Diocletianic Persecution

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by G.W. (talk | contribs) at 11:37, 12 October 2008 (→‎Palestine: Content ''moved''.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The main altar at St. Raphael's Cathedral, Dubuque, Iowa. Contained within the altar is a box containing the alleged remains of Cessianus, a young boy who was martyred during the Diocletianic Persecution.

The Diocletianic Persecution was the last, and most severe, episode of persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire. It took place under Emperor Diocletian, and lasted from 303 to 311.[1]

Background

Prior persecutions

Further information: Persecution of early Christians in the Roman Empire

From the time it first appears to the conversion of Constantine in 312, Christianity was an illegal religion in the eyes of the Roman state. Its members were always suspect, and could be subject to arrest, condemnation, and death at a moment's notice.[2] To the Roman people, it was a wicked superstition: Christians were popularly thought to practice black magic in pursuit of revolutionary aims.[3] In the words of Tacitus, Christians were "hostile to society" (odium generis humani); they had no right to live.[4] In the first two centuries of its existence, Christianity and Christians were loathed by the people at large. It was popular hostility drove the earliest persecutions, not official action: Tertullian writes that the "instinctive fury" of the Carthaginian people inspired persecutions in that city.[5]

Nonetheless, for the first two centuries, no emperor issued general laws against the faith or its Church. Persecutions, such as they were, were carried out under the authority of local government officials.[6] At Bithynia-Pontus in 111, it was the imperial governor, Pliny;[7] at Smyrna (İzmir, Turkey) in 156 and Scilli near Carthage in 180, it was the proconsul;[8] at Lyon in 177, it was the provincial governor.[9] They were certainly violent, but they were sporadic, brief, and limited in extent.[10] Christians were treated as any exotic and deviant minority would be, and their early relationship with the Roman state is comparable to that of astrologers, soothsayers, and magicians.[11]

In the third century, however, the pattern changed. Emperors became more active, and government officials began to actively pursue Christians, rather than merely respond to the will of the crowd.[12] Christianity, too, changed: No longer were its practitioners merely "the lower orders fomenting discontent". Some Christians were now rich, or of high pedigree. Origen, writing at about 248, tells of "the multitude of people coming in to the faith even rich men and persons in positions of honour, and ladies of high refinement and birth".[13] Official reaction grew firmer. In 202, according to the Historia Augusta, Septimius Severus (r. 193–211) issued a general rescript forbidding conversion to either Judaism or Christianity.[14] Maximin (r. 235–38) used his power to target Christian leaders.[15] Decius (r. 249–51), demanding a show of support for the faith, proclaimed that all inhabitants of the empire must sacrifice to the gods, eat sacrificial meat, and testify to these acts.[16] Christians were obstinate in their non-compliance. Church leaders, like Fabian, bishop of Rome, and Babylas, bishop of Antioch, were arrested, tried, and executed.[17]

The Decian persecution was a grave blow to the Church:[18] at Carthage there was mass apostasy;[19] at Smyrna, the bishop, Euctemon, sacrificed, encouraging others to do the same.[20] Because the Church was then largely urban, it would have been easy to identify, isolate, and destroy the Church hierarchy. This did not happen; fate intervened. In June 251, Decius died in battle. His persecutions were not followed up for another six years, allowing some Church functions to resume.[21] Valerian, Decius' friend, took up the imperial mantle in 253. Though he was at first thought of as "exceptionally friendly" towards the Christians,[22] his actions soon showed otherwise. On July 257, he issued a new persecutionary edict. As punishment for following the Christian faith, Christians were to face exile or condemnation to the mines. In August 258, he issued a second edict: The punishment was now death. This persecution, too, was stalled by the whims of fate. In June 260 Valerian was captured in battle and executed. His son, Gallienus (r. 260–68) ended his father's persecution,[23] and inaugurated a forty-year long peace of the Church.[24] The peace would be undisturbed, save for occasional, isolated persecutions, until Diocletian ascended to the throne.[25]

Persecution and Tetrarchic ideology

Diocletian, acclaimed emperor on November 20, 284, was a religious conservative, faithful to the traditional Roman cult. Unlike Aurelian (r. 270–75), Diocletian did not foster any new cult of his own. He preferred older gods, Olympian gods.[26] His favored deity was the head of the Roman pantheon, Jupiter, and he enshrined that deity in his titulature early in his reign. His co-emperor, Maximian, was associated with Hercules.[27] Religious backing became a second source of legitimacy, weakening the army's capacity to play king maker.[28] Diocletian wised to inspire a general religious revival, not a limited and particular one.[29] As the panegyrist to Maximian declared: "You have heaped the gods with altars and statues, temples and offerings, which you dedicated with your own name and your own image, whose sanctity is increased by the example you set, of veneration for the gods. Surely, men will now understand what power resides in the gods, when you worship them so fervently."[30] One quarter of all inscriptions referring to temple repairs in North Africa between 276 and 395 date to Diocletian's reign.[31]

Diocletian did not favor Maximian and Hercules to the exclusion of all others, however. He also built temples for Isis and Sarapis at Rome and a temple to Sol in Italy.[32] Diocletian's favored gods did tend to be those that provided for the safety of the whole empire, however, to the disadvantage of local deities in the provinces. In Africa, Diocletian's revival focused on Jupiter, Hercules, Mercury, Apollo, and the Imperial Cult; the cult of Saturn, the romanised Baal-Hammon, was neglected. The same pattern of favoritism appears in Egypt as well: Native Egyptian deities saw no revival, nor was the sacred hieroglyphic script used. Uniformity in worship was central to Diocletian's religious policies.[33]

Diocletian styled himself a "restorer". He urged the public to see his reign, and his governing system, the Tetrarchy, as a renewal of traditional Roman values, and a return to the "Golden Age of Rome" after the anarchic third century.[34] The Diocletianic regime's activist stance, however, and Diocletian's belief in the power of central government to effect major change in morals and society, make him peculiar: Most earlier emperors tended to be quite cautious in their administrative policies, preferring to work within existing structures rather than overhauling them.[35] Diocletian, by contrast, was willing to reform every aspect of public life to satisfy his goals. Under hs rule, coinage, taxation, architecture, law, and history were all radically reconstructed to reflect his authoritarian and conservative ideology. The reformation of the empire's "moral fabric"—and the elimination of religious minorities—was simply the final step in that process.[36]

Persecution was not the only outlet of the Tetrarchy's moral fervor. In 295, either Diocletian or his Caesar (subordinate emperor), Galerius,[37] issued an edict from Damascus proscribing incestuous marriages, and affirming the supremacy of Roman law over local law. (The edict illegalized sibling marriage, which had long been customary in the East.[38]) Its preamble insists that it is every emperor's duty to enforce the sacred precepts of Roman law, for "the immortal gods themselves will favour and be at peace with the Roman name...if we have seen to it that all subject to our rule entirely lead a pious, religious, peaceable and chaste life in every respect".[39] These principles, if given their full extension, would logically require Roman emperors to enforce conformity in religion.[40]

Public support

Christian denominations grew quickly in many parts of the empire (and especially in the East) after 260, when Gallienus brought peace to the Church.[41] The data to calculate the figures are nearly non-existent, but the historian and sociologist Keith Hopkins has given crude and tentative estimates for Christian population in the third century: from a 250 population of 1.1 million, Christian populations grew to 6 million by 300, or about 10% of the empire's total population.[42] Christians even expanded into the countryside, where they had never been numerous before.[43] Churches in the later third century were no longer as inconspicuous as they had been in the first and second: large churches were prominent in certain major cities throughout the empire;[44] the church in Nicomedia even sat on a hill overlooking the imperial palace.[45] These new churches might have represented not only absolute growth in Christian population, but also the increasing affluence of the Christian community.[46] In some areas where Christians were influential, such as North Africa and Egypt, traditional deities were losing credibility.[47]

It is uncertain exactly how much support there was for policies of persecution within the aristocracy.[48] Christians reached high ranks in Roman government—indeed, Diocletian appointed several Christians to those positions himself,[49] and his wife and daughter may have been sympathetic to the church.[50] There were many individuals willing to be martyrs, and many provincials willing to ignore any persecutionary edicts from the emperors as well. Even the emperor Constantius was known to have disapproved of the policy. The lower classes demonstrated little of the same enthusiastic support they had for earlier persecutions. Perhaps the long-established Church had simply become another accepted part of the peoples' lives.[51]

Within the highest ranks of the imperial administration, however, there were men ideologically opposed to the toleration of Christians, like the philosopher Porphyry of Tyre, and Sossianus Hierocles, governor of Bithynia.[52] Hierocles thought Christian beliefs absurd: if Christians applied their principles consistently, he argued, they would pray to Apollonius of Tyana instead of Jesus. Apollonius' miracles had been far more impressive, and Apollonius never had the temerity to call himself "God".[53] The scriptures were full of "lies and contradictions"; Peter and Paul had peddled falsehoods.[54] In the early 300s, an unidentified philosopher published a pamphlet attacking the Chrisitans. This philosopher, who might have been a pupil of the Neoplatonist Iamblichus, dined repeatedly at the imperial court.[55] Diocletian himself was surrounded by an anti-Christian clique.[56] Pagan intolerance had become socially acceptable once more.[57]

