|
THE HISTORY OF THE DECLINE AND FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE - VOL. II
THE HISTORY OF THE DECLINE AND FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE - VOL. II EDWARD GIBBON With notes by the Rev. H. H. Milman
Vol. 2
Chapter XVI: Conduct Towards The Christians From Nero To
Constantine.
Part I.
Note: The sixteenth chapter I cannot help considering as a
very ingenious and specious but very disgraceful extenuation of
the cruelties perpetrated by the Roman magistrates against the
Christians. It is written in the most contemptibly factious
spirit of prejudice against the sufferers; it is unworthy of a
philosopher and of humanity. Let the narrative of Cyprian's
death be examined. He had to relate the murder of an innocent
man of advanced age and in a station deemed venerable by a
considerable body of the provincials of Africa put to death
because he refused to sacrifice to Jupiter. Instead of pointing
the indignation of posterity against such an atrocious act of
tyranny he dwells with visible art on the small circumstances
of decorum and politeness which attended this murder and which
he relates with as much parade as if they were the most important
particulars of the event.
The Conduct Of The Roman Government Towards The Christians
From The Reign Of Nero To That Of Constantine.
Dr. Robertson has been the subject of much blame for his
real or supposed lenity towards the Spanish murderers and tyrants
in America. That the sixteenth chapter of Mr. G. did not excite
the same or greater disapprobation is a proof of the
unphilosophical and indeed fanatical animosity against
Christianity which was so prevalent during the latter part of
the eighteenth century. - Mackintosh: see Life i. p. 244 245.]
If we seriously consider the purity of the Christian
religion the sanctity of its moral precepts and the innocent as
well as austere lives of the greater number of those who during
the first ages embraced the faith of the gospel we should
naturally suppose that so benevolent a doctrine would have been
received with due reverence even by the unbelieving world; that
the learned and the polite however they may deride the miracles
would have esteemed the virtues of the new sect; and that the
magistrates instead of persecuting would have protected an
order of men who yielded the most passive obedience to the laws
though they declined the active cares of war and government. If
on the other hand we recollect the universal toleration of
Polytheism as it was invariably maintained by the faith of the
people the incredulity of philosophers and the policy of the
Roman senate and emperors we are at a loss to discover what new
offence the Christians had committed what new provocation could
exasperate the mild indifference of antiquity and what new
motives could urge the Roman princes who beheld without concern
a thousand forms of religion subsisting in peace under their
gentle sway to inflict a severe punishment on any part of their
subjects who had chosen for themselves a singular but an
inoffensive mode of faith and worship.
The religious policy of the ancient world seems to have
assumed a more stern and intolerant character to oppose the
progress of Christianity. About fourscore years after the death
of Christ his innocent disciples were punished with death by the
sentence of a proconsul of the most amiable and philosophic
character and according to the laws of an emperor distinguished
by the wisdom and justice of his general administration. The
apologies which were repeatedly addressed to the successors of
Trajan are filled with the most pathetic complaints that the
Christians who obeyed the dictates and solicited the liberty
of conscience were alone among all the subjects of the Roman
empire excluded from the common benefits of their auspicious
government. The deaths of a few eminent martyrs have been
recorded with care; and from the time that Christianity was
invested with the supreme power the governors of the church have
been no less diligently employed in displaying the cruelty than
in imitating the conduct of their Pagan adversaries. To
separate (if it be possible) a few authentic as well as
interesting facts from an undigested mass of fiction and error
and to relate in a clear and rational manner the causes the
extent the duration and the most important circumstances of the
persecutions to which the first Christians were exposed is the
design of the present chapter. ^*
[Footnote *: The history of the first age of Christianity is only
found in the Acts of the Apostles and in order to speak of the
first persecutions experienced by the Christians that book
should naturally have been consulted; those persecutions then
limited to individuals and to a narrow sphere interested only
the persecuted and have been related by them alone. Gibbon
making the persecutions ascend no higher than Nero has entirely
omitted those which preceded this epoch and of which St. Luke
has preserved the memory. The only way to justify this omission
was to attack the authenticity of the Acts of the Apostles; for
if authentic they must necessarily be consulted and quoted.
