Constantine.—Part VII.
Diocletian had no sooner published his edicts against the
Christians, than, as if he had been desirous of committing to
other hands the work of persecution, he divested himself of the
Imperial purple. The character and situation of his colleagues
and successors sometimes urged them to enforce and sometimes
inclined them to suspend, the execution of these rigorous laws;
nor can we acquire a just and distinct idea of this important
period of ecclesiastical history, unless we separately consider
the state of Christianity, in the different parts of the empire,
during the space of ten years, which elapsed between the first
edicts of Diocletian and the final peace of the church.
The mild and humane temper of Constantius was averse to the
oppression of any part of his subjects. The principal offices of
his palace were exercised by Christians. He loved their persons,
esteemed their fidelity, and entertained not any dislike to their
religious principles. But as long as Constantius remained in the
subordinate station of Cæsar, it was not in his power openly to
reject the edicts of Diocletian, or to disobey the commands of
Maximian. His authority contributed, however, to alleviate the
sufferings which he pitied and abhorred. He consented with
reluctance to the ruin of the churches; but he ventured to
protect the Christians themselves from the fury of the populace,
and from the rigor of the laws. The provinces of Gaul (under
which we may probably include those of Britain) were indebted for
the singular tranquillity which they enjoyed, to the gentle
interposition of their sovereign. 165 But Datianus, the president
or governor of Spain, actuated either by zeal or policy, chose
rather to execute the public edicts of the emperors, than to
understand the secret intentions of Constantius; and it can
scarcely be doubted, that his provincial administration was
stained with the blood of a few martyrs. 166
The elevation of Constantius to the supreme and independent
dignity of Augustus, gave a free scope to the exercise of his
virtues, and the shortness of his reign did not prevent him from
establishing a system of toleration, of which he left the precept
and the example to his son Constantine. His fortunate son, from
the first moment of his accession, declaring himself the
protector of the church, at length deserved the appellation of
the first emperor who publicly professed and established the
Christian religion. The motives of his conversion, as they may
variously be deduced from benevolence, from policy, from
conviction, or from remorse, and the progress of the revolution,
which, under his powerful influence and that of his sons,
rendered Christianity the reigning religion of the Roman empire,
will form a very interesting and important chapter in the present
volume of this history. At present it may be sufficient to
observe, that every victory of Constantine was productive of some
relief or benefit to the church.
165 (return) [ Eusebius, l. viii. c. 13. Lactantius de M. P. c.
15. Dodwell (Dissertat. Cyprian. xi. 75) represents them as
inconsistent with each other. But the former evidently speaks of
Constantius in the station of Cæsar, and the latter of the same
prince in the rank of Augustus.]
166 (return) [ Datianus is mentioned, in Gruter’s Inscriptions,
as having determined the limits between the territories of Pax
Julia, and those of Ebora, both cities in the southern part of
Lusitania. If we recollect the neighborhood of those places to
Cape St. Vincent, we may suspect that the celebrated deacon and
martyr of that name had been inaccurately assigned by Prudentius,
&c., to Saragossa, or Valentia. See the pompous history of his
sufferings, in the Mémoires de Tillemont, tom. v. part ii. p.
58-85. Some critics are of opinion, that the department of
Constantius, as Cæsar, did not include Spain, which still
continued under the immediate jurisdiction of Maximian.]
The provinces of Italy and Africa experienced a short but violent
persecution. The rigorous edicts of Diocletian were strictly and
cheerfully executed by his associate Maximian, who had long hated
the Christians, and who delighted in acts of blood and violence.
In the autumn of the first year of the persecution, the two
emperors met at Rome to celebrate their triumph; several
oppressive laws appear to have issued from their secret
consultations, and the diligence of the magistrates was animated
by the presence of their sovereigns. After Diocletian had
divested himself of the purple, Italy and Africa were
administered under the name of Severus, and were exposed, without
defence, to the implacable resentment of his master Galerius.
