treating her slaves with atrocious cruelty. (_Digest._ lib. i.
tit. 6, § 2.)
590 See these laws fully examined by Wallon, tome iii. pp. 51-92, and
also Laferrière, _Sur l’Influence du Stoïcisme sur le Droit_. The
jurisconsults gave a very wide scope to their definitions of
cruelty. A master who degraded a literary slave, or a slave
musician, to some coarse manual employment, such as a porter, was
decided to have ill-treated him. (Wallon, tome iii. p. 62.)
591 Thus, e.g., Livia called in the Stoic Areus to console her after the
death of Drusus (Senec. _Ad Marc._). Many of the letters of Seneca
and Plutarch are written to console the suffering. Cato, Thrasea,
and many others appear to have fortified their last hours by
conversation with philosophers. The whole of this aspect of Stoicism
has been admirably treated by M. Martha (_Les Moralistes de l’Empire
Romain_).
592 We have a pleasing picture of the affection philosophers and their
disciples sometimes bore to one another in the lines of Persius
(_Sat._ v.) to his master Cornutus.
593 Grant’s _Aristotle_, vol. i. pp. 277-278.
594 Champagny, _Les Antonins_, tome i. p. 405.
595 Arrian, iii. 22. Julian has also painted the character of the true
Cynic, and contrasted it with that of the impostors who assumed the
garb. See Neander’s _Life of Julian_ (London, 1850), p. 94.
596 Seneca the rhetorician (father of the philosopher) collected many of
the sayings of the rhetoricians of his time. At a later period,
Philostratus wrote the lives of eminent rhetoricians, Quintilian
discussed their rules of oratory, and Aulus Gellius painted the
whole society in which they moved. On their injurious influence upon
eloquence, see Petronius, _Satyricon_, i. 2. Much curious
information about the rhetoricians is collected in Martha,
_Moralistes de l’Empire Romain_, and in Nisard, _Etudes sur les
Poëtes Latins de la Dècadence_, art. Juvenal.
597 “Cependant ces orateurs n’étaient jamais plus admirés que lorsqu’ils
avaient le bonheur de trouver un sujet où la louange fut un tour de
force.... Lucien a fait l’éloge de la mouche; Fronton de la
poussière, de la fumée, de la négligence; Dion Chrysostome de la
chevelure, du perroquet, etc. Au cinquième siècle, Synésius, qui fut
un grand évêque, fera le panégyrique de la calvitie, long ouvrage où
toutes les sciences sont mises à contribution pour apprendre aux
hommes ce qu’il y a non-seulement de bonheur mais aussi de mérite à
être chauve.”—Martha, _Moralistes de l’Empire Romain_ (ed. 1865), p.
275.
598 There is a good review of the teaching of Maximus in Champagny, _Les
Antonins_, tome ii. pp. 207-215.
_ 599 Orat._ xv.; _De Servitute_.
600 See the singularly charming essay on Dion Chrysostom, in M. Martha’s
book.
601 Mr. Buckle, in his admirable chapter on the “Proximate Causes of the
French Revolution” (_Hist. of Civilisation_, vol. i.), has painted
this fashionable enthusiasm for knowledge with great power, and
illustrated it with ample learning.
602 The saying of Mme. Dudeffand about Helvétius is well known: “C’est
un homme qui a dit le secret de tout le monde.” How truly Helvétius
represented this fashionable society appears very plainly from the
vivid portrait of it in the _Nouvelle Hèloïse_, part ii. letter
xvii., a masterpiece of its kind.
603 Musonius tried to stop this custom of applauding the lecturer. (Aul.
Gell. _Noct._ v. i.) The habits that were formed in the schools of
the rhetoricians were sometimes carried into the churches, and we
have notices of preachers (especially St. Chrysostom) being
vociferously applauded.
604 Thus Gellius himself consulted Favorinus about a perplexing case
which he had, in his capacity of magistrate, to determine, and
received from his master a long dissertation on the duties of a
judge (xiv. 2).
605 i. 10.
_ 606 Noct. Att._ vi. 13. They called these questions _symposiacæ_, as
being well fitted to stimulate minds already mellowed by wine.
607 xviii. 2.
608 We have a curious example of this in a letter of Marcus Aurelius
preserved by Gallicanus in his _Life of Avidius Cassius_.
609 “Senserunt hoc Stoici qui servis et mulieribus philosophandum esse
dixerunt.”—Lact. _Nat. Div._ iii. 25. Zeno was often reproached for
gathering the poorest and most sordid around him when he lectured.
(Diog. Laërt. _Zeno_.)
610 This decadence was noticed and rebuked by some of the leading
philosophers. See the language of Epictetus in Arrian, ii. 19, iv.
8, and of Herod Atticus in Aul. Gell. i. 2, ix. 2. St. Augustine
speaks of the Cynics as having in his time sunk into universal
contempt. See much evidence on this subject in Friedlænder, _Hist.
des Mœurs Romaines_, tome iv. 378-385.
611 This movement is well treated by Vacherot, _Hist. de l’École
d’Alexandrie_.
_ 612 De Superstitione._
_ 613 Dissertations_, x. § 8 (ed. Davis, London, 1740). In some editions
this is _Diss._ xxix.
_ 614 Dissert._ xxxviii.
_ 615 De Dæmone Socratis._
_ 616 De Dæmone Socratis._ See, on the office of dæmons or genii, Arrian
i. 14, and a curious chapter in Ammianus Marcell. xxi. 14. See, too,
Plotinus, 3rd _Enn._ lib. iv.
_ 617 De Dæmone Socratis._
618 I should except Plotinus, however, who was faithful in this point to
Plato, and was in consequence much praised by the Christian Fathers.
619 “Omnium malorum maximum voluptas, qua tanquam clavo et fibula anima
corpori nectitur; putatque vera quæ et corpus suadet, et ita
spoliatur rerum divinarum aspectu.”—Iamblichus, _De Secta Pythagor._
(Romæ, 1556), p. 38. Plotinus, 1st _Enn._ vi. 6.
_ 620 De Sect. Pyth._ pp. 36, 37.
621 Porphyry, _Life of Plotinus_.
622 Iamblichus, _De Mysteriis._ 1.
623 See, on this doctrine of ecstasy, Vacherot, _Hist. de l’École
d’Alexandrie_, tome i. p. 576, &c.
624 “Sic habeto, omnibus qui patriam conservaverint, adjuverint,
auxerint, certum esse in cœlo ac definitum locum ubi beati ævo
sempiterno fruantur.”—Cic. _Somn. Scip._
625 Φῶς, which, according to Plutarch (who here confuses two distinct
words), is poetically used for man (_De Latenter Vivendo_). A
similar thought occurs in M. Aurelius, who speaks of the good man as
light which only ceases to shine when it ceases to be.
_ 626 Diss._ xxi. § 6.
627 Iamblichus, _De Sect. Pythagoræ_, p. 35.
628 Porphyry, _Life of Plotinus_, cap. vii.; Plotinus, 1st _Enn._ iv. 7.
See on this subject Degerando, _Hist. de la Philos._ iii. p. 383.
629 Thus it was said of Apollonius that in his teaching at Ephesus he
did not speak after the manner of the followers of Socrates, but
endeavoured to detach his disciples from all occupation other than
philosophy.—_Philostr. Apoll. of Tyana_, iv. 2. Cicero notices the
aversion the Pythagoreans of his time displayed to argument: “Quum
ex iis quæreretur quare ita esset, respondere solitos, Ipse dixit;
ipse autem erat Pythagoras.”—_De Nat. Deor._ i. 5.
630 See Vacherot, tome ii. p. 66.
631 See Degerando, _Hist. de la Philosophie_, tome iii. pp. 400, 401.
632 Plotinus, 1st _Enn._ ix.
633 See a strong passage, on the universality of this belief, in
Plotinus, 1st _Enn._ i. 12, and Origen, _Cont. Cels._ vii. A very
old tradition represented the Egyptians as the first people who held
the doctrine of the immortality of the soul. Cicero (_Tusc. Quæst._)
says that the Syrian Pherecydes, master of Pythagoras, first taught
it. Maximus of Tyre attributes its origin to Pythagoras, and his
slave Zamolxis was said to have introduced it into Greece. Others
say that Thales first taught it. None of these assertions have any
real historical value.
634 We have a remarkable instance of the clearness with which some even
of the most insignificant historians recognised the folly of
confining history to the biographies of the Emperors, in the opening
chapter of Capitolinus, _Life of Macrinus_.—Tacitus is full of
beautiful episodes, describing the manners and religion of the
people.
635 The passages relating to the Jews in Roman literature are collected
in Aubertin’s _Rapports supposés entre Sénèque et St. Paul_.
Champagny, _Rome et Judée_, tome i. pp. 134-137.
636 Cicero, _pro Flacco_, 28; Sueton. _Claudius_, 25.
637 Juvenal, _Sat._ xiv.
_ 638 Hist._ v.
639 Lact. _Inst. Div._ vii. 3.
640 See their history fully investigated in Aubertin. Augustine followed
Jerome in mentioning the letters, but neither of these writers
asserted their genuineness. Lactantius, nearly at the same time
(_Inst. Div._ vi. 24), distinctly spoke of Seneca as a Pagan, as
Tertullian (_Apol._ 50) had done before. The immense number of
forged documents is one of the most disgraceful features of the
Church history of the first few centuries.
641 Fleury has written an elaborate work maintaining the connection
between the apostle and the philosopher. Troplong (_Influence du
Christianisme sur le Droit_) has adopted the same view. Aubertin, in
the work I have already cited, has maintained the opposite view
(which is that of all or nearly all English critics) with masterly
skill and learning. The Abbé Dourif (_Rapports du Stoïcisme et du
Christianisme_) has placed side by side the passages from each
writer which are most alike.
642 Quoted by St. Augustine.—_De Civ. Dei_, vi. 11.
643 xi. 3.
