Chapter XVI: Conduct Towards The Christians, From Nero To

Constantine.—Part VI.

Although the policy of Diocletian and the humanity of Constantius
inclined them to preserve inviolate the maxims of toleration, it
was soon discovered that their two associates, Maximian and
Galerius, entertained the most implacable aversion for the name
and religion of the Christians. The minds of those princes had
never been enlightened by science; education had never softened
their temper. They owed their greatness to their swords, and in
their most elevated fortune they still retained their
superstitious prejudices of soldiers and peasants. In the general
administration of the provinces they obeyed the laws which their
benefactor had established; but they frequently found occasions
of exercising within their camp and palaces a secret persecution,
144 for which the imprudent zeal of the Christians sometimes
offered the most specious pretences. A sentence of death was
executed upon Maximilianus, an African youth, who had been
produced by his own father 1441 before the magistrate as a
sufficient and legal recruit, but who obstinately persisted in
declaring, that his conscience would not permit him to embrace
the profession of a soldier. 145 It could scarcely be expected
that any government should suffer the action of Marcellus the
Centurion to pass with impunity. On the day of a public festival,
that officer threw away his belt, his arms, and the ensigns of
his office, and exclaimed with a loud voice, that he would obey
none but Jesus Christ the eternal King, and that he renounced
forever the use of carnal weapons, and the service of an
idolatrous master. The soldiers, as soon as they recovered from
their astonishment, secured the person of Marcellus. He was
examined in the city of Tingi by the president of that part of
Mauritania; and as he was convicted by his own confession, he was
condemned and beheaded for the crime of desertion. 146 Examples
of such a nature savor much less of religious persecution than of
martial or even civil law; but they served to alienate the mind
of the emperors, to justify the severity of Galerius, who
dismissed a great number of Christian officers from their
employments; and to authorize the opinion, that a sect of
enthusiastics, which avowed principles so repugnant to the public
safety, must either remain useless, or would soon become
dangerous, subjects of the empire.

144 (return) [ Eusebius, l. viii. c. 4, c. 17. He limits the
number of military martyrs, by a remarkable expression, of which
neither his Latin nor French translator have rendered the energy.
Notwithstanding the authority of Eusebius, and the silence of
Lactantius, Ambrose, Sulpicius, Orosius, &c., it has been long
believed, that the Thebæan legion, consisting of 6000 Christians,
suffered martyrdom by the order of Maximian, in the valley of the
Pennine Alps. The story was first published about the middle of
the 5th century, by Eucherius, bishop of Lyons, who received it
from certain persons, who received it from Isaac, bishop of
Geneva, who is said to have received it from Theodore, bishop of
Octodurum. The abbey of St. Maurice still subsists, a rich
monument of the credulity of Sigismund, king of Burgundy. See an
excellent Dissertation in xxxvith volume of the Bibliothèque
Raisonnée, p. 427-454.]

1441 (return) [ M. Guizot criticizes Gibbon’s account of this
incident. He supposes that Maximilian was not “produced by his
father as a recruit,” but was obliged to appear by the law, which
compelled the sons of soldiers to serve at 21 years old. Was not
this a law of Constantine? Neither does this circumstance appear
in the acts. His father had clearly expected him to serve, as he
had bought him a new dress for the occasion; yet he refused to
force the conscience of his son. and when Maximilian was
condemned to death, the father returned home in joy, blessing God
for having bestowed upon him such a son.—M.]

145 (return) [ See the Acta Sincera, p. 299. The accounts of his
martyrdom and that of Marcellus, bear every mark of truth and
authenticity.]

146 (return) [ Acta Sincera, p. 302. * Note: M. Guizot here
justly observes, that it was the necessity of sacrificing to the
gods, which induced Marcellus to act in this manner.—M.]

After the success of the Persian war had raised the hopes and the
reputation of Galerius, he passed a winter with Diocletian in the
palace of Nicomedia; and the fate of Christianity became the
object of their secret consultations. 147 The experienced emperor
was still inclined to pursue measures of lenity; and though he
readily consented to exclude the Christians from holding any
employments in the household or the army, he urged in the
strongest terms the danger as well as cruelty of shedding the
blood of those deluded fanatics. Galerius at length extorted 1471
from him the permission of summoning a council, composed of a few
persons the most distinguished in the civil and military
departments of the state.