Porphyry, a pupil of Plotinus, was somewhat restrained in his criticism of Christianity, at least in his early works, On the Return of the Soul and Philosophy from Orcales. He had few complaints about Jesus, who he praised as a saintly individual, a "humble" man. Christ's followers, however, he damned as "arrogant".[58] At about 290, Porphyry wrote a fifteen-volume work entitled Against the Christians.[59] In the work, Porphyry expressed his shock at the rapid expansion of Christianity.[60] He also revised his earlier opinions of Jesus, questioning Jesus' exclusion of the rich from the Kingdom of Heaven,[61] and his permissiveness in regards to the demons residing in pigs' bodies.[62] Like Hierocles, he unfavorably compared Jesus to Apollonius of Tyana.[63] Porphyry held that Christians blasphemed by worshiping a human being rather than the Supreme God, and behaved treasonously in forsaking the traditional Roman cult. "To what sort of penalties might we not justly subject people," Porphyry asked, "who are fugitives from their fathers' customs?"[64]

Pagan priests, too, were interested in suppressing any threat to traditional religion.[65] The Christian Arnobius, writing during Diocletian's reign, attributes financial concerns to provisioners of pagan services: "The augurs, the dream interpreters, the soothsayers, the prophets, and the priestlings, ever vain...fearing that their own arts be brought to nought, and that they may extort but scanty contributions from the devotees, now few and infrequent, cry aloud, 'The gods are neglected, and in the temples there is now a very thin attendance. Former ceremonies are exposed to derision, and the time-honoured rites of institutions once sacred have sunk before the superstitions of new religions.'"[66] They believed their ceremonies were hindered by the presence of Christians, who were thought to cloud the sight of oracles and stall the gods' recognition of their sacrifices.[65] By about 290, people began to assert that Christians were the cause of all evils. "From the time when the Christian people began to exist in the world the universe has gone to ruin."[67]

Early persecutions

Christians in the army

At the conclusion of the Persian wars in 299, co-emperors Diocletian and Galerius traveled from Persia to Syrian Antioch (Antakya, Turkey). The Christian rhetor Lactantius records that, at Antioch some time in 299, the emperors were engaged in sacrifice and divination in an attempt to predict the future. The haruspices were unable to read the sacrificed animals, and failed to do so after repeated trials. The master haruspex eventually declared that this failure was the result of interruptions in the process caused by profane men: certain Christians in the imperial household were seen to have made the sign of the cross in an attempt to create a defense against the demons called into service in the pagan ceremonies. Diocletian, enraged by this turn of events, declared that all members of the court need perform their own sacrifice. They sent letters to the military command as well, demanding that the entire army perform the sacrifices or else face discharge.[68] Since there are no reports of bloodshed in Lactantius' narrative, Christians in the imperial household must have survived the event, perhaps after a whipping.[69]

Eusebius of Caesarea tells a similar story: commanders were told to give their troops the choice of sacrifice or loss of rank. These terms were strong—a soldier would lose his career in the military, his state pension and his personal savings—but not fatal. According to Eusebius, the purge was broadly successful, but Eusebius is confused about the technicalities of the event and his characterization of the overall size of the apostasy is ambiguous.[70] Eusebius also attributes the initiative for the purge to Galerius, rather than Diocletian.[71]

Peter Davies surmises that Eusebius is referring to the same event as Lactantius, but that he heard of the event through public rumors, and knew nothing of the privileged discussion at the emperor's private religion ceremony that Lactantius had access to. Since it was Galerius' army that would have been purged—Diocletian had left his in Egypt to quell continuing unrest—Antiochenes would understandably have believed Galerius to be its instigator.[72] The historian David Woods argues instead that Eusebius and Lactantius are referring to completely different events. Eusebius, according to Woods, describes the beginnings of the army purge in Palestine, while Lactantius describes events at court.[73] Woods asserts that the relevant passage in Eusebius' Chronicon was corrupted in the translation to Latin, and that Eusebius' text originally located the beginnings of the army persecution at a fort in Betthorus (El-Lejjun, Jordan).[74]

Eusebius, Lactantius,[75] and Constantine each state that Galerius was the prime impetus for the military purge, and its prime beneficiary.[76] Diocletian, for all his religious conservatism,[77] but still had tendencies towards religious tolerance.[78] Galerius, by contrast, was a devoted and passionate pagan. According to Christian sources, he was consistently the main advocate of such persecution.[79] He was also eager to exploit this position to his own political advantage. Newly prestigious and influential after his victories in the Persian war, Galerius perhaps still smarted at the thought of his humiliating appearance at Antioch, when Diocletian had forced him to walk at the front of the imperial caravan, rather than inside. His resentment fed his discontent with official policies of tolerance; from 302 on, he probably urged Diocletian to enact a general law against the Christians.[80] Since Diocletian was already surrounded by an anti-Christian clique of counsellors, these suggestions must have carried great force.[81]

Manichean persecution

Affairs quieted after the initial persecution. Diocletian remained in Antioch for the following three years. He visited Egypt once, over the winter of 301–2, where he began the grain dole in Alexandria.[82] In Egypt, some Manicheans, followers of the prophet Mani, were decried in the presence of the proconsul of Africa. On March 31, 302, in a rescript from Alexandria, Diocletian, after consultation with the proconsul, ordered that the leading followers of Mani, be burnt alive along with their scriptures. Low-status Manicheans were to be executed; high-status Manicheans were to be sent to work in the quarries of Proconnesus (Marmara Island, Turkey) or the mines of Phaeno. All Manichean property was to be seized and deposited in the imperial treasury.[83]

Diocletian believed quite firmly in these policies, and his religious passion motivated him to use violent and hateful language in their expression. He found much to be offended by in Manichean religion.[84] The proconsul of Africa forwarded Diocletian an anxious inquiry on the Manichees. In late March 302, Diocletian responded: the Manicheans "have set up new and hitherto unheard of sects in opposition to the older creeds so that they might cast out the doctrines vouchsafed to us in the past by divine favour, for the benefit of their own depraved doctrine". He continued: "..our fear is that with the passage of time, they will endeavour...to infect...our whole empire...as with the poison of a malignant serpent". "Ancient religion ought not to be criticized by a new-fangled one", he wrote. The Christians of the empire were vulnerable to the same line of thinking.[85]

Diocletian and Galerius, 302–303

Diocletian was in Antioch in the autumn of 302, when the next instance of persecution occurred. The deacon Romanus had come to the city from Caesarea Maritima, in Syria Palaestina (near modern Caesarea, Israel). Romanus saw many in the city visiting the pagan temples, and was angered. In protest, he visited a court while preliminary sacrifices were taking place and interrupted the ceremonies, decrying the act in a loud voice. He was arrested and sentenced to be set aflame, but Diocletian overruled the decision, and decided that Romanus should have his tongue removed instead. This being done, Romanus was sent to prison, where he would be executed on November 17, 303. The arrogance of this Christian displeased Diocletian, and he left the city and made for Nicomedia for the winter, accompanied by Galerius.[86]

Throughout these years the moral and religious didacticism of the emperors was reaching a fevered pitch; now, at the behest of an oracle, it was to hit its peak.[87] According to Lactantius, Diocletian and Galerius entered into an argument over what imperial policy towards Christians should be while wintering at Nicomedia in 302. Diocletian argued that forbidding Christians from the bureaucracy and military would be sufficient to appease the gods, while Galerius pushed for their extermination. The two men sought to resolve their dispute by sending a messenger to consult the oracle of Apollo at Didyma.[88] Upon returning, the messenger told the court that "the just on earth"[89] hindered Apollo's ability to speak. These "just", Diocletian was informed by members of the court, could only refer to the Christians of the empire. At the behest of his court, Diocletian acceded to demands for a universal persecution.[90]

Great Persecution

First Edict

On February 23, 303, Diocletian ordered that the newly-built Christian church at Nicomedia be razed, its scriptures set to flame, and the treasures of the church collected as treasure.[91] February 23 was the feast of the Termnialia, for Terminus, the god of boundaries. The emperors must have thought it appropriate: It was the day they would terminate Christianity.[92] The next day, Diocletian's first "Edict against the Christians" was published.[93] This ordered the destruction of Christian scriptures, liturgical books, and places of worship across the empire,[94] and prohibited Christians from assembling for worship.[95] Christians were also deprived of the right to petition the courts,[96] making them potential subjects for judicial torture;[97] Christians could not respond to actions brought against them in court;[98] Christian senators, equestrians, decurions, veterans, and soldiers were deprived of their ranks; and imperial freedmen were reduced to the status of slaves.[99]