644 The history of the two schools has been elaborately traced by
Ritter, Pressensé, and many other writers. I would especially refer
to the fourth volume of Degerando’s most fascinating _Histoire de la
Philosophie_.
645 “Scurra Atticus,” Min. Felix, _Octav._ This term is said by Cicero
to have been given to Socrates by Zeno. (Cic. _De Nat. Deor._ i.
34.)
646 Tertull. _De Anima_, 39.
647 See especially his _Apol._ ii. 8, 12, 13. He speaks of the
σπερματικὸς λόγος.
648 See, on all this, Clem. Alex. _Strom._ v., and also i. 22.
649 St. Clement repeats this twice (_Strom._ i. 24, v. 14). The writings
of this Father are full of curious, and sometimes ingenious,
attempts to trace different phrases of the great philosophers,
orators, and poets to Moses. A vast amount of learning and ingenuity
has been expended in the same cause by Eusebius. (_Præp. Evan._ xii.
xiii.) The tradition of the derivation of Pagan philosophy from the
Old Testament found in general little favour among the Latin
writers. There is some curious information on this subject in
Waterland’s “Charge to the Clergy of Middlesex, to prove that the
wisdom of the ancients was borrowed from revelation; delivered in
1731.” It is in the 8th volume of Waterland’s works (ed. 1731).
650 St. Clement (_Strom._ i.) mentions that some think him to have been
Ezekiel, an opinion which St. Clement himself does not hold. See, on
the patristic notions about Pythagoras, Legendre, _Traité de
l’Opinion_, tome i. p. 164.
651 This was the opinion of Julius Firmicus Maternus, a Latin writer of
the age of Constantine, “Nam quia Saræ pronepos fuerat ... Serapis
dictus est Græco sermone, hoc est Σαρᾶς ἄπο.”—Julius Firmicus
Maternus, _De Errore Profanarum Religionum_, cap. xiv.
652 Justin Martyr, _Apol._ i. 54; Trypho, 69-70. There is a very curious
collection of Pagan legends that were parallel to Jewish incidents,
in La Mothe le Vayer, let. xciii.
653 Suet. _Vesp._ 7; Tacit. _Hist._ iv. 81. There is a slight difference
between the two historians about the second miracle. Suetonius says
it was the leg, Tacitus that it was the hand, that was diseased. The
god Serapis was said to have revealed to the patients that they
would be cured by the emperor. Tacitus says that Vespasian did not
believe in his own power; that it was only after much persuasion he
was induced to try the experiment; that the blind man was well known
in Alexandria, where the event occurred, and that eyewitnesses who
had no motive to lie still attested the miracle.
654 The following is a good specimen of the language which may still be
uttered, apparently without exciting any protest, from the pulpit in
one of the great centres of English learning: “But we have prayed,
and not been heard, at least in this present visitation. Have we
deserved to be heard? In former visitations it was observed commonly
how the cholera lessened from the day of the public humiliation.
When we dreaded famine from long-continued drought, on the morning
of our prayers the heaven over our head was of brass; the clear
burning sky showed no token of change. Men looked with awe at its
unmitigated clearness. In the evening was the cloud like a man’s
hand; the relief was come.” (And then the author adds, in a note):
“This describes what I myself saw on the Sunday morning in Oxford,
on returning from the early communion at St. Mary’s at eight. There
was no visible change till the evening.”—Pusey’s _Miracles of
Prayer_, preached at Oxford, 1866.
655 E.g.: “A master of philosophy, travelling with others on the way,
when a fearful thunderstorm arose, checked the fear of his fellows,
and discoursed to them of the natural reasons of that uproar in the
clouds, and those sudden flashes wherewith they seemed (out of the
ignorance of causes) to be too much affrighted: in the midst of his
philosophical discourse he was struck dead with the dreadful
eruption which he slighted. What could this be but the finger of
that God who will have his works rather entertained with wonder and
trembling than with curious scanning?”—Bishop Hall, _The Invisible
World_, § vi.
656 Sir C. Lewis _On the Credibility of Roman Hist._ vol. i. p. 50.
657 Cic. _De Divin._ lib. i. c. 1.
658 “The days on which the miracle [of the king’s touch] was to be
wrought were fixed at sittings of the Privy Council, and were
solemnly notified by the clergy to all the parish churches of the
realm. When the appointed time came, several divines in full
canonicals stood round the canopy of state. The surgeon of the royal
household introduced the sick. A passage of Mark xvi. was read. When
the words ‘They shall lay their hands on the sick and they shall
recover,’ had been pronounced, there was a pause and one of the sick
was brought to the king. His Majesty stroked the ulcers.... Then
came the Epistle, &c. The Service may still be found in the Prayer
Books of the reign of Anne. Indeed, it was not until some time after
the accession of George I. that the University of Oxford ceased to
reprint the office of healing, together with the Liturgy.
Theologians of eminent learning, ability, and virtue gave the
sanction of their authority to this mummery, and, what is stranger
still, medical men of high note believed, or affected to believe,
it.... Charles II., in the course of his reign, touched near 100,000
persons.... In 1682 he performed the rite 8,500 times. In 1684 the
throng was such that six or seven of the sick were trampled to
death. James, in one of his progresses, touched 800 persons in the
choir of the cathedral of Chester.”—Macaulay’s _History of England_,
c. xiv.
659 One of the surgeons of Charles II. named John Brown, whose official
duty it was to superintend the ceremony, and who assures us that he
has witnessed many thousands touched, has written an extremely
curious account of it, called _Charisma Basilicon_ (London, 1684).
This miraculous power existed exclusively in the English and French
royal families, being derived, in the first, from Edward the
Confessor, in the second, from St. Lewis. A surgeon attested the
reality of the disease before the miracle was performed. The king
hung a riband with a gold coin round the neck of the person touched;
but Brown thinks the gold, though possessing great virtue, was not
essential to the cure. He had known cases where the cured person had
sold, or ceased to wear, the medal, and his disease returned. The
gift was unimpaired by the Reformation, and an obdurate Catholic was
converted on finding that Elizabeth, after the Pope’s
excommunication, could cure his scrofula. Francis I. cured many
persons when prisoner in Spain. Charles I., when a prisoner, cured a
man by his simple benediction, the Puritans not permitting him to
touch him. His blood had the same efficacy; and Charles II., when an
exile in the Netherlands, still retained it. There were, however,
some “Atheists, Sadducees, and ill-conditioned Pharisees” who even
then disbelieved it; and Brown gives the letter of one who went, a
complete sceptic, to satisfy his friends, and came away cured and
converted. It was popularly, but Brown says erroneously, believed
that the touch was peculiarly efficacious on Good Friday. An
official register was kept, for every month in the reign of Charles
II., of the persons touched, but two years and a half appear to be
wanting. The smallest number touched in one year was 2,983 (in
1669); the total, in the whole reign, 92,107. Brown gives numbers of
specific cases with great detail. Shakspeare has noticed the power
(_Macbeth_, Act iv. Scene 3). Dr. Johnson, when a boy, was touched
by Queen Anne; but at that time few persons, except Jacobites,
believed the miracle.
660 Lucretius, lib. vi. The poet says there are certain seeds of fire in
the earth, around the water, which the sun attracts to itself, but
which the cold of the night represses, and forces back upon the
water.
The fountain of Jupiter Ammon, and many others that were deemed
miraculous, are noticed by Pliny, _Hist. Nat._ ii. 106.
“Fly not yet; the fount that played
In times of old through Ammon’s shade,
Though icy cold by day it ran,
Yet still, like souls of mirth, began
To burn when night was near.”—Moore’s _Melodies_.
661 Tacit. _Annal._ i. 28. Long afterwards, the people of Turin were
accustomed to greet every eclipse with loud cries, and St. Maximus
of Turin energetically combated their superstition. (Ceillier,
_Hist. des Auteurs sacrés_, tome xiv. p. 607.)
662 Suet. _Aug._ xci.
663 See the answer of the younger Pliny (_Ep._ i. 18), suggesting that
dreams should often be interpreted by contraries. A great many
instances of dreams that were believed to have been verified are
given in Cic. (_De Divinatione_, lib. i.) and Valerius Maximus (lib.
i. c. vii.). Marcus Aurelius (Capitolinus) was said to have appeared
to many persons after his death in dreams, and predicted the future.
664 The augurs had noted eleven kinds of lightning with different
significations. (Pliny, _Hist. Nat._ ii. 53.) Pliny says all nations
agree in clapping their hands when it lightens (xxviii. 5). Cicero
very shrewdly remarked that the Roman considered lightning a good
omen when it shone upon his left, while the Greeks and barbarians
believed it to be auspicious when it was upon the right. (Cic. _De
Divinat._ ii. 39.) When Constantine prohibited all other forms of
magic, he especially authorised that which was intended to avert
hail and lightning. (_Cod. Theod._ lib. ix. tit. xvi. 1. 3.)
665 Suet. _Aug._ xc.
666 Ibid. _Tiber._ lxix. The virtue of laurel leaves, and of the skin of
a sea-calf, as preservatives against lightning, are noticed by Pliny
(_Hist. Nat._ ii. 56), who also says (xv. 40) that the laurel leaf
is believed to have a natural antipathy to fire, which it shows by
its angry crackling when in contact with that element.
667 Suet. _Calig._ ii.
668 Suet. _Jul. Cæs._ lxxxviii.
669 Plin. _Hist. Nat._ ii. 23.
670 “Prodigia eo anno multa nuntiata sunt, quæ quo magis credebant
simplices ac religiosi homines eo plura nuntiabantur” (xxiv. 10).
Compare with this the remark of Cicero on the oracles: “Quando autem
illa vis evanuit? An postquam homines minus creduli esse cœperunt?”
(_De Div._ ii. 57.)