Among the martyrs of Rome, Adauctus deserves the notice of
posterity. He was of a noble family in Italy, and had raised
himself, through the successive honors of the palace, to the
important office of treasurer of the private Jemesnes. Adauctus
is the more remarkable for being the only person of rank and
distinction who appears to have suffered death, during the whole
course of this general persecution. 167
167 (return) [ Eusebius, l. viii. c. 11. Gruter, Inscrip. p.
1171, No. 18. Rufinus has mistaken the office of Adauctus, as
well as the place of his martyrdom. * Note: M. Guizot suggests
the powerful cunuchs of the palace. Dorotheus, Gorgonius, and
Andrew, admitted by Gibbon himself to have been put to death, p.
66.]
The revolt of Maxentius immediately restored peace to the
churches of Italy and Africa; and the same tyrant who oppressed
every other class of his subjects, showed himself just, humane,
and even partial, towards the afflicted Christians. He depended
on their gratitude and affection, and very naturally presumed,
that the injuries which they had suffered, and the dangers which
they still apprehended from his most inveterate enemy, would
secure the fidelity of a party already considerable by their
numbers and opulence. 168 Even the conduct of Maxentius towards
the bishops of Rome and Carthage may be considered as the proof
of his toleration, since it is probable that the most orthodox
princes would adopt the same measures with regard to their
established clergy. Marcellus, the former of these prelates, had
thrown the capital into confusion, by the severe penance which he
imposed on a great number of Christians, who, during the late
persecution, had renounced or dissembled their religion. The rage
of faction broke out in frequent and violent seditions; the blood
of the faithful was shed by each other’s hands, and the exile of
Marcellus, whose prudence seems to have been less eminent than
his zeal, was found to be the only measure capable of restoring
peace to the distracted church of Rome. 169 The behavior of
Mensurius, bishop of Carthage, appears to have been still more
reprehensible. A deacon of that city had published a libel
against the emperor. The offender took refuge in the episcopal
palace; and though it was somewhat early to advance any claims of
ecclesiastical immunities, the bishop refused to deliver him up
to the officers of justice. For this treasonable resistance,
Mensurius was summoned to court, and instead of receiving a legal
sentence of death or banishment, he was permitted, after a short
examination, to return to his diocese. 170 Such was the happy
condition of the Christian subjects of Maxentius, that whenever
they were desirous of procuring for their own use any bodies of
martyrs, they were obliged to purchase them from the most distant
provinces of the East. A story is related of Aglae, a Roman lady,
descended from a consular family, and possessed of so ample an
estate, that it required the management of seventy-three
stewards. Among these Boniface was the favorite of his mistress;
and as Aglae mixed love with devotion, it is reported that he was
admitted to share her bed. Her fortune enabled her to gratify the
pious desire of obtaining some sacred relics from the East. She
intrusted Boniface with a considerable sum of gold, and a large
quantity of aromatics; and her lover, attended by twelve horsemen
and three covered chariots, undertook a remote pilgrimage, as far
as Tarsus in Cilicia. 171
168 (return) [ Eusebius, l. viii. c. 14. But as Maxentius was
vanquished by Constantine, it suited the purpose of Lactantius to
place his death among those of the persecutors. * Note: M. Guizot
directly contradicts this statement of Gibbon, and appeals to
Eusebius. Maxentius, who assumed the power in Italy, pretended at
first to be a Christian, to gain the favor of the Roman people;
he ordered his ministers to cease to persecute the Christians,
affecting a hypocritical piety, in order to appear more mild than
his predecessors; but his actions soon proved that he was very
different from what they had at first hoped. The actions of
Maxentius were those of a cruel tyrant, but not those of a
persecutor: the Christians, like the rest of his subjects,
suffered from his vices, but they were not oppressed as a sect.
Christian females were exposed to his lusts, as well as to the
brutal violence of his colleague Maximian, but they were not
selected as Christians.—M.]
169 (return) [ The epitaph of Marcellus is to be found in Gruter,
Inscrip. p 1172, No. 3, and it contains all that we know of his
history. Marcellinus and Marcellus, whose names follow in the
list of popes, are supposed by many critics to be different
persons; but the learned Abbé de Longuerue was convinced that
they were one and the same.