Diocletian had requested that the edict be pursued "without bloodshed",[100] in spite of Galerius' demands that all those refusing to sacrifice should be burned alive.[101] The practice nevertheless became quite widespread in the East.[102] In spite of Diocletian's request, the death penalty was widely used, following the discretion of local judges.[103] After it was posted, a man on the street named Eutius tore it down and ripped it up, shouting "Here are your Gothic and Sarmatian triumphs!" He was arrested for treason, tortured, and burned alive soon after, thus becoming the edict's first martyr.[104] The provisions of the edict were known and enforced in Palestine by March or April (just before Easter), and was in use by local officials in North Africa by May or June.[105] The earliest martyr at Caesarea was executed on June 7;[106] the edict was in force at Cirta from May 19.[107]

The edict might not actually have been an "edict" in the technical sense; Eusebius does not refer to it as such, and when the Passio Felicis states "exiit edictum imperatorum et Caesarum super omnem faciem terrae", it may simply be as an echo of Luke's Gospel 2:1: "exiit edictum a Caesare Augusto ut profiteretur universus orbis terrae".[108] Elsewhere in the passion, the text is called a programma.[109] The text of the edict itself does not actually survive.[110]

Second, Third, and Fourth Edicts

The First Edict was the sole legally binding edict in the West.[111] In the East, however, progressively harsher legislation was devised. In the summer of 303,[112] following a series of rebellions in Melitene (Malatya, Turkey) and Syria, a Second Edict was published, ordering the arrest and imprisonment of all bishops and priests.[113] The prisons began to fill—they underdeveloped prison system of the time could not handle the deacons, lectors, priests, bishops, and exorcists forced upon them. Eusebius writes that the edict netted so many priests that ordinary criminals were crowded out, and had to be released.[114]

In anticipation of the upcoming twentieth anniversary of his reign on November 20, 303, Diocletian declared a general amnesty in a Third Edict: Any imprisoned clergyman could be freed, so long as they agreed to make a sacrifice to the gods.[115] This was unacceptable to many of the imprisoned, but wardens often managed to obtain at least nominal compliance with the rule. Some of the clergy sacrificed willingly; others did so on pain of torture. Wardens were eager to be rid of the clergy in their midst: Eusebius, in his Martyrs of Palestine, records the case of one man who, after being brought to an altar, had his hands seized and made to complete a sacrificial offering. The clergyman was told that his act of sacrifice had been recognized and was summarily dismissed. Others were told they'd sacrificed even when they'd done nothing.[116]

In 304, the Fourth Edict ordered all persons, men, women, and children, to gather in a public space and offer a collective sacrifice. If they refused, they were to be executed.[117] The precise date of the edict is unknown,[118] but it was probably issued in either January or February 304, and was still being applied in the Balkans in March.[119] This last edict was not enforced at all in the domains of Maximian and Constantius. In the East, it remained applicable until the issue of the Edict of Milan by Constantine and Licinius in 313.[120]

Diocletian and Maximian resigned on May 1, 305. Constantius and Galerius became Augusti, while two new emperors, Severus and Maximinus, took up the office of Caesar.[121] As they left office, Diocletian and Maximian probably imagined Christianity to be in its last throes. Churches had been destroyed, the Church leadership and hierarchy had been snapped, and the army and civil service had been purged. Eusebius declares that apostates from the faith were "countless" (μυρίοι) in number.[122] In the West, however, the loose ends of the Diocletianic settlement were about to bring the whole Tetrarchic tapestry down. Constantine, son of Constantius, and Maxentius, son of Maximian, had been overlooked in the Diocletianic succession, offending the parents and angering the sons.[121] At first, however, the new Tetrarchy seemed to be even more vigorous than the first. Maximinus was particularly eager to persecute.[123] In 306 and 309, he published his own edicts demanding universal sacrifice.[124] Eusebius accuses Galerius of forcefully pressing on with the persecution as well.[125]

Intermittent peace, 311–313

The persecution was officially canceled on April 30, 311[126] (martyrdoms in Gaza, however, continued until May 4).[127] Galerius, now on his deathbed, issued a proclamation declaring an end to hostilities, affording Christians the right to exist under the law, and the benefit of assembly. Persecution was everywhere at an end.[128] Lactantius preserves the Latin text of this pronouncement, describing it as an edict. Eusebius provides a Greek translation of the pronouncement. His version includes imperial titles and an address to provincials, suggesting that the proclamation is, in fact, an imperial letter.[129] The document seems only to have been promulgated in Galerius' provinces.[130]

Among all the other arrangements that we are always making for the benefit and utility of the state, we have heretofore wished to repair all things in accordance with the laws and public discipline of the Romans, and to ensure that even the Christians, who abandoned the practice of their ancestors, should return to good sense. Indeed, for some reason or other, such self-indulgence assailed and idiocy possessed those Christians, that they did not follow the practices of the ancients, which their own ancestors had, perhaps, instituted, but according to their own will and as it pleased them, they made laws for themselves that they observed, and gathered various peoples in diverse areas. Then when our order was issued stating that they should return themselves to the practices of the ancients, many were subjected to peril, and many were even killed. Many more persevered in their way of life, and we saw that they neither offered proper worship and cult to the gods, or to the god of the Christians. Considering the observation of our own mild clemency and eternal custom, by which we are accustomed to grant clemency to all people, we have decided to extend our most speedy indulgence to these people as well, so that Christians may once more establish their own meeting places, so long as they do not act in a disorderly way. We are about to send another letter to our officials detailing the conditions they ought to observe. Consequently, in accord with our indulgence, they ought to pray to their god for our health and the safety of the state, so that the state may be kept safe on all sides, and they may be able to live safely and securely in their own homes.[131]

Galerius' words reinforce the Tetrarchy's theological basis for the persecution; the acts did nothing more than attempt to enforce traditional civic and religious practices (even if the edicts themselves were thoroughly nontraditional). Galerius does nothing to violate the spirit of the persecution—Christians are still admonished for their nonconformity and foolish practices—Galerius never admits that he did anything wrong.[132] The admission that the Christians' god might exist is made only grudgingly.[133] For all its hedging, Galerius' edict remains a landmark moment, an enunciation of the last heaving breath of the persecutionary regime.[134]

It was not effective for long in Maximinus' district. Within seven months of Galerius' proclamation, Maximinus resumed persecution.[135] Persecution would continue in Maximinus' district until 313, soon before his death.[136] At a meeting between Licinius and Constantine in Milan in February 313, the two emperors drafted the terms of a universal peace. The terms of this peace were posted by the victorious Licinius at Nicomedia on June 13, 313.[137] Later ages have taken to calling the document the "Edict of Milan".[138]

We thought it fit to commend these things most fully to your care that you may know that we have given to those Christians free and unrestricted opportunity of religious worship. When you see that this has been granted to them by us, your Worship will know that we have also conceded to other religions the right of open and free observance of their worship for the sake of the peace of our times, that each one may have the free opportunity to worship as he pleases; this regulation is made that we may not seem to detract from any dignity or any religion.

Regional variation

Asia Minor Oriens Danube
Diocletian's provinces (303–5)
26[139]
31[140]
Galerius' provinces (303–5)
14[141]
Galerius' provinces (undatable)
8[142]
Galerius' provinces (305–11)
12[143]
12[144]
After Davies, 68–69.

The enforcement of the persecutionary edicts was inconsistent.[145] In Constantius' realm the persecution was, at most, only lightly enforced;[146] in Maximian's realm, it was firmly enforced; and in the East, under Diocletian and Galerius, its provisions were pursued with more fervor than anywhere else.[147] For the Eastern provinces, Peter Davies tabulated the total number of martyrdoms for an article in the Journal of Theological Studies (His figures count only the number of martyrdoms, not the number of individuals martyred):[148] Davies argues that the figures, although reliant on collections of acta that are both incomplete and only partially reliable, point to a heavier persecution under Diocletian than under Galerius.[149] The historian Simon Corcoran has criticized Davies' paper's over-reliance on these "dubious martyr acts".[150]

Britain and Gaul

The sources are inconsistent regarding the extent of the persecution in Constantius' domain, though all portray it as quite limited. Lactantius states that the destruction of churches was the worst thing that came to pass.[151] Eusebius explicitly denies this in both his Historia Ecclesiastica and his Vita Constantini, although he lists Gaul among the areas suffering from the effects of the persecution in his Martyribus Palestinae.[152] Donatist bishops also declared that "Gaul was immune" (immunis est Gallia) from the persecutions under Constantius.[153] The martyrdom of Saint Alban was once dated to this era, but most now assign it to the reign of Septimius Severus.[154] The second, third and fourth edicts seem not to have been enforced in the West at all.[155] It is possible that Constantius' weak persecutionary spirit was the result of Tetrarchic jealousies: the persecution, after all, had been the project of the Eastern emperors, not the Western ones.[156] After Constantine succeeded his father in 306, he urged the recovery of Church property lost in the persecution, and legislated full freedom for all Christians in his domain.[157]