Now antiquity has left very few works of which the authenticity
is so well established as that of the Acts of the Apostles. (See
Lardner's Cred. of Gospel Hist. part iii.) It is therefore
without sufficient reason that Gibbon has maintained silence
concerning the narrative of St. Luke and this omission is not
without importance. - G.]
The sectaries of a persecuted religion depressed by fear
animated with resentment and perhaps heated by enthusiasm are
seldom in a proper temper of mind calmly to investigate or
candidly to appreciate the motives of their enemies which often
escape the impartial and discerning view even of those who are
placed at a secure distance from the flames of persecution. A
reason has been assigned for the conduct of the emperors towards
the primitive Christians which may appear the more specious and
probable as it is drawn from the acknowledged genius of
Polytheism. It has already been observed that the religious
concord of the world was principally supported by the implicit
assent and reverence which the nations of antiquity expressed for
their respective traditions and ceremonies. It might therefore
be expected that they would unite with indignation against any
sect or people which should separate itself from the communion of
mankind and claiming the exclusive possession of divine
knowledge should disdain every form of worship except its own
as impious and idolatrous. The rights of toleration were held by
mutual indulgence: they were justly forfeited by a refusal of the
accustomed tribute. As the payment of this tribute was
inflexibly refused by the Jews and by them alone the
consideration of the treatment which they experienced from the
Roman magistrates will serve to explain how far these
speculations are justified by facts and will lead us to discover
the true causes of the persecution of Christianity.
Without repeating what has already been mentioned of the
reverence of the Roman princes and governors for the temple of
Jerusalem we shall only observe that the destruction of the
temple and city was accompanied and followed by every
circumstance that could exasperate the minds of the conquerors
and authorize religious persecution by the most specious
arguments of political justice and the public safety. From the
reign of Nero to that of Antoninus Pius the Jews discovered a
fierce impatience of the dominion of Rome which repeatedly broke
out in the most furious massacres and insurrections. Humanity is
shocked at the recital of the horrid cruelties which they
committed in the cities of Egypt of Cyprus and of Cyrene where
they dwelt in treacherous friendship with the unsuspecting
natives; ^1 and we are tempted to applaud the severe retaliation
which was exercised by the arms of the legions against a race of
fanatics whose dire and credulous superstition seemed to render
them the implacable enemies not only of the Roman government but
of human kind. ^2 The enthusiasm of the Jews was supported by the
opinion that it was unlawful for them to pay taxes to an
idolatrous master; and by the flattering promise which they
derived from their ancient oracles that a conquering Messiah
would soon arise destined to break their fetters and to invest
the favorites of heaven with the empire of the earth. It was by
announcing himself as their long-expected deliverer and by
calling on all the descendants of Abraham to assert the hope of
Israel that the famous Barchochebas collected a formidable army
with which he resisted during two years the power of the emperor
Hadrian. ^3
[Footnote 1: In Cyrene they massacred 220000 Greeks; in Cyprus
240000; in Egypt a very great multitude. Many of these unhappy
victims were sawn asunder according to a precedent to which
David had given the sanction of his example. The victorious Jews
devoured the flesh licked up the blood and twisted the entrails
like a girdle round their bodies. See Dion Cassius l. lxviii.
p. 1145.
Note: Some commentators among them Reimar in his notes on
Dion Cassius think that the hatred of the Romans against the Jews
has led the historian to exaggerate the cruelties committed by
the latter. Don. Cass. lxviii. p. 1146. - G.]
[Footnote 2: Without repeating the well-known narratives of
Josephus we may learn from Dion (l. lxix. p. 1162) that in
Hadrian's war 580000 Jews were cut off by the sword besides an
infinite number which perished by famine by disease and by
fire.]