671 This theory, which is developed at length by the Stoic, in the first
book of the _De Divinatione_ of Cicero, grew out of the pantheistic
notion that the human soul is a part of the Deity, and therefore by
nature a participator in the Divine attribute of prescience. The
soul, however, was crushed by the weight of the body; and there were
two ways of evoking its prescience—the ascetic way, which attenuates
the body, and the magical way, which stimulates the soul. Apollonius
declared that his power of prophecy was not due to magic, but solely
to his abstinence from animal food. (Philost. _Ap. of Tyana_, viii.
5.) Among those who believed the oracles, there were two theories.
The first was that they were inspired by dæmons or spirits of a
degree lower than the gods. The second was, that they were due to
the action of certain vapours which emanated from the caverns
beneath the temples, and which, by throwing the priestess into a
state of delirium, evoked her prophetic powers. The first theory was
that of the Platonists, and it was adopted by the Christians, who,
however, changed the signification of the word dæmon. The second
theory, which appears to be due to Aristotle (Baltus, _Réponse à
l’Histoire des Oracles_, p. 132), is noticed by Cic. _De Div._ i.
19; Plin. _H. N._ ii. 95; and others. It is closely allied to the
modern belief in clairvoyance. Plutarch, in his treatise on the
decline of the oracles, attributes that decline sometimes to the
death of the dæmons (who were believed to be mortal), and sometimes
to the exhaustion of the vapours. The oracles themselves, according
to Porphyry (Fontenelle, _Hist. des Oracles_, pp. 220-222, first
ed.), attributed it to the second cause. Iamblichus (_De Myst._ §
iii. c. xi.) combines both theories, and both are very clearly
stated in the following curious passage: “Quamquam Platoni credam
inter deos atque homines, natura et loco medias quasdam divorum
potestates intersitas, easque divinationes cunctas et magorum
miracula gubernare. Quin et illud mecum reputo, posse animum
humanum, præsertim, puerilem et simplicem, seu carminum avocamento,
sive odorum delenimento, soporari, et ad oblivionem præsentium
externari: et paulis per remota corporis memoria, redigi ac redire
ad naturam suam, quæ est immortalis scilicet et divina; atque ita
veluti quodam sopore, futura rerum præsagire.”—Apuleius, _Apolog._
672 Aul. Gell. _Noct._ ii. 28. Florus, however (_Hist._ i. 19), mentions
a Roman general appeasing the goddess Earth on the occasion of an
earthquake that occurred during a battle.
673 Ælian, _Hist. Var._ iv. 17.
_ 674 Hist. Nat._ ii. 81-86.
675 Ibid. ii. 9.
676 Ibid. ii. 23.
677 I have referred in the last chapter to a striking passage of Am.
Marcellinus on this combination. The reader may find some curious
instances of the superstitions of Roman sceptics in Champagny, _Les
Antonins_, tome iii. p. 46.
678 viii. 19. This is also mentioned by Lucretius.
679 viii. 1.
680 viii. 50. This was one of the reasons why the early Christians
sometimes adopted the stag as a symbol of Christ.
681 xxix. 23.
682 xxxii. 1.
683 vii. 2.
684 xxviii. 7. The blind man restored to sight by Vespasian was cured by
anointing his eyes with spittle. (Suet. _Vesp._ 7; Tacit. _Hist._
iv. 81.)
685 Ibid. The custom of spitting in the hand before striking still
exists among pugilists.
686 ii. 101.
687 Legendre, _Traité de l’Opinion_, tome ii. p. 17. The superstition
is, however, said still to linger in many sea-coast towns.
688 Lucian is believed to have died about two years before Marcus
Aurelius.
689 See his very curious Life by Philostratus. This Life was written at
the request of Julia Domna, the wife of Septimus Severus, whether or
not with the intention of opposing the Gospel narrative is a
question still fiercely discussed. Among the most recent Church
historians, Pressensé maintains the affirmative, and Neander the
negative. Apollonius was born at nearly the same time as Christ, but
outlived Domitian. The traces of his influence are widely spread
through the literature of the empire. Eunapius calls him “Ἀπολλώνιος
ὁ ἐκ Τυάνων, οὐκέτι φιλόσοφος ἀλλ᾽ ἦν τι θεῶν τε καὶ ἀνθρώπου
μέσον.”—_Lives of the Sophists._ Xiphilin relates (lxvii. 18) the
story, told also by Philostratus, how Apollonius, being at Ephesus,
saw the assassination of Domitian at Rome. Alexander Severus placed
(_Lampridius Severus_) the statue of Apollonius with those of
Orpheus, Abraham, and Christ, for worship in his oratory. Aurelian
was reported to have been diverted from his intention of destroying
Tyana by the ghost of the philosopher, who appeared in his tent,
rebuked him, and saved the city (Vopiscus, _Aurelian_); and, lastly,
the Pagan philosopher Hierocles wrote a book opposing Apollonius to
Christ, which was answered by Eusebius. The Fathers of the fourth
century always spoke of him as a great magician. Some curious
passages on the subject are collected by M. Chassang, in the
introduction to his French translation of the work of Philostratus.
690 See his defence against the charge of magic. Apuleius, who was at
once a brilliant rhetorician, the writer of an extremely curious
novel (_The Metamorphoses, or Golden Ass_), and of many other works,
and an indefatigable student of the religious mysteries of his time,
lived through the reigns of Hadrian and his two successors. After
his death his fame was for about a century apparently eclipsed; and
it has been noticed as very remarkable that Tertullian, who lived a
generation after Apuleius, and who, like him, was a Carthaginian,
has never even mentioned him. During the fourth century his
reputation revived, and Lactantius, St. Jerome, and St. Augustine
relate that many miracles were attributed to him, and that he was
placed by the Pagans on a level with Christ, and regarded by some as
even a greater magician. See the sketch of his life by M. Bétolaud
prefixed to the Panckoucke edition of his works.
_ 691 Life of Alexander._ There is an extremely curious picture of the
religious jugglers, who were wandering about the Empire, in the
eighth and ninth books of the _Metamorphoses_ of Apuleius. See, too,
Juvenal, _Sat._ vi. 510-585.
692 Porphyry’s _Life of Plotinus_.
693 Eunapius, _Porph._
694 Ibid. _Iamb._ Iamblichus himself only laughed at the report.
695 Eunapius, _Iamb._
696 See her life in Eunapius, _Œdescus_. Ælian and the rhetorician
Aristides are also full of the wildest prodigies. There is an
interesting dissertation on this subject in Friedlænder (_Trad.
Franc._ tome iv. p. 177-186).
697 “Credat Judæus Apella.”—Hor. _Sat._ v. 100.
698 This appears from all the writings of the Fathers. There were,
however, two forms of Pagan miracles about which there was some
hesitation in the early Church—the beneficent miracle of healing and
the miracle of prophecy. Concerning the first, the common opinion
was that the dæmons only cured diseases they had themselves caused,
or that, at least, if they ever (in order to enthral men more
effectually) cured purely natural diseases, they did it by natural
means, which their superior knowledge and power placed at their
disposal. Concerning prophecy, it was the opinion of some of the
Fathers that intuitive prescience was a Divine prerogative, and that
the prescience of the dæmons was only acquired by observation. Their
immense knowledge enabled them to forecast events to a degree far
transcending human faculties, and they employed this power in the
oracles.
_ 699 De Origine ac Progressu Idolatriæ_ (Amsterdam).
700 This characteristic of early Christian apology is forcibly exhibited
by Pressensé, _Hist. des trois premiers Siècles_, 2me série, tome
ii.
701 The immense number of these forged writings is noticed by all candid
historians, and there is, I believe, only one instance of any
attempt being made to prevent this pious fraud. A priest was
degraded for having forged some voyages of St. Paul and St. Thecla.
(Tert. _De Baptismo_, 17.)
_ 702 Apol._ i.
_ 703 Strom._ vi. c. 5.
704 Origen, _Cont. Cols._ v.
_ 705 Oratio_ (apud Euseb.) xviii.
_ 706 De Civ. Dei_, xviii. 23.
707 Constantine, _Oratio_ xix. “His testimoniis quidam revicti solent eo
confugere ut aiant non esse illa carmina Sibyllina, sed a nostris
conficta atque composita.”—Lactant. _Div. Inst._ iv. 15.
708 Antonius Possevinus, _Apparatus Sacer_ (1606), verb. “Sibylla.”
709 This subject is fully treated by Middleton in his _Free Enquiry_,
whom I have closely followed.
710 Irenæus, _Contr. Hæres._ ii. 32.
711 Epiphan. _Adv. Hæres._ ii. 30.
712 St. Aug. _De Civ. Dei_, xxii. 8.
713 This history is related by St. Ambrose in a letter to his sister
Marcellina; by St. Paulinus of Nola, in his _Life of Ambrose_; and
by St. Augustine, _De Civ. Dei_, xxii. 8; _Confess._ ix. 7.
714 Plutarch thought they were known by Plato, but this opinion has been
much questioned. See a very learned discussion on the subject in
Farmer’s _Dissertation on Miracles_, pp. 129-140; and Fontenelle,
_Hist. des Oracles_, pp. 26, 27. Porphyry speaks much of evil
dæmons.
715 Josephus, _Antiq._ viii. 2, § 5.
716 This very curious subject is fully treated by Baltus (_Réponse à
l’Histoire des Oracles_, Strasburg, 1707, published anonymously in
reply to Van Dale and Fontenelle), who believed in the reality of
the Pagan as well as the patristic miracles; by Bingham
(_Antiquities of the Christian Church_, vol. i. pp. 316-324), who
thinks the Pagan and Jewish exorcists were impostors, but not the
Christians; and by Middleton (_Free Enquiry_, pp. 80-93), who
disbelieves in all the exorcists after the apostolic times. It has
also been the subject of a special controversy in England, carried
on by Dodwell, Church, Farmer, and others. Archdeacon Church says:
“If we cannot vindicate them [the Fathers of the first three
centuries] on this article, their credit must be lost for ever; and
we must be obliged to decline all further defence of them. It is
impossible for any words more strongly to express a claim to this
miracle than those used by all the best writers of the second and
third centuries.”—_Vindication of the Miracles of the First Three
Centuries_, p. 199. So, also, Baltus: “De tous les anciens auteurs
ecclésiastiques, n’y en ayant pas un qui n’ait parlé de ce pouvoir
admirable que les Chrétiens avoient de chasser les démons” (p. 296).