Africa

While the persecution under Constantius was relatively light, there is no doubt about the force of the persecution in Maximian's domain. Its effects are recorded at Rome, Sicily, Spain, and in Africa[158]—indeed, Maximian encouraged a particularly strict enforcement of the edict in Africa.[159] Africa's political elite were insistent that the persecution be fulfilled,[160] and Africa's Chrisitans (especially in Numidia), were equally insistent on resisting them. For the Numidians, to hand over scriptures was an act of terrible apostasy.[161] Africa had long been home to the "Church of the martyrs"[162]—in Africa, martyrs held more authority than the clergy[163]—and harbored a particularly intransigent, fanatical, and legalistic variety of Christianity.[164] It was thus Africa that gave the West most of its martyrdoms.[165]

Africa had produced martyrs even in the years immediately prior to the Great Persecution. In 298, Maximilian, a soldier in Tebessa, had been tried for refusing to follow military discipline;[166] in Mauretania, again in 298, the soldier Marcellus refused his army bonus and took off his uniform in public.[167] Once persecutions began, public authorities were eager to assert their authority. Anullinus, proconsul of Africa, expanded on the edict, deciding that, in addition to the destruction the Christians' scriptures and churches, the government should compel Christians to sacrifice to the gods.[168] Governor Valerius Florus enforced the same policy in Numidia during the summer or autumn of 303, when he called for "days of incense burning"; Christians would sacrifice or they would lose their lives.[169]

Coercion existed lower down on the administrative scale as well. The curator of Tibiuca arrested a host of church administrators—their priest, two lectors, and church elders—and demanded their scriptures. The administrators told the curator that their bishop, Felix, held the books. The curator kept the churchmen imprisoned until Felix returned. When Felix finally appeared, admitting ownership of the books but refusing to hand them over, the curator sent him to Carthage, where he was sentenced to death. Felix was decapitated on July 15, 303.[170] At Cirta, the curator appeared in church, and confronted its bishop. The bishop protested that he had no scriptures, but could offer the curator some of the church's plate. The curator accepted the plate, but continued the search, eventually discovering that several lectors had hied off with the scriptures. He tracked down these persons, searched their homes, and seized their sacred codices.[171] At Abitinae, Christians declared that they would carry on with their services in their homes, with or without the benefit of Churches, with or without the imperial ban.[172]

The persecution in Africa also encouraged the development of Donatism, a divergent sect that forbade any compromise with Roman authorities or traditor bishops. One of the key moments in the break occurred in Carthage in 304. The Christians from Abitinae had been brought to the city and imprisoned. Friends and relatives of the prisoners came to visit, but encountered resistance from a local mob. The group was harassed, beaten, and whipped; the food they had brought for their imprisoned friends was scattered on the ground. The mob had been sent by Mensurius, the bishop of the city, and Caecilian, his deacon, for reasons that remain obscure.[173] In 311, Caecilian was elected bishop of Carthage. His opponents charged that his traditio made him unworthy of the office, and declared itself for another candidate, Majorinus. Many others in Africa, including the Abitinians, also supported Majorinus against Caecilian. Majorinus' successor Donatus would give the dissident movement its name.[174] By the time Constantine took over the province, the African church was deeply divided.[175] The Donatists would not be reconciled to the Catholic Church until after 411.[176]

Spain and Italy

At Rome, the bishop of the city, Marcellinus, became a traditor; he handed over the holy scriptures to the authorities.[177] What followed this event is unclear, but there seems to have been a break in the episcopal succession: Marcellinus seems to have died on October 25, 304, and had probably been expelled from the church after his apostasy in early 303,[178] but his successor, Marcellus, was not consecrated until either November or December 306. In the meantime, two factions diverged in the Roman church, separating the lapsed, Christians who had complied with the edicts to ensure their own safety, and the rigorists, those who would brook no compromise with authority. These two groups clashed in street fights and riots, eventually leading to murders.[179] Marcellus, a rigorist, purged all mention of Marcellinus from church records, and removed his name from the official list of bishops.[180] Marcellus himself was banished from the city, and died in exile on January 16, 308.[179]

Outside Rome, there are fewer sure details of the progress and effects of the persecution in Italy. The Acta Eulpi records the martyrdom of Euplus in Catania, Sicily, a Christian who had the gall to carry the holy gospels around, refusing to surrender them. Euplus was arrested on April 29, 304, tried, and martyred on August 12, 304.[181] In Spain the bishop Ossius of Corduba later declared himself a confessor.[182] After the abdication of Diocletian and Maximian in 305, and Constantius became Augustus, there were no more active persecutions in the West. Eusebius declares that the persecution lasted "less than two years".[183] There are not many deaths securely attested for the region. In addition to those already listed, there were also Saturninus and the Martyrs of Abitina,[184] another group martyred on February 12, 304 in Carthage,[185] and the martyrs of Milevis.[186]

Nicomedia

Before the end of February, a fire destroyed part of the imperial palace. Galerius convinced Diocletian that the culprits were Christian conspirators who had plotted with palace eunuchs. An investigation into the act was commissioned, but no responsible party was found. Executions followed. The palace eunuchs Dorotheus and Gorgonius were eliminated. One individual, a Peter, was stripped, raised high, and scourged. Salt and vinegar were poured in his wounds, and he was slowly boiled over an open flame. The executions continued until at least April 24, 303, when six individuals, including the bishop Anthimus, were decapitated.[187] The persecution had intensified: Now presbyters and other clergymen could be arrested without having even been accused of a crime, and condemned to death.[188] A second fire appeared sixteen days after the first. Galerius left the city, declaring it unsafe.[189] Diocletian would soon follow.[190]

Lactantius, still living in Nicomedia, saw the beginnings of the apocalypse in Diocletian's persecution. He predicted that in the convulsions following the persecution, nine-tenths of mankind would die, a figure that included one-third of all Christians.[191] He wrote heated prophecies about the End of Days:

As many as believe him and support him shall be marked by him as sheep, but those who refuse his mark shall either flee into the mountains or be seized and slain with exquisite tortures. He will burn righteous men amidst the books of the prophets, and power shall be given him to desolate the earth for forty-two months...The righteous shall separate themselves from the wicked, and flee into the wilderness. When he hears of this, the impious king, inflamed with anger, will come with a great army and surround the mountain on which the righteous are gathered. They, besieged on all sides, will call on God with a loud voice; and He shall hear them, and send from Heaven a Great King to rescue them, and destroy all the wicked with fire and sword.[192]

Palestine

Date Deaths
303–305
13
306–310
34
310–311
44
Palestinian martyrs recorded
in the Martyribus Palestinae.
After Clarke, 657–58.

Palestine is the only region for which an extended local perspective of the persecution exists, in the form of Eusebius' Martyrs of Palestine. Eusebius was resident in Caesarea, the capital of Palestine, for the duration of the persecution, although he also traveled to Phoenicia and Egypt, and perhaps Arabia as well.[193] Eusebius' account is imperfect. It focuses on martyrs that were his personal friends before the persecutions began, and includes martyrs that took place outside of Palestine.[194] Eusebius recognizes some of his faults. At the outset of his account of the general persecution, Eusebius laments the incompleteness of his reportage: "how could one number the multitude of martyrs in each province, and especially those in Africa and Mauretania, and in Thebaid and Egypt?""[195]

Since no one below the status of governor held the legal power to enforce capital punishment, most recalcitrant Christians would have been sent to Caesarea to await punishment.[196] The first martyr, Procopius, was sent to Caesarea from Scythopolis (Beit She'an, Israel), where he had been a reader and an exorcist. He was brought before the governor on June 7, 303. Asked to sacrifice to the gods, and to pour a libation for the emperors, Procopius responded by quoting Homer: "the lordship of many is not a good thing; let there be one ruler, one king". The governor beheaded the man at once.[197]

Further martyrdoms followed. On November 17, 303, the governor, Flavianus, returning to Caesarea from outside the province, tortured and executed Zacchaeus, a deacon from Gadara (Umm Qais, Jordan), and Alpheus of Eleutheropolis (Bayt Jibrin, Israel), a reader and exorcist.[198] More deaths came the next spring, when the new governor, Urbanus, published the fourth edict. Urbanus, on the advice of the pagans of Gaza, executed a man named Timothy for his recalcitrance on May 21, 304.[199] On the same day, Urbanus sentenced Agapius and the Montanist Thecla (also Gazans) to fight wild beasts in the amphitheater. Their executions were delayed, however, until suitable games were held. On the day of the event, six young men followed Urbanus into the amphitheater, showing their support. These six were arrested and held until March 24, 305, when they, too, were executed.[200] Eusebius probably does not list a complete account of all those executed under the fourth edict—he alludes in passing to others imprisoned with Thecla, for example, though he does not name them.[201]

The bulk of Eusebius' account deals with Maximinus.[202] Maximinus took up the office of emperor on May 1, 305, and governed Egypt and the Levant. Maximinus issued his own persecutionary edict in the spring of 306, ordering general sacrifice. Using lists drawn up by the civil service, Maximinus used town criers to call all men, women, and children down to the temples. There, after being called by name, everyone sacrificed.[203] In late 308 or early 309, Maximinus issued his second edict, calling for another general sacrifice, coupled with a general offering of libations. It was even more systematic than the first, allowing no exceptions for infants or servants. Curatores, duumviri, and tabularii, who kept the records, saw to it that there were no evasions. This edict also required food sold in the marketplaces to be covered in libation, and set sentries to stand guard over bathhouses to ensure that all customers sacrificed.[204]

