When did the persecution of peasants in Rome end? Causes and consequences of persecution of Christians during the Roman Empire

THE EARLY CHRISTIANS WERE GOOD AND GOOD PEOPLE, BUT THEY WERE SEVERELY PERSECUTED. NEVERTHELESS, IT WAS THE PERSECUTION THAT PROMOTED THE MORE INTENSIVE SPREAD OF CHRISTIANITY TO OUR LAND AND BEYOND.

Reason for persecution

Thanks to the Holy Scriptures everyday life The first Christians were distinguished by piety, unfeigned love for people around them, equality and virtue. They, like no one else, understood the preciousness of human life. Not only in words, but also in deeds, they testified to God's love, which changed their lives and their whole nature. With all their hearts they loved Jesus, who died for sinners, so they fulfilled His great commission with joy and zeal - they proclaimed the Saving Gospel to all nations, calling people to do everything that the Lord commanded. Why then were they so mercilessly persecuted and destroyed?

It is worth emphasizing that the apostles and their disciples adhered to the biblical principles of faith set forth in the scriptures and called today the Old Testament, and the writings of the New Testament had not yet been formed at that time. The Apostle Paul wrote about the Old Testament Scriptures: “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be perfect for everyone. good deed cooked" (Bible. 2 Timothy 3:16-17). Christians' faithfulness to God's Word, which calls for a godly life following the example of Jesus Christ, gave rise to persecution against them. No matter how paradoxical it may seem, it is a historical fact. The same apostle Paul wrote to his ward servant Timothy: “And all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted... Moreover, from childhood you know the sacred scriptures, which can make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.” (Bible. 2 Timothy 3:12, 15).

Jewish persecution (30-70 AD)

During this period, Christians did not separate from Judaism. J. Gonzalez in the book “History of Christianity” writes: “The early Christians did not consider themselves followers of a new religion. They were Jews, and the main thing that distinguished them from other adherents of Judaism was their confidence in the already accomplished coming of the Messiah - while other Jews still continued to expect this coming. Therefore, the Christian message to the Jews did not call upon them to renounce Judaism. On the contrary, with the advent of the messianic era they were to become even more perfect Jews... For the early Christians, Judaism was not a rival to Christianity, but the same old faith.” For those Jews who rejected Jesus as the Messiah, Christianity was also not a new religion; they saw it as just another religious Jewish offshoot. Therefore, the followers of Jesus Christ were initially persecuted by the Jewish authorities and their supporters, and the Roman authorities sometimes even protected Christians from their persecutors. The Romans themselves considered the persecution of Jews against Christians to be a purely internal religious conflict among the Jewish faith.

Religious leaders and radical Jews were not going to put up with the fact that faith in Jesus as the Messiah and Savior was spreading at a colossal pace throughout Jerusalem and Judea. Their persecution scattered Christian refugees to other territories, which only contributed to an even more intensive spread of Christianity in other territories of the Roman Empire. “The persecution of the Jerusalem church gave a strong impetus to evangelistic work. The sermons were a great success here, and there was a danger that the disciples would linger in this city for a long time and would not fulfill the Savior’s instructions to proclaim the Gospel to the world. In order to scatter His representatives throughout the earth, where they could serve people, God allowed persecution of His Church. The believers expelled from Jerusalem “went and preached the word.”

Persecution by the pagans (70-313)

Later, as a result of the Judeo-Roman War and the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. e. and especially after the suppressed Jewish revolt led by Bar Kochba in 135 AD. e. persecution of Jews by Roman authorities began throughout the empire. Also suffering from these persecutions were Jewish and non-Jewish Christians who were absolutely not on the side of the Jewish uprisings. The Romans, without much understanding, classified Christians as Jews because of the similarities in their confessions of faith. It was not particularly difficult to distinguish a Jew and a Christian from a pagan. Christians and Jews revered the same Holy Scripture and the Law of God. This apparently manifested itself in the refusal to eat unclean food and the meat of unclean animals, in keeping the Sabbath day holy as the Lord's day according to the Scriptures, and in a categorical refusal to worship idols or generally any objects or images, or anyone as a god. And since Rome strictly demanded compliance with the state cult of the emperor, the refusal of Christians to make sacrifices to the emperor led to accusations of political disloyalty. It is reliably known that the most common test for Christians was the requirement to recognize the emperor as divine and offer incense on the altar in front of his statue.

Those Christians who unhypocritically worshiped the One God remained faithful to Him in these fundamental issues. They, under threat of death, refused to make a sacrifice to the emperor, because otherwise, they would violate the commandment of the One Whom they loved more than their lives. The first two of God's ten commandments read: “I am the Lord your God...thou shalt have no other gods before Me. You shall not make for yourself an idol or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth below, or that is in the water under the earth; You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I am the Lord your God.” (Bible. Exodus 20:2-5).

According to the Bible, true observance of God's Law is based on and is a practical expression of love for God and people: “By this we know that we love the children of God when we love God and keep His commandments. For this is love for God, that we keep His commandments.” (1 John 5:2, 3). Christian love is a response to the great love of the Most High for fallen humanity: “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.” (Bible. Gospel of John 3:16).

First concessions

Thanks to the successful preaching of the Gospel at that time, many people from pagan backgrounds joined the church. But the persecution of the Jews by the Roman authorities prompted some Christians, especially among the former pagans, to dissociate themselves from Judaism once and for all, so that the Romans would not confuse them with the Jews. They managed to do this by abandoning some principles of the Holy Scriptures, the observance of which in the eyes of the Romans was a sign of belonging to the Jewish ethnic group. Therefore, already somewhere from the middle of the 2nd century AD. e. some Christians who were not confirmed in the faith began to observe Sunday instead of the weekly Sabbath of the Lord - the day on which the pagans worshiped their sun god. Although they in their own way explained this change by the remembrance of the resurrection of Christ on this day of the week, nevertheless, the refusal to observe the weekly Sabbath was directly contrary to the Holy Scriptures and was a violation of the fourth commandment of God's Law.

There were also cases when individual Christians, and sometimes entire communities led by bishops, not only deviated from God’s law, but also gave up their scrolls of the Holy Scriptures for destruction and the whole world went to make sacrifices to the emperor just to save their lives. And they motivated this in the same way as many Christians do today: “The Law of the Ten Commandments was given for the Jews,” or: “The Ten Commandments were abolished by the Savior on Calvary,” etc.

But if we are consistent and assume that they were right and that it is possible to break the commandment about the Sabbath and worship idols in certain cramped circumstances, then it turns out that it is possible to break other commandments in similar situations: do not kill, do not steal, do not commit adultery, honor father and mother... In fact, these were cases when Christians publicly renounced their faith, fearing threats and persecution. Their practical faith had nothing in common with genuine Christianity and with those Christians who deliberately died at the hands of persecutors, without sacrificing a single principle of Holy Scripture.

Persecution of Christians who did not submit to the state church (380-1800)

No matter how hard the pagans tried to eradicate the spread of the Good News, the shed blood of Christians became the holy seed, thanks to which thousands were converted to Christianity. The famous early Christian writer and theologian Tertullian said correctly when addressing the persecutors of the Church in his book “Apology”: “The more you destroy us, the more we will become: the blood of Christians is the seed.” The way Christians met death with dignity, sometimes even with singing, shocked the minds of many sincere and thoughtful people who later became Christians themselves. Thus, persecution only increased the number of witnesses to the truth. Ultimately, by the 4th century, Christianity had become the most influential religion in the empire and spread even beyond its borders. But this was not the victorious end of Christianity, since the now state Christian church began to use power to forcibly impose its faith on dissenters.

Since the days of Emperor Constantine, the Roman state wanted to have one single church under its control, and those communities and ideological movements that did not submit to it were declared heretical and persecuted. Thus began an era of brutal persecution of Christians who did not obey the state church. Of these, the Nestorians, Arians, Paulicians and others are known... Those who disobeyed were not, in fact, necessarily heretics. Among them were many Christians who, in contrast to the official teaching of the church of that time, tried to preserve the purity of the teachings of Christ. As a result, persecuted Christians moved outside the empire. Therefore, the spread of Christianity outside the empire occurred precisely through the so-called “heretical movements” that established themselves in Eurasia and Africa. These churches are known under different names: “Celtic Church” - in Northern Europe, from Gaul to Finland and Novgorod; “Arians” - in Eastern and Central Europe among the Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Lombards, Heruls, Vandals; “Nestorians” - from the Caucasus to China and India, and others.

Christians outside the Empire

“At the beginning of the 2nd century. n. e. Rome evicted especially zealous followers of the Christian faith to the outskirts of the empire (the territory of modern Romania and Ukraine. - Author). For example, Emperor Trajan (98-117) is known for this. During persecution, Christians found shelter among the peoples of the Black Sea region." In this way, Christianity spread beyond the borders of the empire, including in the lands of Ukraine, then known as Gothia or Scythia.

We have many examples of heroes of faith who lived in our lands and maintained faith in Jesus Christ, adhering to God's commandments. But more about this in the next issues of the newspaper.

In the face of persecution, the Apostle Paul wrote on behalf of sincere and courageous Christians: “We are considered deceivers, but we are faithful; we are unknown, but we are recognized; we are considered dead, but behold, we are alive; we are punished, but we do not die; we are saddened, but we always rejoice; We are poor, but we enrich many; We have nothing, but we possess everything." (Bible. 2 Corinthians 6:8-10).

persecution of early Christ. Churches in the I-IV centuries. as an “illegal” community organized by the Roman state. G. periodically resumed and stopped for various reasons.

The history of the relationship between the Roman Empire and Christ. communities on its territory in the I-IV centuries. represents a complex set of theological, legal, religious and historical problems. During this period, Christianity in the Roman Empire did not have a stable status; it was officially considered an “illegal religion” (Latin religio illicita), which theoretically put its staunch adherents outside the law. At the same time, a significant part of the population of the empire, as well as certain circles of Rome. high society, especially from con. II - beginning III century, sympathized with Christianity. The time of relatively peaceful, stable development of communities was replaced by periods of more or less decisive persecution of Christianity by the imperial or local authorities, G. on Christ. Church. A hostile attitude towards Christians was characteristic of both the conservative aristocracy and the “crowd”, who were inclined to see Christians as the source of socio-political problems or natural disasters that occurred in the empire.

In determining the reasons for the rejection of Christianity by the Roman state and the Church of the modern people. There is no consensus among researchers. Most often it is said about the incompatibility of Christ. worldviews from Rome. traditional public and government orders. However, the history of Christianity from the 4th century, after the reforms of the emperor. Constantine, points precisely to the compatibility and wide possibilities of interaction between Christianity and Rome. society.

Religion is also indicated. opposition to Christ creeds and traditions. Rome. pagan religion. At the same time, religious. the tradition of the ancient world, defined as paganism, is often perceived undifferentiated; the state and evolution of cults of various types on the territory of the empire is not taken into account. Nevertheless, the evolution of ancient religions during the imperial era had a significant impact on the spread of Christianity and its relationship with the state. Long before the advent of Christianity, the decline of the Greeks became a fait accompli. Olympic religion, which retained influence only in certain regions. System of traditions. Rome. urban cults centered on the Capitol were rapidly losing popularity in society by the time the Principate was formed in the 1st century. BC. In the first centuries AD, the syncretic cults of the Middle East became the most influential in the empire. origin, as well as Christianity, aimed at spreading throughout the ecumene beyond ethnic and state. boundaries and containing a meaningful tendency towards monotheism.

In addition, the internal development of ancient philosophical thought already from the 2nd century. (Marcus Aurelius, Aristides), and especially in the 3rd-5th centuries, during the heyday of Neoplatonism, led to a significant convergence of the foundations of Christ. and late antique philosophical worldview.

G. in different periods of the history of the empire and Christianity were caused by various reasons. At the early stage, I-II centuries, they were determined by the contradictions between the ideas of Rome. state cult and principles of Christianity, as well as the long conflict between Rome and the Jews. Later, at the end. III-IV centuries, G. were a consequence of the internal political and social struggle in the empire, accompanied the process of searching for new religious and ideological guidelines in society and the state. In this last period, Christ. The Church turned into one of the social movements, on which various political forces could rely, and at the same time, the Church was subjected to government for political reasons. The fact that Christians, having abandoned the Old Testament religion, retained an irreconcilable attitude towards all “alien”, “external” cults, which was originally characteristic of Judaism, also contributed to the special bitterness of Georgy. The spread of eschatological expectations in Christ also played a major role in the development of Christianity. environment, which were present to one degree or another in the life of communities throughout the 1st-4th centuries. and influenced the behavior of Christians during G.

Roman tolerance towards other religions. traditions on the territory of the empire were based on the latter’s recognition of Rome. sovereignty and, subsequently, Rome. state religion. The state, the bearer of tradition, the principles of law, and justice, was considered by the Romans to be the most important value, and serving it was perceived as the meaning of human activity and one of the most important virtues. “The goal of a rational being, as defined by Marcus Aurelius, is to obey the laws of the state and the most ancient state structure” (Aurel. Antonin. Ep. 5). An integral part of Rome. The political and legal system remained Rome. state a religion in which the Capitoline gods, led by Jupiter, acted as a symbol of the state, a powerful guarantor of its preservation, success and prosperity. According to the approval of the Principate of Augustus, part of the state. religion became the cult of the rulers of the empire. In Rome it took the form of veneration of the "divine genius of the emperor", with Augustus and his successors bearing the title divus (i.e. divine, close to the gods). In the provinces, especially in the East, the emperor was directly revered as a god, which became a continuation of the tradition of the cult of the Hellenistic rulers of Egypt and Syria. After the death of many emperors who gained good fame among their subjects were officially deified in Rome by special decision Senate The most intense imp. The cult began to develop in the era of the soldier emperors of the 3rd century, when the government, lacking the means to ensure its legitimacy, resorted to postulating the connection and involvement of the emperor with the supernatural. During this period, the official the title appeared to include the definition of ruler Dominus et deus (Lord and God); the title was occasionally used by Domitian in con. I century, reached wide distribution under Aurelian and the tetrarchs at the end. III-IV centuries One of the most important titles in the 3rd century. became Sol Invictus (Invincible Sun), who had family ties both with Mithraism, which was influential in the empire, and with Sir. cult of Bel-Marduk. State The cult of the imperial era, especially in the late period, could no longer satisfy the spiritual needs of the absolute majority of its population, but was steadily preserved and developed as a means of political and ideological unification of the country and was accepted by society.

Rome. state the cult was initially unacceptable for Christians and inevitably led to a direct clash between the Church and the state. Trying in every possible way to demonstrate their loyalty to the imperial authorities (according to the saying of the Apostle Paul, “there is no authority except from God” - Rom. 31.1), Christians consistently separated Rome. state system from Rome religious traditions. At the turn of the 2nd and 3rd centuries. Tertullian declared, addressing Rome. power: “Every person can dispose of himself, just as a person is free to act in matters of religion... Natural right, universal human right requires that everyone be given the opportunity to worship whomever he wants. The religion of one can be neither harmful nor beneficial for another... So, let some worship the true God, and others Jupiter...” Speaking about the right of a Christian - a subject of the empire not to recognize Rome. state cult, he declared: “Doesn’t he have the right to say: I don’t want Jupiter to favor me! Why are you bothering here? Let Janus be angry with me, let him turn to me the face he pleases!” (Tertull. Apol. adv. gent. 28). Origen in the 3rd century. in a treatise against Celsus he contrasted Christianity, which follows the Divine Law, with Rome. state based on a law written by people: “We are dealing with two laws. One is a natural law, the cause of which is God, the other is a written law, which is given by the state. If they agree with each other, they should be observed equally. But if the natural, Divine law commands us to do something that is at odds with the legislation of the country, then we must ignore the latter and, neglecting the will of human legislators, obey only the divine will, no matter what dangers and labors are associated with this, even if we have to endure death and shame" (Orig. Contr. Cels. V 27).

A significant role in Greece was also played by the hostility of the vast mass of the empire's population, from the lowest strata to the intellectual elite, towards Christians and Christianity. The perception of Christians by a significant part of the population of the empire was full of all kinds of prejudices, misunderstandings, and often direct slander against supporters of the teachings of Christ. An example of such perception is described in the dialogue “Octavius” by Minucius Felix (c. 200). The author puts into the mouth of his interlocutor Caecilius judgments that expressed the most widespread views of the Romans on Christians: “From the lowest scum, ignorant and gullible women gathered there, who, due to the susceptibility to other people’s influence inherent in their sex, already fall for any fishing rod: they form a common gang of conspirators, which fraternizes not only during festivals with fasting and food unworthy of a person, but also in crimes, a suspicious, photophobic society, mute in public and chatty in the corners; they disdain the temples as if they were gravediggers, spit before the images of the gods, ridicule the sacred sacrifices; They look down on you - is it even possible to mention this? - with regret for our priests; They themselves are half naked, they despise positions and titles. O unimaginable stupidity, oh boundless impudence! They consider current torture to be nothing, because they are afraid of unknown futures, because they are afraid of dying after death, but they are not afraid of dying now. False hope to the resurrection comforts them and deprives them of all fear” (Min. Fel. Octavius. 25).