Gregory of Tours describes exorcism as sufficiently common in his
time, and mentions having himself seen a monk named Julian cure by
his words a possessed person. (_Hist._ iv. 32.)
_ 717 Vit. Hilar._ Origen notices that cattle were sometimes possessed by
devils. See Middleton’s _Free Enquiry_, pp. 88, 89.
718 The miracle of St. Babylas is the subject of a homily by St.
Chrysostom, and is related at length by Theodoret, Sozomen, and
Socrates. Libanius mentions that, by command of Julian, the bones of
St. Babylas were removed from the temple. The Christians said the
temple was destroyed by lightning; the Pagans declared it was burnt
by the Christians, and Julian ordered measures of reprisal to be
taken. Amm. Marcellinus, however, mentions a report that the fire
was caused accidentally by one of the numerous candles employed in
the ceremony. The people of Antioch defied the emperor by chanting,
as they removed the relics, “Confounded be all they that trust in
graven images.”
719 See the _Life of Gregory Thaumaturgus_, by Gregory of Nyssa. St.
Gregory the Great assures us (_Dial._ iii. 10) that Sabinus, Bishop
of Placentia, wrote a letter to the river Po, which had overflowed
its banks and flooded some church lands. When the letter was thrown
into the stream the waters at once subsided.
720 “Edatur hic aliquis sub tribunalibus vestris, quem dæmone agi
constet. Jussus a quolibet Christiano loqui spiritus ille, tam se
dæmonem confitebitur de vero, quam alibi deum de falso. Æque
producatur aliquis ex iis qui de deo pati existimantur, qui aris
inhalantes numen de nidore concipiunt ... nisi se dæmones confessi
fuerint, Christiano mentiri non audentes, ibidem illius Christiani
procacissimi sanguinem fundite. Quid isto opere manifestius? quid
hæc probatione fidelius?”—Tert. _Apol._ xxiii.
_ 721 Apol._ i.; _Trypho_.
_ 722 Cont. Cels._ vii.
_ 723 Inst. Div._ iv. 27.
_ 724 Life of Antony._
_ 725 Octavius._
_ 726 De Superstitione._
727 i. 6.
_ 728 De Mort. Peregrin._
729 Origen, _Adv. Cels._ vi. Compare the curious letter which Vopiscus
(Saturninus) attributes to Hadrian, “Nemo illic [i.e. in Egypt]
archisynagogus Judæorum, nemo Samarites, nemo Christianorum
presbyter, non mathematicus, non aruspex, non aliptes.”
730 “Si incantavit, si imprecatus est, si (ut vulgari verbo impostorum
utor) exorcizavit.”—Bingham, _Antiquities of the Christian Church_
(Oxf., 1855), vol. i. p. 318. This law is believed to have been
directed specially against the Christians, because these were very
prominent as exorcists, and because Lactantius (_Inst. Div._ v. 11)
says that Ulpian had collected the laws against them.
731 Philostorgius, _Hist. Eccl._ viii. 10.
732 See Juvenal, _Sat._ vi. 314-335.
733 See Juvenal, _Sat._ vi. 520-530.
_ 734 Metamorphoses_, book x.
735 See their _Lives_, by Lampridius and Spartianus.
736 The conflict between St. Cyprian and the confessors, concerning the
power of remitting penances claimed by the latter, though it ended
in the defeat of the confessors, shows clearly the influence they
had obtained.
737 “Thura plane non emimus; si Arabiæ queruntur scient Sabæi pluris et
carioris suas merces Christianis sepeliendis profligari quam diis
fumigandis.”—_Apol._ 42. Sometimes the Pagans burnt the bodies of
the martyrs, in order to prevent the Christians venerating their
relics.
738 Many interesting particulars about these commemrative festivals are
collected in Cave’s _Primitive Christianity_, part i. c. vii. The
anniversaries were called “Natalia,” or birth-days.
739 See her acts in Ruinart.
740 St. Clem. Alex. _Strom._ iv. 10. There are other passages of the
same kind in other Fathers.
_ 741 Ad Scapul._ v. Eusebius (_Martyrs of Palestine_, ch. iii.) has
given a detailed account of six young men, who in the very height of
the Galerian persecution, at a time when the most hideous tortures
were applied to the Christians, voluntarily gave themselves up as
believers. Sulp. Severus (_Hist._ ii. 32), speaking of the voluntary
martyrs under Diocletian, says that Christians then “longed for
death as they now long for bishoprics.” “Cogi qui potest, nescit
mori,” was the noble maxim of the Christians.
742 Arrian, iv. 7. It is not certain, however, that this passage alludes
to the Christians. The followers of Judas of Galilee were called
Galilæans, and they were famous for their indifference to death. See
Joseph. _Antiq._ xviii. 1.
743 xi. 3.
744 Peregrinus.
745 Zosimus.
746 “Do I not hate them, O Lord, that hate thee?—yea, I hate them with a
perfect hatred.”
747 See Renan’s _Apôtres_, p. 314.
748 M. Pressensé very truly says of the Romans, “Leur religion était
essentiellement un art—l’art de découvrir les desseins des dieux et
d’agir sur eux par des rites variés.”—_Hist. des Trois premiers
Siècles_, tome i. p. 192. Montesquieu has written an interesting
essay on the political nature of the Roman religion.
749 Sueton. _Claud._ xxv.
750 Plin. _Hist. Nat._ vii. 31.
751 Tacit. _De Orat._ xxxv.; Aul. Gell. _Noct._ xv. 11. It would appear,
from this last authority, that the rhetoricians were twice expelled.
752 Dion Cassius, lii. 36. Most historians believe that this speech
represents the opinions, not of the Augustan age, but of the age of
the writer who relates it.
753 On the hostility of Vespasian to philosophers, see Xiphilin, lxvi.
13; on that of Domitian, the _Letters_ of Pliny and the _Agricola_
of Tacitus.
754 See a remarkable passage in Dion Chrysostom, _Or._ lxxx. _De
Libertate_.
755 Cic. _De Legib._ ii. 11; Tertull. _Apol._ v.
756 Livy, iv. 30
757 Val. Maximus, i. 3, § 1.
758 Livy, xxv. 1.
759 Val. Max. i. 3, § 2.
760 See the account of these proceedings, and of the very remarkable
speech of Postumius, in Livy, xxxix. 8-19. Postumius notices the old
prohibition of foreign rites, and thus explains it:—“Judicabant enim
prudentissimi viri omnis divini humanique juris, nihil æque
dissolvendæ religionis esse, quam ubi non patrio sed externo ritu
sacrificaretur.” The Senate, though suppressing these rites on
account of the outrageous immoralities connected with them, decreed,
that if any one thought it a matter of religious duty to perform
religious ceremonies to Bacchus, he should be allowed to do so on
applying for permission to the Senate, provided there were not more
than five assistants, no common purse, and no presiding priest.
761 Val. Max. i. 3.
762 See Dion Cassius, xl. 47; xlii. 26; xlvii. 15; liv. 6.
763 Joseph. _Antiq._ xviii. 3.
764 Tacit. _Annal._ ii. 85.
765 Tacitus relates (_Ann._ xi. 15) that under Claudius a senatus
consultus ordered the pontiffs to take care that the old Roman (or,
more properly, Etruscan) system of divination was observed, since
the influx of foreign superstitions had led to its disuse; but it
does not appear that this measure was intended to interfere with any
other form of worship.
766 “Sacrosanctam istam civitatem accedo.”—Apuleius, _Metam._ lib. x. It
is said that there were at one time no less than 420 ædes sacræ in
Rome. Nieupoort, _De Ritibus Romanorum_ (1716), p. 276.
767 Euseb. _Præp. Evang._ iv. 1. Fontenelle says very truly, “Il y a
lieu de croire que chez les payens la religion n’estoit qu’une
pratique, dont la spéculation estoit indifférente. Faites comme les
autres et croyez ce qu’il vous plaira.”—_Hist. des Oracles_, p. 95.
It was a saying of Tiberius, that it is for the gods to care for the
injuries done to them: “Deorum injurias diis curæ.”—Tacit. _Annal._
i. 73.
768 The most melancholy modern instance I remember is a letter of Hume
to a young man who was thinking of taking orders, but who, in the
course of his studies, became a complete sceptic. Hume strongly
advised him not to allow this consideration to interfere with his
career (Burton, _Life of Hume_, vol. ii. pp. 187, 188.) The
utilitarian principles of the philosopher were doubtless at the root
of his judgment.
_ 769 De Divinat._ ii. 33; _De Nat. Deor._ ii. 3.
770 “Quæ omnia sapiens servabit tanquam legibus jussa non tanquam diis
grata.... Meminerimus cultum ejus magis ad morem quam ad rem
pertinere.”—St. Aug. _De Civ. Dei_, vi. 10. St. Augustine denounces
this view with great power. See, too, Lactantius. _Inst. Div._ ii.
3.
_ 771 Enchirid._ xxxi.
772 This is noticed by Philo.
773 The ship in which the atheist Diagoras sailed was once nearly
wrecked by a tempest, and the sailors declared that it was a just
retribution from the gods because they had received the philosopher
into their vessel. Diagoras, pointing to the other ships that were
tossed by the same storm, asked whether they imagined there was a
Diagoras in each. (_Cic. De Nat. Deor._ iii. 37.)
