Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T09:25:58.200Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Aspects of the “Great” Persecution*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 August 2011

G. E. M. de Ste. Croix
G. E. M. de Ste. Croix
Affiliation:
New College, Oxford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The ‘Great’ Persecution, of the years 303 to 312/3, requires thorough reconsideration. This paper will discuss certain features of the persecution, and, without attempting to present a complete picture, will suggest some modifications in the received view.

Type
Research Article
Information
Harvard Theological Review , Volume 47 , Issue 2 , April 1954 , pp. 75 - 113
Copyright
Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1954

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Optat., Append. II, pp. 200, 202 (ed. C. Ziwsa, CSEL XXVI): ‘ubi scripturae inveniuntur, (et) ipsa domus diruitur.’

2 Euseb. Hist. Eccles. VIII 2.4; Mart. Pal. Praef. 1; 2.1; Optat., Append. II, pp. 198–9; cf. Lactant. De Mort. Pers. 12.

3 Eus. HE VIII 2.4; MP Praef. 1; Optat., Append I, pp. 186–8; II, p. 199; Augustine c. Cresc. III 27.30; Conc. Arelat. I, Can. 13; and several Passions cited later.

4 Eus. HE IX 10.8; and the Passions of the martyrs of Abitina and Philip of Heraclea.

5 Lact. MP 13.1; cf. 15.5.

6 I.é. senators (clarissimi), those of equestrian status (perfectissimi, egregii), decurions, veterans, and to some extent soldiers.

7 Lact. MP 13.1; Eus. HE VIII 2.4; MP Praef. 1. Thus the privileged classes would become liable to torture and the more savage punishments normally reserved for the lower orders.

8 Cf. the Caesariani of the Valerianic persecuting edict (Cypr. Epist. LXXX 1). See Jones, in J. Rom. Stud. XXXIX (1949) at p. 46Google Scholar; Baynes in Camb. Anc. Hist. XII 666 and nn. 1–4.

9 Eus. HE VIII 2.4; MP Praef. 1.

10 XII 666–7.

11 Eus. HE VIII 6.8–9; cf. MP Praef. 2.

12 Opinions still differ regarding this date, but it is not necessary to discuss the question here. Contrast W. Seston, Dioclétien et la Tétrarchie I 49–51, with W. Ensslin in Pauly-Wissowa, Realenc, 2te Reihe, VII ii, 2423–4.

13 Eus. HE VIII 6.10; MP Praef. 2. Despite the language of the former passage, it seems unlikely that torture was prescribed as a penalty for recusants.

14 1.3–4. Cf. the 14th ‘canon’ of the episcopal letter of Peter of Alexandria (p. 84 and n. 44 below).

15 Eus. MP 3.1: θύειν τε καὶ σπένδειν. The records of martyrdoms suggest that offering incense or pouring a libation could be accepted as sufficient.

16 See Baynes in Cl. Quart. XVIII (1924) at pp. 189–92. It should, however, be realized that of the Balkan martyrdoms discussed by B. only those of Agape, Chione and Irene (March and April, at Thessalonica) are securely dated to 304. For an outline of the views adopted here about the divisions of the empire among the tetrarchs, see Appendix II below. For a criticism of the theory about the origin of E 4 advanced by Baynes, see Appendix III below.

17 HE VII 13; cf. 30.19; VIII 1.1–6. On this very thorny question, see esp. the excellent summary of Baynes in Camb. Anc. Hist. XII 655–6.

18 See esp. the edict of Maximin of 313 (Eus. HE IX 10.8), where the whole persecution is summed up in the words, τὰς συνόδους τῶν χριστιανῶν ἐξῃρῆσθαι.

19 MP 11.8.

20 E.g. H. J. Lawlor and J. E. L. Oulton, Eusebius, II 272: the death penalty would have been ‘a violation of the First Edict.’

21 See Appendix IV below.

22 Cf. CTh XVI 5.34 (398), where the death penalty is specifically prescribed for Eunomians and Montanists who fail to hand over their heretical books.