[Footnote 3: For the sect of the Zealots see Basnage Histoire
des Juifs l. i. c. 17; for the characters of the Messiah
according to the Rabbis l. v. c. 11 12 13; for the actions of
Barchochebas l. vii. c. 12. (Hist. of Jews iii. 115 &c.) - M.]
Notwithstanding these repeated provocations the resentment
of the Roman princes expired after the victory; nor were their
apprehensions continued beyond the period of war and danger. By
the general indulgence of polytheism and by the mild temper of
Antoninus Pius the Jews were restored to their ancient
privileges and once more obtained the permission of circumcising
their children with the easy restraint that they should never
confer on any foreign proselyte that distinguishing mark of the
Hebrew race. ^4 The numerous remains of that people though they
were still excluded from the precincts of Jerusalem were
permitted to form and to maintain considerable establishments
both in Italy and in the provinces to acquire the freedom of
Rome to enjoy municipal honors and to obtain at the same time
an exemption from the burdensome and expensive offices of
society. The moderation or the contempt of the Romans gave a
legal sanction to the form of ecclesiastical police which was
instituted by the vanquished sect. The patriarch who had fixed
his residence at Tiberias was empowered to appoint his
subordinate ministers and apostles to exercise a domestic
jurisdiction and to receive from his dispersed brethren an
annual contribution. ^5 New synagogues were frequently erected in
the principal cities of the empire; and the sabbaths the fasts
and the festivals which were either commanded by the Mosaic law
or enjoined by the traditions of the Rabbis were celebrated in
the most solemn and public manner. ^6 Such gentle treatment
insensibly assuaged the stern temper of the Jews. Awakened from
their dream of prophecy and conquest they assumed the behavior
of peaceable and industrious subjects. Their irreconcilable
hatred of mankind instead of flaming out in acts of blood and
violence evaporated in less dangerous gratifications. They
embraced every opportunity of overreaching the idolaters in
trade; and they pronounced secret and ambiguous imprecations
against the haughty kingdom of Edom. ^7
[Footnote 4: It is to Modestinus a Roman lawyer (l. vi.
regular.) that we are indebted for a distinct knowledge of the
Edict of Antoninus. See Casaubon ad Hist. August. p. 27.]
[Footnote 5: See Basnage Histoire des Juifs l. iii. c. 2 3.
The office of Patriarch was suppressed by Theodosius the
younger.]
[Footnote 6: We need only mention the Purim or deliverance of
the Jews from he rage of Haman which till the reign of
Theodosius was celebrated with insolent triumph and riotous
intemperance. Basnage Hist. des Juifs l. vi. c. 17 l. viii.
c. 6.]
[Footnote 7: According to the false Josephus Tsepho the
grandson of Esau conducted into Italy the army of Eneas king of
Carthage. Another colony of Idumaeans flying from the sword of
David took refuge in the dominions of Romulus. For these or
for other reasons of equal weight the name of Edom was applied
by the Jews to the Roman empire.
Note: The false Josephus is a romancer of very modern date
though some of these legends are probably more ancient. It may
be worth considering whether many of the stories in the Talmud
are not history in a figurative disguise adopted from prudence.
The Jews might dare to say many things of Rome under the
significant appellation of Edom which they feared to utter
publicly. Later and more ignorant ages took literally and
perhaps embellished what was intelligible among the generation
to which it was addressed. Hist. of Jews iii. 131.
The false Josephus has the inauguration of the emperor with
the seven electors and apparently the pope assisting at the
coronation! Pref. page xxvi. - M.]
Since the Jews who rejected with abhorrence the deities
adored by their sovereign and by their fellow-subjects enjoyed
however the free exercise of their unsocial religion there must
have existed some other cause which exposed the disciples of
Christ to those severities from which the posterity of Abraham
was exempt. The difference between them is simple and obvious;
but according to the sentiments of antiquity it was of the
highest importance. The Jews were a nation; the Christians were
a sect: and if it was natural for every community to respect the
sacred institutions of their neighbors it was incumbent on them
to persevere in those of their ancestors. The voice of oracles
the precepts of philosophers and the authority of the laws
unanimously enforced this national obligation. By their lofty
claim of superior sanctity the Jews might provoke the Polytheists
to consider them as an odious and impure race. By disdaining the
intercourse of other nations they might deserve their contempt.