774 The vestal Oppia was put to death because the diviners attributed to
her unchastity certain “prodigies in the heavens,” that had alarmed
the people at the beginning of the war with Veii. (Livy, ii. 42.)
The vestal Urbinia was buried alive on account of a plague that had
fallen upon the Roman women, which was attributed to her
incontinence, and which is said to have ceased suddenly upon her
execution. (Dion. Halicar. ix.)
775 Pliny, in his famous letter to Trajan about the Christians, notices
that this had been the case in Bithynia.
776 Tert. _Apol._ xl. See, too, Cyprian, _contra Demetrian._, and
Arnobius, _Apol._ lib. i.
777 St. Aug. _De Civ. Dei_, ii. 3.
778 Instances of this kind are given by Tertullian _Ad Scapulam_, and
the whole treatise _On the Deaths of the Persecutors_, attributed to
Lactantius, is a development of the same theory. St. Cyprian’s
treatise against Demetrianus throws much light on the mode of
thought of the Christians of his time. In the later historians,
anecdotes of adversaries of the Church dying horrible deaths became
very numerous. They were said especially to have been eaten by
worms. Many examples of this kind are collected by Jortin. (_Remarks
on Eccles. Hist._ vol. i. p. 432.)
779 “It is remarkable, in all the proclamations and documents which
Eusebius assigns to Constantine, some even written by his own hand,
how, almost exclusively, he dwells on this worldly superiority of
the God adored by the Christians over those of the heathens, and the
visible temporal advantages which attend on the worship of
Christianity. His own victory, and the disasters of his enemies, are
his conclusive evidences of Christianity.”—Milman, _Hist. of Early
Christianity_ (ed. 1867), vol. ii. p. 327. “It was a standing
argument of Athanasius, that the death of Arius was a sufficient
refutation of his heresy.”—Ibid. p. 382.
780 Socrates, _Eccl. Hist._, vii. 30.
781 Greg. Tur. ii. 30, 31. Clovis wrote to St. Avitus, “Your faith is
our victory.”
782 Milman’s _Latin Christianity_ (ed. 1867), vol. ii. pp. 236-245.
783 Ibid. vol. iii. p. 248.
_ 784 Ep._ xl.
785 “An diutius perferimus mutari temporum vices, irata cœli temperie?
Quæ Paganorum exacerbata perfidia nescit naturæ libramenta servare.
Unde enim ver solitam gratiam abjuravit? unde æstas, messe jejuna,
laboriosum agricolam in spe destituit aristarum? unde hyemis
intemperata ferocitas uberitatem terrarum penetrabili frigore
sterilitatis læsione damnavit? nisi quod ad impietatis vindictam
transit lege sua naturæ decretum.”—Novell. lii. Theodos. _De Judæis,
Samaritanis, et Hæreticis_.
786 Milman’s _Latin Christianity_ vol. ii. p. 354.
_ 787 Démonomanie des Sorciers_, p. 152.
788 See a curious instance in Bayle’s _Dictionary_, art. “Vergerius.”
789 Pliny, Ep. x. 43. Trajan noticed that Nicomedia was peculiarly
turbulent. On the edict against the hetæriæ, or associations, see
_Ep._ x. 97.
790 All the apologists are full of these charges. The chief passages
have been collected in that very useful and learned work, Kortholt,
_De Calumniis contra Christianos_. (Cologne, 1683.)
791 Justin Martyr tells us it was the brave deaths of the Christians
that converted him. (_Apol._ ii. 12.)
792 Peregrinus.
_ 793 Ep._ x. 97.
_ 794 Ep._ ii.
795 Juvenal describes the popular estimate of the Jews:—
“Tradidit arcano quodcunque volumine Moses;
Non monstrare vias, eadem nisi sacra colenti,
Quæsitum ad fontem solos deducere verpos.”
_Sat._ xix. 102-105.
It is not true that the Mosaic law contains these precepts.
796 See Merivale’s _Hist. of Rome_, vol. viii. p. 176.
797 See Justin Martyr, _Trypho_, xvii.
798 Justin Martyr, _Apol._ i. 26.
799 Eusebius expressly notices that the licentiousness of the sect of
Carpocrates occasioned calumnies against the whole of the Christian
body. (iv. 7.) A number of passages from the Fathers describing the
immorality of these heretics are referred to by Cave, _Primitive
Christianity_, part ii. ch. v.
800 Epiphanius, _Adv. Hær._ lib. i. Hær. 26. The charge of murdering
children, and especially infants, occupies a very prominent place
among the recriminations of religionists. The Pagans, as we have
seen, brought it against the Christians, and the orthodox against
some of the early heretics. The Christians accused Julian of
murdering infants for magical purposes, and the bed of the Orontes
was said to have been choked with their bodies. The accusation was
then commonly directed against the Jews, against the witches, and
against the mid-wives, who were supposed to be in confederation with
the witches.
801 See an example in Eusebius, iii. 32. After the triumph of
Christianity the Arian heretics appear to have been accustomed to
bring accusations of immorality against the Catholics. They procured
the deposition of St. Eustathius, Bishop of Antioch, by suborning a
prostitute to accuse him of being the father of her child. The woman
afterwards, on her death-bed, confessed the imposture. (Theodor.
_Hist._ i. 21-22.) They also accused St. Athanasius of murder and
unchastity, both of which charges he most triumphantly repelled.
(Ibid. i. 30.)
802 The great exertions and success of the Christians in making female
converts is indignantly noticed by Celsus (_Origen_) and by the
Pagan interlocutor in Minucius Felix (_Octavius_), and a more minute
examination of ecclesiastical history amply confirms their
statements. I shall have in a future chapter to revert to this
matter. Tertullian graphically describes the anger of a man he knew,
at the conversion of his wife, and declares he would rather have had
her “a prostitute than a Christian.” (_Ad Nationes_, i. 4.) He also
mentions a governor of Cappadocia, named Herminianus, whose motive
for persecuting the Christians was his anger at the conversion of
his wife, and who, in consequence of his having persecuted, was
devoured by worms. (_Ad Scapul._ 3.)
803 “Matronarum Auriscalpius.” The title was given to Pope St. Damasus.
See Jortin’s _Remarks on Ecclesiastical History_, vol. ii. p. 27.
Ammianus Marcellinus notices (xxvii. 3) the great wealth the Roman
bishops of his time had acquired through the gifts of women.
Theodoret (_Hist. Eccl._ ii. 17) gives a curious account of the
energetic proceedings of the Roman ladies upon the exile of Pope
Liberius.
_ 804 Conj. Præcept._ This passage has been thought to refer to the
Christians; if so, it is the single example of its kind in the
writings of Plutarch.
805 Pliny, in his letter on the Christians, notices that their
assemblies were before daybreak. Tertullian and Minucius Felix speak
frequently of the “nocturnes convocationes,” or “nocturnes
congregationes” of the Christians. The following passage, which the
last of these writers puts into the mouth of a Pagan, describes
forcibly the popular feeling about the Christians: “Qui de ultima
fæce collectis imperitioribus et mulieribus credulis sexus sui
facilitate labentibus, plebem profanæ conjurationis instituunt: quæ
nocturnis congregationibus et jejuniis solennibus et inhumanis cibis
non sacro quodam sed piaculo fœderantur, latebrosa et lucifugax
natio, in publico muta, in angulis garrula; templa ut busta
despiciunt, deos despuunt, rident sacra.”—_Octavius._ Tertullian, in
exhorting the Christian women not to intermarry with Pagans, gives
as one reason that they would not permit them to attend this
“nightly convocation.” (_Ad Uxorem_, ii. 4.) This whole chapter is a
graphic but deeply painful picture of the utter impossibility of a
Christian woman having any real community of feeling with a “servant
of the devil.”
_ 806 De Civ. Dei_, xix. 23.
807 The policy of the Romans with reference to magic has been minutely
traced by Maury, _Hist. de la Magie_. Dr. Jeremie conjectures that
the exorcisms of the Christians may have excited the antipathy of
Marcus Aurelius, he, as I have already noticed, being a disbeliever
on this subject. (Jeremie, _Hist. of Church in the Second and Third
Cent._ p. 26.) But this is mere conjecture.
808 See the picture of the sentiments of the Pagans on this matter, in
Plutarch’s noble _Treatise on Superstition_.
809 Thus Justin Martyr: “Since sensation remains in all men who have
been in existence, and everlasting punishment is in store, do not
hesitate to believe, and be convinced that what I say is true....
This Gehenna is a place where all will be punished who live
unrighteously, and who believe not that what God has taught through
Christ will come to pass.”—_Apol._ 1. 18-19. Arnobius has stated
very forcibly the favourite argument of many later theologians: “Cum
ergo hæc sit conditio futurorum ut teneri et comprehendi nullius
possint anticipationis attactu: nonne purior ratio est, ex duobus
incertis et in ambigua expectatione pendentibus, id potius credere
quod aliquas spes ferat, quam omnino quod nullas? In illo enim
periculi nihil est, si quod dicitur imminere cassum fiat et vacuum.
In hoc damnum est maximum.”—_Adv. Gentes_, lib. i
810 The continual enforcement of the duty of belief, and the credulity
of the Christians, were perpetually dwelt on by Celsus and Julian.
According to the first, it was usual for them to say, “Do not
examine, but believe only.” According to the latter, “the sum of
their wisdom was comprised in this single precept, believe.” The
apologists frequently notice this charge of credulity as brought
against the Christians, and some famous sentences of Tertullian go
far to justify it. See Middleton’s _Free Enquiry_, Introd. pp. xcii,
xciii.
811 See the graphic picture of the agony of terror manifested by the
apostates as they tottered to the altar at Alexandria, in the Decian
persecution, in Dionysius apud Eusebius, vi. 41. Miraculous
judgments (often, perhaps, the natural consequence of this extreme
fear) were said to have frequently fallen upon the apostates. St.