23 Optat., Append. I, p. 187.

24 Mos. et Rom. leg. coll. XV 3.1, in E. Seckel and B. Kuebler, Iurisprud. anteiust. reliq.6 II ii, 381–3, or F. Girard, Textes de droit rom.,6 602–3. The date is probably 31st March 297: see Seston in Mél. A. Ernout (1940) 345–54. The greater severity with which Manichaeans were treated was no doubt due to their being regarded as agents of a hostile power, as well as religious offenders; but much of Diocletian's invective against the Manichaeans would have applied equally to the Christians.

25 Pliny Epist. X 97.2.

26 See Lact. MP 15.5.

27 There seems to be no good evidence from the Great persecution of attempts to make accused Christians curse Christ (as in Passio Polycarp. IX 3) or swear by the emperor's genius or τύχη (as in Id. IX 2; X 1; Passio Scillitan. 5; Passio Apollon. 3).

28 See n. 25 above.

29 The exemptions in Cod. Just. IX 41.11.pr.; cf. 1 (and see Dig. XLVIII 18.15.1; 18.16.1; 18.21; 22.6.2; XLIX 5.2; 16.7; L 2.14), show that the practice was already well established by the reign of Marcus. The situation under the Severi onwards is well known: see Mommsen, Röm. Strafr. 406–8. For the 4th century, Dig. XXII 5.21.2 is illuminating.

30 Pliny Epist. X 96.3,5.

31 There is evidence for Syria, Palestine and Numidia: see below.

32 See esp. Delehaye, Les passions des martyrs; Les légendes hagiographiques3.

33 See e.g., Delehaye, Les passions 241–2.

34 The Passion of Philip of Heraclea, of which we possess only a Latin translation, contains valuable material and seems to depend ultimately on the account of an eye-witness (though not the official Acta) ; but it has been so heavily embroidered, as regards its dialogues, that it is unsafe to use it for present purposes. The order to sacrifice mentioned in Eus. HE VIII 6.2 can be explained as by A. C. McGiffert in his note ad loc, on p. 327 of his translation of Eusebius.

35 1.1–2. Lawlor and Oulton, at the end of Vol. I of their Eusebius, conveniently print side by side admirable English translations of S and of a composite version (from the Greek, Latin and Syriac) of L.

36 See Delehaye, Les legendes hag.3, chap, v, at pp. 124–5. Cf. the similar addition to the Passio Felicis, given in Anal. Bolland. XXXIX (1921) 272, § 11.

37 MP 2.1. If the churches were only now being destroyed, as S states, the authorities had been very slow to put E 1 into operation in Syria.

38 Eus. MP 1.5. L is very much fuller.

39 7; 8. Cf. Eus. HE VI 41.11–12.

40 As in Peter Alex. Epist. Can. (see n. 44 below) 8; contrast 9, 10. Among the many other passages condemning voluntary martyrdom are Passio Polycarp. IV (cf. Eus. HE IV 15.7–8) ; Clem. Alex. Strom. IV iv. 16.3 to 17.3; x. 76–77; VII xi. 66.3 to 67.2, ed. O. Stählin; Cypr. Epist. LXXXI; Passio Cypr. 1.6 (endorsed by Aug. c. Gaudent. I 31.40); Cone. Illib., Can. 60; cf. Lact. MP 13.2,3.

41 Aug. Brev. Coll. III 13.25, in the translation of A. H. M. Jones, Constantine and the Conversion of Europe 106. But this allegation may have been a commonplace: cf. the Passio Theodoriti 3 (‘audivi te esse fisci debitorem, et ideo mori desideras ne reddas quod debes’) ; Hippol. Elench. IX 12.7, ed. P. Wendland (Callistus, the future bishop of Rome, unable to repay money he had embezzled, voluntarily sought martyrdom).

42 E.g. Baynes in Cl. Quart. XVIII (1924) at p. 189, and in Camb. Anc. Hist. XII 668; M. Besnier, Hist. rom. (Roman vol. IV of Hist. gén., ed. G. Glotz) 328; G. Costa, in Ruggiero, Diz. epigr. di antich. rom. II 1860–1; L. Duchesne, Early Hist. of the Christian Church II 79; cf. W. Ensslin in Pauly-Wissowa, 2te Reihe, VII ii, 2487.

43 3.1. Our remaining contemporary authority for the persecution, Constantine (ap. Eus. Vita Const. II 51), does not distinguish between the various ‘sanguinary edicts.’