The important question was agitated in their presence, and those
ambitious courtiers easily discerned, that it was incumbent on
them to second, by their eloquence, the importunate violence of
the Cæsar. It may be presumed, that they insisted on every topic
which might interest the pride, the piety, or the fears, of their
sovereign in the destruction of Christianity. Perhaps they
represented, that the glorious work of the deliverance of the
empire was left imperfect, as long as an independent people was
permitted to subsist and multiply in the heart of the provinces.
The Christians, (it might specially be alleged,) renouncing the
gods and the institutions of Rome, had constituted a distinct
republic, which might yet be suppressed before it had acquired
any military force; but which was already governed by its own
laws and magistrates, was possessed of a public treasure, and was
intimately connected in all its parts by the frequent assemblies
of the bishops, to whose decrees their numerous and opulent
congregations yielded an implicit obedience. Arguments like these
may seem to have determined the reluctant mind of Diocletian to
embrace a new system of persecution; but though we may suspect,
it is not in our power to relate, the secret intrigues of the
palace, the private views and resentments, the jealousy of women
or eunuchs, and all those trifling but decisive causes which so
often influence the fate of empires, and the councils of the
wisest monarchs. 148

147 (return) [ De M. P. c. 11. Lactantius (or whoever was the
author of this little treatise) was, at that time, an inhabitant
of Nicomedia; but it seems difficult to conceive how he could
acquire so accurate a knowledge of what passed in the Imperial
cabinet. Note: * Lactantius, who was subsequently chosen by
Constantine to educate Crispus, might easily have learned these
details from Constantine himself, already of sufficient age to
interest himself in the affairs of the government, and in a
position to obtain the best information.—G. This assumes the
doubtful point of the authorship of the Treatise.—M.]

1471 (return) [ This permission was not extorted from Diocletian;
he took the step of his own accord. Lactantius says, in truth,
Nec tamen deflectere potuit (Diocletianus) præcipitis hominis
insaniam; placuit ergo amicorum sententiam experiri. (De Mort.
Pers. c. 11.) But this measure was in accordance with the
artificial character of Diocletian, who wished to have the
appearance of doing good by his own impulse and evil by the
impulse of others. Nam erat hujus malitiæ, cum bonum quid facere
decrevisse sine consilio faciebat, ut ipse laudaretur. Cum autem
malum. quoniam id reprehendendum sciebat, in consilium multos
advocabat, ut alioram culpæ adscriberetur quicquid ipse
deliquerat. Lact. ib. Eutropius says likewise, Miratus callide
fuit, sagax præterea et admodum subtilis ingenio, et qui
severitatem suam aliena invidia vellet explere. Eutrop. ix. c.
26.—G.——The manner in which the coarse and unfriendly pencil of
the author of the Treatise de Mort. Pers. has drawn the character
of Diocletian, seems inconsistent with this profound subtilty.
Many readers will perhaps agree with Gibbon.—M.]

148 (return) [ The only circumstance which we can discover, is
the devotion and jealousy of the mother of Galerius. She is
described by Lactantius, as Deorum montium cultrix; mulier
admodum superstitiosa. She had a great influence over her son,
and was offended by the disregard of some of her Christian
servants. * Note: This disregard consisted in the Christians
fasting and praying instead of participating in the banquets and
sacrifices which she celebrated with the Pagans. Dapibus
sacrificabat pœne quotidie ac vicariis suis epulis exhibebat.
Christiani abstinebant, et illa cum gentibus epulante, jejuniis
hi et oratiomibus insisteban; hine concepit odium Lact de Hist.
Pers. c. 11.—G.]