Cyprian has preserved a number of these in his treatise _De Lapsis_.
Persons, when excommunicated, were also said to have been sometimes
visibly possessed by devils. See Church, _On Miraculous Powers in
the First Three Centuries_, pp. 52-54.
812 “Si quis aliquid fecerit, quo leves hominum animi superstitione
numinis terrerentur, Divus Marcus hujusmodi homines in insulam
relegari rescripsit,” _Dig._ xlviii. tit. 19, l. 30.
813 A number of instances have been recorded, in which the punishment of
the Christians was due to their having broken idols, overturned
altars, or in other ways insulted the Pagans at their worship. The
reader may find many examples of this collected in Cave’s _Primitive
Christianity_, part i. c. v.; Kortholt, _De Calumniis contra
Christianos_; Barbeyrac, _Morale des Pères_, c. xvii.; Tillemont,
_Mém. ecclésiast._ tome vii. pp. 354-355; Ceillier, _Hist. des
Auteurs sacrés_, tome iii. pp. 531-533. The Council of Illiberis
found it necessary to make a canon refusing the title of “martyr” to
those who were executed for these offences.
814 The first of these anecdotes is told by St. Jerome, the second by
St. Clement of Alexandria, the third by St. Irenæus.
815 The severe discipline of the early Church on this point has been
amply treated in Marshall’s _Penitential Discipline of the Primitive
Church_ (first published in 1714, but reprinted in the library of
Anglo-Catholic theology), and in Bingham’s _Antiquities of the
Christian Church_, vol. vi. (Oxford, 1855). The later saints
continually dwelt upon this duty of separation. Thus, “St. Théodore
de Phermé disoit, que quand une personne dont nous étions amis
estoit tombée dans la fornication, nous devions luy donner la main
et faire notre possible pour le relever; mais que s’il estoit tombé
dans quelque erreur contre la foi, et qu’il ne voulust pas s’en
corriger après les premières remonstrances, il falloit l’abandonner
promptement et rompre toute amitié avec luy, de peur qu’en nous
amusant à le vouloir retirer de ce gouffre, il ne nous y entraînast
nous-mêmes.”—Tillemont, _Mém. Ecclés._ tome xii. p. 367.
816 “Habere jam non potest Deum patrem qui ecclesiam non habet matrem.
Si potuit evadere quisquam qui extra arcam Noe fuit, et qui extra
ecclesiam foris fuerit evadit ... hanc unitatem qui non tenet ...
vitam non tenet et salutem ... esse martyr non potest qui in
ecclesia non est.... Cum Deo manere non possunt qui esse in ecclesia
Dei unanimes noluerunt. Ardeant licet flammis et ignibus traditi,
vel objecti bestiis animas suas ponunt, non erit illa fidei corona,
sed pœna perfidiæ, nec religiosæ virtutis exitus gloriosus sed
desperationis interitus. Occidi talis potest, coronari non potest.
Sic se Christianum esse profitetur quo modo et Christum diabolus
sæpe mentitur.”—Cyprian, _De Unit. Eccles._
817 Eusebius, v. 16.
_ 818 Confess._ iii. 11. She was afterwards permitted by a special
revelation to sit at the same table with her son!
_ 819 Ep._ xl.
_ 820 Ep._ xviii.
821 Tertull. _De Corona_.
822 Milman’s _Hist. of Christianity_, vol. ii. pp. 116-125. It is
remarkable that the Serapeum of Alexandria was, in the Sibylline
books, specially menaced with destruction.
823 Eunapius, _Lives of the Sophists_. Eunapius gives an extremely
pathetic account of the downfall of this temple. There is a
Christian account in Theodoret (v. 22). Theophilus, Bishop of
Alexandria, was the leader of the monks. The Pagans, under the
guidance of a philosopher named Olympus, made a desperate effort to
defend their temple. The whole story is very finely told by Dean
Milman. (_Hist. of Christianity_, vol. iii. pp. 68-72.)
_ 824 Apology_, v. The overwhelming difficulties attending this assertion
are well stated by Gibbon, ch. xvi. Traces of this fable may be
found in Justin Martyr. The freedom of the Christian worship at Rome
appears not only from the unanimity with which Christian writers
date their troubles from Nero, but also from the express statement
in _Acts_ xxviii. 31.
825 “Judæos, impulsore Chresto, assidue tumultuantes, Roma
expulit.”—Sueton. _Claud._ xxv. This banishment of the Jews is
mentioned in _Acts_ xviii. 2, but is not there connected in any way
with Christianity. A passage in Dion Cassius (lx. 6) is supposed to
refer to the same transaction. Lactantius notices that the Pagans
were accustomed to call Christus, _Chrestus_: “Eum immutata litera
Chrestum solent dicere.”—_Div. Inst._ iv. 7.
826 This persecution is fully described by Tacitus (_Annal._ xv. 44),
and briefly noticed by Suetonius (_Nero_, xvi.).
827 This has been a matter of very great controversy. Looking at the
question apart from direct testimony, it appears improbable that a
persecution directed against the Christians on the charge of having
burnt Rome, should have extended to Christians who did not live near
Rome. On the other hand, it has been argued that Tacitus speaks of
them as “haud perinde in crimine incendii, quam odio humani generis
convicti;” and it has been maintained that “hatred of the human
race” was treated as a crime, and punished in the provinces. But
this is, I think, extremely far-fetched; and it is evident from the
sequel that the Christians at Rome were burnt as incendiaries, and
that it was the conviction that they were not guilty of that crime
that extorted the pity which Tacitus notices. There is also no
reference in Tacitus to any persecution beyond the walls. If we pass
to the Christian evidence, a Spanish inscription referring to the
Neronian persecution, which was once appealed to as decisive, is now
unanimously admitted to be a forgery. In the fourth century,
however, Sulp. Severus (lib. ii.) and Orosius (_Hist._ vii. 7)
declared that general laws condemnatory of Christianity were
promulgated by Nero; but the testimony of credulous historians who
wrote so long after the event is not of much value. Rossi, however,
imagines that a fragment of an inscription found at Pompeii
indicates a general law against Christians. See his _Bulletino
d’Archeologia Cristiana_ (Roma, Dec. 1865), which, however, should
be compared with the very remarkable _Compte rendu_ of M. Aubé,
_Acad. des Inscrip. et Belles-lettres_, Juin 1866. These two papers
contain an almost complete discussion of the persecutions of Nero
and Domitian. Gibbon thinks it quite certain the persecution was
confined to the city; Mosheim (_Eccl. Hist._ i. p. 71) adopts the
opposite view, and appeals to the passage in Tertullian (_Ap._ v.),
in which he speaks of “leges istæ ... quas Trajanus ex parte
frustratus est, vitando inquiri Christianos,” as implying the
existence of special laws against the Christians. This passage,
however, may merely refer to the general law against unauthorised
religions, which Tertullian notices in this very chapter; and Pliny,
in his famous letter, does not show any knowledge of the existence
of special legislation about the Christians.
828 Ecclesiastical historians maintain, but not on very strong evidence,
that the Church of Rome was founded by St. Peter, A.D. 42 or 44. St.
Paul came to Rome A.D. 61.
829 On this horrible punishment see Juvenal, _Sat._ i. 155-157.
830 Lactantius, in the fourth century, speaks of this opinion as still
held by some “madmen” (_De Mort. Persec._ cap. ii.); but Sulp.
Severus (_Hist._ lib. ii.) speaks of it as a common notion, and he
says that St. Martin, when asked about the end of the world,
answered, “Neronem et Antichristum prius esse venturos: Neronem in
occidentali plaga regibus subactis decem, imperaturum, persecutionem
autem ab eo hactenus exercendam ut idola gentium coli
cogat.”—_Dial._ ii. Among the Pagans, the notion that Nero was yet
alive lingered long, and twenty years after his death an adventurer
pretending to be Nero was enthusiastically received by the Parthians
(Sueton. _Nero_, lvii.).
831 See the full description of it in Rossi’s _Bulletino d’Archeol.
Crist._ Dec. 1865. Eusebius (iii. 17) and Tertullian (_Apol._ v.)
have expressly noticed the very remarkable fact that Vespasian, who
was a bitter enemy to the Jews, and who exiled all the leading
Stoical philosophers except Musonius, never troubled the Christians.
832 See a pathetic letter of Pliny, lib. iii. _Ep._ xi. and also lib. i.
_Ep._ v. and the _Agricola_ of Tacitus.
833 Euseb. iii. 20.
834 “Præter cæteros Judaicus fiscus acerbissime actus est. Ad quem
deferebantur, qui vel improfessi Judaicam intra urbem viverent
vitam, vel dissimulata origine imposita genti tributa non
pependissent.”—Sueton. _Domit._ xi. Suetonius adds that, when a
young man, he saw an old man of ninety examined before a large
assembly to ascertain whether he was circumcised.
835 Euseb. iii. 18.
836 See the accounts of these transactions in Xiphilin, the abbreviator
of Dion Cassius (lxvii. 14); Euseb. iii. 17-18. Suetonius notices
(_Domit._ xv.) that Flavius Clemens (whom he calls a man
“contemptissimæ inertiæ”) was killed “ex tenuissima suspicione.” The
language of Xiphilin, who says he was killed for “impiety and Jewish
rites;” the express assertion of Eusebius, that it was for
Christianity; and the declaration of Tertullian, that Christians
were persecuted at the close of this reign, leave, I think, little
doubt that this execution was connected with Christianity, though
some writers have questioned it. At the same time, it is very
probable, as Mr. Merivale thinks (_Hist. of Rome_, vol. vii. pp.
381-384), that though the pretext of the execution might have been
religious, the real motive was political jealousy. Domitian had
already put to death the brother of Flavius Clemens on the charge of
treason. His sons had been recognised as successors to the throne,
and at the time of his execution another leading noble named Glabrio
was accused of having fought in the arena. Some ecclesiastical
historians have imagined that there may have been two Domitillas—the
wife and niece of Flavius Clemens. The islands of Pontia and
Pandataria were close to one another.