Even after Galerius' edict of toleration in 311, Maximinus continued to persecute. Maximinus issued orders forbidding Christians to congregate in cemeteries in Autumn 311, and began persecuting Church leaders before the year was out. Peter of Alexandria was beheaded on November 26, 311.[205] Lucian of Antioch was executed in Nicomedia on January 7, 312.[206] Many other Egyptian bishops, according to Eusebius, suffered the same fate.[207] According to Lactantius, Maximinus ordered confessors to have "their eyes gouged out, their hands cut off, their feet amputated, their noses or ears severed".[208] Persecution had begun again, and would not cease until Maximinus was defeated at the hands of Licinius in spring 313. Maximinus was compelled to begin unequivocally asserting the full liberty of his Christian citizens.[209]

Evasion

For all the individual cases of martyrdom, Christians were never purged systematically in any part of the empire, and Christian evasion continually undermined the edicts' enforcement.[210] For example, there is the case the Christian Copres, brought to face the court on an unknown matter. His experience shows that Lactantius' complaint that Christians were deprived of all their legal rights because of this edict is exaggerated, but not substantially incorrect. Some Christians refused official requirements to sacrifice before judicial proceedings. Others, like Copres, simply avoided them. A papyrus from Oxyrhynchus preserves a letter Copres wrote to his wife, wherein he declares that he'd visited a court to do business, but, having seen that "those who present themselves in court are being made to sacrifice", decided to give his brother power of attorney. His brother could then sacrifice on his behalf, while continuing to represent his interests.[211]

Others bribed their way out of trouble (Imperial edicts always gave cause to much profiterring). Peter, bishop of Alexandria, issued rules for the lapsed in 306. The rules were much more liberal than those issued in the third century: Where penance had once been extended until death, now the greatest penalty was a mere three or four years' penance. Lesser offenders, such as those who escaped punishment through bribery, could return to the church without penalty; those who had sent slaves or pagans to sacrifice on their behalf were given only minor punishments.[212]

The handing over of sacred scriptures (traditio) was viewed in the West as a terrible sin, and led to post-persecution rigorist reaction and the Donatist schism. The lengthy recriminations of that dispute have preserved many details of the first edict's implementation in Africa.[213] The Acts of the Council of Cirta demonstrate the lengths many clergymen would go to to preserve their scriptures: Donatus of Calama surrendered medical codices in place of scripture, Victor of Rustica did the same with four unreadable gospels, Marinus of Aquae Tibilitanae fobbed investigators off with a random selection of papers.[214] Mensurinus claimed he surrendered only heretical works to authorities.[215] Some, of course, refused to do even this: Bishop Felix was decapitated, and Secundus, bishop of Tigisis, lists many martyrs who were "crowned because they did not surrender".[216]

Legacy

Diocletian's empire-wide persecution has been considered to be one of the bloodiest and most ruthless persecutions in the history of the Roman Empire. The persecution made such an impression on Christians that the Alexandrian church used the start of Diocletian's reign (284) as the epoch for their Era of Martyrs. Another effect of the persecution was the flight of Marinus the Dalmatian to Mount Titano, forming what eventually became the Republic of San Marino. It was also the last time that Christians were systematically persecuted in the Roman Empire, as after Diocletian's retirement most emperors would be Christian, with the notable exception of the pagan Julian the Apostate who made but a small amount of Christian Martryrs in contrast to Diocletian (i.e. see John and Paul).