For their part, many Christians were no less biased towards the values ​​of ancient culture. The apologist Tatian (2nd century) spoke extremely contemptuously about ancient philosophy, science and literature: “Your (pagan - I.K.) eloquence is nothing more than an instrument of untruth, your poetry glorifies only quarrels and love affairs of the gods for the destruction of people, all your philosophers were fools and flatterers” (Tatian. Adv. gent. 1-2). The attitude of Christians towards the ancient theater was negative, which Tertullian (III century) and Lactantius (IV century) declared an unholy sanctuary of Venus and Bacchus. Mn. Christians considered it impossible to study music, painting, or maintain schools, since in their classes one way or another they heard names and symbols of pagan origin. As if summarizing the confrontation between Christianity and ancient civilization, Tertullian proclaimed: “Pagans and Christians are alien to each other in everything” (Tertull. Ad uxor. II 3).

I. O. Knyazky, E. P. G.

History of G.

Traditionally, for the first 3 centuries of the Church’s existence, they count 10 years, finding an analogy with the 10 plagues of Egypt. or 10 horns of the apocalyptic beast (Ex 7-12; Rev 12. 3; 13. 1; 17. 3, 7, 12, 16), and are attributed to the reign of the emperors Nero, Domitian, Trajan, Marcus Aurelius, Septimius Severus, Maximinus the Thracian , Decius, Valerian, Aurelian and Diocletian. Such a calculation was probably first made by a church writer at the turn of the 4th and 5th centuries. Sulpicius Severus (Sulp. Sev. Chron. II 28, 33; cf.: Aug. De civ. Dei. XVIII 52). In reality, this “figure does not have a solid historical basis,” since the number of disasters that occurred during this period “can be counted both more and less” (Bolotov. Collected works. T. 3. pp. 49-50).

The Lord Himself, even during his earthly ministry, predicted to His disciples the coming years, when they “will be handed over to the courts and beaten in the synagogues” and “will be led before rulers and kings for Me, to testify before them and the Gentiles” (Matthew 10:17- 18), and His followers will reproduce the very image of His Passion (“You will drink the cup that I drink, and you will be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized” - Mk 10.39; Mt 20.23; cf. Mk 14. 24 and Matthew 26.28). Christ. The community, as soon as it emerged in Jerusalem, experienced the justice of the Savior’s words. The first persecutors of Christians were their fellow tribesmen and former Christians. fellow believers - Jews. Already from sir. 30s I century The list of Christ opens. martyrs: approx. 35, a crowd of “zealots for the law” stoned the first deacon. Stephen (Acts 6.8-15; 7.1-60). During the short reign of the Jewish king Herod Agrippa (40-44), the ap. Jacob Zebedee, brother of St. John the Evangelist; other disciple of Christ, ap. Peter was arrested and miraculously escaped execution (Acts 12:1-3). OK. 62, after the death of the governor of Judea Festus and before the arrival of his successor Albinus, by the verdict of the high priest. Anna the Younger, the leader of Christ was stoned. communities in Jerusalem ap. Jacob, brother of the Lord according to the flesh (Ios. Flav. Antiq. XX 9. 1; Euseb. Hist. eccl. II 23. 4-20).

The successful spread of Christianity in the first decades of the existence of the Church outside Palestine - in Heb. Diaspora, primarily among Hellenized Jews and pagan proselytes, met with serious opposition from conservative Jews who did not want to give up a single point of their traditions. ritual law (Frend. 1965. P. 157). In their eyes (as, for example, it was the case with the Apostle Paul), the preacher of Christ was “the instigator of rebellion among the Jews living throughout the world” (Acts 24.5); they persecuted the apostles, forcing them to move from city to city, inciting the people to oppose them (Acts 13.50; 17.5-14). The enemies of the apostles tried to use civil power as a tool to suppress the missionary activities of Christians, but were faced with the reluctance of Rome. power to intervene in the conflict between Old and New Israel (Frend. 1965. P. 158-160). Official persons looked at it as an internal affair of the Jews, considering Christians to be representatives of one of the branches of the Jewish religion. Yes, ok. 53 in Corinth, proconsul Prov. Achaia Lucius Junius Gallio (brother of the philosopher Seneca) refused to accept the case of the ap. Paul, pointing out to the accusers: “Figure it out for yourself, I don’t want to be a judge in this…” (Acts 18:12-17). Rome. the authorities during this period were not hostile either to the apostle or to his preaching (cf. other cases: in Thessalonica - Acts 17.5-9; in Jerusalem the attitude of the procurators Felix and Festus towards Paul - Acts 24.1-6; 25 .2). However, in the 40s, during the reign of the Emperor. Claudius, certain steps were taken in Rome directed against Christians: the authorities limited themselves to expelling from the city “the Jews who were constantly worried about Christ” (Suet. Claud. 25.4).

When imp. Nerone (64-68)

The first serious clash between the Church and Rome. power, the causes and partly the nature of which are still the subject of debate, was associated with a strong fire in Rome, which happened on July 19, 64 Rome. the historian Tacitus (beginning of the 2nd century) reports that popular rumor suspected the emperor himself of arson, and then Nero, “to overcome the rumors, found the culprits and put to the most sophisticated executions those who had brought upon themselves universal hatred with their abominations and whom the crowd called Christians.” "(Tac. Ann. XV 44). Both the authorities and the people of Rome looked upon Christianity as a “malignant superstitio” (exitiabilis superstitio), a Jewish sect whose adherents were guilty “not so much of villainous arson as of hatred of the human race” (odio humani generis). Initially, “those who openly admitted themselves to belong to this sect were arrested, and then, on their orders, a great many others...”. They were brutally killed, given over to be torn to pieces by wild animals, crucified on crosses or burned alive “for the sake of night illumination” (Ibidem).

Christ. authors con. I - beginning II century confirm the assumption that Christians in Rome at this time were still identified with Jewish sectarians. St. Clement of Rome seems to view the persecution as a result of the conflict between the communities of Jews and Christians, believing that “through jealousy and envy the greatest and righteous pillars of the Church were subjected to persecution and death” (Clem. Rom. Ep. I ad Cor. 5; Herma. Pastor. 43. 9, 13-14 (Commandment 11), about the Church as a “synagogue”). In this case, this G. can be interpreted as the reaction of the Jews who did not accept Christ, who, having influential patrons at court in the person of the praetorian prefect Tigellinus and Poppaea Sabina, the 2nd wife of Nero, “managed to direct the anger of the mob towards the hated schismatics - the Christian synagogue "(Frend. P. 164-165).

The supreme apostles Peter (memorial: January 16, June 29, 30) and Paul (memorial: June 29) became G.'s victims. The place, manner and time of their execution were recorded very early in Church Tradition. In con. II century Rev. Of the Roman Church, Guy knew about the “victory trophy” of the apostles (i.e., about their holy relics), which were located in the Vatican and on the Ostian road - the places where they ended their earthly life as martyrdom (Euseb. Hist. eccl. II 25. 6- 7). Ap. Peter was crucified on the cross upside down. Paul, like Rome. citizen, beheaded (John 21. 18-19; Clem. Rom. Ep. I ad Cor. 5; Lact. De mort. persecut. 3; Tertull. De praescript. haer. 36; idem. Adv. Gnost. 15; and etc.). Regarding the time of the martyrdom of St. Peter, it should be noted that Eusebius of Caesarea dates it to 67/8, probably because he is trying to justify the 25-year stay of the apostle in Rome, starting from 42 (Euseb. Hist. eccl. II 14.6) . The time of death of the ap. Paul is even more vague. The fact that he was executed like Rome. citizen, allows us to believe that the execution took place in Rome either before the fire (in 62? - Bolotov. Collected works. T. 3. P. 60), or after several. years after him (Zeiller. 1937. Vol. 1. P. 291).

In addition to the apostles, among the victims of the first city in Rome, the squads of the martyrs Anatolia, Photida, Paraskeva, Kyriacia, Domnina (commemorated March 20), Vasilisa and Anastasia (c. 68; memorial April 15) are known. G. was limited to Rome and its immediate environs, although it is possible that it moved to the provinces. In Christ. hagiographic tradition by the time of the Emperor. Nero included the group of Kerkyra martyrs (Satornius, Iakischol, Favstian and others; commemorated April 28), the martyrs in Milan (Gervasius, Protasius, Nazarius and Kelsius; memorial Oct. 14), as well as Vitaly of Ravenna (commemorated April 28 .), martyr Gaudentius from the city of Philippi in Macedonia (comm. Oct. 9).

In connection with the first G., on the part of the Romans, the question of the application of legislation against Christians under Nero is important. In zap. In historiography, when solving this problem, researchers are divided into 2 groups. Representatives of the first - Ch. arr. Catholic French and Belgian scientists believe that after G. Nero Christianity was prohibited by a special general law, the so-called. institutum Neronianum, about which in the 3rd century. mentions Tertullian (Tertull. Ad martyr. 5; Ad nat. 1. 7), and G. were a consequence of this act. Supporters of such a view. noted that Christians were initially accused as arsonists, which was pointed out by the frightened Nero, and after an investigation and clarification of their religions. differences from the Jews were outlawed. Christianity was no longer considered as a branch of Judaism, and therefore it was deprived of the status of a permitted religion (religio licita), under the “canopy” of which it existed in the first decades. Now his followers had a choice: to participate as citizens or subjects of the Roman state in the official. polytheistic cults of the empire or face persecution. Because Christ. faith does not allow participation in the pagan cult, Christians remained outside the law: non licet esse christianos (it is not allowed to be Christians) - this is the meaning of the “general law” (Zeiller. 1937. Vol. 1. P. 295). Subsequently, J. Zeye changed his position, treating the institutum Neronianum more as a custom than as a written law (lex); opponents of this theory recognized the new interpretation as closer to the truth (Frend. 1965. P. 165). This attitude towards Christians is understandable if we consider that the Romans were suspicious of all foreign cults (Bacchus, Isis, Mithra, the religion of the Druids, etc.), the spread of which from ancient times was considered a dangerous and harmful phenomenon for society and the state. .

Dr. scientists, emphasizing adm. and the political nature of the persecution of Christians, denied the existence of a “general law” issued under Nero. From their point of view, it was enough to apply to Christians the already existing laws directed against sacrilege (sacrilegium) or lese majeste (res maiestatis), as Tertullian speaks of (Tertull. Apol. adv. gent. 10. 1). This thesis was expressed by K. Neumann (Neumann. 1890. S. 12). However, there is no information that in the first 2 centuries during Greece, Christians were accused of these crimes, which were closely related to each other (failure to recognize the emperor as a god entailed charges of lese majeste). Only from the 3rd century. Attempts began to force Christians to make sacrifices to the emperor's deity. If Christians were accused of anything, it was disrespect for the gods of the empire, but even this did not make them atheists in the eyes of the authorities, as they were considered only by the ignorant lower classes. Dr. accusations that popular rumor brought against Christians - black magic, incest and infanticide - official. justice never took into account. It cannot therefore be argued that the persecutions were the result of the application of pre-existing legislation, since it did not contain a strict legal basis for the persecution of Christians.

According to another theory, government was the result of the use of coercive measures (coercitio) by high-ranking magistrates (usually provincial governors) to maintain public order, which included the right to arrest and impose a death sentence on violators, with the exception of Rome. citizens (Mommsen. 1907). Christians did not obey the orders of the authorities to renounce their faith, which was considered a violation of public order and entailed condemnation without c.-l. special law. However, in the 2nd century. the highest magistrates considered it necessary to confer with the emperors regarding Christians. In addition, the procedure for their actions, described by Pliny the Younger in a letter to the emperor. Trajan and repeatedly confirmed by subsequent emperors, involves the implementation of measures of judicial inquiry (cognitio), and not the intervention of police power (coercitio).

Thus, the question of the original legislative framework in Rome. the law regarding G. remains open. Christians' idea of ​​themselves as the "true Israel" and their refusal to fulfill Heb. ceremonial law led to conflict with Orthodox Jews. Christians found themselves in this situation before Rome. authorities, that there was no need for a general edict against them, since it was customary for a person to obey some existing law: if he did not obey the Jewish law, he had to obey the law of his own city. If both of these laws were rejected, then he was suspected as an enemy of the gods, and therefore of the society in which he lived. Under such circumstances, accusations before the authorities from personal enemies, including Orthodox Jews, have always been dangerous for a Christian.

When imp. Domitians (96)

G. broke out in the last months of his 15-year reign. St. Meliton of Sardis (ap. Euseb. Hist. eccl. IV 26. 8) and Tertullian (Apol. adv. gent. 5. 4) call him the 2nd “persecutor emperor.” Domitian, who left a memory as a gloomy and suspicious tyrant, took measures to eradicate Jewish customs, which were widespread in Rome among the senatorial aristocracy during the reign of his father Vespasian and brother Titus (Suet. Domit. 10.2; 15.1; Dio Cassius . Hist. Rom. LXVII 14; Euseb . Hist. eccl. III 18. 4). In order to replenish the state. treasury Domitian pursued a strict financial policy, consistently collecting from the Jews a special tax (fiscus judaicus) in the amount of the didrachm, previously levied on the Jerusalem temple, and after its destruction - in favor of Jupiter Capitolinus. This tax was imposed not only on “those who openly led a Jewish lifestyle”, but also on “those who hid their origin”, evading its payment (Suet. Domit. 12.2). The authorities could also count Christians among the latter, many of whom, as it was found out during the investigation, turned out to be non-Jews (Bolotov. Collected works. T. 3. pp. 62-63; Zeiller. 1937. Vol. 1. P. 302). Among the victims of the suspicious Domitian were his close relatives, accused of atheism (ἀθεότης) and observance of Jewish customs (᾿Ιουδαίων ἤθη): the consul of 91, Acilius Glabrion, and the emperor’s cousin, the consul of 95, Titus Flavius ​​Clement, were executed. The latter's wife, Flavia Domitilla, was sent into exile (Dio Cassius. Hist. Rom. LXVII 13-14). Eusebius of Caesarea, as well as recorded in the 4th century. the tradition of the Roman Church confirms that Domitilla “along with many” suffered “for the confession of Christ” (Euseb. Hist. eccl. III 18.4; Hieron. Ep. 108: Ad Eustoch.). Regarding St. Clement of Rome there is no reliable information that he suffered for his faith. This circumstance does not allow us to call him Christ. martyr, although very early attempts were made to identify Flavius ​​Clement with the 3rd after ap. Peter by Bishop of Rome St. Clement (see: Bolotov. Collected works. T. 3. P. 63-64; Duchesne L. History of the Ancient Church. M., 1912. T. 1. P. 144).

This time G. affected the provinces of the Roman Empire. In Revelation St. John the Theologian reports about the persecution of Christians by the authorities, the people and the Jews (Rev 13; 17). In the cities of M. Asia, Smyrna and Pergamum, bloody scenes of the torment of believers took place (Rev 2.8-13). Among the victims was Bishop. Pergama sschmch. Antipas (comm. April 11). Ap. John the Theologian was taken to Rome, where he testified to the faith before the emperor, and was exiled to the island of Patmos (Tertull. De praescr. haer. 36; Euseb. Hist. eccl. III 17; 18. 1, 20. 9). Christians in Palestine were also persecuted. According to the historian of the 2nd century. Igisippu, whose news was preserved by Eusebius of Caesarea (Ibid. III 19-20), imp. Domitian undertook an investigation regarding the descendants of King David - relatives of the Lord in the flesh.

Pliny the Younger in a letter to the emperor. Trajan (traditionally dated c. 112) reports about Christians in the province. Bithynia, who renounced the faith 20 years before his time, which may also be associated with G. Domitian (Plin. Jun. Ep. X 96).

When imp. Trajans (98-117)

a new period of relations between the Church and the Roman state began. It was this sovereign, not only a talented commander, but also an excellent administrator, whom his contemporaries and descendants considered “the best emperor” (optimus princeps), who formulated the first extant. time legal basis for the persecution of Christians. Among the letters of Pliny the Younger there is his request to Trajan about Christians and the emperor’s response message, a rescript - a document that determined the attitude of Rome for a century and a half. power to a new religion (Plin. Jun. Ep. X 96-97).

Pliny the Younger, c. 112-113 sent by Trajan as an extraordinary legate to Bithynia (northwest Asia), encountered a significant number of Christians. Pliny admitted that he had never previously participated in legal proceedings involving Christians, but, having come into contact with them, he already considered them as guilty and subject to punishment. But he did not know what to charge them with - professing Christianity or some possibly related crimes. Without conducting a special trial, using the inquiry procedure (cognitio), which consisted of 3-fold interrogation of the accused, Pliny condemned all who stubbornly adhered to Christianity to death. “I had no doubt,” wrote Pliny, “that whatever they confessed, they should have been punished for their inflexible rigidity and stubbornness” (Ibid. X 96.3).