The pleasure of the emperors was at length signified to the
Christians, who, during the course of this melancholy winter, had
expected, with anxiety, the result of so many secret
consultations. The twenty-third of February, which coincided with
the Roman festival of the Terminalia, 149 was appointed (whether
from accident or design) to set bounds to the progress of
Christianity. At the earliest dawn of day, the Prætorian præfect,
150 accompanied by several generals, tribunes, and officers of
the revenue, repaired to the principal church of Nicomedia, which
was situated on an eminence in the most populous and beautiful
part of the city. The doors were instantly broke open; they
rushed into the sanctuary; and as they searched in vain for some
visible object of worship, they were obliged to content
themselves with committing to the flames the volumes of the holy
Scripture. The ministers of Diocletian were followed by a
numerous body of guards and pioneers, who marched in order of
battle, and were provided with all the instruments used in the
destruction of fortified cities. By their incessant labor, a
sacred edifice, which towered above the Imperial palace, and had
long excited the indignation and envy of the Gentiles, was in a
few hours levelled with the ground. 151

149 (return) [ The worship and festival of the god Terminus are
elegantly illustrated by M. de Boze, Mém. de l’Académie des
Inscriptions, tom. i. p. 50.]

150 (return) [ In our only MS. of Lactantius, we read
_profectus;_ but reason, and the authority of all the critics,
allow us, instead of that word, which destroys the sense of the
passage, to substitute _prœfectus_.]

151 (return) [ Lactantius, de M. P. c. 12, gives a very lively
picture of the destruction of the church.]

The next day the general edict of persecution was published; 152
and though Diocletian, still averse to the effusion of blood, had
moderated the fury of Galerius, who proposed, that every one
refusing to offer sacrifice should immediately be burnt alive,
the penalties inflicted on the obstinacy of the Christians might
be deemed sufficiently rigorous and effectual. It was enacted,
that their churches, in all the provinces of the empire, should
be demolished to their foundations; and the punishment of death
was denounced against all who should presume to hold any secret
assemblies for the purpose of religious worship. The
philosophers, who now assumed the unworthy office of directing
the blind zeal of persecution, had diligently studied the nature
and genius of the Christian religion; and as they were not
ignorant that the speculative doctrines of the faith were
supposed to be contained in the writings of the prophets, of the
evangelists, and of the apostles, they most probably suggested
the order, that the bishops and presbyters should deliver all
their sacred books into the hands of the magistrates; who were
commanded, under the severest penalties, to burn them in a public
and solemn manner. By the same edict, the property of the church
was at once confiscated; and the several parts of which it might
consist were either sold to the highest bidder, united to the
Imperial domain, bestowed on the cities and corporations, or
granted to the solicitations of rapacious courtiers. After taking
such effectual measures to abolish the worship, and to dissolve
the government of the Christians, it was thought necessary to
subject to the most intolerable hardships the condition of those
perverse individuals who should still reject the religion of
nature, of Rome, and of their ancestors. Persons of a liberal
birth were declared incapable of holding any honors or
employments; slaves were forever deprived of the hopes of
freedom, and the whole body of the people were put out of the
protection of the law. The judges were authorized to hear and to
determine every action that was brought against a Christian. But
the Christians were not permitted to complain of any injury which
they themselves had suffered; and thus those unfortunate
sectaries were exposed to the severity, while they were excluded
from the benefits, of public justice. This new species of
martyrdom, so painful and lingering, so obscure and ignominious,
was, perhaps, the most proper to weary the constancy of the
faithful: nor can it be doubted that the passions and interest of
mankind were disposed on this occasion to second the designs of
the emperors. But the policy of a well-ordered government must
sometimes have interposed in behalf of the oppressed Christians;
1521 nor was it possible for the Roman princes entirely to remove
the apprehension of punishment, or to connive at every act of
fraud and violence, without exposing their own authority and the
rest of their subjects to the most alarming dangers. 153

152 (return) [ Mosheim, (p. 922—926,) from man scattered passages
of Lactantius and Eusebius, has collected a very just and
accurate notion of this edict though he sometimes deviates into
conjecture and refinement.]

1521 (return) [ This wants proof. The edict of Diocletian was
executed in all its right during the rest of his reign. Euseb.
Hist. Eccl. l viii. c. 13.—G.]

153 (return) [ Many ages afterwards, Edward J. practised, with
great success, the same mode of persecution against the clergy of
England. See Hume’s History of England, vol. ii. p. 300, last 4to
edition.]