The laws of Moses might be for the most part frivolous or absurd;
yet since they had been received during many ages by a large
society his followers were justified by the example of mankind;
and it was universally acknowledged that they had a right to
practise what it would have been criminal in them to neglect.
But this principle which protected the Jewish synagogue
afforded not any favor or security to the primitive church. By
embracing the faith of the gospel the Christians incurred the
supposed guilt of an unnatural and unpardonable offence. They
dissolved the sacred ties of custom and education violated the
religious institutions of their country and presumptuously
despised whatever their fathers had believed as true or had
reverenced as sacred. Nor was this apostasy (if we may use the
expression) merely of a partial or local kind; since the pious
deserter who withdrew himself from the temples of Egypt or Syria
would equally disdain to seek an asylum in those of Athens or
Carthage. Every Christian rejected with contempt the
superstitions of his family his city and his province. The
whole body of Christians unanimously refused to hold any
communion with the gods of Rome of the empire and of mankind.
It was in vain that the oppressed believer asserted the
inalienable rights of conscience and private judgment. Though
his situation might excite the pity his arguments could never
reach the understanding either of the philosophic or of the
believing part of the Pagan world. To their apprehensions it
was no less a matter of surprise that any individuals should
entertain scruples against complying with the established mode of
worship than if they had conceived a sudden abhorrence to the
manners the dress or the language of their native country. ^8
^*
[Footnote 8: From the arguments of Celsus as they are
represented and refuted by Origen (l. v. p. 247 - 259) we may
clearly discover the distinction that was made between the Jewish
people and the Christian sect. See in the Dialogue of Minucius
Felix (c. 5 6) a fair and not inelegant description of the
popular sentiments with regard to the desertion of the
established worship.]
[Footnote *: In all this there is doubtless much truth; yet does
not the more important difference lie on the surface? The
Christians made many converts the Jews but few. Had the Jewish
been equally a proselyting religion would it not have encountered
as violent persecution? - M.]
The surprise of the Pagans was soon succeeded by resentment;
and the most pious of men were exposed to the unjust but
dangerous imputation of impiety. Malice and prejudice concurred
in representing the Christians as a society of atheists who by
the most daring attack on the religious constitution of the
empire had merited the severest animadversion of the civil
magistrate. They had separated themselves (they gloried in the
confession) from every mode of superstition which was received in
any part of the globe by the various temper of polytheism: but it
was not altogether so evident what deity or what form of
worship they had substituted to the gods and temples of
antiquity. The pure and sublime idea which they entertained of
the Supreme Being escaped the gross conception of the Pagan
multitude who were at a loss to discover a spiritual and
solitary God that was neither represented under any corporeal
figure or visible symbol nor was adored with the accustomed pomp
of libations and festivals of altars and sacrifices. ^9 The
sages of Greece and Rome who had elevated their minds to the
contemplation of the existence and attributes of the First Cause
were induced by reason or by vanity to reserve for themselves and
their chosen disciples the privilege of this philosophical
devotion. ^10 They were far from admitting the prejudices of
mankind as the standard of truth but they considered them as
flowing from the original disposition of human nature; and they
supposed that any popular mode of faith and worship which
presumed to disclaim the assistance of the senses would in
proportion as it receded from superstition find itself incapable
of restraining the wanderings of the fancy and the visions of
fanaticism. The careless glance which men of wit and learning
condescended to cast on the Christian revelation served only to
confirm their hasty opinion and to persuade them that the
principle which they might have revered of the Divine Unity
was defaced by the wild enthusiasm and annihilated by the airy
speculations of the new sectaries. The author of a celebrated
dialogue which has been attributed to Lucian whilst he affects
to treat the mysterious subject of the Trinity in a style of
ridicule and contempt betrays his own ignorance of the weakness
of human reason and of the inscrutable nature of the divine
perfections. ^11
[Footnote 9: Cur nullas aras habent? templa nulla? nulla nota
simulacra! - Unde autem vel quis ille aut ubi Deus unicus
solitarius desti tutus? Minucius Felix c. 10. The Pagan
interlocutor goes on to make a distinction in favor of the Jews
who had once a temple altars victims &c.]