Soon Pliny began to receive anonymous denunciations, which turned out to be false. This time, some of the accused admitted that they had once been Christians, but some of them had left this faith for 3 years, and some for 20 years. This explanation, according to Pliny, gave the right to leniency towards them, even if someone was guilty of a crime. To prove their innocence, Pliny offered the accused ritual tests: burning incense and pouring a libation of wine in front of the image of Rome. gods and the emperor, as well as pronouncing a curse on Christ. Former Christians said that they met on a certain day before sunrise and sang hymns to Christ as God. In addition, they were bound by an oath not to commit crimes: not to steal, not to commit adultery, not to bear false witness, and not to refuse to give out confidential information. After the meeting, they took part in a joint meal, which included regular food. All this refuted the accusations of black magic, incest and infanticide, traditionally leveled by the mob against the first Christians. To confirm such information, Pliny, under torture, interrogated 2 slaves called “ministers” (deaconesses - ministrae), and “discovered nothing but an immense ugly superstition,” which is unacceptable to tolerate (Ibid. X 96.8).

In the protracted trial of Christians, it was found that many both urban and rural residents of the province were “infected with harmful superstition.” Pliny suspended the investigation and turned to the emperor with questions: whether to punish the accused only for calling themselves Christians, even if there are no other crimes, or only for crimes related to calling themselves Christians; Should we forgive for repentance and renunciation of faith and should we take into account the age of the accused? The request also noted that not too harsh measures against Christians had their effect: pagan temples began to be visited again, and the demand for sacrificial meat increased.

In the rescript, Trajan supported his governor, but gave him freedom of action, because for this kind of matter “it is impossible to establish a general definite rule” (Ibid. X 97). The emperor insisted that actions against Christians be within the framework of strict legality: the authorities should not take the initiative to search for Christians, anonymous denunciations were strictly prohibited, and when openly accusing stubborn Christians, the emperor ordered execution without distinction of age for simply calling themselves Christians. releasing anyone who openly renounces their faith. In this case, it is enough for the accused to make a sacrifice. to the gods. As for worshiping the image of the emperor and pronouncing a curse on Christ, the emperor passed over these actions taken by Pliny in silence.

As a result of the appearance of such a rescript, Christians, on the one hand, could be punished as criminals, being adherents of an illegal religion, on the other hand, due to their relative harmlessness, since Christianity was not considered the same serious crime as theft or robbery, which in the first place the queue had to pay attention to the local Rome. authorities, Christians should not have been searched for, and if they renounced their faith, they should have been released. Rescript of the imp. Trajan's response to Pliny, as the emperor's response to his official on a private issue, did not have the binding force of law for the entire Roman Empire, but became a precedent. Over time, similar private rescripts could appear for other provinces. It is possible that as a result of the publication by Pliny the Younger of his correspondence with the emperor, this document gained fame and became a legal norm for Roman relations. power to Christians. “History indicates certain special cases in which the effect of the rescript continued until the time of Diocletian, despite the fact that during the persecution of Decius the government itself took the initiative in the persecution of Christians” (Bolotov. Collected works. Vol. 3. P. 79) .

In addition to the nameless Christians in the provinces of Bithynia and Pontus, where Pliny acted, under Trajan he died a martyr at the age of 120 years. Simeon, son of Cleopas, relative of the Lord and bishop. Jerusalem (memorial April 27; Euseb. Hist. eccl. III 32. 2-6; according to Hegisippus). Traditional the date of his death is 106/7; There are other dates: approx. 100 (Frend. 1965. P. 185, 203, n. 49) and 115-117. (Bolotov. Collected works. T. 3. P. 82). According to some sources of late origin (not earlier than the 4th century), at the same time, Pope Clement, the third after Linus and Anacletus, was exiled to the Crimea Peninsula and died there as a martyr; Eusebius of Caesarea reports his death in the 3rd year of Trajan's reign (c. 100; Euseb. Hist. eccl. III 34). We also know about the martyrdom of Eustathius Placis and his family in Rome ca. 118 (commemorated September 20).

The central figure of G. under the emperor. Trajan is schmch. Ignatius the God-Bearer, bishop. Antiochian. The acts of his martyrdom, which exist in 2 editions, are unreliable. The testimony of Ignatius himself has also been preserved - 7 of his messages addressed to the Scheme. Polycarp of Smyrna, communities of Asia Minor and Rome. Christians, which were written by him during a long journey under guard from Antioch, accompanied by the companions Zosima and Rufus along the coast of Asia and through Macedonia (along the road that in the Middle Ages received the name Via Egnatia in his honor) to Rome, where the apostolic the husband ended his earthly journey by being thrown to be devoured by animals in the circus on the occasion of the celebration of the victory of the emperor. Trajan over the Dacians. During his forced journey, Ignatius enjoyed relative freedom. He met with schmch. Polycarp, he was met by delegations of many. Churches of Asia Minor, which wanted to express respect for the Bishop of Antioch and love for him. Ignatius, in response, supported Christians in the faith, warned about the danger of the recently appeared docetism, asked for their prayers, so that, having become truly “the pure bread of Christ” (Ign. Ep. ad Pom. 4), he would be worthy to become food for animals and reach God. Eusebius in the Chronicle dates this event to 107; V.V. Bolotov dates it to 115, connecting it with the Parthian campaign of the emperor (Bolotov. Collected works. T. 3. P. 80-82).

The Christians of Macedonia also experienced hysteria under Trajan. An echo of the persecution of Christians that took place in this Europe. provinces, is contained in the message of the SCHMC. Polycarp of Smyrna to the Christians of the city of Philippi with a call for patience, which they “saw with their own eyes not only in Blessed Ignatius, Zosima and Rufus, but also in others among you” (Polycarp. Ad Phil. 9). The chronology of this event is unknown; most likely it occurred at the same time as the martyrdom of Ignatius the God-Bearer.

When imp. Adrian (117-138)

successor of Trajan in 124-125. instructed the proconsul prov. Asiya Minitsia Fundana on the nature of actions towards Christians. Shortly before this, the former the ruler of the same province, Licinius Granian, addressed the emperor with a letter, in which he noted that “it is unfair to execute Christians without any accusation, just to please the screaming crowd” (Euseb. Hist. eccl. IV 8.6). Probably, the provincial government was once again faced with the demands of the mob to persecute, without observing legal formalities, representatives of a religion alien to it, who denied its gods. In response, Adrian ordered: “If the inhabitants of the province can confirm their accusation against Christians and answer before the court, then let them act this way, but not with demands and cries. It is very proper, in the event of an accusation, to conduct an investigation. If anyone can prove their accusation, namely, that they (Christians - A.H.) are acting illegally, then establish a punishment in accordance with the crime. If anyone has made an activity out of denunciations, put a stop to this disgrace” (Euseb. Hist. eccl. IV 9. 2-3). That. Hadrian's new rescript confirmed the norm established by his predecessor: anonymous denunciations were prohibited, legal proceedings against Christians were initiated only if there was an accuser. Due to this circumstance, Christians acquired a certain protection, because if the defendant’s guilt turned out to be unproven, a harsh fate awaited the accuser as a slanderer. In addition, the process against Christians required certain material costs on the part of the informer, since the accusation could only be accepted by the governor of the province, endowed with the power to pronounce the death sentence, and therefore not everyone was ready to decide to travel to a remote city, where he had to conduct a long, costly money litigation.

Mn. Christians of the 2nd century Hadrian's rescript seemed to provide them with protection. This is probably how the martyr understood him. Justin the Philosopher, citing the text of the document in the 1st Apology (Chapter 68). Meliton of Sardis mentions the rescript as being favorable to Christians (ap. Euseb. Hist. eccl. IV 26. 10). However, despite the fact that in practice Hadrian's rescript was close to tolerance, Christianity still remained outlawed. At the end of Hadrian's reign, Pope St. Telesphorus (Euseb. Hist. eccl. IV 10; Iren. Adv. haer. III 3). Justin the Philosopher, who was baptized precisely during this period, in the 2nd Apology (Chapter 12) writes about the martyrs who influenced his choice and affirmation in the faith. Other martyrs who suffered under Hadrian are also known: Esper and Zoe of Attalia (commemorated on May 2), Philetus, Lydia, Macedon, Kronid, Theoprepius and Amphilochius of Illyria (commemorated on March 23). With the era of the imp. Adrian Church Tradition also connects the martyrdom of Faith, Nadezhda, Love and their mother Sophia in Rome (mem. September 17).

Under Hadrian, Christians in Palestine who refused to join the anti-Rome. The uprising of the Jews in 132-135 had to experience serious persecution from them. Mch. Justin reports that the leader of the Jews, Bar Kokhba, “ordered that only Christians should be subjected to terrible torment if they did not renounce Jesus Christ and blaspheme Him” (Iust. Martyr. I Apol. 31.6). In a letter found by archaeologists in 1952 in the Wadi Murabbaat area (25 km southeast of Jerusalem), Bar Kochba mentions certain “Galileans” (Allegro J. M. The Dead Sea Scrolls. Harmondsworth, 1956. Fig 7). This, according to W. Friend, may be an indirect confirmation of the message of Justin the Philosopher (Frend. P. 227-228, 235, n. 147; for a discussion about Bar Kochba’s letter, see: RB. 1953. Vol. 60. P 276-294; 1954. Vol. 61. P. 191-192; 1956. Vol. 63. P. 48-49).

When imp. Antonina Pia (138-161)

religion continued. Adrian's politics. Without repealing strict legislation against Christians, he did not allow the mob to speak out. St. Melito of Sardis mentions 4 rescripts of the emperor addressed to the cities of Larissa, Thessalonica, Athens and the provincial assembly of Achaia, “so that there would be no innovations in relation to us” (Euseb. Hist. eccl. IV 26. 10). The name of Antoninus Pius is also traditionally associated with a rescript addressed to the province. Asia, which exists in 2 editions: as an appendix to the 1st apology of the martyr. Justin (Chapter 70 in the Russian translation by Archpriest P. Preobrazhensky after the rescript of Hadrian) and in Eusebius’s “Ecclesiastical History” under the name of Marcus Aurelius (Ibid. IV 13. 1-7). However, despite the fact that A. von Harnack spoke for its authenticity (Harnack A. Das Edict des Antoninus Pius // TU. 1895. Bd. 13. H. 4. S. 64), most researchers recognize the rescript as fraudulent. Perhaps it was written by some unknown Christian in the con. II century The author uses religions as an example for pagans. the devotion of Christians emphasizes their humility; the idea they express about pagan gods does not correspond to the views of Antoninus Pius, much less Marcus Aurelius (Coleman-Norton. 1966. Vol. 1. P. 10). In general, the document is not consistent with the real position that Christians occupied in the Roman Empire during this period.

Under Antoninus Pius in Rome ca. 152-155 The saints turned out to be victims of the pagans. Ptolemy and 2 laymen who bore the name Lucius (memo. zap. Oct. 19). The martyr narrates about their trial. Justin (Iust. Martyr. II Apol. 2): a certain noble Roman, irritated by his wife’s conversion to Christianity, accused Ptolemy of her conversion before the prefect of Rome Lollius Urbicus, who passed a death sentence in this case. The trial was observed by 2 young Christians. They tried to protest this decision before the prefect, since, in their opinion, the convict had not committed any crime, and his only guilt was that he was a Christian. Both young men were also executed after a short trial.

During the reign of Antoninus Pius, due to the anger of the rebellious mob, the city suffered. Polycarp, bishop Smirnsky. A reliable record of the martyrdom of this apostolic man has been preserved in the letter of the Christians of Smyrna to “the Church of God in Philomelia and all the places where the holy universal Church has found refuge” (Euseb. Hist. eccl. IV 15. 3-4). The chronology of Polycarp's martyrdom is controversial. From the 2nd half. XIX century pl. Church historians attribute this event to the last years of the reign of Antoninus Pius: by 155 (A. Harnack; Zeiller. 1937. Vol. 1. P. 311), by 156 (E. Schwartz), by 158 (Bolotov Collected works, vol. 3, pp. 93-97). Traditional dated 23 Feb. 167, based on the “Chronicle” and “Church History” of Eusebius (Eusebius. Werke. B., 1956. Bd. 7. S. 205; Euseb. Hist. eccl. IV 14. 10), is also accepted by some researchers (Frend. 1965. P. 270 ff.). In the city of Philadelphia (M. Asia), 12 Christians were arrested and sent to the annual games in Smyrna, where they were abandoned for the entertainment of the people in the circus to be devoured by animals. One of the condemned, the Phrygian Quintus, got scared at the last moment and made a sacrifice to the pagan gods. The angry crowd was not satisfied with the spectacle and demanded to find the “teacher of Asia” and the “father of Christians” Bishop. Polycarp. The authorities were forced to make concessions, found him and brought him to the amphitheater. Despite his advanced age, sschmch. Polycarp stood firm: during interrogation, he refused to swear by the fortune of the emperor and pronounce a curse on Christ, which the proconsul of Asia Statius Quadratus insisted on. “I have served Him for 86 years,” answered the elderly bishop, “and He has not offended me in any way. Can I blaspheme my King, who saved me? (Euseb. Hist. eccl. IV 15. 20). Polycarp confessed himself to be a Christian and, after persistent persuasion and threats from the proconsul, was condemned to be burned alive (Ibid. IV 15.29).

From ser. II century Rome. authorities in various provinces increasingly had to reckon with social factor the spread of Christianity, which had a serious influence on the character and intensity of the city. By this time, from the little-known Jewish sect, how Christians seemed to their contemporaries in the end. I century (when Tacitus had to explain their origin), the Church turned into an influential organization that was no longer possible to ignore. Christ. communities arose in the most remote corners of the empire, actively engaged in missionary activities, attracting new members almost exclusively from among the pagans. The Church successfully (albeit sometimes painfully) overcame not only the consequences of external pressure from the pagan world, but also internal schisms, for example. associated with the influence of Gnosticism or emerging Montanism. Rome. During this period, the authorities did not take the initiative in Georgia against the Church and had difficulty restraining outbreaks of popular anger against Christians. To traditional Accusations of black magic, cannibalism, incest and atheism were supplemented by accusations of various natural disasters, which, according to the pagans, expressed the anger of the gods at the presence of Christians in the empire. As Tertullian wrote, “if the Tiber overflows or the Nile does not overflow its banks, if there is drought, earthquake, famine, plague, they immediately shout: “Christians to the lion!”” (Tertull. Apol. adv. gent. 40. 2). The mob demanded from the authorities and sometimes achieved the persecution of Christians without observing the code. legal formalities. Educated pagans also opposed Christianity: some intellectuals, like Marcus Cornelius Fronto, a close associate of Marcus Aurelius, were ready to believe in the “monstrous crimes” of Christians (Min. Fel. Octavius. 9), but most educated Romans did not share the prejudices of the crowd. However, perceiving the new religion as a threat to tradition. Greco-Roman culture, its social and religious. order, they considered Christians to be members of a secret illegal society or participants in a “rebellion against social order"(Orig. Contr. Cels. I 1; III 5). Dissatisfied with the fact that their provinces were “filled with atheists and Christians” (Lucianus Samosatenus. Alexander sive pseudomantis. 25 // Lucian / Ed. A. M. Harmon. Camb., 1961. Vol. 4), they openly justified the harsh Antichrist. government measures. Representatives of the intellectual elite of the empire did not limit themselves, like Lucian, to ridiculing the teachings or social composition of the Church, presenting the believers as a bunch of “old women, widows, orphans” (Lucianus Samosatenus. De morte Peregrini. 12 // Ibid. Camb., 1972r. Vol. 5 ), but, like Celsus, they were consistently attacked by many. aspects of theology and social behavior Christians, refusing representatives of Christ. religion in the opportunity to belong to the intellectual elite of Greco-Roman. society (Orig. Contr. Cels. III 52).