This edict was scarcely exhibited to the public view, in the most
conspicuous place of Nicomedia, before it was torn down by the
hands of a Christian, who expressed at the same time, by the
bitterest invectives, his contempt as well as abhorrence for such
impious and tyrannical governors. His offence, according to the
mildest laws, amounted to treason, and deserved death. And if it
be true that he was a person of rank and education, those
circumstances could serve only to aggravate his guilt. He was
burnt, or rather roasted, by a slow fire; and his executioners,
zealous to revenge the personal insult which had been offered to
the emperors, exhausted every refinement of cruelty, without
being able to subdue his patience, or to alter the steady and
insulting smile which in his dying agonies he still preserved in
his countenance. The Christians, though they confessed that his
conduct had not been strictly conformable to the laws of
prudence, admired the divine fervor of his zeal; and the
excessive commendations which they lavished on the memory of
their hero and martyr, contributed to fix a deep impression of
terror and hatred in the mind of Diocletian. 154

154 (return) [ Lactantius only calls him quidam, et si non recte,
magno tamer animo, &c., c. 12. Eusebius (l. viii. c. 5) adorns
him with secular honora Neither have condescended to mention his
name; but the Greeks celebrate his memory under that of John. See
Tillemont, Memones Ecclésiastiques, tom. v. part ii. p. 320.]

His fears were soon alarmed by the view of a danger from which he
very narrowly escaped. Within fifteen days the palace of
Nicomedia, and even the bed-chamber of Diocletian, were twice in
flames; and though both times they were extinguished without any
material damage, the singular repetition of the fire was justly
considered as an evident proof that it had not been the effect of
chance or negligence. The suspicion naturally fell on the
Christians; and it was suggested, with some degree of
probability, that those desperate fanatics, provoked by their
present sufferings, and apprehensive of impending calamities, had
entered into a conspiracy with their faithful brethren, the
eunuchs of the palace, against the lives of two emperors, whom
they detested as the irreconcilable enemies of the church of God.

Jealousy and resentment prevailed in every breast, but especially
in that of Diocletian. A great number of persons, distinguished
either by the offices which they had filled, or by the favor
which they had enjoyed, were thrown into prison. Every mode of
torture was put in practice, and the court, as well as city, was
polluted with many bloody executions. 155 But as it was found
impossible to extort any discovery of this mysterious
transaction, it seems incumbent on us either to presume the
innocence, or to admire the resolution, of the sufferers. A few
days afterwards Galerius hastily withdrew himself from Nicomedia,
declaring, that if he delayed his departure from that devoted
palace, he should fall a sacrifice to the rage of the Christians.

The ecclesiastical historians, from whom alone we derive a
partial and imperfect knowledge of this persecution, are at a
loss how to account for the fears and dangers of the emperors.
Two of these writers, a prince and a rhetorician, were
eye-witnesses of the fire of Nicomedia. The one ascribes it to
lightning, and the divine wrath; the other affirms, that it was
kindled by the malice of Galerius himself. 156

155 (return) [ Lactantius de M. P. c. 13, 14. Potentissimi
quondam Eunuchi necati, per quos Palatium et ipse constabat.
Eusebius (l. viii. c. 6) mentions the cruel executions of the
eunuchs, Gorgonius and Dorotheus, and of Anthimius, bishop of
Nicomedia; and both those writers describe, in a vague but
tragical manner, the horrid scenes which were acted even in the
Imperial presence.]

156 (return) [ See Lactantius, Eusebius, and Constantine, ad
Cœtum Sanctorum, c. xxv. Eusebius confesses his ignorance of the
cause of this fire. Note: As the history of these times affords
us no example of any attempts made by the Christians against
their persecutors, we have no reason, not the slightest
probability, to attribute to them the fire in the palace; and the
authority of Constantine and Lactantius remains to explain it. M.
de Tillemont has shown how they can be reconciled. Hist. des
Empereurs, Vie de Diocletian, xix.—G. Had it been done by a
Christian, it would probably have been a fanatic, who would have
avowed and gloried in it. Tillemont’s supposition that the fire
was first caused by lightning, and fed and increased by the
malice of Galerius, seems singularly improbable.—M.]