Veridicus rector lapsis quia crimina flere
Prædixit miseris, fuit omnibus hostis amarus.
Hinc furor, hinc odium; sequitur discordia, lites,
Seditio, cædes; solvuntur fœdera pacis.
Crimen ob alterius, Christum qui in pace negavit
Finibus expulsus patriæ est feritate Tyranni.
Hæc breviter Damasus voluit comperta referre:
Marcelli populus meritum cognoscere posset.
We may observe that Damasus was made Bishop of Rome, A. D. 366.]
170 (return) [ Optatus contr. Donatist. l. i. c. 17, 18. * Note:
The words of Optatus are, Profectus (Roman) causam dixit; jussus
con reverti Carthaginem; perhaps, in pleading his cause, he
exculpated himself, since he received an order to return to
Carthage.—G.]
171 (return) [ The Acts of the Passion of St. Boniface, which
abound in miracles and declamation, are published by Ruinart, (p.
283—291,) both in Greek and Latin, from the authority of very
ancient manuscripts. Note: We are ignorant whether Aglae and
Boniface were Christians at the time of their unlawful
connection. See Tillemont. Mem, Eccles. Note on the Persecution
of Domitian, tom. v. note 82. M. de Tillemont proves also that
the history is doubtful.—G. ——Sir D. Dalrymple (Lord Hailes)
calls the story of Aglae and Boniface as of equal authority with
our _popular_ histories of Whittington and Hickathrift. Christian
Antiquities, ii. 64.—M.]
The sanguinary temper of Galerius, the first and principal author
of the persecution, was formidable to those Christians whom their
misfortunes had placed within the limits of his dominions; and it
may fairly be presumed that many persons of a middle rank, who
were not confined by the chains either of wealth or of poverty,
very frequently deserted their native country, and sought a
refuge in the milder climate of the West. 1711 As long as he
commanded only the armies and provinces of Illyricum, he could
with difficulty either find or make a considerable number of
martyrs, in a warlike country, which had entertained the
missionaries of the gospel with more coldness and reluctance than
any other part of the empire. 172 But when Galerius had obtained
the supreme power, and the government of the East, he indulged in
their fullest extent his zeal and cruelty, not only in the
provinces of Thrace and Asia, which acknowledged his immediate
jurisdiction, but in those of Syria, Palestine, and Egypt, where
Maximin gratified his own inclination, by yielding a rigorous
obedience to the stern commands of his benefactor. 173 The
frequent disappointments of his ambitious views, the experience
of six years of persecution, and the salutary reflections which a
lingering and painful distemper suggested to the mind of
Galerius, at length convinced him that the most violent efforts
of despotism are insufficient to extirpate a whole people, or to
subdue their religious prejudices. Desirous of repairing the
mischief that he had occasioned, he published in his own name,
and in those of Licinius and Constantine, a general edict, which,
after a pompous recital of the Imperial titles, proceeded in the
following manner:—
1711 (return) [ A little after this, Christianity was propagated
to the north of the Roman provinces, among the tribes of Germany:
a multitude of Christians, forced by the persecutions of the
Emperors to take refuge among the Barbarians, were received with
kindness. Euseb. de Vit. Constant. ii. 53. Semler Select. cap. H.
E. p. 115. The Goths owed their first knowledge of Christianity
to a young girl, a prisoner of war; she continued in the midst of
them her exercises of piety; she fasted, prayed, and praised God
day and night. When she was asked what good would come of so much
painful trouble she answered, “It is thus that Christ, the Son of
God, is to be honored.” Sozomen, ii. c. 6.—G.]
172 (return) [ During the four first centuries, there exist few
traces of either bishops or bishoprics in the western Illyricum.
It has been thought probable that the primate of Milan extended
his jurisdiction over Sirmium, the capital of that great
province. See the Geographia Sacra of Charles de St. Paul, p.