When imp. Marche Aurelius (161-180)

the legal status of the Church has not changed. The norms of the Antichrist were still in effect. legislation introduced under the first Antonines; bloody G. occurred sporadically in many. places of the empire. St. Meliton of Sardis, in an apology addressed to this emperor, reports that something unheard of is happening in Asia: “... according to the new edicts, pious people are being persecuted and persecuted; shameless informers and lovers of other people’s things, based on these orders, openly commit robbery, robbing innocent people night and day.” The apologist calls on the emperor to act justly and even expresses doubt whether by his order a “new edict appeared, which would not be appropriate to issue even against barbarian enemies” (ap. Euseb. Hist. eccl. IV 26). Based on this news, some historians conclude that “the persecution of Marcus Aurelius was carried out according to a personal imperial order, which approved the persecution of Christians” and introduced changes to the regulations previously issued against them (Lebedev, pp. 77-78). Sources indeed confirm the activation of the Antichrist during this period. speeches of the people, note the facts of simplification of judicial proceedings, search and acceptance of anonymous denunciations, but the preservation of the previous nature of punishments. However, from the words of St. It is difficult for Meliton to understand what he meant: general imperial laws (edicts, δόϒματα) or responses to private requests from provincial authorities (orders, διατάϒματα) - both terms are used by him when describing events. In the “Petition for Christians” (Chapter 3) of Athenagoras addressed to Marcus Aurelius, as well as in certain reports about the martyrdoms of that time (martyr Justin the Philosopher, Lugdun martyrs - Acta Justini; Euseb. Hist. eccl. V 1) the facts of a significant change in Rome are confirmed. legislation regarding Christians. This emperor considered Christianity a dangerous superstition, the fight against the Crimea had to be consistent, but within the framework of strict legality. In his philosophical work, Marcus Aurelius rejected the fanaticism of Christians going to their death, seeing this as a manifestation of “blind persistence” (Aurel. Anton. Ad se ipsum. XI 3). The “new edicts” and the change in the character of G., attributed by Melito to Marcus Aurelius, could well have been the result of the demands of the pagans and the response of provincial rulers, who, on the one hand, were well aware of the emperor’s moods, and on the other, sought to somehow calm down the anti-Christian part of society and forced every time to seek advice from the emperor (Ramsay. P. 339; Zeiller. Vol. 1. P. 312).

With G. in the 60-70s. II century are trying to connect another legal monument preserved in the Digests of the Emperor. Justinian (VI century; Lebedev, p. 78), according to whom “the divine Mark decreed in a rescript that those guilty of confusing weak human souls with superstitious customs should be sent to the islands” (Dig. 48. 19. 30). This document appeared in the last years of the reign of Marcus Aurelius. However, the inclusion of such a norm in the general imperial legislation of Christ. emperor of the 6th century, and also not corresponding historical facts softness towards criminals does not allow us to recognize this document as the Antichrist. directionality (Ramsay. P. 340).

Imp. Marcus Aurelius is credited with a rescript to the Senate to end the persecution of Christians. According to the story given by Tertullian and Eusebius, during the campaign against the Germans. tribe of Quadi (c. 174) Rome. the army, experiencing hunger and thirst due to severe drought and surrounded by superior enemy forces, was miraculously saved by a thunderstorm that broke out through the prayers of the Christian soldiers of the Melitene Legion, renamed for this reason the “Lightning” (Legio XII Fulminata; Tertull. Apol. adv. gent. 5. 6; Euseb. Hist. eccl. V 5. 2-6). In the letter, the text of which is given in the appendix to the 1st apology of the martyr. Justin the Philosopher (Chapter 71 in Russian translation), the emperor, having told about the miracle, from now on allows Christians to be, “so that they do not receive any weapons against us through their prayers,” forbids persecuting them, forcing them to retreat from faith and deprive of freedom, and anyone who accuses a Christian only of being a Christian is ordered to be burned alive. “The rescript of Marcus Aurelius is undoubtedly framed,” since this emperor throughout his reign did not deviate from the principles established by his predecessors and each time cruelly persecuted Christians - this is the verdict of Church historians regarding this document (Bolotov. Collected works. Vol. 3. pp. 86-87; Zeiller. Vol. 1. P. 316).

In general, the number of martyrs known by name and revered by the Church who underwent martyrdom under Marcus Aurelius is approximately the same as under the other Antonines. At the beginning of the reign of Marcus Aurelius (c. 162), the monks suffered in Rome. Felicita and 7 other martyrs, who are traditionally considered her sons (see: Allard P. Histoire des persécutions pendant les deux premiers siècles. P., 19083. P. 378, n. 2). After several years (the usual dating is about 165), following the denunciation of the Cynic philosopher Crescentus, the prefect of Rome, Junius Rusticus, was convicted as a martyr. Justin the Philosopher, who organized Christ in Rome. public school. Along with him, 6 students suffered, among them was a woman named Charito (Acta Justini. 1-6). The fact of Crescent's denunciation (some researchers dispute its existence - see, for example: Lebedev, pp. 97-99) is based on the reports of Tatian and Eusebius of Caesarea, who used him (Tat. Contr. graec. 19; Euseb. Hist. eccl. IV 16. 8-9). Mch. Justin in the 2nd Apology (Chapter 3) considered Crescent as a possible culprit for his impending death. Preserved reliable acts the martyrdom of Justin and his disciples in 3 editions (see: SDHA. P. 341 seq., translation of all editions into Russian: P. 362-370).

G. affected the Churches in other places of the Roman Empire: Christians of Gortyn and others were persecuted. cities of Crete (Euseb. Hist. eccl. IV 23.5), the primate of the Athenian Church Publius was martyred (memorial note. January 21; Ibid. IV 23.2-3). Ep. Dionysius of Corinth in a letter to the Bishop of Rome. Soteru (c. 170) thanks him for the help that the Roman Church provided to those sentenced to hard labor in the mines (Ibid. IV 23.10). In M. Asia, during the proconsulate of Sergius Paul (164-166), Bishop died a martyr. Sagaris of Laodicea (Ibid. IV 26.3; V 24.5); OK. 165 (or 176/7) the bishop was executed. Thraseus of Eumenia (Ibid. V 18.13; 24.4), and in Apamea-on-Meander - 2 other residents of the city of Eumenia, Guy and Alexander (Ibid. V 16.22); in Pergamum approx. 164-168 Carp, Papila and Agathonika suffered (Ibid. IV 15, 48; in the hagiographic tradition, this martyrdom dates back to the time of Decius G.; memorial Oct. 13).

The protests took place against the backdrop of increasing hostility among the mob. St. Theophilus of Antioch noted that pagan Christians “pursued and are persecuted daily, some were stoned, others were killed...” (Theoph. Antioch. Ad Autol. 3. 30). In the West of the Empire, in 2 cities of Gaul, Vienne (modern Vienne) and Lugdun (modern Lyon), in the summer of 177, one of the most ferocious events occurred (see Lugdun Martyrs; memorial zap. July 25, June 2). These events are narrated in the letter of the Vienne and Lugdunian Churches to the Churches of Asia and Phrygia (preserved in Eusebius’ “Ecclesiastical History” - Euseb. Hist. eccl. V 1). In both cities, for unclear reasons, Christians were prohibited from appearing in public places - baths, markets, etc., as well as in citizens' homes. The mob attacked them “in droves and in crowds.” Municipal authorities before the arrival of the governor of the Prov. Lugdunian Gaul made arrests among Christians without distinction of their age, gender and social status, imprisoning them after preliminary interrogation under torture. The arrival of the governor marked the beginning of judicial reprisals, accompanied by torture and torture. Even those arrested who had fallen away from the faith continued to be kept in prison together with staunch confessors. Died in prison after pl. abuse of the local bishop. sschmch. Pofin. Matur and the deacon were subjected to inhuman torture. Saint, slave Blandina, her teenage brother Pontik and many others. etc. In relation to Attalus, a famous person in Lugdunum and Rome. citizen, a difficulty has arisen. The governor, not having the right to execute him, turned to the emperor with a request. Marcus Aurelius answered in the spirit of Trajan’s rescript: “To torture confessors, to let go of those who deny.” The governor "ordered the Roman citizens to cut off their heads and throw the rest to the beasts." An exception was made in relation to Attalus: for the sake of the mob, he was also thrown to the beasts. Those apostates who, while in prison, again turned to Christ, were tortured and then executed. In total, 48 people became victims of this G. in Gaul, according to tradition. The bodies of the martyrs were burned and the ashes were thrown into the river. Rodan (to Ron).

When imp. Commode

(180-192) calmer times came for the Church. To Rome This emperor left a bad reputation in history after his death, because, unlike his father Marcus Aurelius, he had little interest in the state. affairs. Showing indifference to politics, he turned out to be a less adamant persecutor of Christians than other representatives of the Antonine dynasty. In addition, Commodus was strongly influenced by his concubin Marcia, a Christian, although she had not been baptized (Dio Cassius. Hist. Rom. LXXII 4.7). Other Christians appeared at the emperor’s court, which Irenaeus mentions (Adv. haer. IV 30. 1): freedmen Proxenus (who later played a significant role in the reign of Septimius Severus) and Carpophorus (according to Hippolytus of Rome, master of the Roman Pope Callistus - see: Hipp. Philos. IX 11-12). The favorable attitude towards Christians at court could not go unnoticed for long in the provinces. Although the Antichrist. the legislation remained in force, the central government did not call the magistrates to G. and they could not help but take such changes into account. For example, in Africa approx. 190, the proconsul Cincius Severus secretly informed the Christians brought to him how they should answer before him in court in order to be released, and his successor Vespronius Candidus generally refused to judge Christians brought to him by an angry crowd (Tertull. Ad Scapul . 4). In Rome, Marcia managed to get from the emperor. Commodus of forgiveness of confessors sentenced to hard labor in the mines of the island of Sardinia. Pope Victor, through the Rev., close to Marcia. Jacintha presented a list of confessors, who were released (among them was the future Roman Bishop Callistus; Hipp. Philos. IX 12. 10-13).

Nevertheless, scenes of ruthless persecution of Christians could be observed under Commodus. At the beginning of his reign (c. 180), the first Christians suffered in Proconsular Africa. martyrs in this province, the memory of whom has been preserved to this day. time. 12 Christians from the small city of Scyllia in Numidia, accused in Carthage before the proconsul Vigelius Saturninus, firmly confessed their faith, refused to make a sacrifice to the pagan gods and swear by the genius of the emperor, for which they were convicted and beheaded (memorial July 17; see: Bolotov V V. On the question of Acta Martyrum Scillitanorum // Kh.Ch. 1903. T. 1. P. 882-894; T. 2. P. 60-76). Several years later (in 184 or 185), the proconsul of Asia, Arrius Antoninus, brutally dealt with Christians (Tertull. Ad Scapul. 5). In Rome approx. 183-185 Senator Apollonius suffered (memorial April 18) - another example of the penetration of Christianity into the highest circles of Rome. aristocracy. The slave who accused him of Christianity was executed in accordance with ancient laws, since it was forbidden for slaves to denounce their masters, but this did not free the martyr. Apollonius from answering before the praetorian prefect Tigidius Perennius, who invited him to leave Christ. faith and swear by the genius of the emperor. Apollonius refused and 3 days later read an apology in his defense before the Senate, at the end of which he again refused to sacrifice to the pagan gods. Despite the convincingness of the speech, the prefect was forced to condemn Apollonius to death, since “those once brought to trial can be released only if they change their way of thinking” (Euseb. Hist. eccl. V 21.4).

A new stage in the relationship between the Church and the Roman state occurs during the reign of the Severan dynasty (193-235), representatives of the swarm, caring little about the preservation and establishment of the old Rome. religious order, adhered to the politics of religions. syncretism. Under the emperors of this dynasty, the East. cults became widespread throughout the empire, penetrating various classes and social groups of its population. Christians, especially under the last 3 emperors of the Severan dynasty, lived relatively calmly, sometimes even enjoying the personal favor of the ruler.

When imp. Septimius Severus (193-211)

The years began in 202. Septimius was a Punic from the province. Africa. In his origin, as well as in the influence on him of his 2nd wife Julia Domna, daughter of Ser. priests from Emesa, see the reasons for the new religion. policies of the Roman state. In the first decade of Septimius's reign, Severus was tolerant of Christians. They were also among his courtiers: one of them, Proculus, healed the emperor (Tertull. Ad Scapul. 4.5).

However, in 202, after the Parthian campaign, the emperor took measures against the Jews and Christians. proselytism. According to the Biography of the North, he “forbade conversion to Judaism under pain of severe punishment; he established the same regarding Christians” (Scr. hist. Aug. XVII 1). G.'s researchers are divided on the meaning of this message: some consider it fiction or delusion, others see no reason not to accept it. There is also no consensus in assessing the character of G. under the North. For example, W. Friend, based on the words sschmch. Hippolytus of Rome in his Commentary on the Book of the Prophets. Daniel, that before the Second Coming “the faithful will be destroyed in all cities and towns” (Hipp. In Dan. IV 50. 3), believes that G. under the emperor. The North “was the first coordinated, widespread movement against Christians” (Frend. 1965. P. 321), but it affected a small group of Christian converts or not yet baptized people in the plural. provinces. Perhaps due to the relatively high social status of some victims, this G. made a special impression on society. Eusebius of Caesarea, mentioning Christ. the writer Jude, who compiled the chronicle before 203, adds: “He thought that the coming of the Antichrist, about whom they talked endlessly, was approaching; the strong persecution against us at that time gave rise to confusion in many minds” (Euseb. Hist. eccl. VI 7).

Christians were brought to Alexandria for punishment from Egypt and Thebaid. The head of the catechetical school, Clement of Alexandria, was forced to leave the city because of G. His disciple Origen, whose father Leonidas was among the martyrs, took upon himself the preparation of converts. Several his disciples also became martyrs, many of whom were only catechumens and were baptized while in captivity. Among those executed was the maiden Potamiena, who was burned along with her mother Markella, and the warrior Basilides who accompanied her (Euseb. Hist. eccl. VI 5). On March 7, 203, in Carthage, the noble Roman Perpetua and her slave Felicity, along with Secundinus, Saturninus, the slave Revokat and the elderly priest, appeared before the proconsul of Africa and were thrown to wild beasts. Satur (commemorated February 1; Passio Perpetuae et Felicitatis 1-6; 7, 9; 15-21). There are known martyrs who suffered in Rome, Corinth, Cappadocia and other parts of the empire.

When imp. (211-217)

G. again covered the provinces of the North. Africa, however, was limited. This time, Christians were persecuted by the ruler of Proconsular Africa, Mauritania and Numidia, Scapula, the addressee of Tertullian’s apology (“To Scapula”).

In general, the Church calmly survived the reign of the last Severas. Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Elagabalus (218-222) intended to transfer to Rome “the religious rites of the Jews and Samaritans, as well as Christian worship” in order to subordinate them to the priests of the Emesian god El, whom he revered (Scr. hist. Aug. XVII 3. 5). For several During his reign, Elagabalus gained the universal hatred of the Romans and was killed in the palace. At the same time, apparently, Pope Callistus and the Most Rev. died from the riots of the crowd. Calepodium (memoir Oct. 14; Depositio martyrum // PL. 13. Col. 466).

Imp. Alexander Sever (222-235)

the last representative of the dynasty, not only “was tolerant of Christians” (Ibid. XVII 22.4) and wanted to “build a temple for Christ and accept Him among the gods” (Ibid. 43.6), but even set Christ as an example. the practice of electing priests as a model for the appointment of provincial rulers and other officials (Ibid. 45. 6-7). Nevertheless, Christ. hagiographic tradition dates back to the reign of Alexander Severus. testimonies about G., including the passion of MC. Tatiana (memorial January 12), MC. Martin (memorial dated January 1), who apparently suffered in Rome. OK. 230, probably, the monastery suffered in Nicaea Bithynia. Theodotia (comm. September 17).

Imp. Maximin Thracian

(235-238)

who was proclaimed emperor by the soldiers after the murder of Alexander Severus, “due to hatred of the house of Alexander, which consisted mostly of believers,” raised a new short-lived G. (Euseb. Hist. eccl. VI 28). This time the persecution was directed against the clergy, whom the emperor accused of “teaching Christianity.” Ambrose and the priest were arrested and martyred in Caesarea Palestine. Protoctitis, friends of Origen, to whom he dedicated the treatise “On Martyrdom.” In 235 in Rome, Pope Pontian (commemoration: August 5; memorial: August 13) and antipope Sschmch became victims of G. Hippolytus of Rome, exiled to the mines of the island of Sardinia (Catalogos Liberianus // MGH. AA. IX; Damasus. Epigr. 35. Ferrua). In 236, Pope Anter was executed (commemoration, August 5; memorial, January 3). In Cappadocia and Pontus, persecution affected all Christians, but here they were less a consequence of the application of the Edict of Maximinus than a manifestation of the Antichrist. fanaticism awakened among the pagans due to the devastating earthquake that occurred ca. 235-236 in this region (Letter of Firmilian of Caesarea - ap. Cypr. Carth. Ep. 75. 10).

To the beginning 251 the persecution virtually came to naught. Taking advantage of a certain freedom, the Church was able to turn to solving internal problems that arose during the G. A direct consequence of the G. under the imp. Decius raised the issue of church discipline related to the acceptance of the fallen, which caused divisions among Christians in the West. In Rome, after a 15-month break that followed the execution of Fabian, a new bishop was elected, not without difficulties. Cornelius; he treated apostates leniently, which became the cause of the Novatian schism (named after antipope Novatian). In Carthage sschmch. Cyprian assembled the first large Council after Greece, which was to deal with the painful issue of the fallen.