44 Migne, PG XVIII 467–508; Routh, Rel. Sacr.2 IV 23–45; A. P. de Lagarde, Reliq. juris eccles. antiq. 63–73; cf. Schwartz, E. in Gött. Nachr., phil.-hist. Klasse, 1905, at pp. 166–75Google Scholar.

45 C. J. Hefele — H. Leclercq, Hist, des conciles I i, 301–26; Mansi II 513–22. The first nine canons deal with the lapsi.

46 Athan. Apol. c. Arian. 59.1; Socr. Hist. Eccles. I 6.

47 § § 4–6.

48 See, on this Passion, n. 34 above.

49 Hefele-Leclercq, op. cit. 280–95; Mansi II 471–4.

50 13 (traditio); 14.

51 Passio 2; 19–23.

52 E.g. Paul of Cirta (Optat., Append. I, pp. 186–7), Donatus of Mascula (Aug. c. Cresc. III 27.30), possibly the bishops of Zama and Furni (Optat., Append. II, p. 199). Victor of Rusiccade admitted throwing a copy of the Gospels into the flames, claiming in extenuation that it was virtually illegible (Aug. c. Cresc. III 27.30).

53 Mensurius claimed that he had given up heretical works (Aug. Brev. Coll. III 13.25). Donatus of Calama surrendered medical books, Marinus of Aquae Tibilitanae some other papers (Aug. c. Cresc. III 27.30).

54 See Aug. Brev. Coll. III 13.25. The obliging officials tell Mensurius to give them ‘aliqua ecbola aut quodcumque.’ When he refuses, they discover and take away some heretical works. Some Carthaginian decurions complain to Anullinus, but he refuses to pursue M.

55 Aug. c. Cresc. III 27.30.

56 C. Bigg (The Origins of Christianity 482–3) was inclined to doubt whether E 4 was ever published in the West. And see Jones (op. cit. in n. 41 above, 55): ‘There is no sound evidence for the promulgation of the fourth edict in the West.’

57 Byzacena (Byzacium), here treated as part of the Proconsular province, may have been a province separate from Proconsularis in 303–4, as it certainly was at some time during the first tetrarchy (ILA 3832 = CIL VIII 23179).

58 There is evidence for libellatici in Spain (Cypr. Epist. LXVII 1.1; 6.1–2), at Rome (Id. XXX 3.1; also XXI 2.2; 3.2), and also of course in Africa: Id. XX 2.2; LV 3.2; 10.2; 13.2; 14.1; 17.3; 26.1; De Lapsis 27–8; Ad Fort. 11. In Epist. LV 26.1, Cyprian describes the purchase of a certificate as a far less grave sin than adultery.

59 Aug. Adv. Fulg. 26.

60 Optat., Append. II, pp. 198–9. The form Abthugna, or Abthugni, is the best attested: see CIL VIII (Suppl. IV) 23085, and the remarks of H. Dessau at P. 2338.

61 3.8, a rhetorical contrast between Florus and Macarius the imperial notary sent to Africa by Constans in 347 (see W. H. C. Frend, The Donatist Church 177 ff.).

62 II 25.

63 I 13.

64 Optat. I 15; Aug. Adv. Fulg. 26.

65 See Appendix V below.

66 ILS 644 = CIL VIII 4764 (18698). On the date of the vicennalia see n. 12 above.

67 See p. 84 and n. 42 above.

68 Cf. Cypr. Epist. LIX 10.3.

69 See, on the remainder, Appendix VI below.

70 I 2–3; I 7; II 3; IV 1.

71 Id. III 1: ‘Et adiecit Anulinus commentariensi officio dicens: “Ad omnem deformationem deducta, a novacula ablatis crinibus decalvetur, ut eius primum facies ad ignominiam deveniat.”’ Franchi, curiously enough, was willing to accept this; but see P. Monceaux in Mél. Boissier (1903) at p. 386. For other defects in the Passion see Monceaux, op. cit. 386–7, 388–9.

72 Op. cit. 383–7.

73 HE VIII 6.10.

74 See Appendix II and n. 117 below. Alban's martyrdom cannot be dated: see Stevens, C. E. in Eng. Hist. Rev. LVI (1941) at p. 373CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

75 Studi e testi XLIX (1928) at p. 16.

76 See Delehaye, Les légendes hag.3 114. The opening words show that the compiler had no written source available.

77 Evidently Delehaye thought so, for he places the work in his third class of Passions (op. cit. 114–5).

78 For a summary of the literature, see A. Harnack, Die Mission u. Ausbreitung des Christentums3 (1915) II 281 and n. 2 (‘Die Märtyrerakte taugt nichts; die Tatsache ist gut bezeugt’).