68-76, with the observations of Lucas Holstenius.]
173 (return) [ The viiith book of Eusebius, as well as the
supplement concerning the martyrs of Palestine, principally
relate to the persecution of Galerius and Maximin. The general
lamentations with which Lactantius opens the vth book of his
Divine Institutions allude to their cruelty.] “Among the
important cares which have occupied our mind for the utility and
preservation of the empire, it was our intention to correct and
reestablish all things according to the ancient laws and public
discipline of the Romans. We were particularly desirous of
reclaiming into the way of reason and nature, the deluded
Christians who had renounced the religion and ceremonies
instituted by their fathers; and presumptuously despising the
practice of antiquity, had invented extravagant laws and
opinions, according to the dictates of their fancy, and had
collected a various society from the different provinces of our
empire. The edicts, which we have published to enforce the
worship of the gods, having exposed many of the Christians to
danger and distress, many having suffered death, and many more,
who still persist in their impious folly, being left destitute of
_any_ public exercise of religion, we are disposed to extend to
those unhappy men the effects of our wonted clemency. We permit
them therefore freely to profess their private opinions, and to
assemble in their conventicles without fear or molestation,
provided always that they preserve a due respect to the
established laws and government. By another rescript we shall
signify our intentions to the judges and magistrates; and we hope
that our indulgence will engage the Christians to offer up their
prayers to the Deity whom they adore, for our safety and
prosperity for their own, and for that of the republic.” 174 It
is not usually in the language of edicts and manifestos that we
should search for the real character or the secret motives of
princes; but as these were the words of a dying emperor, his
situation, perhaps, may be admitted as a pledge of his sincerity.
174 (return) [ Eusebius (l. viii. c. 17) has given us a Greek
version, and Lactantius (de M. P. c. 34) the Latin original, of
this memorable edict. Neither of these writers seems to recollect
how directly it contradicts whatever they have just affirmed of
the remorse and repentance of Galerius. Note: But Gibbon has
answered this by his just observation, that it is not in the
language of edicts and manifestos that we should search * * for
the secre motives of princes.—M.]
When Galerius subscribed this edict of toleration, he was well
assured that Licinius would readily comply with the inclinations
of his friend and benefactor, and that any measures in favor of
the Christians would obtain the approbation of Constantine. But
the emperor would not venture to insert in the preamble the name
of Maximin, whose consent was of the greatest importance, and who
succeeded a few days afterwards to the provinces of Asia. In the
first six months, however, of his new reign, Maximin affected to
adopt the prudent counsels of his predecessor; and though he
never condescended to secure the tranquillity of the church by a
public edict, Sabinus, his Prætorian præfect, addressed a
circular letter to all the governors and magistrates of the
provinces, expatiating on the Imperial clemency, acknowledging
the invincible obstinacy of the Christians, and directing the
officers of justice to cease their ineffectual prosecutions, and
to connive at the secret assemblies of those enthusiasts. In
consequence of these orders, great numbers of Christians were
released from prison, or delivered from the mines. The
confessors, singing hymns of triumph, returned into their own
countries; and those who had yielded to the violence of the
tempest, solicited with tears of repentance their readmission
into the bosom of the church. 175
175 (return) [ Eusebius, l. ix. c. 1. He inserts the epistle of
the præfect.]
But this treacherous calm was of short duration; nor could the
Christians of the East place any confidence in the character of
their sovereign. Cruelty and superstition were the ruling
passions of the soul of Maximin. The former suggested the means,
the latter pointed out the objects of persecution. The emperor
was devoted to the worship of the gods, to the study of magic,
and to the belief of oracles. The prophets or philosophers, whom
he revered as the favorites of Heaven, were frequently raised to
the government of provinces, and admitted into his most secret
councils. They easily convinced him that the Christians had been
indebted for their victories to their regular discipline, and
that the weakness of polytheism had principally flowed from a
want of union and subordination among the ministers of religion.