In the summer of 251, imp. Decius was killed in the war with the Goths in Moesia. Occupied Rome. Trebonian Gall (251-253) resumed the throne. But unlike his predecessor, who considered Christians dangerous for the state, this emperor was forced to yield to the sentiments of the crowd, who saw Christians as the perpetrators of the plague epidemic that swept the entire empire at the end. 251 Pope St. was arrested in Rome. Cornelius, but the matter was limited to his exile in the outskirts of Rome, where he died in 253. His successor Lucius, immediately after his election, was removed from the city by the authorities and was able to return only the next year (Cypr. Carth. Ep. 59. 6; Euseb. Hist. eccl. VII 10).

When imp. Valerians (253-260)

after some time with new strength G. resumed. The first years of his reign were calm for the Church. As it seemed to many, the emperor even favored Christians, who were also at court. But in 257 in religion. There was a dramatic change in politics. St. Dionysius of Alexandria sees the reason for Valerian’s change of mood in the influence of his close associate Macrinus, an ardent supporter of the East. cults hostile to the Church.

In Aug. 257 the 1st edict of Valerian against Christians appeared. Hoping that the moderates are the Antichrist. actions will have a greater effect than harsh measures, the authorities dealt the main blow to the highest clergy, believing that after the apostasy of the primates of the Churches, their flock would follow them. This edict ordered the clergy to perform a sacrifice to Rome. Gods, refusal was punishable by exile. In addition, under threat of the death penalty, it was forbidden to perform religious services and visit burial sites. From the letters of Saints Dionysius of Alexandria to Hermammon and Herman (Euseb. Hist. eccl. VII 10-11) and Cyprian of Carthage (Ep. 76-80) it is known how the edict was executed in Alexandria and Carthage. Both saints were summoned by local rulers and, after refusing to comply with the edict, were sent into exile. In Africa, the legate of Numidia was sentenced to hard labor in the mines of many. bishops of this province, together with priests, deacons and certain laymen - probably for violating the prohibition to perform Christ. meetings. By the time of the 1st Edict of Valerian, tradition dates back to the martyrdom of Pope Stephen I, executed in 257 (memorial August 2; life see: Zadvorny V. History of the Roman Popes. M., 1997. Vol. 1. P. 105-133).

The authorities soon became convinced that the measures taken were ineffective. 2nd Edict, published Aug. 258, was more cruel. For refusing to obey, clergy were supposed to be executed, noble laymen of the senatorial and equestrian class were to be deprived of their dignity and subject to confiscation of property, in case of persistence, they were to be executed, their wives were to be deprived of property and exiled, persons who were members of the imp. service (caesariani), - deprive of property and condemn to forced labor on palace estates (Cypr. Carth. Ep. 80).

The application of the 2nd Edict was extremely harsh. Aug 10 258 Pope Sixtus II and the deacons Lawrence, Felicissimus and Agapitus were martyred in Rome (commemorated on August 10). Squads of the Roman martyrs of this time: deacons Hippolytus, Irenaeus, Avundius and MC. Concordia (comm. August 13); Eugenia, Protus, Iakinthos and Claudia (commemorated December 24). 14 Sep. from the place of exile, a smch was delivered to the proconsul of Africa Galerius Maximus. Cyprian of Carthage. A short dialogue took place between them: “Are you Tascius Cyprian?” - “I.” - “The Holy Emperors ordered you to make a sacrifice” (caeremoniari). - “I will not do it.” - “Think” (Consule tibi). - “Do what is prescribed to you. In a matter so just there is nothing to think about” (In re tam justa nulla est consultatio). After this, the proconsul formulated an accusation and the sentence followed: “Tastius Cyprian is to be executed with the sword.” - “Thanks be to God!” - answered the bishop (memorial, August 31; memorial, September 14; Acta Proconsularia S. Cypriani 3-4 // CSEL. T. 3/3. P. CX-CXIV; cf.: Bolotov. Collected works T. 3. P. 132). Dr. African. bishops, exiled a year ago, were now summoned and executed, among them: Theogenes of Hippo († 26 Jan. 259; memo. zan. 3 Jan.?) and bishops Agapius and Secundin († 30 Apr. 259; memo. z. 30 April). Diak. James and the reader Marian, arrested near the city of Cirta in Numidia, were executed on May 6, 259 in the city of Lambesis, the residence of the legate of Numidia, along with many. by the laity (memorial dated April 30). There were so many victims that the executions continued for several years. days (Zeiller. Vol. 2. P. 155). In Utica, a group of martyrs suffered, led by Bishop. Codratus (Aug. Serm. 306). 29 Jan 259 in Spain the bishop was burned alive. Fructuosus of Tarracona together with the deacons Augur and Eulogius (memorial, January 21; Zeiller. 1937. Vol. 2. P. 156). Bishops Marcian of Syracuse (mem. Oct. 30) and Libertin of Agrigento (mem. Nov. 3) suffered. G. also touched the east of the empire, where Valerian went to war with the Persians. The martyrdom of Christians in Palestine, Lycia and Cappadocia dating back to this time is known (see, for example: Euseb. Hist. eccl. VII 12).

Period of peace (260-302)

In June 260, imp. Valerian was captured by the Persians. Power passed to his son and co-ruler Gallienus (253-268), who abandoned the Antichrist. father's politics. The text of his rescript on the return to Christians of places for unhindered worship, addressed to Bishop. Dionysius of Alexandria and other bishops, preserved in Greek. translated by Eusebius (Hist. eccl. VII 13). Some Church historians believe that such legislative acts of the imp. Gallienus was the first to openly proclaim tolerance of the Church (Bolotov, Collected Works, Vol. 3, p. 137 ff.; Zeiller, Vol. 2, p. 157). However, this did not mean that Christianity acquired the status of a permitted religion. As subsequent events of the almost 40-year period of peaceful existence of the Church, which begins from this time, show, individual cases of hostility towards Christians, ending in their death, continued to occur in the future. Already under Gallienus, in Caesarea Palestine, Marinus, a noble and rich man who had distinguished himself, was beheaded for professing Christianity. military service(mem. March 17, Aug. 7; Euseb. Hist. eccl. VII 15). Similar cases occurred during the reign of other emperors of the 2nd half. III century

The danger of the new G. loomed over the Church under the Emperor. Aurelians (270-275). This emperor was a supporter of the East. "solar monotheism". Despite personal participation (in 272) in the expulsion of the heresiarch Paul I of Samosata from the See of Antioch, who was deposed to several. Councils, Aurelian, shortly before his death, as Eusebius and Lactantius report, conceived a new G., preparing an appropriate order (Euseb. Hist. eccl. VII 30. 2; Lact. De mort. persecution. 6. 2; text of Aurelian’s order about persecution of Christians, see: Coleman-Norton, 1966, Vol. 1, pp. 16-17). Although the persecution under Aurelian was limited, the number of martyrs of this period venerated by the Church is quite large. By the time of imp. Aurelian is traditionally attributed to the squad of the Byzantine martyrs Lucillian, Claudius, Hypatius, Paul, Dionysius and Paul the Virgin (commemorated June 3); martyrs Paul and Juliana of Ptolemais (March 4); martyrs Razumnik (Sinesius) of Rome (comm. Dec. 12), Philumenus of Ancyra (Nov. 29), etc.

Peace for the Church was preserved under Aurelian's immediate successors, the emperors Tacitus (275-276), Probus (276-282) and Cara (282-283), and then during the first 18 years of the emperor's reign. Diocletian (284-305) and his co-rulers - Augustus Maximian and Caesars Galerius and Constantius I Chlorus. As Eusebius of Caesarea, an eyewitness to the events, reports, “the emperors were very disposed towards our faith” (Euseb. Hist. eccl. VIII 1. 2). Lactantius, a stern denouncer of persecuting emperors, called the reign of Diocletian until 303 the happiest times for Christians (De mort. persec. 10).

During this period, Christians occupied important government positions. positions, while receiving exemption from making sacrifices to pagan gods, which were part of the duties of officials. Among the martyrs, after. victims of the “Great Persecution” of Diocletian were the judge and manager of the royal treasury in Alexandria Philor (Euseb. Hist. eccl. VIII 9. 7; memorial zap. 4 Feb.), the emperor’s close associates Gorgonius and Dorotheus (Ibid. VII 1. 4 ; memorial September 3, December 28), a noble dignitary Davikt (Adavkt), who occupied one of the highest government positions (Ibid. VIII 11.2; memorial October 4). Christianity also penetrated into the emperor’s family: it was professed by Diocletian’s wife Prisca and their daughter Valeria (Lact. De mort. persecuted. 15). There were many Christians among educated people this time: it is enough to mention Arnobius and his student Lactantius. The latter was a court teacher of Latin. language in Nicomedia. Christians made up a significant part of the army. During the same period, there were mass conversions of pagans to Christianity. Eusebius exclaimed: “How to describe these meetings of thousands in every city, these amazing crowds of people flocking to houses of prayer! There were few old buildings; but new, extensive churches were erected in all cities” (Euseb. Hist. eccl. VIII 1. 5).

"Great Persecution" imp. Diocletian and his heirs (303-313)

The period of peace between the Church and the state had to end sooner or later. Changes have emerged in the end. 90s III century; they are usually associated with successful Persians. campaign of Caesar Galerius in 298 (Zeiller. 1037. Vol. 2. P. 457). Soon after its completion, Galerius began to systematically cleanse the army of Christians. A certain Veturius was appointed executor, who offered a choice: either obey and remain in his rank, or lose it by opposing the order (Euseb. Hist. eccl. VIII 4. 3). These measures applied to both officers and soldiers. Some Christian soldiers, who stood firmly for the faith, paid with their lives, for example. Samosata martyrs Roman, Jacob, Philotheus, Iperichius, Aviv, Julian and Parigorios (mem. January 29), martyr. Aza and 150 warriors (memorial November 19), etc.

According to Lactantius, the main culprit and executor of the “Great Persecution” was Galerius, which is quite consistent with the facts. “The historical truth, as we can gather it from various evidences, is evidently this, that Diocletian became a persecutor, contrary to all his former policy, and again began a religious war in the empire under the direct and predominant influence of Galerius” (Zeiller. 1937. Vol. 2. P 461). Lactantius lived for a long time at the court in Nicomedia and therefore was an important, although impartial, witness to what was happening and believed that the cause of G. should not be seen only in the personality of Caesar Galerius or in the influence of his superstitious mother (Lact. De mort. persecution. 11). Responsibility for the persecution of Christians cannot be removed from the imp. Diocletian.

According to some researchers, the policy of the imp. Diocletian was initially an antichrist: the fundamental contradiction between the Church and the state was obvious to the emperor, and only the need to solve the current problems of government prevented him from implementing the rule (Stade. 1926; see: Zeiller. Vol. 2. P. 459). So, in the first years of his reign, Diocletian was busy with numerous reforms: he reorganized the army, adm. governance, financial and tax reform; he had to fight external enemies, suppress uprisings and revolts of usurpers. Legislation imp. Diocletian (for example, the prohibition of marriages between close relatives, issued in 295, or the law on the Manichaeans 296) indicates that the emperor's goal was to restore the old Rome. orders of magnitude. Diocletian added a title to his name in honor of Jupiter (Jovius), and Maximian - in honor of Hercules (Herculius), which was supposed to demonstrate the rulers' commitment to the ancient religions. traditions The behavior of some Christians could not but alarm Rome. authorities. In the army, Christians refused to obey the orders of their commanders, citing the prohibitions of their religion. In con. 90s III century the recruit Maximian and the centurion Marcellus were executed for categorically refusing military service.

The “spirit of war” with Christians also hovered among educated pagans, so Caesar Galerius was not the only supporter of G. in Diocletian’s entourage. Pupil of the philosopher Porphyry Hierocles, governor of the province. Bithynia, on the eve of the beginning G. published a pamphlet entitled Λόϒοι φιλαλήθεις πρὸς τοὺς χριστιανούς (Truth-loving words to Christians). Lactantius mentions, without naming the name, another philosopher who published the Antichrist at the same time. essay (Lact. Div. inst. V 2). This mood of pagan intellectuals contributed to the beginning of G., and the authorities could not ignore this.

In Antioch in 302 (Lact. De mort. persecution. 10) when making a sacrifice to the imp. Diocletian, when he was awaiting the results of fortune-telling from the entrails of slaughtered animals, the head of the haruspices Tagis declared that the presence of Christians was interfering with the ceremony. The angry Diocletian ordered not only everyone present at the ceremony, but also the servants in the palace to make sacrifices to the gods, and punish those who refused with whips. Then orders were sent to the troops to force the soldiers to do the same, and those who refused to be expelled from service. Returning to the main residence in Nicomedia, Diocletian hesitated whether to take active measures against Christians. Caesar Galerius, together with the highest dignitaries, including Hierocles, insisted on the beginning of the city. Diocletian decided to send a haruspex to the Milesian sanctuary of Apollo to find out the will of the gods. The oracle confirmed the desire of the emperor’s entourage (Lact. De mort. persecute. 11). But this did not convince Diocletian to shed the blood of Christians. An edict was prepared concerning buildings and sacred books, as well as various categories of believers. The use of the death penalty was not intended. On the eve of the publication of the edict in Nicomedia, an armed detachment occupied Christ, who was located not far from the palace. temple, destroyed it and set the liturgical books on fire.

24 Feb In 303, the edict on Greece was promulgated: it was ordered to destroy Christ everywhere. temples and destroy holy books, deprive Christians of titles and honors, the right to make accusations in courts, Christian slaves could no longer receive freedom (Euseb. Hist. eccl. VIII 2.4). One indignant Christian tore the edict from the wall, for which he was tortured and executed (Lact. De mort. persecution. 13; Euseb. Hist. eccl. VIII 5. 1).

Soon in imp. There were 2 fires in the palace in Nicomedia. Galerius convinced Diocletian that the arsonists should be sought among Christians. The Emperor now viewed all Christians as enemies. He forced his wife and daughter to perform the sacrifice, but the Christian courtiers were more stubborn. Dorotheus, Peter and many others. others refused to carry out the emperor's orders and were executed after severe torture. The first victims of G. were the primate of the Nicomedia Church, Sschmch. Anthimus (mem. Sept. 3), numerous clergy and laity of this city, among whom were women and children (Lact. De mort. persecuted. 15; Euseb. Hist. eccl. VIII 6; memorial Jan. 20, 7 Feb., Sept. 2, 3, Dec. 21, 28; see Martyrs of Nicomedia, monastery Juliana).

With the exception of Gaul and Britain, where Caesar Constantius I Chlorus, who ruled these areas, limited himself to the destruction of several. temples, the edict was carried out everywhere with great severity. In Italy, Spain and Africa, subject to the empire. Maximian Herculius, as well as in the East, in the domains of Diocletian and Galerius, church books were burned, temples were razed to the ground. There were cases when the clergy themselves handed over church values ​​and holy books to local authorities. Others, like Bishop. Mensurius of Carthage, replaced liturgical books with heretical ones and gave the latter to the authorities. There were also martyrs who refused to give up anything, like Felix of Tubiz in the North. Africa (memo. zap. Oct. 24; Bolotov. Collected works. T. 3. P. 158; Zeiller. Vol. 2. P. 464).

Among the most famous and revered martyrs of the time, G. imp. Diocletian - Markellinus, Pope of Rome, with his retinue (commemorated on June 7), Markell, Pope of Rome, with his retinue (commemorated on June 7), VMC. Anastasia the Pattern Maker (commemorated on December 22), martyr. St. George the Victorious (commemorated April 23; commemorated Georgian November 10), martyrs Andrei Stratelates (commemorated August 19), John the Warrior (commemorated July 30), Cosmas and Damian the Unmercenary (commemorated July 1, Oct. 17 ., November 1), Cyrus and Julitta of Tarsus (commemorated July 15), Cyrus and John of Egypt with their retinue (commemorated January 31), archdeacon. Eupl of Catania (Sicily; commemorated Aug. 11), martyr. Panteleimon of Nicomedia (comm. July 27), Theodotus Korchemnik (comm. Nov. 7), Moky Byzantine (comm. May 11), who was famous in K-pol; Sebastian of Rome (comm. December 18), whose cult acquired great importance in the West. Europe in the Middle Ages.

Mn. victims of G. imp. Diocletian is revered by the Church in the squads. These are, for example, ep. Iannuarius of Laodicea with deacons Proculus, Sissius and Faustus and others (memorial April 21), presbyters Trophimus and Thales of Laodicea (memorial March 16), Militin martyrs (memorial November 7), martyr. Theodotus and the 7 Virgins of Ancyra (memorial: May 18, November 6), mc. Theodulia, martyrs Elladius, Macarius and Evagrius of Anazar (commemorated February 5); Mauritius of Apamea and 70 soldiers (commemorated February 22), Isaac, Apollos and Codratus of Spain (commemorated April 21), martyrs Valeria, Kyriacia and Maria of Caesarea (commemorated June 7), Virgin Lucia of Rome with her retinue (commemorated 6 July), martyrs Victor, Sosthenes and VMC. Euphemia of Chalcedon (Commemorated September 16), martyrs Capitolina and Erotiida of Caesarea-Cappadocia (Commemorated October 27) and many others. etc.