79 That edited by Vielhaber (see Appendix I below). The crucial words, apparently lacking in the other MSS, are ‘necesse est ut praeceptis imperatorum obtemperes, ut accedens sacrifices.’ In this MS the sentence on Afra begins with a nominativus pendens.

80 The Passion of Florian of Lauriacum (on which see J. Zeiller, Les origines chrétiennes dans les provinces danubiennes 62–4) preserves some historical elements, but so much of it is fictitious that we cannot use it for present purposes. (Noricum ought perhaps to be considered as falling in the Eastern part of the empire during the years 303–6, and not in the area subject to Maximian).

81 See A. Dufourcq, Étude sur les Gesta Martyrum romains (1900–10), esp. I 287–90. It is Delehaye's opinion also that the Roman legends ‘sont dépourvues de toute valeur au point de vue de l'histoire qu'elles prétendent faire connaître’ (Les origines du culte des martyrs2 262). For the worthless Passio Sabini (Savini), which so impressed Mason and others, see also Lanzoni, F. in Röm. Quartalschr. XVII (1903) 1–26Google Scholar, endorsed by Delehaye, Les légendes hag3 83, n. 2.

82 See the good brief summary in L. Duchesne, op. cit. (in n. 42 above) 72–6.

83 See Appendix VII below.

84 Eus. HE VIII 14.1; Optat. I 18. Church property was only returned to the Christians of Rome by Maxentius in 311 (Aug. Brev. Coll. III 18.34) and to the African Christians (probably) by Constantine in 312/3 (Eus. HE X 5.15–17).

85 MP 13.12.; cf. 13.13; HE VIII 13.11.

86 The actual election of Silvanus, described at length in the Gesta apud Zenophilum (Optat., Append. I, pp. 192–7), must of course have taken place before the consecration-meeting on the 4th or 5th March 305: for this date, see Appendix IV below, § (d).

87 De Lapsis 3.

88 Cypr. De Laps. 2; 3; 4; and many letters, esp. XII 2.2; XIV 2.1; XIX 2.2; XXX 5.3; XXXI 6.2; LV 5.1.

89 De Laps. 3.

90 HE VI 41.11: ὀνομαστὶ … καλούμενοι.

91 See Knipfing, J. H., ‘The Libelli of the Decian Persecution,’ in Harv. Theol. Rev. XVI (1923) 345–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar, supplemented by H. Grégoire, Les persécutions dans l'empire rom. (1951) 113–4, and the works there referred to.

92 Cf. Cypr. Epist. XLIII 3.1 (Carthage) and (if the document really relates to 250) Passio Pionii III 1 (Smyrna).

93 Eus. MP 4.8.

94 MP 4.6,8,14.

95 By Maximin, according to Eus. MP 9.2. By now M. had probably been recognized as Augustus by Galerius, who may have prompted this action. It is obviously wrong to seek, with A. J. Mason (The Persecution of Diocletian 284–5), for echoes of this edict in Passions the wording of which is untrustworthy.

96 MP 4.1.

97 See Appendix VIII below.

98 Peter Alex. Epist. Can. 5–7 (see n. 44 above).

99 Conc. Ancyran. I, Can. 1 (see n. 45 above).

100 Hist. Arian. ad Monach. 64.

101 MP 11.31.

102 13.11 S (cf. L).

103 In the special sense in which Eus. uses the term, to include Palestinians, wherever they suffered, and Christians from other provinces martyred in Palestine.

104 Cf. Peter Alex. Epist. Can. 11.

105 Including 5 out of the 6 whose names we know. In MP 13.1 L, Eus. gives over 100 Egyptians out of a total of about 150 Christians remaining at Phaeno. Cf. 13.6 S. He records no great number of Palestinian confessors as being condemned to the mines: cf. MP 7.2,3; 8.3,4; 13.1 L; 13.10 L. In MP 8.1,13 he mentions 227 Egyptian Christians sent to Palestine in two groups: the first batch (of 97: MP 8.1 L, against S) were all sent to Phaeno; of the second (numbering 130: MP 8.13), some were taken to Cilicia.