According to one estimate, a total of 3,000–3,500 Christians were killed in the persecution,[217] while many others suffered torture or imprisonment.[218] In future generations, both Christians and pagans would look back on Diocletian as, in the words of Henry Chadwick, "the embodiment of irrational ferocity".[219]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ Odahl, 67–69; Barnes, CE, 22–25.
  2. ^ Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 503.
  3. ^ Suetonius, Nero 16.2; Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 504.
  4. ^ Tacitus, Annales 15.44.6, qtd. and tr. in Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 504.
  5. ^ Tertullian, Apologetius, 37.2, qtd. and tr. in Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 511.
  6. ^ Clarke, 616; Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 510. See also: Barnes, "Legislation"; de Sainte-Croix, "Persecuted?"; Musurillo, lviii–lxii; and Sherwin-White, "Early Persecutions".
  7. ^ Pliny, Epistaules 10.96; Edwards, 579; Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 506–8.
  8. ^ Martyrium Polycarpi (= Musurillo, 2–21); Eusebius, HE 4.15; Frend, 509 (Smyrna); Martyrium Scillitanarum acta (= Musurillo, 86–89); Frend, 510 (Scilli).
  9. ^ Eusebius, HE 5.1 (= Musurillo, 62–85); Edwards, 587; Frend, 508.
  10. ^ Clarke, 616; Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 510.
  11. ^ Clarke, 616.
  12. ^ Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 511.
  13. ^ Origen, Contra Celsum 3.9, qtd. and tr. in Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 512.
  14. ^ SHA, Septimius Severus, 17.1; Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 511.
  15. ^ Eusebius, HE 6.28; Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 513. Clarke (621–25) argues that other evidence (Cyprian, Epistaules 75.10.1f; Origen Contra Celsus 3.15) undermines Eusebius' picture of Maximin's supposed persecution.
  16. ^ Clarke, 625–27; Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 513; Rives, 135.
  17. ^ Eusebius, HE 6.39.4; Clarke, 632, 634; Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 514.
  18. ^ Clarke, 635; Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 514.
  19. ^ Cyprian, De lapsis 8; Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 514.
  20. ^ Martyrium Pionii 15 (= Musurillo, 156–57); Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 514.
  21. ^ Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 514.
  22. ^ Eusebius, HE 7.10.3, qtd. and tr. in Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 515.
  23. ^ Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 516.
  24. ^ Eusebius, HE 7.15; Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 517.
  25. ^ Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 517.
  26. ^ Williams, 161.
  27. ^ Bowman, "Diocletian", 70–71; Corcoran, "Before Constantine", 40; Liebeschuetz, 235–52, 240–43; Odahl, 43–44; Williams, 58–59.
  28. ^ Williams, 58–59.
  29. ^ Williams, 161–62.
  30. ^ Panegyrici Latini 11(3)6, tr. Williams, 162.
  31. ^ C. Lepelley, Les Cités de l'Afrique romaine au Bas Empire, volume 1, Paris: Études Augustiniennes, 1979, cited in Frend, "Prelude", 3.
  32. ^ Williams, 161–62.
  33. ^ Frend, "Prelude", 4.
  34. ^ ILS 617, 641, 618 qtd. in Potter, 296; Frend, "Prelude", 3; Lane Fox, 593. See also Millar, 182, on Tetrarchic triumphalism in the Near East.
  35. ^ Potter, 336.
  36. ^ Potter, 333.
  37. ^ Barnes, CE, 19, 295 n.50; NE, 62 n.76.
  38. ^ Barnes, CE, 295 n.50.
  39. ^ Mosiacarum et Romanarum Legum Collatio 6.4, tr. in Clarke, 649; Barnes, CE, 19–20.
  40. ^ Barnes, CE, 20. See also: Lane Fox, 594.
  41. ^ Davies, 93.
  42. ^ Hopkins, 191. Hopkins assumes a constant growth rate of 3.35% per annum. Hopkins' study is cited at Potter, 314. The historian Robin Lane Fox gives a smaller estimate, of 4% or 5%, but allows that Christian numbers grew as a result of the hardship of the years from 250 to 280 (590–92). See also: Rodney Stark, The Rise of Christianity: A Sociologist Reconsiders History (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996).
  43. ^ Frend, "Prelude", 2.
  44. ^ Keresztes, 379; Lane Fox, 587; Potter, 314.
  45. ^ Keresztes, 379; Potter, 314.
  46. ^ Keresztes, 379. Clarke (615), however, cautions against reading a spectacular advancement in the numbers and social status of Christians into this data.
  47. ^ Frend, "Prelude", 2.
  48. ^ Barnes, CE, 21.
  49. ^ Eusebius, HE 7.23, 8.14, 8.6.2–4, 8.97, 8.11.2; Keresztes, 379; Potter, 337, 661 n.16.
  50. ^ Lactantius, DMP 15.2; Keresztes, 379; Potter, 337, 661 n.16.
  51. ^ Barnes, CE, 21; Clarke, 621–22. Clarke cautions, however, that this shift in attitudes may simply be an artifact of the source material.
  52. ^ Barnes, CE, 21–22.
  53. ^ Lactantius, DI 5.2.12–13; Digeser, Christian Empire, 5.
  54. ^ Lactantius, DI 5.2.3; Frend, "Prelude", 13.
  55. ^ Lactantius, DI 5.2.3ff; Barnes, CE, 22.
  56. ^ Aurelius Victor describes the circle around Diocletian as an imminentium scrutator (Aurelius Victor, Caes. 39.48; Kersetzes, 381); Lactantius describes it as a scrutator rerum futurarum (Lactantius, DMP 10.1; Kersetzes, 381).
  57. ^ Barnes, CE, 22.
  58. ^ Augustine, De Citivae Dei 10.29, qtd. and tr. in Frend, "Prelude", 9.
  59. ^ Frend, "Prelude", 10. Later dates are possible, but discouraged by the statement in the Suda that Porphyry only "survived until [the reign] of Diocletian" (π,2098, qtd. and tr. Frend, "Prelude", 10 n.64). See also: Barnes, "Porphyry's Against the Christians"; Croke; and Digeser, "Religious Toleration".
  60. ^ Frend, "Prelude", 10–11.
  61. ^ Porphyry frg. 58; Frend, "Prelude", 12.
  62. ^ Porphyry frg. 49; Frend, "Prelude", 12.
  63. ^ Porphyry frg. 60, 63; Frend, "Prelude", 12.
  64. ^ Porphyry frg. 1, tr. Digeser, Christian Empire, 6; Frend, "Prelude", 13 n.89.
  65. ^ a b Davies, 92.
  66. ^ Arnobius, Adversus Nationes, 1.24, quoted in Davies, 79–80, from a translation by Bryce and Campbell.
  67. ^ Arnobius, Adversus Nationes, 1.1.9, qtd. and tr. in Frend, "Prelude", 14.
  68. ^ Lactantius, DMP 10.1–5; Barnes, "Sossianus Hierocles", 245; Barnes, CE, 18–19; Davies, 78–79; Helgeland, 159; Liebeschuetz, 246–8; Odahl, 65. Helgeland (159) places the event in 301. Barnes ("Sossianus Hierocles", 245) first argues for a date of 302 or "not long before"; but later (CE, 18–19) accepts a date of 299.
  69. ^ Keresztes, 380.
  70. ^ Eusebius, HE 8.4.2–3; Barnes, "Sossianus Hierocles", 246; Helgeland, 159.
  71. ^ Davies, 89–92.
  72. ^ Davies, 89–92.
  73. ^ Woods, "'Veturius'", 588.
  74. ^ Woods, "'Veturius'", 589.
  75. ^ Lactantius, DMP 10.6, 31.1; Eusebius, HE 8, app. 1, 3; Barnes, CE, 19, 294; Keresztes, 381.
  76. ^ Constantine, Oratio ad Coetum Sanctum 22; Barnes, CE, 19, 294. The identification of Constantine's unnamed emperor with Galerius has been disputed by Davies, 82–83.
  77. ^ Barnes, CE, 20; Corcoran, "Before Constantine", 51; Odahl, 54–56, 62.
  78. ^ Barnes (CE, 19–21) argues that Diocletian was prepared to tolerate Christianity—he did, after all, live within sight of Nicomedia's Christian church, and his wife and daughter were, if not Christians themselves (Eusebius, HE 8.1.3; Lactantius, DMP 15.1), at least sympathetic to the faith—but was sucessively brought closer and closer to intolerance under Galerius' influence. For a skeptical view, see Davies, 66–94.
  79. ^ Jones, 71; Liebschuetz, 235–52, 246–48. Contra: Davies, 66–94.
  80. ^ Barnes, CE, 19.
  81. ^ Corcoran, Empire, 261; Keresztes, 381.
  82. ^ Barnes, CE, 19.
  83. ^ ILS 660; Mosiacarum et Romanarum Legum Collatio 25.36–8; Barnes, CE, 20; Clarke, 648.
  84. ^ Lactantius, DMP 33.1; Barnes, CE, 20.
  85. ^ Mosiacarum et Romanarum Legum Collatio 15.3.3f, tr. in Clarke, 648; Clarke 647–48.
  86. ^ Barnes, CE, 20–21.
  87. ^ Lane Fox, 595.
  88. ^ Lactantius, DMP 10.6–11; Barnes, CE, 21; Odahl, 67.
  89. ^ Eusebius, VC 2.50. Davies (80 n.75) believes that this should be re-written as "the profane on earth".
  90. ^ Barnes, CE, 21; Elliott, 35–36; Kersetzes, 381; Lane Fox, 595; Liebeschuetz, 235–52, 246–48; Odahl, 67; Potter, 338.
  91. ^ Barnes, CE, 22; Clarke, 650; Odahl, 67–69; Potter, 337.
  92. ^ Lactantius, DMP, 12.1; Barnes, CE, 21; Keresztes, 381.
  93. ^ Barnes, CE, 22; Clarke, 650; Potter, 337; de Ste Croix, "Aspects", 75; Williams, 176.
  94. ^ Eusebius, HE 8.2.4; MP praef. 1; 21; Optatus, Appendix 2; Barnes, CE, 22; Clarke, 650; Liebeschuetz, 249–50; Potter, 337; de Ste Croix, "Aspects", 75. This apparently included any house in which scriptures might be found (Optatus, Appendix 2, cited in De Ste Croix, "Aspects", 75).
  95. ^ Eusebius, HE 9.10.8; Barnes, CE, 22; De Ste Croix, "Aspects", 75; Liebeschuetz, 249–50.
  96. ^ Clarke, 650–51; Potter, 337; de Ste Croix, "Aspects", 75–76.
  97. ^ Clarke, 650; de Ste Croix, "Aspects", 75–76.
  98. ^ Clarke, 650–51; Potter, 337.
  99. ^ Clarke, 650–51; Potter, 337; de Ste Croix, "Aspects", 75–76.
  100. ^ Lactantius, DMP 11.8, quoted in Clarke, 651; Keresztes, 381.
  101. ^ Lactantius, DMP 11.8; Keresztes, 381.
  102. ^ Keresztes, 381.
  103. ^ Clarke, 651.
  104. ^ Lactantius, DMP 13.2; Eusebius, HE 8.5.1; Barnes, CE, 22; Corcoran, Empire, 179; Wiliams, 176. The quotation is from Williams.
  105. ^ Eusebius, HE 8.2.4; MP praef.; Acta Felicis (= Musurillo, 266–71); Corcoran, Empire, 180; Clarke, 651; Kersetzes, 382; Potter, 337.
  106. ^ Eusebius, MP 1.1–2; Corcoran, Empire, 180.
  107. ^ Optatus, Appendix 1; Corcoran, Empire, 180.
  108. ^ The Old Latin pre-Vulgate version is given here, from Corcoran, Empire, 179–80.
  109. ^ Corcoran, Empire, 180.
  110. ^ Corcoran, Empire, 179.
  111. ^ Barnes, CE, 23; Corcoran, Empire, 181–82.
  112. ^ Corcoran, Empire, 181.
  113. ^ Eusebius, HE 8.2.5; 8.6.8–9; MP Praef. 2; Barnes, CE, 24; Corcoran, Empire, 181; de Ste Croix, "Aspects", 76.
  114. ^ Eusebius, HE 8.2.4; Barnes, CE, 24; de Ste Croix, "Aspects", 76.
  115. ^ Eusebius, HE 8.2.5; 8.6.10; MP Praef. 2; Barnes, CE, 24; Corcoran, Empire, 181–82; de Ste Croix, "Aspects", 76–77.
  116. ^ Eusebius, MP (S), Praef. 2; (S) 1.3–4; (L) 1.5b; HE 8.2.5, 6.10, cited in Barnes, CE, 24; Corcoran, Empire, 181–82; de Ste Croix, "Aspects", 76–77; Kersetzes, 383.
  117. ^ Eusebius, MP 3.1; Barnes, CE, 24; Liebeschuetz, 249–50; de Ste Croix, "Aspects", 77.
  118. ^ Baynes, "Two Notes", 189; de Ste Croix, "Aspects", 77.
  119. ^ de Ste Croix, "Aspects", 77.
  120. ^ Liebeschuetz, 250–51.
  121. ^ a b Barnes, CE, 26–27; Odahl, 72–74; Southern, 152–53.
  122. ^ Eusebius, HE 8.3.1, qtd. in Clarke, 655.
  123. ^ Clarke, 655.
  124. ^ Eusebius MP 4.8, 9.2; Kersetzes, 384.
  125. ^ Eusebius, HE 8.14.9ff; Clarke, 655.
  126. ^ Clarke, 656; Corcoran, Empire, 186.
  127. ^ Eusebius, MP 9.4–13.10; Clarke, 656.
  128. ^ Clarke, 656.
  129. ^ Lactatnius, DMP 33.11–35; Eusebius, HE 8.16.1; 7.17.1–11; Corcoran, Empire, 186.
  130. ^ Eusebius, HE 9.1.1; Corcoran, Empire, 186, 186 n.68.
  131. ^ Lactantius, DMP 34.1–5, qtd. and tr. in Potter, 355–56. Cf. Clarke, 656–57, for a translation from J.L. Creed.
  132. ^ Potter, 356.
  133. ^ Clarke, 657.
  134. ^ Clarke, 657; Potter, 356.
  135. ^ Eusebius, HE 9.2.1; Clarke, 659.
  136. ^ Barnes, CE, 149.
  137. ^ Lactantius, DMP 45.1, 48.2; Clarke, 662–63.
  138. ^ The document is actually a letter, not an edict. The two can be distinguished by the presence of a specific addressee on a letter, and the absence of one on an edict (Corcoran, Empire, 2). The version of the document preserved by Lactantius (DMP 48.2–12) is a letter to the governor of Bithynia, and was presumably posted in Nicomedia after Licinius had taken the city from Maximinus. Eusebius' version (HE 10.5.2–14) is probably a copy sent to the governor of Palestine and posted in Caesarea (Corcoran, Empire, 158–59).
  139. ^ BHG 63, 198, 292, 297, 352, 452 (= BHL 2047), 548, 619 (= BHL 2708), 749, 972, 1165, 1219, 1383, 1515, 1542, 1781, 1850, 2058, 2443 (= BHL 8115), 2464, 2466; BHL 481, 2321, 3858, 5921, 6757a; Davies, 68 n.6.
  140. ^ BHG 163, 193, 299z, 313y (= BHL 1801), 469 (= BHL 2077), 659, 965, 970, 1171, 127, 1418z, 1513y (= BHG 1846 = BHL 6803), 1612, 1884, 2023, 2048, 2052, 2069, 2108, 2428, 2440; BHL 722, 1967, 3081, 4054, 5240, 5980, 7598, 7981, 8091, 8354a; Davies, 68 n.7.
  141. ^ BHG 34 (= BHL 118), 265z, 491, 1238, 1330; BHL 414, 1836, 3054, 4466, 4555, 5811, 6834, 6869; Davies, 69 n.8.
  142. ^ BHG 48, 144, 1239, 1784, 2399; BHL 2115, 2268, 7035; Davies, 69 n.9.
  143. ^ BHG 27 (= BHL 3744), 213 (= BHL 913), 616, 658 (= BHL 2833), 962z (= BHL 4522), 1272z, 1412z (= BHL 6429), 2053, 2139, 2173, 2319; BHL 6087; Davies, 69 n.10.
  144. ^ BHG 13, 39, 496 (= BHL 2122), 572, 656, 1549 (= BHL 6866), 1760 (= BHL 8077), 2109; BHL 280, 1021, 7595, 8469; Davies, 69 n.11.
  145. ^ Clarke, 651; Kersetzes, 384–85.
  146. ^ Clarke, 651.
  147. ^ Lane Fox, 596; Williams, 180.
  148. ^ Davies, 68.
  149. ^ Davies, 68–69.
  150. ^ Corcoran, Empire, 261 n.58.
  151. ^ Lactantius, DMP 15.7; Clarke, 651.
  152. ^ Eusebius, HE 8.13.13; VC 1.13; MP 13.12; Clarke, 651, 651 n.149.
  153. ^ Optatus, 1.22; Clarke, 651 n.149.
  154. ^ Charles Thomas, Christianity in Roman Britain to AD 500 (London: Batsford, 1981), 48–50, cited in Corcoran, Empire, 180.
  155. ^ Corcoran, Empire, 181–82.
  156. ^ Clarke, 651.
  157. ^ Lactantius, DMP 24.9; Clarke, 652.
  158. ^ Barnes, CE, 23; Clarke, 651.
  159. ^ Barnes, CE, 23.
  160. ^ Barnes, CE, 23.
  161. ^ Willams, 177.
  162. ^ Frend, "Genesis and Legacy", 510.
  163. ^ Martyrium Perpetuae et Felicitatis 13.1 (= Musurillo, 106–31); Tilley, "North Africa", 391.
  164. ^ Edwards, 585; Tilley, "North Africa", 387, 395; Williams, 179.
  165. ^ Williams, 179.
  166. ^ Acta Maximiliani (= Musurillo, 244–49); Tilley, The Bible, 45–46.
  167. ^ Acta Marcelli (= Musurillo, 250–59); Tilley, The Bible, 46.
  168. ^ Optatus, Appendix 2; Barnes, CE, 23.
  169. ^ Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum 8.6700, quoted and translated in Barnes, CE, 23.
  170. ^ Acta Felicis (= Musurillo, 266–71); Barnes, CE, 23; Williams, 179.
  171. ^ Optatus, Appendix 1; Barnes, CE, 23.
  172. ^ Ruinart, Acta Sincera; Williams, 179.
  173. ^ Acts of the Abitinian Martyrs 20 (= Tilley, Martyr Stories, 44–46); Tilley, Martyr Stories, xi; The Bible, 9, 57–66.
  174. ^ Tilley, The Bible, 10.
  175. ^ Barnes, CE, 56.
  176. ^ Tilley, Martyr Stories, xi.
  177. ^ Augustine, Contra Litteras Petiliani 2.92.202; De Unico Baptismo 16.27; Barnes, CE, 38, 303 n.100.
  178. ^ Chronica Minora 1.75; Barnes, CE, 38, 303 n.103.
  179. ^ a b Damasus, Epigrammata 48 = Inscriptiones Latinae Christianae Veteres 962; Chronica Minora 1.70; Martyrologium Hieronymianum, under January 16; Barnes, CE, 38, 304 n.106.
  180. ^ Chronica Minora 1.70–72; Barnes, CE, 38, 303–4 n.105.
  181. ^ Acta Eupli (= Musurillo, 310–19); Clarke, 651, 651 n.151.
  182. ^ Athanasius, Hisoria Arianorum ad monachos 44.1; Clarke, 651.
  183. ^ Eusebius, MP 13.12, qtd. in Clarke, 652.
  184. ^ Partrologia Latina 8.689; Tilley, Martyr Stories, 25–49; Clarke, 652 n.153.
  185. ^ Augustine, Breviculus collationis cum Donatistis 3.17.32; Clarke, 652 n.153.
  186. ^ Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum 8.6700 (19353); Clarke, 652 n.153.
  187. ^ Barnes, CE, 24; Lane Fox, 596; Williams, 178. See also: Kersetzes, 382.
  188. ^ Williams, 178.
  189. ^ Barnes, CE, 24; Southern, 168; Williams, 177.
  190. ^ Barnes, CE, 24.
  191. ^ Lactantius, DI 7; Williams, 178.
  192. ^ Lactantius, DI 7, qtd. in Williams, 180–81.
  193. ^ Barnes, CE, 148–50.
  194. ^ Barnes, CE, 154–55.
  195. ^ Eusebius, HE 8.6.10, qtd. and tr. in Kersetzes, 389.
  196. ^ Barnes, CE, 150.
  197. ^ Eusebius, MP (L) 1.1ff; Barnes, CE, 150–51.
  198. ^ Eusebius, MP (L) 1.5; Barnes, CE, 151.
  199. ^ Eusebius, MP 3.1; Barnes, CE, 151, 356 n.27.
  200. ^ Eusebius, MP 3.2ff; Barnes, CE, 151.
  201. ^ Eusebius, MP (L) 3.2; Barnes, CE, 151.
  202. ^ Kersetzes, 389.
  203. ^ Eusebius, MP 4.8; Kersetzes, 384.
  204. ^ Eusebius, MP 9.2; Kersetzes, 384.
  205. ^ Eusebius, HE 9.6.2; Clarke, 660.
  206. ^ Eusebius, HE 9.6.3; Clarke, 660.
  207. ^ Eusebius, HE 9.6.2; Clarke, 660.
  208. ^ Lactantius, DMP 36.7, qtd. and tr. in Clarke, 660.
  209. ^ Eusebius, HE 9.10.10f; Clarke, 661–62.
  210. ^ Clarke, 651; Lane Fox, 597–98.
  211. ^ Oxyrhynchus Papyri 2601, tr. J.R. Rhea, quoted in Barnes, "Constantine and the Bishops", 382; Lane Fox, 598.
  212. ^ Canons, in Martin Routh, Reliquiae Sacrae (Oxoni: E Typographeo Academico, 1846–48): 23–45, 52ff; Canon 3; 11; 6–7, cited in Lane Fox, 597–98, 773 n.5.
  213. ^ Clarke, 651–52.
  214. ^ Augustine, Contra Cresconium 3.27.30; Clarke, 652.
  215. ^ Augustine, Breviculus collationis cum Donatistis 3.13.25; Clarke, 652.
  216. ^ Augustine, Contra Cresconium 3.27.30, cited and translated in Clarke, 652.
  217. ^ W.H.C. Frend, as cited by Liebeschuetz, 251–52.
  218. ^ Liebeschuetz, 252.
  219. ^ Chadwick, 179.