In the spring of 303, revolts broke out in Armenia and Syria. Diocletian blamed Christians for this, and soon new edicts followed one after another: one ordered the imprisonment of the heads of communities, the other ordered the release of those who agreed to make a sacrifice, subjecting those who refused to torture. In con. 303 Diocletian, on the occasion of the celebration of the 20th anniversary of his accession to the throne, declared an amnesty; many Christians were released from prison, and the intensity of persecution subsided. However, soon the imp. Diocletian fell seriously ill and power actually ended up in the hands of Galerius.

In the spring of 304, the 4th edict was issued, repeating the desperate measures of the emperor. Decius. All Christians were required to make sacrifices under pain of death. Many believers suffered from the application of this edict throughout the empire, with the exception of Gaul and Britain.

On May 1, 305, Diocletian resigned, forcing Maximian Herculius to do the same. From that moment on, Greece virtually ceased in the West, in the possessions of Constantius Chlorus, who became Augustus, and his heir, Constantine the Great. The persecution of Christians and other rulers of the West - Flavius ​​Severus, Maximian Herculius and Maxentius Euseb - did not resume. De mart. Palaest. 4. 8). The consequence of this was numerous martyrdoms. In Alexandria, by order of the prefect of Egypt, the martyr was beheaded. Philor together with Bishop. Tmuitsky schmch. Sirloin. Executions took place almost daily in Palestine; Among the victims was the scientist Rev. Pamphilus (comm. February 16), friend and mentor of Eusebius of Caesarea. Many Christians in Caesarea Palestine were sentenced to hard labor in the mines after being previously blinded (Ibid. 9).

Despite a certain decline in persecution, the number of martyrs who suffered under the imp. Galeria and those revered by the Church are also extremely large. Of these, the most widely known are the martyrs. Demetrius of Thessalonica (comm. Oct. 26), Adrian and Natalia of Nicomedia (Aug. 26), Cyrus and John the Unmercenary (mem. Jan. 31), vmts. Catherine of Alexandria (comm. November 24), martyr. Theodore Tiron (comm. February 17); numerous squads of saints, such as the 156 Tire martyrs led by bishops Pelias and Nile (memorial on September 17), the Nicomedia priests Hermolai, Hermippus and Hermocrates (memorial on July 26), the Egyptian martyrs Marcian, Nikander, Iperechios, Apollo, etc. (commemorated June 5), Melitene martyrs Eudoxius, Zinon and Macarius (commemorated September 6), Amasia martyrs Alexandra, Claudia, Euphrasia, Matrona and others (commemorated March 20), Bithyn martyrs Minodora, Metrodorus and Nymphodora (memorial September 10), Caesarea martyrs Antoninus, Nicephorus and Germanus (Nov. 13), Ennath, Valentinus and Paul (Feb. 10).

Vmch. Theodore Stratilates meets the emperor. Licinia. The mark of the icon “Vmch. Theodore Stratelates with 14 scenes from his life." XVI century (NGOMZ)

He took control of the entire East of the Empire after the death of Galerius (May 5, 311) and, despite the edict of toleration, resumed G. At this time it ceased to be a question only domestic policy, since Maximin began a war with the neighboring Armenian kingdom, which 10 years ago, under Trdat III, adopted Christianity as an official one. religion (Euseb. Hist. eccl. IX 8.2, 4). In the domains of Daza, for the first time they tried to reorganize paganism, giving it a special hierarchical structure that resembled the Church (Lact. De mort. persecuted. 36-37; Greg. Nazianz. Or. 4). At the direction of Maximin Daza, forged “Acts of Pilate” were distributed, containing slander against Christ (Euseb. Hist. eccl. IX 5. 1). The emperor secretly incited the pagans to take the initiative to expel Christians from the cities. New executions followed: the elderly bishop was thrown to the beasts. Silvanus of Emesa together with the deacon. Luke and the reader Mokiy (mem. January 29), executed by bishop. Methodius of Patara (comm. June 20), archbishop. Peter of Alexandria (comm. November 25), other bishops of Egypt died; in Nicomedia the scientist Venerable was killed. Antioch Church sschmch. Lucian (Comm. Oct. 15), Bishop also suffered. Clement of Ancyra (commemorated January 23), Porphyry Stratilates and 200 soldiers in Alexandria (commemorated November 24), Eustathius, Thespesius and Anatoly of Nicaea (commemorated November 20), Julian, Kelsius, Anthony, Anastasius, Basilissa, Marionilla , 7 youths and 20 warriors of Antinous (Egypt; January 8), Mina, Hermogenes and Evgraf of Alexandria (commemorated December 10), etc.

The persecution in the East continued actively until 313, when, at the request of Constantine the Great, Maximin Daza was forced to stop it. The text of his rescript addressed to the prefect Sabinus has been preserved, in which it was ordered “not to offend the inhabitants” and to attract “to faith in the gods more with affection and persuasion” (text: Euseb. Hist. eccl. IX 9). Christians did not believe in the tolerance proclaimed by the emperor, watching with alarm the new policy of the former cruel persecutor, until he left the historical stage, defeated by Licinius in 313.

Bolotov. Collection works T. 3. P. 167).

Despite the crushing defeat of paganism, in the 4th century. There were 2 more short-term relapses of the former Antichrist. politicians.

Imp. Licinius (308-324)

who ruled the East of the empire and from 312 entered into an alliance with the emperor. Constantine and supported the Edict of Milan, for unclear reasons ca. 320 opened G. against the Church in his possessions. It ceased after his defeat by Constantine the Great at Chrysopolis and his deposition in 324.

Victims of G. Licinius, among others. became military personnel Theodore Stratelates (319; commemorated February 8, June 8), martyr. Eustathius of Ancyra (comm. July 28), bishop. Basil of Amasia (April 26), Foka Vertogradar of Sinop (comm. Sept. 22); 40 Martyrs of Sebastia (commemorated March 9), as well as Sebastian martyrs Atticus, Agapius, Eudoxius and others (commemorated November 3); martyrs Elijah, Zotik, Lucian and Valerian of Tomsk (Thrace; memorial September 13).

Imp. Julian the Apostate (361-363)

became the last persecutor of the Church in the Roman Empire. Having made a desperate attempt to revive paganism, he could not persecute Christians in open court. Having declared universal religious tolerance, Julian forbade Christians from teaching grammar and rhetoric. By returning bishops from exile, the emperor provoked conflicts between dogmatic opponents, Arians and Orthodox, or even supported certain heretics (extreme Arians - Anomeans). During his short reign in many. The Antichrist took place in the cities of the Empire's East. pogroms, which resulted in several Christians became martyrs. The death of Julian in 363 put an end to the last attempt of paganism to prevail over Christianity.

A. V. Khrapov

Source: Owen E. C. E. Some Authentic Acts of the Early Martyrs. Oxf., 1927; Ranovich A. B. Primary sources on the history of early Christianity. M., 1933; Ausgewählte Märtyrerakten / Hrsg. v. R. Knopf, G. Krüger. Tüb., 19654; Coleman-Norton P. R. Roman State and Christian Church: a Coll. of Legal Documents to A. D. 535. L., 1966; The Acts of the Christian Martys / Introd., texts and transl. by H. Musurillo. Oxf., 1972. L., 2000; Lanata G. Gli Atti dei martiri come documenti processuali. Mil., 1973; A New Eusebius: Documents Illustrating the History of the Church to AD 337 / Ed. J. Stevenson, W. H. C. Frend. L., 1987(2); Bobrinsky A. From the era of the birth of Christianity: Testimonies of non-Christian writers of the 1st-2nd centuries. Our Lord Jesus Christ and Christians. M., 1995r; SDHA.

Lit.: Arseny (Ivashchenko), archim. Notes on the martyrdom of St. Arefs and others with him in the city of Negran, serving and explaining the history of Christianity in South Arabia in the 6th century. // Wanderer. 1873. No. 6. P. 217-262; Mason A. J. The Persecution of Diocletian. Camb., 1876; idem. The Historic Martyrs of the Primitive Church. L.; N. Y., 1905; Sokolov V. ABOUT . On the influence of Christianity on Greco-Roman legislation // CHOLDP. 1877. Jan. Dept. 1. pp. 53-92. May. Dept. 1. P. 509-541; Nov. Dept. 1. pp. 548-567; 1878. March. Dept. 1. pp. 260-393; Sep. Dept. 1. pp. 227-256; Dec. Dept. 1 pp. 664-714; G örres F . Die Märtyrer der aurelianischen Christenverfolgung // Jb. f. protestantische Theologie. 1880. Bd. 6. S. 449-494; Berdnikov I. WITH . State position of religion in the Roman-Byzantine Empire. Kaz., 1881; Adeney W. F. Marcus Aurelius and the Christian Church // British Quarterly Review. 1883. Vol. 77. P. 1-35; B-y A. The Legend of Nero as the Antichrist // CHOLDP. 1883. Jan. Dept. 1. pp. 17-34; Gibbon E. The history of the decline and destruction of the Roman Empire. M., 1883. St. Petersburg, 1997. Part 1; Lebedev A. P . Marcia: (Episode from the history of Christianity during the reign of Commodus, II century) // PrTSO. 1887. Part 40. pp. 108-147; aka. The era of persecution of Christians and the establishment of Christianity in the Greco-Roman world under Constantine the Great. M., 1994. St. Petersburg, 2003; Island S. On the historiography of the persecution of Christians during the reign of the Emperor. Hadrian and from the accession of Gall to the accession of Diocletian (251-285) // CHOLDP. 1888. March. Dept. 1. P. 269-301; July. Dept. 1. P. 74-106; Sep. Dept. 1. pp. 219-256; aka. Persecution of Christians during the reign of Commodus // PO. 1890. No. 11/12. pp. 697-705; Z. The nature of the first two persecutions against Christians // PO. 1888. No. 10. P. 231-253; No. 11. P. 432-465; Neumann K. J. Der Römische Staat und die allgemeine Kirche bis auf Diocletian. Lpz., 1890; Boissier G. The Fall of Paganism: Research. latest religion struggle in the West in the 4th century. / Per. from French edited by and with a preface. M. S. Korelina. M., 1892; Addis W. E. Christianity and the Roman Empire. L., 1893; S-tsky N. On the question of the fallen in the Roman and North African Churches in the 3rd century. // ViR. 1893. No. 9. P. 559-591; No. 11. N. 691-710; Pavlovich A. Nero’s persecution of Christians and the policy of the Flavian emperors towards them // Kh. 1894. Part 1. Issue. 2. P. 209-239; aka. Persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire in the first two centuries (before 170) // Ibid. Vol. 3. P. 385-418; Ramsay W. M. The Church in the Roman Empire before A.D. 170. L., 18954; idem. The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia and their Place in the Plan of the Apocalypse. N. Y., 1905; Gregg J. A. F. The Decian Persecution. Edinb., 1897; Bolotov V. IN . Persecution of Christians under Nero // Kh. 1903. Part 1. No. 1. P. 56-75; Allard P. Histoire des persécutions pendant la première moitié du troisième siècle. P., 19053; Healy P. J. The Valerian Persecution. Boston, 1905; Harnak A. Church and state before the establishment of the state. Church // General history of Europe. culture / Ed. I. M. Grevsa and others. St. Petersburg, 1907. T. 5. P. 247-269; Mommsen Th. Der Religionsfrevel nach römischen Recht // Gesammelte Schriften. B., 1907. Bd. 3. S. 389-422; Canfield L. H. The Early Persecutions of the Christians. N. Y., 1913; Melikhov V. A . From the history of the Judeo-Roman persecution of Christians // ViR. 1913. No. 16. P. 486-500; No. 17. P. 651-666; Yarushevich V. Persecution of Christians by imp. Decius (249-251) // Ibid. 1914. No. 1. P. 63-74; No. 2. P. 164-177; Brilliantov A. AND . Emperor Constantine the Great and the Edict of Milan 313 Pg., 1916; Knipfing J. R. The Libelli of the Decian Persecution // HarvTR. 1923. Vol. 16. P. 345-390; Merrill E. T. Essays in Early Christian History. L., 1924; Nemoevsky A. Is the persecution under Nero a historical fact? // Atheist. 1925. No. 1. P. 44-47; Hardy E. G. Christianity and the Roman Government. L., 1925r; Stade K. E. Der politiker Diocletian und die letzte grosse Christenverfolgung: Diss. Baden, 1926; Bludau A. Die ägyptischen Libelli und die Christenverfolgung des Kaisers Decius. Freiburg i. Br., 1931. (RQS. Suppl.; 27); Niven W. D. The Conflicts of the Early Church. L., ; Phipps C. B. Persecution under Marcus Aurelius // Hermathena. Dublin, 1932. Vol. 47. P. 167-201; Poteat H. M. Rome and the Christians // Classical Journal. Gainesville, 1937/1938. Vol. 33. P. 134-44; Zeiller J. Les premières persecutions, la legislation impériale relative aux chrétiens. La persécutions sous les Flaviens et les Antonins. Les grandes persécutions du milieu du IIIe s. et la période de paix religieuse de 260 à 302. La dernière persécution // Histoire de l"Église depuis les origins jusqu"à nos jours / Ed. A. Fliche et V. Martin. P., 1937. Vol. 1-2; idem. Nouvelles observations sur l"origine juridique des persécutions contre les chrétiens aux deux premiers siècles // RHE. 1951. T. 46. P. 521-533; Barnes A. S. Christianity at Rome in the Apostolic Age. L., 1938; idem: Legislation against the Christians // JRS. 1968. Vol. 58. P. 32-50; idem. Pre-Decian Acta Martyrum // JThSt. 1968. N. S. Vol. 19. P. 509-531; idem. The New Empire of Diocletian and Constantine. Camb., 1982; Baynes N. H. The Great Persecution // The Cambridge Ancient History. Camb., 1939. Vol. 12. P. 646-691; Shtaerman E. M. Persecution of Christians in the 3rd century. // VDI. 1940. No. 2. P. 96-105; Sherwin-White A. N. The Early Persecution and Roman Law Again // JThSt. 1952. N. S. Vol. 3. P. 199-213; Whipper R. YU . Rome and early Christianity. M., 1954; Ste-Croix G. E. M., de. Aspects of the 'Great" Persecution // HarvTR. 1954. Vol. 47. P. 75-113; Grant R. M. The Sword and the Cross. N. Y., 1955; Andreotti R. Religione ufficiale e culto dell "imperatore nei" libelli" di Decio // Studi in onore di A. Calderini e R. Paribeni. Mil., 1956. Vol. 1. P. 369-376; Stein E. Histoire du Bas-empire. P., 1959. Vol. 1: (284-476); Rossi S. La cosiddette persecuzione di Domiziano // Giornale italiano di filologia. R., 1962. Vol. 15. P. 302-341; Ste Croix G. E. M. de, Sherwin-White A. N. Why Were the Early Christians Persecuted? // Past and Present. Oxf., 1963. Vol. 26. P. 6-38; Barnard L. W. Clement of Rome and the Persecution of Domitian // NTS. 1963. Vol. 10. P. 251-260; Gré goire H. Les persécutions dans l "Empire Romain. Brux., 19642; Remondon R. La crise de L" Empire Romain de Marc Aurelius à Anasthasius. P., 1964, 19702; Kazhdan A. P . From Christ to Constantine. M., 1965; Friend W. H. C. Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church: A Study of a Conflict from the Maccabees to Donatus. Oxf., 1965; idem. Open Questions Concerning the Christians and the Roman Empire in the Age of the Severi // JThSt. 1974. N. S. Vol. 25. P. 333-351; idem. A Severan Persecution?: Evidence of the Historia Augusta // Forma Futuri: Studi in onore del Card. M. Pellegrino. Torino, 1975. P. 470-480; idem. The Rise of Christianity. L.; Phil., 1984; Sordi M. Il Сristianesimo e Roma. Bologna, 1965; Clarke G. W. Some Victims of the Persecution of Maximinus Thrax // Historia. 1966. Vol. 15. P. 445-453; idem. Some Observations on the Persecution of Decius // Antichthon. , 1969. Vol. 3. P. 63-76; idem. Two Measures in the Persecution of Decius // Bull. of the Inst. of Classical Studies of the Univ. of London. L., 1973. Vol. 20. P. 118-124; Golubtsova N. AND . At the origins of the Christian Church. M., 1967; Delvoye C. Les Persécutions contre les chrétiens dans l"Empire Romain. Brux., 1967; Freudenberger R. Das Verhalten der römischen Behörden gegen die Christen in 2. Jh. Münch., 1967; idem. Christenreskript: ein umstrittenes Reskript des Antoninus Pius // ZKG. 1967. Bd. 78. S. 1-14; idem. Das angebliche Christenedikt des Septimius Severus // WSt. 1968. Bd. 81. S. 206-217; Bickermann E. Trajan, Hadrian and the Christians // Rivista di Filologia e di Istruzione Classica. Torino, 1968. Vol. 96. P. 290-315; Keresztes P. Marcus Aurelius a Persecutor? // HarvTR. 1968. Vol. 61. P. 321-341; idem. The Emperor Maximinus" Decree of 235 A.D.: Between Septimius and Decius // Latomus. 1969. Vol. 28. P. 601-618; idem. The Jews, the Christians and the Emperor Domitian // VChr. 1973. Vol. 27. P. 1-28; idem. The Peace of Gallienus // WSt. 1975. N. F. Bd. 9. S. 174-185; idem. From the Great Persecution to the Peace of Galerius // VChr. 1983. Vol. 37. P. 379-300; idem. Imperial Rome and the Christians. Lanham; N. Y.; L., 1989. 2 vol.; Molthagen J. Der römische Staat und die Christen im 2. und 3. Jh. Gött., 1970; Wlosok A. Rom und die Christen. Stuttg., 1970; idem. Die Rechtsgrundlagen der Christenverfolgungen der ersten zwei Jh. // Das frühe Christentum im römischen Staat. Darmstadt, 1971. S. 275-301; Jannsen L. F. “Superstitio” , and the Persecution of the Christians // VChr. 1979. Vol. 33. P. 131-159; Nersesyants V. S. Legal understanding of Roman jurists // Soviet State and Law. 1980. No. 12. P. 83- 91; Sergeenko M. E. Persecution of Decius // VDI. 1980. No. 1. P. 171-176; Workman B. W. Persecution in the Early Church. Oxf., 19802; idem. The New Empire of Diocletian and Constantine. Camb., 1982; Syme R. Domitian: the Last Years // Chiron. Münch., 1983. P. 121-146; Lepelley C. Chrétiens et païens au temps de la persecution de Dioclétien: Le cas d "Abthugni // StPatr. 1984. Bd. 15. S. 226-232; Nicholson O. The Wild Man of the Tetrarchy: A Divine Companion for the Emperor Galerius // Byzantion. 1984. Vol. 54; Wilken R. L. The Christians as Romans Saw Them. New Haven, 1984; Williams S. Diocletian and the Roman Recovery. N. Y.; L., 1985; Sventsitskaya I. WITH . From community to Church: (On the formation of the Christian Church). M., 1985; she is the same. Early Christianity: Pages of History. M., 1988; she is the same. Features of the religious life of the masses in the Asian provinces of the Roman Empire (II-III centuries): Paganism and Christianity // VDI. 1992. No. 2. P. 54-71; she is the same. The first Christians and the Roman Empire. M., 2003; Pohlsander H. A. The Religious Policy of Decius // ANRW. 1986. Vol. 2. S. 1826-1842; Kolb F. Diocletian und die Erste Tetrarchie: Improvisation oder Experiment in der Organization monarchianischer Herrschaft. B.; N.Y., 1987; Kurbatov G. L., Frolov E. D., Froyanov I. I . Christianity: Antiquity. Byzantium. Ancient Rus'. L., 1988; Posnov M. E. History of the Christian Church: (Before the division of the Churches - 1054). Brussels, 19882. K., 1991r; Fedosik V. A . Persecution of Decius in the North. Africa // Spring. Belarus. Derzh. Univ. Ser. 3: History. Philosophy. Scientific kamunizm. Economics. Rights. 1988. No. 1. P. 17-19; aka. Church and State: Criticism of theology. concepts. Minsk, 1988. P. 94-95; aka. “The Great Persecution” of Diocletian against Christians // Scientific. atheism and atheistic education. Minsk, 1989; Donini A. At the origins of Christianity: (From its origins to Justinian): Trans. from Italian M., 19892; Alf ö ldy G . Die Krise des Imperium Romanum und die Religion Roms // Religion und Gesellschaft in der römischen Kaiserzeit: Kolloquium zu Ehren von F. Vittinghoft. Koln, 1989. S. 53-102; Davis P. S. The Origin and Purpose of the Persecution of AD 303 // JThSt. 1989. N. S. Vol. 40. P. 66-94; Schwarte K. H. Die Religionsgesetze Valerians // Religion und Gesellschaft in der römischen Kaiserzeit. 1989. P. 103-163; Histoire de Christianisme. P., 1993. Vol. 1; Christ K. Geschichte der romischen Kaiserzeit: Von Augustus bis zu Konstantin. Münch., 19953, 20055; Jones A. X . M. The Death of the Ancient World / Trans. from English: T. V. Goryaynova. M.; Rostov-on-Don, 1997; Rudokvas A. D. The question of the so-called “persecution” of Licinius and the political side of the Arian schism // Ancient society: Problems of politics. stories. St. Petersburg, 1997. pp. 135-146; Essays on the history of the Christian Church in Europe // Antiquity, Middle Ages, Reformation / Ed. Yu. E. Ivonina. Smolensk, 1999; Tyulenev V. M. Lactantius: Christian historian at the crossroads of eras. St. Petersburg, 2000; Dodds E. R . Pagan and Christian in Time of Troubles: Certain aspects of religions. practitioner in the period from Marcus Aurelius to Constantine / Trans. from English: A. D. Panteleev, A. V. Petrov. St. Petersburg, 2003; Schlossberg G. The Church and its persecutors: Trans. from English St. Petersburg, 2003.