106 Procopius, Zacchaeus, and the woman of Gaza (Ennatha: Eus. MP 8.8 L). The other members of this third group are Timothy, Thecla (whose execution is not actually recorded — perhaps she died in prison), Ulpian, Agapius I (MP 3.1; 6.3–7), Domninus, Auxentius, the two Pauls, Ennathas, Peter, Asclepius, Pamphilus and Valens. The 13 outright volunteers are Alpheus, Romanus, the 6 young men of Eus. MP 3.3–4, Apphianus, Aedesius, Antoninus, Zebinas and Germanus.

107 See n. 105 above.

108 16.3–11; 35.2.

109 HE VIII 9.5. On Id. 3 we should note the sceptical observations of Gibbon (ed. Bury, II 137, n. 183). And here also the martyrs may well have been mainly volunteers. For five Egyptian volunteers in the Decian persecution, see Eus. HE VI 41.22–23. For the militant characteristics of lower class Egyptians in the later 4th century, see Amm. Marc. XXII 16.23.

110 Div. Inst. V 11.13. Lact. characteristically contrives to make his statement redound to the discredit of the governors concerned.

111 See n. 54 above.

112 Dionys. Alex., ap. Eus. HE VI 41.1–9; cf. Firmilian, ap. Cypr. Epist. LXXV 10.1. Contrast Eus. MP 9.3.

113 Les passions des martyrs 241; cf. the quotation on p. 244 from the Passion of Trophimus and others.

114 Eus. HE VIII 6.1–7; Lact. MP 15.1–3.

115 Contrast Lact. Div. Inst. V 11.10 with Eus. HE VIII 11.1 (and Rufinus's version). This may be exaggerated hearsay: not even the name of the town is given. Ramsay's suggestion (Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia I ii, 505–9) that the town was Eumeneia is mere conjecture.

116 See esp. Lact. MP 15.6; Julian Orat. I 7ab. Cf. also Eus. HE VIII 13.11; MP 3.5; Vita Const. I 14; II 51.

117 The best evidence is the Donatist petition in Optat. I 22. Against the disingenuous Eus. HE VIII 13.12–13 and VIII Append. 4, and the absurd Vita Const. I 16, we must obviously accept Lact. MP 15.7.

118 The details can be reconstructed from Lact. MP 10.6; 11.3; 14; 17–19 and the subscriptiones of the constitutions issued during the years 293–4 and 303: see the list of constitutions in chronological order in P. Krüger's edn. of the Cod. Just., Appendix I, and Mommsen, Ges. Schr. II ii, at pp. 273–88, 290. Lact. MP 18.6 is very exaggerated.

119 Op. cit. (in n. 12 above) 244–5, citing the proof by J. R. Palanque (Essai sur la préfecture du prétoire du Bas-Emp. 34) of the existence of a separate Prefecture of Illyricum from 357 to c. 361.

120 See Baynes, Constantine the Great and the Christian Church (Proc. Br. Acad. XV, 1929) 50–6.

121 Aug. c. Litt. Petil. II 92.202; cf. Gesta Coll. Carth. III 491–514; Aug. Brev. Coll. III 18.34–36.

122 Liber Pontif., ed. Duchesne, I 162–3; cf. 72–3; Acta ps.-Synod. Sinuessae, in Mansi I 1249–60 (cf. Hefele-Leclercq, Hist, des conciles I i, 207–8).

123 Aug. De Unic. Bapt. 16.27, 30; Liber Genealogus 626 (ed. Mommsen, in MGH Auct. Antiq. IX, Chron. Min. i. 196). On the Donatist additions to this work, see Monceaux, op. cit. (in Appendix VI above) IV 101–2.

124 Liber Pontif. and Acta ps.-Synod. Sinuess. (as cited in n. 122 above); cf. Theodoret Hist. Eccles. I 2. The silence of the Catalogus Liberianus (Duchesne, Liber Pontif. I 6–7), Depositio Episcoporum (Id. 10: here ‘Marcellini’ should clearly be ‘Marcelli’), and Depositio Martyrum (Id. 11–12), as well as of the Martyrologium Hieronymianum, seems conclusive.