A system of government was therefore instituted, which was
evidently copied from the policy of the church. In all the great
cities of the empire, the temples were repaired and beautified by
the order of Maximin, and the officiating priests of the various
deities were subjected to the authority of a superior pontiff
destined to oppose the bishop, and to promote the cause of
paganism. These pontiffs acknowledged, in their turn, the supreme
jurisdiction of the metropolitans or high priests of the
province, who acted as the immediate vicegerents of the emperor
himself. A white robe was the ensign of their dignity; and these
new prelates were carefully selected from the most noble and
opulent families. By the influence of the magistrates, and of the
sacerdotal order, a great number of dutiful addresses were
obtained, particularly from the cities of Nicomedia, Antioch, and
Tyre, which artfully represented the well-known intentions of the
court as the general sense of the people; solicited the emperor
to consult the laws of justice rather than the dictates of his
clemency; expressed their abhorrence of the Christians, and
humbly prayed that those impious sectaries might at least be
excluded from the limits of their respective territories. The
answer of Maximin to the address which he obtained from the
citizens of Tyre is still extant. He praises their zeal and
devotion in terms of the highest satisfaction, descants on the
obstinate impiety of the Christians, and betrays, by the
readiness with which he consents to their banishment, that he
considered himself as receiving, rather than as conferring, an
obligation. The priests as well as the magistrates were empowered
to enforce the execution of his edicts, which were engraved on
tables of brass; and though it was recommended to them to avoid
the effusion of blood, the most cruel and ignominious punishments
were inflicted on the refractory Christians. 176
176 (return) [ See Eusebius, l. viii. c. 14, l. ix. c. 2—8.
Lactantius de M. P. c. 36. These writers agree in representing
the arts of Maximin; but the former relates the execution of
several martyrs, while the latter expressly affirms, occidi
servos Dei vetuit. * Note: It is easy to reconcile them; it is
sufficient to quote the entire text of Lactantius: Nam cum
clementiam specie tenus profiteretur, occidi servos Dei vetuit,
debilitari jussit. Itaque confessoribus effodiebantur oculi,
amputabantur manus, nares vel auriculæ desecabantur. Hæc ille
moliens Constantini litteris deterretur. Dissimulavit ergo, et
tamen, si quis inciderit. mari occulte mergebatur. This detail of
torments inflicted on the Christians easily reconciles Lactantius
and Eusebius. Those who died in consequence of their tortures,
those who were plunged into the sea, might well pass for martyrs.
The mutilation of the words of Lactantius has alone given rise to
the apparent contradiction.—G. ——Eusebius. ch. vi., relates the
public martyrdom of the aged bishop of Emesa, with two others,
who were thrown to the wild beasts, the beheading of Peter,
bishop of Alexandria, with several others, and the death of
Lucian, presbyter of Antioch, who was carried to Numidia, and put
to death in prison. The contradiction is direct and undeniable,
for although Eusebius may have misplaced the former martyrdoms,
it may be doubted whether the authority of Maximin extended to
Nicomedia till after the death of Galerius. The last edict of
toleration issued by Maximin and published by Eusebius himself,
Eccl. Hist. ix. 9. confirms the statement of Lactantius.—M.]
The Asiatic Christians had every thing to dread from the severity
of a bigoted monarch who prepared his measures of violence with
such deliberate policy. But a few months had scarcely elapsed
before the edicts published by the two Western emperors obliged
Maximin to suspend the prosecution of his designs: the civil war
which he so rashly undertook against Licinius employed all his
attention; and the defeat and death of Maximin soon delivered the
church from the last and most implacable of her enemies. 177
177 (return) [ A few days before his death, he published a very
ample edict of toleration, in which he imputes all the severities
which the Christians suffered to the judges and governors, who
had misunderstood his intentions.See the edict of Eusebius, l.
ix. c. 10.]