From its origins until its legalization under Constantine, Christianity had no official status in the Roman Empire. In the first two centuries, Christianity and its followers were suspicious of much of the empire's population. They were considered members of some kind of "secret society" who communicated through secret signs and shunned polite society, so in the beginning there was public hostility and mob anger against Christians rather than official action. The first known attempt to formulate an official position was made by the imperial legate in the province of Bithynia and Pontus, Pliny the Younger, who in his letter Traianu reported that he had received a large number of anonymous denunciations against Christians, and asked for advice, since he considered the matter serious. The emperor's response, in fact - an official document, a rescript, boiling down to the fact that Christians should not be specifically sought out, and if they are exposed and renounce their faith, then they should be released, confirmed by Hadrian in 125, set the direction of imperial policy towards Christians for the coming decades. However, the practical consequence of Trajan's rescript was that identified, confessed and non-renounced Christians were subjected to torture and execution, as was the case in 177 in Lyon and Vienne, when the intervention of civil authorities prevented a mob of townspeople from dragging Christians from their homes and beating them to death. The proconsul, who applied for the emperor’s decision, received from Marcus Aurelius, who was ruling at that time, the following decision: to execute those who were firm in Christianity, to execute Roman citizens with the sword, to kill others, and to release apostates.

On the contrary, the name of faction should be given to those who conspire to hate good and honest people, who unanimously demand the blood of innocent people, hiding behind the false opinion to justify their hatred that they, Christians, are the culprits of every social disaster, every national misfortune. If the Tiber entered the walls, if the Nile did not flood the fields, if the sky did not give rain, if there was an earthquake, if there was a famine or epidemic; then they immediately shout: Christians to the lion.

For followers of traditional Roman cults, Christians were too strange - not quite barbarians and not quite Romans. Their religious practices challenged traditional principles. Christians refused to celebrate national holidays and participate in events imperial cult and publicly criticized ancient customs. Justin the Philosopher reports about a pagan husband who denounced his Christian wife, Tertullian about children who were disinherited after converting to Christianity. Traditional Roman religion was inextricably linked to Roman society, and Christians rejected both. According to Tacitus, by this they showed “hatred of the human race.” There were widespread ideas about Christians as practicing black magic (lat. maleficus) to achieve their goals, as well as practicing incest and cannibalism.

However, in the first two centuries of Christian history, no laws were passed against Christians, and persecution was carried out only on the initiative of local authorities. This happened in 111 in Bithynia-Pontus under Pliny the Younger, in Smyrna in 156 - the martyrdom of Polycarp of Smyrna, the first about which there is relatively reliable information, Scylla near Carthage in 180 by order of the proconsul, etc. When Emperor Nero executed Christians after the fire of 64, this was an exclusively local matter, not extending beyond the borders of Rome. These early persecutions, although brutal, were sporadic, short, local, did not pose a threat to the Christian community as a whole, but nevertheless deeply influenced the worldview of the early Christians.

By the 3rd century the situation had changed. Emperors and regional officials began to actively and on their own initiative persecute Christians. Those, in turn, also changed, and wealthy and noble citizens of the empire appeared among them. Origen, writing about this in 248, noted that “at the present time, with a significant number of people entering Christianity, one can indicate rich people, even several high-ranking men, women known for their sophistication and nobility.” One of the first laws against Christians was a decree issued in 202, as reported by the History of the Augustans, by Septimius Severus, prohibiting conversion to Judaism or Christianity. After a lull that lasted until the assassination of Emperor Alexander Severus, Christian leaders became the target of Maximin (235-238), Decius (249-251) demanded the general and open practice of pagan rites. Christians persisted in their reluctance to swear allegiance to the emperor, resulting in their leaders being tortured and executed, as in the case of Bishop Fabian of Rome and Bishop Babyla of Antioch. Ordinary believers also suffered, such as Pionius of Smyrna and many others who were martyred under Decius. .

Constantine the Great. Bronze. IV century Rome.

Around 285 AD e. In Naissus, Caesar Flavius ​​Valerius Constantius I Chlorus, the Roman governor in Gaul, and his wife Helen Flavius ​​had a son, Flavius ​​Valerius Constantine. Constantius Chlorus himself was a modest, gentle and courteous man. Religiously, he was a monotheist, worshiping the sun god Sol, who during the Empire was identified with eastern deities, especially with the Persian god of light Mithras - the sun god, the god of treaty and harmony. It was to this deity that he dedicated his family. According to some sources, Elena was a Christian (there were many Christians around Constantius, and he treated them very kindly), according to others, she was a pagan. In 293, Constantius and Helena were forced to divorce for political reasons, but the ex-wife still occupied an honorable place at his court. Constantius had to send his son from a young age to the court of Emperor Diocletian in Nicomedia.

By that time, the Christian Church had already played a very large role in the life of the Empire and millions of people were Christians - from slaves to senior government officials. There were many Christians at the court in Nicomedia. However, in 303, Diocletian, under the influence of his son-in-law Galerius, a rude and superstitious pagan, decided to destroy the Christian Church. The most terrible persecution of the new religion of an all-empire nature began. Thousands and thousands of people were brutally tortured for simply belonging to the Church. It was at this moment that young Constantine found himself in Nicomedia and witnessed a bloody orgy of murder, which caused grief and regret in him. Brought up in an atmosphere of religious tolerance, Constantine did not understand Diocletian's policies. Constantine himself continued to honor Mithra the Sun, and all his thoughts were aimed at strengthening his position in that difficult situation and finding a path to power.

In 305, Emperor Diocletian and his co-ruler Maximian Heruklius renounced power in favor of their successors. In the east of the Empire, power passed to Galerius, and in the west - to Constantius Chlorus and Maxentius. Constantius Chlorus was already seriously ill and asked Galerius to release his son Constantine from Nicomedia, but Galerius delayed the decision, fearing his rival. Only a year later, Constantine finally managed to get Galerius’ consent to leave. The terminally ill father blessed his son and gave him command of the troops in Gaul.

In 311, Galerius, suffering from an unknown illness, decided to stop the persecution of Christians. Apparently, he suspected that his illness was “the revenge of the God of Christians.” Therefore, he allowed Christians to “freely gather at their gatherings” and “offer prayers for the safety of the emperor.” A few weeks later Galerius died; under his successors, persecution of Christians resumed, albeit on a smaller scale.

Maxentius and Licinius were two Augusti, and Constantine was proclaimed by the Senate as Chief Augustus. The following year, war broke out in the west of the Empire between Constantine and Maxentius, as Maxentius claimed to become sole ruler. Licinius sided with Constantine. Of the 100,000-strong army stationed in Gaul and at the disposal of Constantine, he was able to allocate only a fourth, while Maxentius had 170,000 infantry and 18,000 cavalry. Constantine's campaign against Rome thus began under unfavorable conditions for him. Sacrifices were made to the pagan gods so that the gods would reveal the future, and their predictions were bad. In the fall of 312, Constantine's small army approached Rome. Constantine seemed to be challenging the eternal city - everything was against him. It was at this time that the religious Caesar began to experience visions that strengthened his spirit. First, he saw in a dream a huge fiery cross in the eastern part of the sky. And soon angels appeared to him, saying: “Constantine, with this you will win.” Inspired by this, Caesar ordered the sign of the name of Christ to be inscribed on the soldiers’ shields. Subsequent events confirmed the emperor's visions.

The ruler of Rome, Maxentius, did not leave the city, having received a prediction from the oracle that he would die if he left the gates of Rome. The troops were successfully commanded by his generals, relying on a huge numerical superiority. The fateful day for Maxentius was the anniversary of his gaining power - October 28. The battle broke out under the walls of the city, and Maxentius’s soldiers had a clear advantage and a better strategic position, but events seemed to confirm the proverb: “Whom God wants to punish, he deprives of reason.” Suddenly, Maxentius decided to seek advice from the “Sibylline Books” (a collection of sayings and predictions that served for official fortune telling in Ancient Rome) and read in them that the enemy of the Romans would die on that day. Inspired by this prediction, Maxentius left the city and appeared on the battlefield. While crossing the Mulvinsky Bridge near Rome, the bridge collapsed behind the emperor's back; Maxentius's troops panicked and began to flee. Crushed by the crowd, the emperor fell into the Tiber and drowned. Even the pagans saw Constantine's unexpected victory as a miracle. He himself, of course, had no doubt that he owed his victory to Christ.

It was from this moment that Constantine began to consider himself a Christian, but had not yet accepted baptism. The emperor understood that strengthening his power would inevitably be associated with actions contrary to Christian morality, and therefore was in no hurry. The rapid adoption of the Christian faith might not have pleased supporters of the pagan religion, of whom there were especially many in the army. Thus, a strange situation arose when the head of the empire was a Christian who was not formally a member of the Church, because he came to faith not through a search for truth, but as an emperor (Caesar) seeking God to protect and sanctify his power. This ambiguous position later became the source of many problems and contradictions, but for the time being, at the beginning of his reign, Constantine, like the Christians, felt inspired. A reflection of this is the Edict of Milan on Tolerance, drawn up in 313 by the Emperor of the West, Constantine, and the Emperor of the East (Galerius’ successor) Licinius. This law differed significantly from the decree of Galerius of 311, which was also poorly executed.

The Edict of Milan proclaimed religious tolerance: “Freedom in religion should not be restricted; on the contrary, the right to take care of Divine objects must be given to the mind and heart of everyone, according to his own will.” This was a very bold step and had a huge impact. The religious freedom proclaimed by Emperor Constantine remained the dream of mankind for a long time. The emperor himself subsequently betrayed this principle more than once. The Edict gave Christians the right to spread their teachings and convert other people to their faith. Until now, this was forbidden to them as a “Jewish sect” (conversion to Judaism was punishable by death under Roman law). Constantine ordered the return to Christians of all property confiscated during the persecution.

Although during the reign of Constantine the equality of paganism and Christianity proclaimed by him was respected (the emperor allowed the Flavian family cult and even the construction of a temple to “his deity”), all the sympathies of the authorities were on the side of the new religion, and Rome was adorned with a statue of Constantine with his right hand raised for the sign of the cross.

The Emperor carefully ensured that the Christian Church had all the privileges enjoyed by the pagan priests (for example, exemption from government duties). Moreover, soon the bishops were given the right of jurisdiction (conducting court, legal proceedings) in civil matters, the right to set slaves free; Thus, Christians received, as it were, their own judgment. 10 years after the adoption of the Edict of Milan, Christians were allowed not to participate in pagan festivals. Thus, the new significance of the Church in the life of the Empire received legal recognition in almost all areas of life.

Meanwhile, the political life of the Roman Empire went on as usual. In 313, Licinius and Constantine remained the only rulers of Rome. Already in 314, Constantine and Licinius entered into a struggle with each other; The Christian emperor won two battles and achieved the annexation of almost the entire Balkan Peninsula to his possessions, and 10 years later a decisive battle took place between the two rival rulers. Constantine had 120 thousand infantry and cavalry and 200 small ships, and Licinius had 150 thousand infantry, 15 thousand cavalry and 350 large three-oared galleys. Nevertheless, Licinius's army was defeated in a land battle near Adrianople, and Constantine's son Crispus defeated Licinius' fleet in the Hellespont (Dardanelles). After another defeat, Licinius surrendered. The winner promised him life in exchange for renouncing power. However, the drama didn't end there. Licinius was exiled to Thessalonica and executed a year later. In 326, on the orders of Constantine, his ten-year-old son, Licinius the Younger, was also killed, despite the fact that his mother, Constantia, was Constantine's half-sister.