References

Primary sources

  • Arnobius. Adversus Nationes ('Against the Heathen) ca. 295–300. Translation.
  • Bibliotheca Hagiographica Graeca (Brussels: Society of Bollandists, 1909; BHG in citations)
  • Bibliotheca Hagiographica Latina (Brussels: Society of Bollandists, 1898–1911; BHL in citations)
  • Dessau, Hermann. Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae (Berlin: Weidmann, 1892–1916; ILS in citations)
  • Eusebius of Caesarea. Historia Ecclesiastica (Church History; HE in citations) first seven books ca. 300, eighth and ninth book ca. 313, tenth book ca. 315, epilogue ca. 325. Books Eight and Nine. Translation.
  • Eusebius of Caesarea. De Martyribus Palestinae (On the Martyrs of Palestine; MP in citations). Translation.
  • Eusebius of Caesarea. Vita Constantini (The Life of the Blessed Emperor Constantine; VC in citations) ca. 336–39. Translation.
  • Lactantius. Divinae Institutiones (The Divine Institutes; DI in citatios) ca. 303–311. Translation.
  • Lactantius. Liber De Mortibus Persecutorum (Book on the Deaths of the Persecutors; DMP in citations) ca. 313–15. Translation.
  • Musurillo, Herbert, trans. The Acts of the Christian Martyrs. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972.
  • Optatus. Contra Parmenianum Donatistam (Against the Donatists) ca. 366–367. Translation.
  • Porphyry. Fragments. Translation.
  • Tilley, Maureen A, trans. Donatist Martyr Stories: The Church in Conflict in Roman North Africa. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 1996.