In this general view of the persecution, which was first
authorized by the edicts of Diocletian, I have purposely
refrained from describing the particular sufferings and deaths of
the Christian martyrs. It would have been an easy task, from the
history of Eusebius, from the declamations of Lactantius, and
from the most ancient acts, to collect a long series of horrid
and disgustful pictures, and to fill many pages with racks and
scourges, with iron hooks and red-hot beds, and with all the
variety of tortures which fire and steel, savage beasts, and more
savage executioners, could inflict upon the human body. These
melancholy scenes might be enlivened by a crowd of visions and
miracles destined either to delay the death, to celebrate the
triumph, or to discover the relics of those canonized saints who
suffered for the name of Christ. But I cannot determine what I
ought to transcribe, till I am satisfied how much I ought to
believe. The gravest of the ecclesiastical historians, Eusebius
himself, indirectly confesses, that he has related whatever might
redound to the glory, and that he has suppressed all that could
tend to the disgrace, of religion. 178 Such an acknowledgment
will naturally excite a suspicion that a writer who has so openly
violated one of the fundamental laws of history, has not paid a
very strict regard to the observance of the other; and the
suspicion will derive additional credit from the character of
Eusebius, 1781 which was less tinctured with credulity, and more
practised in the arts of courts, than that of almost any of his
contemporaries. On some particular occasions, when the
magistrates were exasperated by some personal motives of interest
or resentment, the rules of prudence, and perhaps of decency, to
overturn the altars, to pour out imprecations against the
emperors, or to strike the judge as he sat on his tribunal, it
may be presumed, that every mode of torture which cruelty could
invent, or constancy could endure, was exhausted on those devoted
victims. 179 Two circumstances, however, have been unwarily
mentioned, which insinuate that the general treatment of the
Christians, who had been apprehended by the officers of justice,
was less intolerable than it is usually imagined to have been. 1.
The confessors who were condemned to work in the mines were
permitted by the humanity or the negligence of their keepers to
build chapels, and freely to profess their religion in the midst
of those dreary habitations. 180 2. The bishops were obliged to
check and to censure the forward zeal of the Christians, who
voluntarily threw themselves into the hands of the magistrates.
Some of these were persons oppressed by poverty and debts, who
blindly sought to terminate a miserable existence by a glorious
death. Others were allured by the hope that a short confinement
would expiate the sins of a whole life; and others again were
actuated by the less honorable motive of deriving a plentiful
subsistence, and perhaps a considerable profit, from the alms
which the charity of the faithful bestowed on the prisoners. 181
After the church had triumphed over all her enemies, the interest
as well as vanity of the captives prompted them to magnify the
merit of their respective sufferings. A convenient distance of
time or place gave an ample scope to the progress of fiction; and
the frequent instances which might be alleged of holy martyrs,
whose wounds had been instantly healed, whose strength had been
renewed, and whose lost members had miraculously been restored,
were extremely convenient for the purpose of removing every
difficulty, and of silencing every objection. The most
extravagant legends, as they conduced to the honor of the church,
were applauded by the credulous multitude, countenanced by the
power of the clergy, and attested by the suspicious evidence of
ecclesiastical history.
178 (return) [ Such is the _fair_ deduction from two remarkable
passages in Eusebius, l. viii. c. 2, and de Martyr. Palestin. c.
12. The prudence of the historian has exposed his own character
to censure and suspicion. It was well known that he himself had
been thrown into prison; and it was suggested that he had
purchased his deliverance by some dishonorable compliance. The
reproach was urged in his lifetime, and even in his presence, at
the council of Tyre. See Tillemont, Mémoires Ecclésiastiques,
tom. viii. part i. p. 67.]
1781 (return) [ Historical criticism does not consist in
rejecting indiscriminately all the facts which do not agree with
a particular system, as Gibbon does in this chapter, in which,
except at the last extremity, he will not consent to believe a
martyrdom. Authorities are to be weighed, not excluded from
examination. Now, the Pagan historians justify in many places the
detail which have been transmitted to us by the historians of the
church, concerning the tortures endured by the Christians. Celsus
reproaches the Christians with holding their assemblies in
secret, on account of the fear inspired by their sufferings, “for
when you are arrested,” he says, “you are dragged to punishment:
and, before you are put to death, you have to suffer all kinds of
tortures.” Origen cont. Cels. l. i. ii. vi. viii. passing.