837 “Tentaverat et Domitianus, portio Neronis de crudelitate; sed qua et
homo facile cœptum repressit, restitutis etiam quos relegaverat.”
(_Apol._ 5.) It will be observed that Tertullian makes no mention of
any punishment more severe than exile.
838 Euseb. iii. 20.
_ 839 De Mort. Persec._ iii.
840 Xiphilin, lxviii. 1. An annotator to Mosheim conjectures that the
edict may have been issued just before the death of the emperor, but
not acted on till after it.
841 Euseb. iv. 26. The whole of this apology has been recently
recovered, and translated into Latin by M. Renan in the _Spicilegium
Solesmense_.
_ 842 Apol._ 5.
843 Lactant. _De Mort. Persec._ 3-4.
844 Pliny, _Ep._ x. 97-98.
845 Euseb. lib. iii.
846 There is a description of this earthquake in Merivale’s _Hist. of
the Romans_, vol. viii. pp. 155-156. Orosius (_Hist._ vii. 12)
thought it was a judgment on account of the persecution of the
Christians.
847 Eusebius, iv. 8-9. See, too, Justin Martyr, _Apol._ i. 68-69.
848 This is mentioned incidentally by Lampridius in his _Life of A.
Severus_.
849 See this very curious letter in Vopiscus, _Saturninus_.
850 Justin Mart. _Ap._ i. 31. Eusebius quotes a passage from Hegesippus
to the same effect. (iv. 8.)
851 “Præcepitque ne cui Judæo introeundi Hierosolymam esset licentia,
Christianis tantum civitate permissa.”—_Oros._ vii. 13.
852 A letter which Eusebius gives at full (iv. 13), and ascribes to
Antoninus Pius, has created a good deal of controversy. Justin Mart.
(_Apol._ i. 71) and Tertullian (_Apol._ 5) ascribe it to Marcus
Aurelius. It is now generally believed to be a forgery by a
Christian hand, being more like a Christian apology than the letter
of a Pagan emperor. St. Melito, however, writing to Marcus Aurelius,
expressly states that Antoninus had written a letter forbidding the
persecution of Christians. (Euseb. iv. 26.)
853 It is alluded to by Minucius Felix.
854 Eusebius, iv. 16.
855 St. Melito expressly states that the edicts of Marcus Aurelius
produced the Asiatic persecution.
856 Eusebius, iv. 15.
857 See the most touching and horrible description of this persecution
in a letter written by the Christians of Lyons, in Eusebius, v. 1.
858 Sulpicius Severus (who was himself a Gaul) says of their martyrdom
(_H. E._, lib. ii.), “Tum primum intra Gallias Martyria visa, serius
trans Alpes Dei religione suscepta.” Tradition ascribes Gallic
Christianity to the apostles, but the evidence of inscriptions
appears to confirm the account of Severus. It is at least certain
that Christianity did not acquire a great extension till later. The
earliest Christian inscriptions found are (one in each year) of A.D.
334, 347, 377, 405, and 409. They do not become common till the
middle of the fifth century. See a full discussion of this in the
preface of M. Le Blant’s admirable and indeed exhaustive work,
_Inscriptions Chrétiennes de la Gaule_.
859 It was alleged among the Christians, that towards the close of his
reign Marcus Aurelius issued an edict protecting the Christians, on
account of a Christian legion having, in Germany, in a moment of
great distress, procured a shower of rain by their prayers. (Tert.
_Apol._ 5.) The shower is mentioned by Pagan as well as Christian
writers, and is portrayed on the column of Antoninus. It was
“ascribed to the incantations of an Egyptian magician, to the
prayers of a legion of Christians, or to the favour of Jove towards
the best of mortals, according to the various prejudices of
different observers.”—Merivale’s _Hist. of Rome_, vol. viii. p. 338.
860 Xiphilin, lxxii. 4. The most atrocious of the Pagan persecutions was
attributed, as we shall see, to the mother of Galerius, and in
Christian times the Spanish Inquisition was founded by Isabella the
Catholic; the massacre of St. Bartholomew was chiefly due to
Catherine of Medicis, and the most horrible English persecution to
Mary Tudor.
861 Euseb. v. 21. The accuser, we learn from St. Jerome, was a slave. On
the law condemning slaves who accused their masters, compare
Pressensé, _Hist. des Trois premiers Siècles_ (2me série), tome i.
pp. 182-183, and Jeremie’s _Church History of Second and Third
Centuries_, p. 29. Apollonius was of senatorial rank. It is said
that some other martyrs died at the same time.
862 “Judæos fieri sub gravi pœna vetuit. Idem etiam de Christianis
sanxit.”—Spartian. _S. Severus_. The persecution is described by
Eusebius, lib. vi. Tertullian says Severus was favourable to the
Christians, a Christian named Proculus (whom he, in consequence,
retained in the palace till his death) having cured him of an
illness by the application of oil. (_Ad Scapul._ 4.)
863 “Of the persecution under Severus there are few, if any, traces in
the West. It is confined to Syria, perhaps to Cappadocia, to Egypt,
and to Africa, and in the latter provinces appears as the act of
hostile governors proceeding upon the existing laws, rather than the
consequence of any recent edict of the emperor.”—Milman’s _Hist. of
Christianity_, vol. ii. pp. 156-157.
_ 864 Adv. Cels._ iii. See Gibbon, ch. xvi.
865 Eusebius, vi. 28.
866 Lampridius, _A. Severus_. The historian adds, “Judæis privilegia
reservavit. Christianos esse passus est.”
867 Compare Milman’s _History of Early Christianity_ (1867), vol. ii. p.
188, and his _History of Latin Christianity_ (1867), vol. i. pp.
26-59. There are only two cases of alleged martyrdom before this
time that can excite any reasonable doubt. Irenæus distinctly
asserts that Telesphorus was martyred; but his martyrdom is put in
the beginning of the reign of Antoninus Pius (he had assumed the
mitre near the end of the reign of Hadrian), and Antoninus is
represented, by the general voice of the Church, as perfectly free
from the stain of persecution. A tradition, which is in itself
sufficiently probable, states that Pontianus, having been exiled by
Maximinus, was killed in banishment.
868 Tacitus has a very ingenious remark on this subject, which
illustrates happily the half-scepticism of the Empire. After
recounting a number of prodigies that were said to have taken place
in the reign of Otho, he remarks that these were things habitually
noticed in the ages of ignorance, but now only noticed in periods of
terror. “Rudibus sæculis etiam in pace observata, quæ nunc tantum in
metu audiuntur.”—_Hist._ i. 86.
869 M. de Champagny has devoted an extremely beautiful chapter (_Les
Antonins_, tome ii. pp. 179-200) to the liberty of the Roman Empire.
See, too, the fifty-fourth chapter of Mr. Merivale’s _History_. It
is the custom of some of the apologists for modern Cæsarism to
defend it by pointing to the Roman Empire as the happiest period in
human history. No apology can be more unfortunate. The first task of
a modern despot is to centralise to the highest point, to bring
every department of thought and action under a system of police
regulation, and, above all, to impose his shackling tyranny upon the
human mind. The very perfection of the Roman Empire was, that the
municipal and personal liberty it admitted had never been surpassed,
and the intellectual liberty had never been equalled.
870 Sueton. _Aug._ xxxi. It appears from a passage in Livy (xxxix. 16)
that books of oracles had been sometimes burnt in the Republic.
871 Tacitus has given us a very remarkable account of the trial of
Cremutius Cordus, under Tiberius, for having published a history in
which he had praised Brutus and called Cassius the last of Romans.
(_Annal._ iv. 34-35.) He expressly terms this “novo ac tunc primum
audito crimine,” and he puts a speech in the mouth of the accused,
describing the liberty previously accorded to writers. Cordus
avoided execution by suicide. His daughter, Marcia, preserved some
copies of his work, and published it in the reign and with the
approbation of Caligula. (Senec. _Ad. Marc._ 1; Suet. _Calig._ 16.)
There are, however, some traces of an earlier persecution of
letters. Under the sanction of a law of the decemvirs against
libellers, Augustus exiled the satiric writer Cassius Severus, and
he also destroyed the works of an historian named Labienus, on
account of their seditious sentiments. These writings were
re-published with those of Cordus. Generally, however, Augustus was
very magnanimous in his dealings with his assailants. He refused the
request of Tiberius to punish them (Suet. _Aug._ 51), and only
excluded from his palace Timagenes, who bitterly satirised both him
and the empress, and proclaimed himself everywhere the enemy of the
emperor. (Senec. _De Ira_, iii. 23.) A similar magnanimity was shown
by most of the other emperors; among others, by Nero. (Suet. _Nero_,
39.) Under Vespasian, however, a poet, named Maternus, was obliged
to retouch a tragedy on Cato (Tacit. _De Or._ 2-3), and Domitian
allowed no writings opposed to his policy. (Tacit. _Agric._) But no
attempt appears to have been made in the Empire to control religious
writings till the persecution of Diocletian, who ordered the
Scriptures to be burnt. The example was speedily followed by the
Christian emperors. The writings of Arius were burnt in A.D. 321,
those of Porphyry in A.D. 388. Pope Gelasius, in A.D. 496, drew up a
list of books which should not be read, and all liberty of
publication speedily became extinct. See on this subject Peignot,
_Essai historique sur la Liberté d’Écrire_; Villemain, _Études de
Littèr. ancienne_; Sir C. Lewis on the _Credibility of Roman Hist._
vol. i. p. 52; Nadal, _Mémoire sur la liberté qu’avoient les soldats
romains de dire des vers satyriques contre ceux qui triomphoient_
(Paris 1725).
872 See a collection of passages on this point in Pressensé, _Hist. des
Trois premiers Siècles_ (2me série), tome i. pp. 3-4.