[Footnote 10: It is difficult (says Plato) to attain and
dangerous to publish the knowledge of the true God. See the
Theologie des Philosophes in the Abbe d'Olivet's French
translation of Tully de Natura Deorum tom. i. p. 275.]
[Footnote 11: The author of the Philopatris perpetually treats
the Christians as a company of dreaming enthusiasts &c.; and in
one place he manifestly alludes to the vision in which St. Paul
was transported to the third heaven. In another place Triephon
who personates a Christian after deriding the gods of Paganism
proposes a mysterious oath.]
It might appear less surprising that the founder of
Christianity should not only be revered by his disciples as a
sage and a prophet but that he should be adored as a God. The
Polytheists were disposed to adopt every article of faith which
seemed to offer any resemblance however distant or imperfect
with the popular mythology; and the legends of Bacchus of
Hercules and of Aesculapius had in some measure prepared
their imagination for the appearance of the Son of God under a
human form. ^12 But they were astonished that the Christians
should abandon the temples of those ancient heroes who in the
infancy of the world had invented arts instituted laws and
vanquished the tyrants or monsters who infested the earth in
order to choose for the exclusive object of their religious
worship an obscure teacher who in a recent age and among a
barbarous people had fallen a sacrifice either to the malice of
his own countrymen or to the jealousy of the Roman government.
The Pagan multitude reserving their gratitude for temporal
benefits alone rejected the inestimable present of life and
immortality which was offered to mankind by Jesus of Nazareth.
His mild constancy in the midst of cruel and voluntary
sufferings his universal benevolence and the sublime simplicity
of his actions and character were insufficient in the opinion
of those carnal men to compensate for the want of fame of
empire and of success; and whilst they refused to acknowledge
his stupendous triumph over the powers of darkness and of the
grave they misrepresented or they insulted the equivocal
birth wandering life and ignominious death of the divine
Author of Christianity. ^13
[Footnote 12: According to Justin Martyr (Apolog. Major c.
70-85) the daemon who had gained some imperfect knowledge of the
prophecies purposely contrived this resemblance which might
deter though by different means both the people and the
philosophers from embracing the faith of Christ.]
[Footnote 13: In the first and second books of Origen Celsus
treats the birth and character of our Savior with the most
impious contempt. The orator Libanius praises Porphyry and
Julian for confuting the folly of a sect. which styles a dead
man of Palestine God and the Son of God. Socrates Hist.
Ecclesiast. iii. 23.]
The personal guilt which every Christian had contracted in
thus preferring his private sentiment to the national religion
was aggravated in a very high degree by the number and union of
the criminals. It is well known and has been already observed
that Roman policy viewed with the utmost jealousy and distrust
any association among its subjects; and that the privileges of
private corporations though formed for the most harmless or
beneficial purposes were bestowed with a very sparing hand. ^14
The religious assemblies of the Christians who had separated
themselves from the public worship appeared of a much less
innocent nature; they were illegal in their principle and in
their consequences might become dangerous; nor were the emperors
conscious that they violated the laws of justice when for the
peace of society they prohibited those secret and sometimes
nocturnal meetings. ^15 The pious disobedience of the Christians
made their conduct or perhaps their designs appear in a much
more serious and criminal light; and the Roman princes who might
perhaps have suffered themselves to be disarmed by a ready
submission deeming their honor concerned in the execution of
their commands sometimes attempted by rigorous punishments to
subdue this independent spirit which boldly acknowledged an
authority superior to that of the magistrate. The extent and
...
|