Libanius, the panegyrist of Julian, says, while speaking of the
Christians. “Those who followed a corrupt religion were in
continual apprehensions; they feared lest Julian should invent
tortures still more refined than those to which they had been
exposed before, as mutilation, burning alive, &c.; for the
emperors had inflicted upon them all these barbarities.” Lib.
Parent in Julian. ap. Fab. Bib. Græc. No. 9, No. 58, p. 283—G.
——This sentence of Gibbon has given rise to several learned
dissertation: Möller, de Fide Eusebii Cæsar, &c., Havniæ, 1813.
Danzius, de Eusebio Cæs. Hist. Eccl. Scriptore, ejusque tide
historica recte æstimandâ, &c., Jenæ, 1815. Kestner Commentatio
de Eusebii Hist. Eccles. conditoris auctoritate et fide, &c. See
also Reuterdahl, de Fontibus Historiæ Eccles. Eusebianæ, Lond.
Goth., 1826. Gibbon’s inference may appear stronger than the text
will warrant, yet it is difficult, after reading the passages, to
dismiss all suspicion of partiality from the mind.—M.]
179 (return) [ The ancient, and perhaps authentic, account of the
sufferings of Tarachus and his companions, (Acta Sincera Ruinart,
p. 419—448,) is filled with strong expressions of resentment and
contempt, which could not fail of irritating the magistrate. The
behavior of Ædesius to Hierocles, præfect of Egypt, was still
more extraordinary. Euseb. de Martyr. Palestin. c. 5. * Note: M.
Guizot states, that the acts of Tarachus and his companion
contain nothing that appears dictated by violent feelings,
(sentiment outré.) Nothing can be more painful than the constant
attempt of Gibbon throughout this discussion, to find some flaw
in the virtue and heroism of the martyrs, some extenuation for
the cruelty of the persecutors. But truth must not be sacrificed
even to well-grounded moral indignation. Though the language of
these martyrs is in great part that of calm de fiance, of noble
firmness, yet there are many expressions which betray “resentment
and contempt.” “Children of Satan, worshippers of Devils,” is
their common appellation of the heathen. One of them calls the
judge another, one curses, and declares that he will curse the
Emperors, as pestilential and bloodthirsty tyrants, whom God will
soon visit in his wrath. On the other hand, though at first they
speak the milder language of persuasion, the cold barbarity of
the judges and officers might surely have called forth one
sentence of abhorrence from Gibbon. On the first unsatisfactory
answer, “Break his jaw,” is the order of the judge. They direct
and witness the most excruciating tortures; the people, as M.
Guizot observers, were so much revolted by the cruelty of Maximus
that when the martyrs appeared in the amphitheatre, fear seized
on all hearts, and general murmurs against the unjust judge rank
through the assembly. It is singular, at least, that Gibbon
should have quoted “as probably authentic,” acts so much
embellished with miracle as these of Tarachus are, particularly
towards the end.—M. * Note: Scarcely were the authorities
informed of this, than the president of the province, a man, says
Eusebius, harsh and cruel, banished the confessors, some to
Cyprus, others to different parts of Palestine, and ordered them
to be tormented by being set to the most painful labors. Four of
them, whom he required to abjure their faith and refused, were
burnt alive. Euseb. de Mart. Palest. c. xiii.—G. Two of these
were bishops; a fifth, Silvanus, bishop of Gaza, was the last
martyr; another, named John was blinded, but used to officiate,
and recite from memory long passages of the sacred writings—M.]
180 (return) [ Euseb. de Martyr. Palestin. c. 13.]
181 (return) [ Augustin. Collat. Carthagin. Dei, iii. c. 13, ap.
Tillanant, Mémoires Ecclésiastiques, tom. v. part i. p. 46. The
controversy with the Donatists, has reflected some, though
perhaps a partial, light on the history of the African church.]