_ 873 Trypho._
_ 874 Apol._ xxxvii.
875 Euseb. vi. 43.
876 Eusebius, it is true, ascribes this persecution (vi. 39) to the
hatred Decius bore to his predecessor Philip, who was very friendly
to the Christians. But although such a motive might account for a
persecution like that of Maximin, which was directed chiefly against
the bishops who had been about the Court of Severus, it is
insufficient to account for a persecution so general and so severe
as that of Decius. It is remarkable that this emperor is uniformly
represented by the Pagan historians as an eminently wise and humane
sovereign. See Dodwell, _De Paucitate Martyrum_, lii.
877 St. Cyprian (_Ep._ vii.) and, at a later period, St. Jerome (_Vit.
Pauli_), both notice that during this persecution the desire of the
persecutors was to subdue the constancy of the Christians by
torture, without gratifying their desire for martyrdom. The
consignment of Christian virgins to houses of ill fame was one of
the most common incidents in the later acts of martyrs which were
invented in the middle ages. Unhappily, however, it must be
acknowledged that there are some undoubted traces of it at an
earlier date. Tertullian, in a famous passage, speaks of the cry “Ad
Lenonem” as substituted for that of “Ad Leonem;” and St. Ambrose
recounts some strange stories on this subject in his treatise _De
Virginibus_.
878 St. Cyprian has drawn a very highly coloured picture of this general
corruption, and of the apostasy it produced, in his treatise _De
Lapsis_, a most interesting picture of the society of his time. See,
too, the _Life of St. Gregory Thaumaturgus_, by Greg. of Nyssa.
879 “La persécution de Dèce ne dura qu’environ un an dans sa grande
violence. Car S. Cyprien, dans les lettres écrites en 251, dès
devant Pasque, et mesme dans quelques-unes écrites apparemment dès
la fin de 250, témoigne que son église jouissoit déjà de quelque
paix, mais d’une paix encore peu affermie, en sorte que le moindre
accident eust pu renouveler le trouble et la persécution. Il semble
mesme que l’on n’eust pas encore la liberté d’y tenir les
assemblées, et néanmoins il paroist que tous les confesseurs
prisonniers à Carthage y avoient esté mis en liberté dès ce
temps-là.”—Tillemont, _Mém. d’Hist. ecclésiastique_, tome iii. p.
324.
880 Dionysius the bishop wrote a full account of it, which Eusebius has
preserved (vi. 41-42). In Alexandria, Dionysius says, the
persecution produced by popular fanaticism preceded the edict of
Decius by an entire year. He has preserved a particular catalogue of
all who were put to death in Alexandria during the entire Decian
persecution. They were seventeen persons. Several of these were
killed by the mob, and their deaths were in nearly all cases
accompanied by circumstances of extreme atrocity. Besides these,
others (we know not how many) had been put to torture. Many,
Dionysius says, perished in other cities or villages of Egypt.
881 See St. Cyprian, _Ep._ viii.
882 There was much controversy at this time as to the propriety of
bishops evading persecution by flight. The Montanists maintained
that such a conduct was equivalent to apostasy. Tertullian had
written a book, _De Fuga in Persecutione_, maintaining this view;
and among the orthodox the conduct of St. Cyprian (who afterwards
nobly attested his courage by his death) did not escape
animadversion. The more moderate opinion prevailed, but the leading
bishops found it necessary to support their conduct by declaring
that they had received special revelations exhorting them to fly.
St. Cyprian, who constantly appealed to his dreams to justify him in
his controversies (see some curious instances collected in
Middleton’s _Free Enquiry_, pp. 101-105), declared (_Ep._ ix.), and
his biographer and friend Pontius re-asserted (_Vit. Cyprianis_),
that his flight was “by the command of God.” Dionysius, the Bishop
of Alexandria, asserts the same thing of his own flight, and attests
it by an oath (see his own words in Euseb. vi. 40); and the same
thing was afterwards related of St. Gregory Thaumaturgus. (See his
_Life_ by Gregory of Nyssa.)
883 “E veramente che almeno fino dal secolo terzo i fedeli abbiano
posseduto cimiteri a nome commune, e che il loro possesso sia stato
riconosciuto dagl’ imperatori, è cosa impossibile a negare.”—Rossi,
_Roma Sotterranea_, tomo i. p. 103.
884 This is all fully discussed by Rossi, _Roma Sotterranea_, tomo i.
pp. 101-108. Rossi thinks the Church, in its capacity of burial
society, was known by the name of “ecclesia fratrum.”
885 See, on the history of early Christian Churches, Cave’s _Primitive
Christianity_, part i. c. vi.
886 Dodwell (_De Paucit. Martyr._ lvii.) has collected evidence of the
subsidence of the persecution in the last year of the reign of
Decius.
887 This persecution is not noticed by St. Jerome, Orosius, Sulpicius
Severus, or Lactantius. The very little we know about it is derived
from the letters of St. Cyprian, and from a short notice by
Dionysius of Alexandria, in Eusebius, vii. 1. Dionysius says, Gallus
began the persecution when his reign was advancing prosperously, and
his affairs succeeding, which probably means, after he had procured
the departure of the Goths from the Illyrian province, early in A.D.
252 (see Gibbon, chap. x.). The disastrous position into which
affairs had been thrown by the defeat of Decius appears, at first,
to have engrossed his attention.
888 Lucius was at first exiled and then permitted to return, on which
occasion St. Cyprian wrote him a letter of congratulation (_Ep._
lvii.). He was, however, afterwards re-arrested and slain, but it is
not, I think, clear whether it was under Gallus or Valerian. St.
Cyprian speaks (_Ep._ lxvi.) of both Cornelius and Lucius as
martyred. The emperors were probably at this time beginning to
realise the power the Bishops of Rome possessed. We know hardly
anything of the Decian persecution at Rome except the execution of
the bishop; and St. Cyprian says (_Ep._ li.) that Decius would have
preferred a pretender to the throne to a Bishop of Rome.
889 Dionysius, Archbishop of Alexandria; see Euseb. vii. 10.
890 Eusebius, vii. 10-12; Cyprian, _Ep._ lxxxi. Lactantius says of
Valerian, “Multum quamvis brevi tempore justi sanguinis fudit.”—_De
Mort. Persec._ c. v.
891 Cyprian. _Ep._ lxxxi.
892 See his _Life_ by the deacon Pontius, which is reproduced by Gibbon.
893 Eusebius, vii. 13.
894 Tertullian had before, in a curious passage, spoken of the
impossibility of Christian Cæsars. “Sed et Cæsares credidissent
super Christo si aut Cæsares non essent seculo necessarii, aut si et
Christiani potuissent esse Cæsares.”—_Apol._ xxi.
_ 895 Contra Demetrianum._
896 Eusebius, vii. 30. Aurelian decided that the cathedral at Antioch
should be given up to whoever was appointed by the bishops of Italy.
897 Compare the accounts in Eusebius, vii. 30, and Lactantius, _De
Mort._ c. vi.
898 See the forcible and very candid description of Eusebius, viii. 1.
899 This is noticed by Optatus.
900 See the vivid pictures in Lact. _De Mort. Persec._
901 Lactant. _De Mort. Persec._ 15.
902 Eusebius, viii.
903 These incidents are noticed by Eusebius in his _History_, and in his
_Life of Constantine_, and by Lactantius, _De Mort. Persec._
904 “Italy, Sicily, Gaul, and whatever parts extend towards the
West,—Spain, Mauritania, and Africa.”—Euseb. _Mart. Palest._ ch.
xiii. But in Gaul, as I have said, the persecution had not extended
beyond the destruction of churches; in these provinces the
persecution, Eusebius says, lasted not quite two years.
905 The history of this persecution is given by Eusebius, _Hist._ lib.
viii., in his work on the _Martyrs of Palestine_, and in Lactantius,
_De Mort. Persec._ The persecution in Palestine was not quite
continuous: in A.D. 308 it had almost ceased; it then revived
fiercely, but at the close of A.D. 309, and in the beginning of A.D.
310, there was again a short lull, apparently due to political
causes. See Mosheim, _Eccles. Hist._ (edited by Soames), vol. i. pp.
286-287.
906 Eusebius.
907 See two passages, which Gibbon justly calls remarkable. (_H. E._
viii. 2; _Martyrs of Palest._ ch. xii.)
908 There is one instance of a wholesale massacre which appears to rest
on good authority. Eusebius asserts that, during the Diocletian
persecution, a village in Phrygia, the name of which he does not
mention, being inhabited entirely by Christians who refused to
sacrifice, was attacked and burnt with all that were in it by the
Pagan soldiery. Lactantius (_Inst. Div._ v. 11) confines the
conflagration to a church in which the entire population was burnt;
and an early Latin translation of Eusebius states that the people
were first summoned to withdraw, but refused to do so. Gibbon (ch.
xvi.) thinks that this tragedy took place when the decree of
Diocletian ordered the destruction of the churches.
909 Mariana (_De Rebus Hispaniæ_, xxiv. 17). Llorente thought this
number perished in the single year 1482; but the expressions of
Mariana, though he speaks of “this beginning,” do not necessarily
imply this restriction. Besides these martyrs, 17,000 persons in
Spain recanted, and endured punishments less than death, while great
numbers fled. There does not appear to have been, in this case,
either the provocation or the political danger which stimulated the
Diocletian persecution.
910 This is according to the calculation of Sarpi. Grotius estimates the
victims at 100,000.—Gibbon, ch. xvi.
911 See some curious information on this in Ticknor’s _Hist. of Spanish
Literature_ (3rd American edition), vol. iii. pp. 236-237.
912 This was the case in the persecutions at Lyons and Smyrna, under
Marcus Aurelius. In the Diocletian persecution at Alexandria the
populace were allowed to torture the Christians as they pleased.
(_Eusebius_, viii. 10.)