Secondary sources

  • Barnes, Timothy D. "Legislation Against the Christians." Journal of Roman Studies 58:1–2 (1968): 32–50.
  • Barnes, Timothy D. "Sossianus Hierocles and the Antecedents of the "Great Persecution"." Journal of Roman Studies 80 (1976): 239–252.
  • Barnes, Timothy D. Constantine and Eusebius (CE in citations). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981. ISBN 978-0674165311
  • Barnes, Timothy D. The New Empire of Diocletian and Constantine (NE in citations). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982. ISBN 0783722214
  • Barnes, Timothy D. "Scholarship or Propaganda? Poprphyry Against the Christians and its Historical Setting." Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 39 (1994): 53–65.
  • Barnes, Timothy D. "Review: Constantine and the Bishops: The Politics of Intolerance." Phoenix 54:3–4 (2000): 381–383.
  • Barnes, Timothy D. "Monotheists All?" Phoenix 55:1–2 (2001): 142–162.
  • Baynes, Norman H. "Two Notes on the Great Persecution." The Classical Quarterly 18:3–4 (1924): 189–194.
  • Chadwick, Henry. The Church in Ancient Society: From Galilee to Gregory the Great. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.
  • Clarke, Graeme. "Third-Century Christianity." In The Cambridge Ancient History, Volume XII: The Crisis of Empire, edited by Alan Bowman, Averil Cameron, and Peter Garnsey, 589–671. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005. ISBN 0-521-30199-8
  • Corcoran, Simon. The Empire of the Tetrarchs, Imperial Pronouncements and Government AD 284–324. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996. ISBN 0-19-814984-0
  • Corcoran, Simon. "Before Constantine." In The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Constantine, edited by Noel Lenski, 35–58. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Hardcover ISBN 0-521-81838-9 Paperback ISBN 0-521-52157-2
  • Davies, P.S. "The Origin and Purpose of the Persecution of AD 303." Journal of Theological Studies 40:1 (1989): 66–94.
  • Digeser, Elizabeth DePalma. The Making of a Christian Empire: Lactantius and Rome. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2000. ISBN 0801435943
  • Edwards, Mark. "Christianity, A.D. 70–192." In The Cambridge Ancient History, Volume XII: The Crisis of Empire, edited by Alan Bowman, Averil Cameron, and Peter Garnsey, 573–588. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005. ISBN 0-521-30199-8
  • Elliott, T. G. The Christianity of Constantine the Great. Scranton, PA: University of Scranton Press, 1996. ISBN 0-940866-59-5
  • Fox, Robin Lane. Pagans and Christians. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1986. ISBN 0-394-55495-7
  • Frend, W.H.C. "Prelude to the Great Persecution: The Propaganda War." Journal of Ecclesiastical History 38:1 (1987): 1–18.
  • Frend, W.H.C. "Persecutions: Genesis and Legacy." In The Cambridge History of Christianity, Volume I: Origins to Constantine, edited by Margaret M. Mitchell and Frances M. Young, 503–523. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006. ISBN 978-0-521-81239-9
  • Helgeland, John. "Christians and the Roman Army A.D. 173–337." Church History 43:2 (1974): 149–163, 200.
  • Hopkins, Keith. "Christian Number and Its Implications." Journal of Early Christian Studies 6:2 (1998): 185–226.
  • Jones, A.H.M. The Later Roman Empire, 284–602: A Social, Economic and Administrative Survey. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1964.
  • Keresztes, Paul. "From the Great Persecution To the Peace of Galerius." Vigiliae Christianae 37:4 (1983): 379–399.
  • Liebeschuetz, J. H. W. G. Continuity and Change in Roman Religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979. ISBN 0-19-814822-4.
  • Millar, Fergus. The Roman Near East, 31 B.C.–A.D. 337. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993. Hardcover ISBN 0-674-77885-5 Paperback ISBN 0-674-77886-3
  • Odahl, Charles Matson. Constantine and the Christian Empire. New York: Routledge, 2004. Hardcover ISBN 0-415-17485-6 Paperback ISBN 0-415-38655-1
  • Potter, David S. The Roman Empire at Bay: AD 180–395. New York: Routledge, 2005. Hardcover ISBN 0-415-10057-7 Paperback ISBN 0-415-10058-5
  • Rives, J.B. "The Decree of Decius and the Religion of the Empire." Journal of Roman Studies 89 (1999): 135–154.
  • de Sainte-Croix, G.E.M. "Aspects of the Great Persecution." Harvard Theological Review 47 (1954): 75–113.
  • de Sainte-Croix, G.E.M. "Why Were the Early Christians Persecuted?" Past & Present 26 (1963): 6–38.
  • Sherwin-White, A.N. "The Early Persecutions and Roman Law Again." Journal of Theological Studies 3:2 (1952), 199–213.
  • Tilley, Maureen A. The Bible in Christian North Africa: The Donatist World. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997. ISBN 0-8006-2880-2
  • Tilley, Maureen A. "North Africa." In The Cambridge History of Christianity, Volume I: Origins to Constantine, edited by Margaret M. Mitchell and Frances M. Young, 381–396. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006. ISBN 978-0-521-81239-9
  • Williams, Stephen. Diocletian and the Roman Recovery. New York: Routledge, 1997. ISBN 0-415-91827-8
  • Woods, David. "'Veterius' and the Beginning of the Diocletianic Persecution." Mnemosyne 54:5 (2001): 587–591.

Further reading

  • Barnes, Timothy D. "Porphyry's Against the Christians: Date and the Attribution of Fragments." Journal of Theological Studies 24:2 (1973): 424–442.
  • Burgess, R.W. "The Date of the Persecution of Christians in the Army." Journal of Theological Studies 47:1 (1996): 157–158.
  • Corsaro, Francesco. "L'imperatore Licinio e la legislazione filocristiana dal 311 al 313." Studi in onore di Cesare Sanfilippo (Università di Catania: Pubblicazioni della Facoltà di Giurisprudenza, 96), 3 (1983): 155–186.
  • Croke, Brian. "The Era of Porphyry's Anti-Christian Polemic." Journal of Religious History 13:1 (1984): 1–14.
  • Dearn, Alan. "The Abitinian Martyrs and the Outbreak of the Donatist Schism." Journal of Ecclesiastical History 55:1 (2004): 1–18.
  • Digeser, Elizabeth DePalma. "Lactantius, Porphyry, and the Debate over Religious Toleration." Journal of Roman Studies 88 (1998): 129–146.
  • Digeser, Elizabeth DePalma. "An Oracle of Apollo at Daphne and the Great Persecution." Classical Philology 99:1 (2004): 57–77.
  • Duncan-Jones, Richard P. "An African Saint and his Interrogator." Journal of Theological Studies 25 (1974): 106–110.
  • Frend, W.H.C. The Donatist Church: A Movement of Protest in Roman North Africa. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1952.
  • Frend, W.H.C. "The Failure of the Persecutions in the Roman Empire." Past and Present 16:1 (1959): 10–30.
  • de Sainte-Croix, G.E.M. Christian Persecution, Martyrdom, and Orthodoxy. Edited by Michael Whitby and Joseph Streeter. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2006. ISBN 978-0199278121
  • Schott, Jeremy M. "Porphyry on Christians and Others: "Barbarian Wisdom," Identity Politics, and Anti-Christian Polemics on the Eve of the Great Persecution." Journal of Early Christian Studies 13:3 (2005): 277–314.
  • Simmons, Michael Bland. Arnobius of Sicca: Religious Conflict and Competition in the Age of Diocletian. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995.
  • Tabernee, William. "Eusebius’ "Theology of Persecution": As Seen in the Various Editions of his Church History." Journal of Early Christian Studies 5:3 (1997): 319–334.
  • Woods, David. "Two Notes on the Great Persecution." Journal of Theological Studies 43:1 (1992): 128–134.

External links

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Diocletianic_Persecution&oldid=244756865"