As the edict against the Christians was designed for a general
law of the whole empire, and as Diocletian and Galerius, though
they might not wait for the consent, were assured of the
concurrence, of the Western princes, it would appear more
consonant to our ideas of policy, that the governors of all the
provinces should have received secret instructions to publish, on
one and the same day, this declaration of war within their
respective departments. It was at least to be expected, that the
convenience of the public highways and established posts would
have enabled the emperors to transmit their orders with the
utmost despatch from the palace of Nicomedia to the extremities
of the Roman world; and that they would not have suffered fifty
days to elapse, before the edict was published in Syria, and near
four months before it was signified to the cities of Africa. 157

This delay may perhaps be imputed to the cautious temper of
Diocletian, who had yielded a reluctant consent to the measures
of persecution, and who was desirous of trying the experiment
under his more immediate eye, before he gave way to the disorders
and discontent which it must inevitably occasion in the distant
provinces. At first, indeed, the magistrates were restrained from
the effusion of blood; but the use of every other severity was
permitted, and even recommended to their zeal; nor could the
Christians, though they cheerfully resigned the ornaments of
their churches, resolve to interrupt their religious assemblies,
or to deliver their sacred books to the flames. The pious
obstinacy of Felix, an African bishop, appears to have
embarrassed the subordinate ministers of the government. The
curator of his city sent him in chains to the proconsul. The
proconsul transmitted him to the Prætorian præfect of Italy; and
Felix, who disdained even to give an evasive answer, was at
length beheaded at Venusia, in Lucania, a place on which the
birth of Horace has conferred fame. 158 This precedent, and
perhaps some Imperial rescript, which was issued in consequence
of it, appeared to authorize the governors of provinces, in
punishing with death the refusal of the Christians to deliver up
their sacred books. There were undoubtedly many persons who
embraced this opportunity of obtaining the crown of martyrdom;
but there were likewise too many who purchased an ignominious
life, by discovering and betraying the holy Scripture into the
hands of infidels. A great number even of bishops and presbyters
acquired, by this criminal compliance, the opprobrious epithet of
_Traditors;_ and their offence was productive of much present
scandal and of much future discord in the African church. 159

157 (return) [ Tillemont, Mémoires Ecclesiast. tom. v. part i. p.
43.]

158 (return) [ See the Acta Sincera of Ruinart, p. 353; those of
Felix of Thibara, or Tibiur, appear much less corrupted than in
the other editions, which afford a lively specimen of legendary
license.]

159 (return) [ See the first book of Optatus of Milevis against
the Donatiste, Paris, 1700, edit. Dupin. He lived under the reign
of Valens.]

The copies as well as the versions of Scripture, were already so
multiplied in the empire, that the most severe inquisition could
no longer be attended with any fatal consequences; and even the
sacrifice of those volumes, which, in every congregation, were
preserved for public use, required the consent of some
treacherous and unworthy Christians. But the ruin of the churches
was easily effected by the authority of the government, and by
the labor of the Pagans. In some provinces, however, the
magistrates contented themselves with shutting up the places of
religious worship. In others, they more literally complied with
the terms of the edict; and after taking away the doors, the
benches, and the pulpit, which they burnt as it were in a funeral
pile, they completely demolished the remainder of the edifice.
160 It is perhaps to this melancholy occasion that we should
apply a very remarkable story, which is related with so many
circumstances of variety and improbability, that it serves rather
to excite than to satisfy our curiosity. In a small town in
Phrygia, of whose name as well as situation we are left ignorant,
it should seem that the magistrates and the body of the people
had embraced the Christian faith; and as some resistance might be
apprehended to the execution of the edict, the governor of the
province was supported by a numerous detachment of legionaries.
On their approach the citizens threw themselves into the church,
with the resolution either of defending by arms that sacred
edifice, or of perishing in its ruins. They indignantly rejected
the notice and permission which was given them to retire, till
the soldiers, provoked by their obstinate refusal, set fire to
the building on all sides, and consumed, by this extraordinary
kind of martyrdom, a great number of Phrygians, with their wives
and children. 161

160 (return) [ The ancient monuments, published at the end of
Optatus, p. 261, &c. describe, in a very circumstantial manner,
the proceedings of the governors in the destruction of churches.
They made a minute inventory of the plate, &c., which they found
in them. That of the church of Cirta, in Numidia, is still
extant. It consisted of two chalices of gold, and six of silver;
six urns, one kettle, seven lamps, all likewise of silver;
besides a large quantity of brass utensils, and wearing apparel.]

