Back to Chapter Listing
Previous Chapter
Continue Reading
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.
The sectaries of a persecuted religion, depressed by fear
animated with resentment, and perhaps heated by enthusiasm, are
seldom in a proper temper of mind calmly to investigate, or
candidly to appreciate, the motives of their enemies, which often
escape the impartial and discerning view even of those who are
placed at a secure distance from the flames of persecution. A
reason has been assigned for the conduct of the emperors towards
the primitive Christians, which may appear the more specious and
probable as it is drawn from the acknowledged genius of
Polytheism. It has already been observed, that the religious
concord of the world was principally supported by the implicit
assent and reverence which the nations of antiquity expressed for
their respective traditions and ceremonies. It might therefore
be expected, that they would unite with indignation against any
sect or people which should separate itself from the communion of
mankind, and claiming the exclusive possession of divine
knowledge, should disdain every form of worship, except its own,
as impious and idolatrous. The rights of toleration were held by
mutual indulgence: they were justly forfeited by a refusal of the
accustomed tribute. As the payment of this tribute was
inflexibly refused by the Jews, and by them alone, the
consideration of the treatment which they experienced from the
Roman magistrates, will serve to explain how far these
speculations are justified by facts, and will lead us to discover
the true causes of the persecution of Christianity.
Without repeating what has already been mentioned of the
reverence of the Roman princes and governors for the temple of
Jerusalem, we shall only observe, that the destruction of the
temple and city was accompanied and followed by every
circumstance that could exasperate the minds of the conquerors,
and authorize religious persecution by the most specious
arguments of political justice and the public safety. From the
reign of Nero to that of Antoninus Pius, the Jews discovered a
fierce impatience of the dominion of Rome, which repeatedly broke
out in the most furious massacres and insurrections. Humanity is
shocked at the recital of the horrid cruelties which they
committed in the cities of Egypt, of Cyprus, and of Cyrene, where
they dwelt in treacherous friendship with the unsuspecting
natives; 1 and we are tempted to applaud the severe retaliation
which was exercised by the arms of the legions against a race of
fanatics, whose dire and credulous superstition seemed to render
them the implacable enemies not only of the Roman government, but
of human kind. 2 The enthusiasm of the Jews was supported by the
opinion, that it was unlawful for them to pay taxes to an
idolatrous master; and by the flattering promise which they
derived from their ancient oracles, that a conquering Messiah
would soon arise, destined to break their fetters, and to invest
the favorites of heaven with the empire of the earth. It was by
announcing himself as their long-expected deliverer, and by
calling on all the descendants of Abraham to assert the hope of
Israel, that the famous Barchochebas collected a formidable army,
with which he resisted during two years the power of the emperor
Hadrian. 3
Footnote 1: In Cyrene, they massacred 220,000 Greeks; in Cyprus,
240,000; in Egypt, a very great multitude. Many of these unhappy
victims were sawn asunder, according to a precedent to which
David had given the sanction of his example. The victorious Jews
devoured the flesh, licked up the blood, and twisted the entrails
like a girdle round their bodies. See Dion Cassius, l. lxviii.
p. 1145.
Note: Some commentators, among them Reimar, in his notes on
Dion Cassius think that the hatred of the Romans against the Jews
has led the historian to exaggerate the cruelties committed by
the latter. Don. Cass. lxviii. p. 1146. - G.
Footnote 2: Without repeating the well-known narratives of
Josephus, we may learn from Dion, (l. lxix. p. 1162,) that in
Hadrian's war 580,000 Jews were cut off by the sword, besides an
infinite number which perished by famine, by disease, and by
fire.
Footnote 3: For the sect of the Zealots, see Basnage, Histoire
des Juifs, l. i. c. 17; for the characters of the Messiah,
according to the Rabbis, l. v. c. 11, 12, 13; for the actions of
Barchochebas, l. vii. c. 12. (Hist. of Jews iii. 115, &c.) - M.
Notwithstanding these repeated provocations, the resentment
of the Roman princes expired after the victory; nor were their
apprehensions continued beyond the period of war and danger. By
the general indulgence of Polytheism, and by the mild temper of
Antoninus Pius, the Jews were restored to their ancient
privileges, and once more obtained the permission of circumcising
their children, with the easy restraint, that they should never
confer on any foreign proselyte that distinguishing mark of the
Hebrew race. 4 The numerous remains of that people, though they
were still excluded from the precincts of Jerusalem, were
permitted to form and to maintain considerable establishments
both in Italy and in the provinces, to acquire the freEdom of
Rome, to enjoy municipal honors, and to obtain at the same time
an exemption from the burdensome and expensive offices of
society. The moderation or the contempt of the Romans gave a
legal sanction to the form of ecclesiastical police which was
instituted by the vanquished sect. The patriarch, who had fixed
his residence at Tiberias, was empowered to appoint his
subordinate ministers and apostles, to exercise a domestic
jurisdiction, and to receive from his dispersed brethren an
annual contribution. 5 New synagogues were frequently erected in
the principal cities of the empire; and the sabbaths, the fasts,
and the festivals, which were either commanded by the Mosaic law,
or enjoined by the traditions of the Rabbis, were celebrated in
the most solemn and public manner. 6 Such gentle treatment
insensibly assuaged the stern temper of the Jews. Awakened from
their dream of prophecy and conquest, they assumed the behavior
of peaceable and industrious subjects. Their irreconcilable
hatred of mankind, instead of flaming out in acts of blood and
violence, evaporated in less dangerous gratifications. They
embraced every opportunity of overreaching the idolaters in
trade; and they pronounced secret and ambiguous imprecations
against the haughty kingdom of Edom. 7
Footnote 4: It is to Modestinus, a Roman lawyer (l. vi.
regular.) that we are indebted for a distinct knowledge of the
Edict of Antoninus. See Casaubon ad Hist. August. p. 27.
Footnote 5: See Basnage, Histoire des Juifs, l. iii. c. 2, 3.
The office of patriarch was suppressed by Theodosius the
younger.
Footnote 6: We need only mention the Purim, or deliverance of
the Jews from he rage of Haman, which, till the reign of
Theodosius, was celebrated with insolent triumph and riotous
intemperance. Basnage, Hist. des Juifs, l. vi. c. 17, l. viii.
c. 6.
Footnote 7: According to the false Josephus, Tsepho, the
grandson of Esau, conducted into Italy the army of Eneas, king of
Carthage. Another colony of Idumaeans, flying from the sword of
David, took refuge in the dominions of Romulus. For these, or
for other reasons of equal weight, the name of Edom was applied
by the Jews to the Roman empire.
Note: The false Josephus is a romancer of very modern date,
though some of these legends are probably more ancient. It may
be worth considering whether many of the stories in the Talmud
are not history in a figurative disguise, adopted from prudence.
The Jews might dare to say many things of Rome, under the
significant appellation of Edom, which they feared to utter
publicly. Later and more ignorant ages took literally, and
perhaps embellished, what was intelligible among the generation
to which it was addressed. Hist. of Jews, iii. 131.
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.
Back to Chapter Listing
Previous Chapter
Continue Reading
To cite original text:
Gibbon, Edward, 1737-1794. The history of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire. (NY : Knopf, 1993), v. 2, pp. 3-8.