161 (return) [ Lactantius (Institut. Divin. v. 11) confines the
calamity to the _conventiculum_, with its congregation. Eusebius
(viii. 11) extends it to a whole city, and introduces something
very like a regular siege. His ancient Latin translator, Rufinus,
adds the important circumstance of the permission given to the
inhabitants of retiring from thence. As Phrygia reached to the
confines of Isauria, it is possible that the restless temper of
those independent barbarians may have contributed to this
misfortune. Note: Universum populum. Lact. Inst. Div. v. 11.—G.]

Some slight disturbances, though they were suppressed almost as
soon as excited, in Syria and the frontiers of Armenia, afforded
the enemies of the church a very plausible occasion to insinuate,
that those troubles had been secretly fomented by the intrigues
of the bishops, who had already forgotten their ostentatious
professions of passive and unlimited obedience. 162

The resentment, or the fears, of Diocletian, at length
transported him beyond the bounds of moderation, which he had
hitherto preserved, and he declared, in a series of cruel edicts,
1621 his intention of abolishing the Christian name. By the first
of these edicts, the governors of the provinces were directed to
apprehend all persons of the ecclesiastical order; and the
prisons, destined for the vilest criminals, were soon filled with
a multitude of bishops, presbyters, deacons, readers, and
exorcists. By a second edict, the magistrates were commanded to
employ every method of severity, which might reclaim them from
their odious superstition, and oblige them to return to the
established worship of the gods. This rigorous order was
extended, by a subsequent edict, to the whole body of Christians,
who were exposed to a violent and general persecution. 163

Instead of those salutary restraints, which had required the
direct and solemn testimony of an accuser, it became the duty as
well as the interest of the Imperial officers to discover, to
pursue, and to torment the most obnoxious among the faithful.
Heavy penalties were denounced against all who should presume to
save a prescribed sectary from the just indignation of the gods,
and of the emperors. Yet, notwithstanding the severity of this
law, the virtuous courage of many of the Pagans, in concealing
their friends or relations, affords an honorable proof, that the
rage of superstition had not extinguished in their minds the
sentiments of nature and humanity. 164

162 (return) [ Eusebius, l. viii. c. 6. M. de Valois (with some
probability) thinks that he has discovered the Syrian rebellion
in an oration of Libanius; and that it was a rash attempt of the
tribune Eugenius, who with only five hundred men seized Antioch,
and might perhaps allure the Christians by the promise of
religious toleration. From Eusebius, (l. ix. c. 8,) as well as
from Moses of Chorene, (Hist. Armen. l. ii. 77, &c.,) it may be
inferred, that Christianity was already introduced into Armenia.]

1621 (return) [ He had already passed them in his first edict. It
does not appear that resentment or fear had any share in the new
persecutions: perhaps they originated in superstition, and a
specious apparent respect for its ministers. The oracle of
Apollo, consulted by Diocletian, gave no answer; and said that
just men hindered it from speaking. Constantine, who assisted at
the ceremony, affirms, with an oath, that when questioned about
these men, the high priest named the Christians. “The Emperor
eagerly seized on this answer; and drew against the innocent a
sword, destined only to punish the guilty: he instantly issued
edicts, written, if I may use the expression, with a poniard; and
ordered the judges to employ all their skill to invent new modes
of punishment. Euseb. Vit Constant. l. ii c 54.”—G.]

163 (return) [ See Mosheim, p. 938: the text of Eusebius very
plainly shows that the governors, whose powers were enlarged, not
restrained, by the new laws, could punish with death the most
obstinate Christians as an example to their brethren.]

164 (return) [ Athanasius, p. 833, ap. Tillemont, Mém.
Ecclesiast. tom v part i. 90.]