At the same time, the emperor ordered the death of his own son Crispus. The reasons for this are unknown. Some contemporaries believed that the son participated in some kind of conspiracy against his father, others - that he was slandered by the emperor’s second wife, Fausta (Crispus was Constantine’s son from his first marriage), trying to clear the way to power for his children. A few years later, she also died, suspected by the emperor of violating marital fidelity.

Despite the bloody events in the palace, the Romans loved Constantine - he was strong, handsome, polite, sociable, loved humor and had excellent self-control. As a child, Konstantin did not receive a good education, but he respected educated people.

Constantine's internal policy consisted of gradually promoting the transformation of slaves into dependent peasants - colons (simultaneously with the growth of dependence and free peasants), strengthening the state apparatus and increasing taxes, and broadly granting senatorial ranks to rich provincials - all this strengthened his power. The emperor disbanded the Praetorian Guard, rightly considering it a source of domestic conspiracies. Barbarians - Scythians and Germans - were widely recruited to serve in the army. There were a lot of Franks at court, and Constantine was the first to open access to the highest positions for the barbarians. However, the emperor felt uncomfortable in Rome and in 330 he founded the new capital of the state - New Rome - on the site of the Greek trading city of Byzantium, on the European shore of the Bosphorus Strait. After some time, the new capital began to be called Constantinople. Over the years, Constantine gravitated more and more toward luxury, and his court in the new (eastern) capital was very similar to the court of an eastern ruler. The emperor dressed in colorful silk clothes embroidered with gold, wore false hair and wore gold bracelets and necklaces.

In general, the 25-year reign of Constantine I was peaceful, except for the church unrest that began under him. The reason for this turmoil, in addition to religious and theological disputes, was that the relationship between the imperial power (Caesar) and the Church remained unclear. While the emperor was a pagan, Christians resolutely defended their internal freedom from encroachments, but with the victory of a Christian emperor (even if he had not yet been baptized), the situation changed fundamentally. According to the tradition that existed in the Roman Empire, it was the head of state who was the supreme arbiter in all, including religious, disputes.

The first event was a schism in the Christian Church of Africa. Some believers were dissatisfied with the new bishop, since they considered him associated with those who renounced the faith during the period of persecution under Diocletian. They chose another bishop, Donatus (they began to be called pre-Natists), refused to submit to church authorities and turned to the court of Caesar. “What madness to demand judgment from a person who himself awaits the judgment of Christ!” - Konstantin exclaimed. Indeed, he was not even baptized. However, wanting peace for the Church, the emperor agreed to act as a judge. After listening to both sides, he decided that the Donatists were wrong, and immediately showed his power: their leaders were sent into exile, and the property of the Donatist Church was confiscated. This government intervention in the internal church dispute was contrary to the spirit of the Edict of Milan on religious tolerance, but was perceived by everyone as completely natural. Neither the bishops nor the people objected. And the Donatists themselves, victims of persecution, did not doubt that Constantine had the right to resolve this dispute - they only demanded that persecution fall on their opponents. The schism gave rise to mutual bitterness, and persecution gave rise to fanaticism, and real peace did not come to the African Church very soon. Weakened by internal unrest, this province after a few decades became easy prey for vandals.

But the most serious split occurred in the east of the Empire in connection with the dispute with the Arians. Back in 318, a dispute arose in Alexandria between Bishop Alexander and his deacon Arius about the identity of Christ. Very quickly all Eastern Christians were drawn into this dispute. When Constantine annexed the eastern part of the Empire in 324, he was faced with a situation close to schism, which could not but depress him, since both as a Christian and as an emperor he passionately desired church unity. “Give me back peaceful days and good nights, so that I can finally find consolation in pure light (i.e., the one Church. - Note ed.)", - he wrote. To resolve this issue, he convened a council of bishops, which took place in Nicaea in 325 (I Ecumenical or Nicene Council of 325).

Constantine received the 318 bishops who arrived solemnly and with great honor in his palace. Many bishops were victims of the persecutions of Diocletian and Galerius, and Constantine looked with tears in his eyes at their injuries and scars. The minutes of the First Ecumenical Council have not survived. What is known is that he condemned Arius as a heretic and solemnly proclaimed that Christ is consubstantial with God the Father. The council was chaired by the emperor and resolved several other issues related to worship. In general, for the entire empire it was, of course, a triumph of Christianity.

In 326, Constantine's mother Helen made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, where the cross of Jesus Christ was found. On her initiative, the cross was raised and slowly turned to the four cardinal directions, as if dedicating the whole world to Christ. Christianity won. But peace was still very far away. The court bishops, and above all Eusebius of Caesarea, were friends of Arius. At the Council of Nicaea, they agreed with his condemnation, seeing the mood of the overwhelming majority of the bishops, but then they tried to convince the emperor that Arius had been wrongly condemned. Constantine (still not baptized!), of course, listened to their opinion and therefore returned Arius from exile and ordered, again resorting to his imperial power, to accept him back into the bosom of the Church (this did not happen, since Arius died on the way to Egypt). He sent all the irreconcilable opponents of Arius and supporters of the Council of Nicaea, and above all the new Bishop of Alexandria Athanasius, into exile. This happened in 330-335.

The intervention of Constantine led to the fact that the Arian schism stretched throughout almost the entire 4th century and was eliminated only in 381 at the Second Ecumenical Council (Council of Constantinople 381), but this happened after the death of the emperor. In 337, Constantine felt death approaching. All his life he dreamed of being baptized in the waters of the Jordan, but political affairs prevented this. Now, on his deathbed, it was impossible to put it off any longer, and before his death he was baptized by the same Eusebius of Caesarea. On May 22, 337, Emperor Constantine I died in the Aquirion Palace, near Nicomedia, leaving three heirs. His ashes are buried in Apostolic Church in Constantinople. Church historians named Constantine the Great and hailed him as a model of a Christian.

The importance of Constantine I the Great is enormous. In fact, it began a new era both in the life of the Christian Church and in the history of mankind, which was called the “era of Constantine” - a complex and contradictory period. Constantine was the first of the Caesars to realize the greatness and complexity of the combination of Christian faith and political power, the first to try to understand his power as Christian service to people, but at the same time he inevitably acted in the spirit of the political traditions and mores of his time. Constantine gave the Christian Church freedom, releasing it from underground, and for this he was called equal to the apostles, but he too often acted as an arbiter in church disputes, thereby subordinating the Church to the state. It was Constantine who was the first to proclaim the high principles of religious tolerance and humanism, but was unable to put them into practice. The “thousand-year era of Constantine” that begins next will carry all these contradictions of its founder.

In a bloody struggle that lasted for centuries, Christianity defeated Rome. History does not know an even more sublime spectacle than this struggle, which was necessary by the very nature of the clashing forces and which could only end in the victory of Christianity. The blood of the martyrs, due to the redemptive merits of Christ, was the seed of Christianity. These gon., of which there were ten, fall into three stages, according to which we will present them.

1. In the 1st century, Christians suffered two persecutions. - from the emperors Nero (54-68) and Domitian (81-96). The first persecution was under Nero after a great fire in Rome (July 18-27, 64), the culprit of which, according to the people’s suspicion, was himself, but he blamed all the blame on Christians, who, as “haters of the human race,” had already became an object of hatred on the part of the pagans. The persecution was cruel, expressed in all kinds of torments to which innocent Christians were betrayed, but, at the same time, short-lived and hardly spread beyond the borders of Rome. It is remarkable that the pagan world, not yet understanding the meaning of Christianity, however, began to distinguish Christians from Jews and directed its enmity much more towards the former than towards the latter, and even then they began to be accused of hatred of the human race (odium humani generis) and treated them with hostility. All sorts of crimes were attributed to them, as a sect, the Founder of which, in the eyes of the Roman, died the death of a criminal, and about whose meetings there were already rumors that they were indulging in unnatural vices of debauchery, arranging so-called fiesta dinners. Among the martyrs of Nero, without a doubt, were the apostles Peter and Paul. - Second rut. was under Domitian, which was actually directed against the Jews, the motivation for which was the greed of the despot; at the same time, of course, those who lived externally according to Jewish laws or had their origins in Judaism also had to endure. Hence, Christians, allegedly for non-payment of taxes, were to be punished in the form of deprivation of property and exile. Another charge against them was “atheism,” that is, denial of the state religion. This accusation was directed against the Jews and those who “fell into the customs of the Jews,” that is, Christians. Among the numerous Christian martyrs of this time, according to the chronicle of Eusebius, Flavia Domitilla, wife of the consular Flavius ​​Clement, who was burned for her faith in 95, stands out for her position. Whether consular Flavius ​​Clement, Domitian's brother-in-law, who was executed at the same time on the most insignificant suspicion, shared his wife's faith and suffered for her, it is impossible to decide on the basis of existing sources. According to Egesippus, Domitian, out of political suspicion, demanded two relatives of Jesus Christ, the grandchildren of Judas, the brother of Jesus, but after he saw their calloused hands from working on a small plot of land and heard from them that the kingdom of Christ is not of this world and will come only at the end of the world did he release them as harmless simpletons. Tradition dates the exile of St. Apostle to this same time. John to the island of Patmos, although news of it first appears only in St. Irenea.

2. The turning point in the relations of the Roman state towards Christians came during the reign of Emperor Trajan (98-117). In view of the ever-increasing strength of imperial power, as an expression of Roman statehood, and also in view of the ever-increasing spread of Christianity, it was necessary to establish one form or another in the relations of the Roman state to Christians, who more and more found followers among the pagans. The external reason for such regulation was provided by the following circumstance. Pliny the Younger, who had been governor of Bithynia since 111, was put into difficulty by the fact that he began to receive numerous complaints against Christians. He did not know what to do with these Christians: whether it was necessary to make a distinction between them, depending on the age, gender and condition of the accused, whether one name without a crime was enough, or to punish only those whose name was combined with a crime. Wanting, therefore, to receive more definite instructions from the emperor, he turned to him with his famous letter, in which, while asking these questions, he at the same time reported on how he himself had acted hitherto. “I asked,” he writes, “if they were Christians. If they confessed to this, then I, under threat of death, asked a second and third time; if they persisted, I ordered their execution. For I have no doubt that stubbornness and inflexible obstinacy must be punished, whatever their profession may be.” “Those who claimed that they were not Christians and were not such, I found it necessary to release if, following my example, they called on the gods and, making sacrifices of incense and wine, idolized your image, which for this purpose I placed along with the images of the gods , and, in addition, they cursed Christ, which, as they say, true Christians would never do.” To this, Trajan, having generally approved his course of action, gave Pliny the following decision: “Christians do not need to be deliberately sought out (conquirendi non sunt): but if they are pointed out and brought in, then they must be punished, and, however, whoever says that he is not a Christian and This is proven by the very deed, that is, by the worship of our gods, as a result of such repentance he should be released without punishment, even if he remained in suspicion regarding the past. Anonymous denunciations should not be taken into account." This response of the emperor, while not yet a law, actually determined the course of action towards Christians until the beginning of the 3rd century. The position in which he placed Christians was quite dangerous, although the emperor wanted a gentle attitude towards them, hoping with this gentleness to suppress the evil that was emerging, in his opinion. Laws on prohibited communities and prohibited religions could simply be enforced against Christians; but Trajan apparently wanted to do without this when he wrote to Pliny that in this matter one cannot be guided by the usual rules. Nevertheless, the position of Christians in the empire, as a result of this imperial decree, became such that every Christian already in his very name carried within himself a crime, although it was considered complete and worthy of death only if it was revealed in evading sacrifice to the state gods , sacrilege and other illegal acts, if they are proven in court. Christian apologists complained bitterly about the unfair treatment of Christians, and Tertullian poured out all the force of his wit on this decree and legal proceedings, but the decree itself showed that on the part of the state they wanted to stick to the most humane ground possible and even tried to exclude Christians from committing a crime worthy of death; However, the Roman state would have renounced its own essence if it had left Christians unpunished for their persistent renunciation of sacrifice. After all, both in the worship of state gods, and especially in the idolization of the emperor, submission to the majesty of the Roman state was manifested, so the persistent rejection of this religious act was to be understood in the sense of positive political opposition. In this regard, however, some mitigating circumstances were taken into account, and attention was paid to their ancient national origin. In relation to Christians there could not be this mitigation, since, unlike the Jews, they represented in the eyes of the Roman government a new sect that made claims to the significance of a world religion. But the purpose of the law turned out to be insufficient for the Roman state power, since it did not take into account either the essence of Christianity, which was not yet understood, or the courageous readiness of its confessors to sacrifice even their lives for their faith, which so often happened in practice. The persecutions that Christians endured due to Trajan's order were very different in different places and at different times. Within the framework of this law, the governors were left with a large space within which they could act at their own discretion with more or less severity or moderation. Historical information about martyrs from the time of Trajan is very scarce. According to Hegesippus, during this third persecution Bishop Simeon of Jerusalem, son of Cleopas and successor of James, who was (c. 109) in old age. The martyrdom of the Antiochian bishop Ignatius (115) also dates back to this time. The Emperor followed the same policy. Hadrian (117-138). From his time, a remarkable rescript to the proconsul of Asia Minor, Minucius Fundanus, has reached us (and its authenticity cannot be doubted). According to the report of the governor Serenius Granian, in the province of Asia, pagans at public festivals noisily and furiously demanded mass executions for Christians. Consequently, the emperor, in a special letter to the named successor of Serenius Granian, Minucius Fundan, ordered the suspension of ordinary legal proceedings and subject the Christians to an extraordinary trial, at the same time protecting Christians from outbreaks of popular rage. Little has been preserved about the victims of persecution at this time. reliable information. This probably includes the martyrdom of the Roman bishop Telesphorus (c. 135). Emperor Antoninus Pius (138-161) persistently followed the example of both his predecessors, joining Hadrian in defending Christians against outbreaks of popular hatred. The Christian-friendly document ad communae Asiae does not come from him. Here and there trials gave rise to bloody confession. The fourth persecution occurred under the fourth in a row of great Roman emperors, Marcus Aurelius (161-180). He was a true Roman and (Stoic) philosopher, and all the more decisively he opposed Christianity. True, during his reign the same procedure for legal proceedings against Christians generally continued to be preserved; but popular hatred, taking advantage of the personal mood of the emperor, in certain provinces subjected Christians to persecution all the more often and more strongly, and denunciations were even encouraged by the promise of part of the property of those convicted to their accusers. The martyrdom of the apologist Justin the Philosopher (166, in Rome), Bishop Polycarp of Smyrna (according to the most probable reckoning in 166, and not in 155) dates back to this time; Eusebius describes the rut. in Lucdunum and Vienne. - Fifth rut. was under the ignoble son of Marcus Aurelius, Commodus (180-192). Although he was less hostile towards Christians, this mainly depended on his religious indifference. Probably his concubine Marcia, who, however, was hardly a Christian, inclined him towards gentleness. The persecution of Christians that took place under him was of a more local nature. Around 185, Senator Apollonius died in Rome for his profession. Septimius Severus (193-211) fully stood on the basis of the Edict of Trajan. He tried to counteract the spread of Christianity, in addition, by prohibiting the transition from Judaism to Christianity (202). At the same time, however, he tolerated Christians even in his palace: one slave, Christian Proculus, healed him of a serious illness, anointing him with oil, and a Christian mother fed his son. In certain areas of the empire, in Egypt and Africa, things came to a more significant rut. In Alexandria, among others, Leonidas, the father of Origen, the slave Potamiena and her mother Marcella suffered; in Africa - the martyrs of the Numidian city of Scillita, the Carthaginians Perepetua and Felicita. The persecution of Christians almost completely ceased under Caracalla, Eliogabala and Alexander Severus.

3. The sixth persecution was under Maximinus the Thracian (235-238), the first emperor, who, abandoning the policies of Trajan, decided to systematically persecute Christians - until the complete destruction of Christianity itself. To this end, he, aware of the strength and importance of the Christian clergy, ordered their merciless execution. Only the weakness of his authority and his early death prevented him from carrying out this edict. His successors, the Arabs Gordian and Philip, left the Christians alone. But Decius (249-251) again took up the implementation of Maximin’s plan and gave the signal for a general attack on the Christian churches, primarily on their leaders (seventh gon.). Being weak as a ruler, but animated by the desire to restore the Roman Empire to its former glory and in the same spirit, Decius set out to completely destroy this, in his opinion, hostile community of Christians in the state. Here the Roman state principle first entered into a struggle for existence with its enemy. The very form of prosecution remains the same. This was a terrible visit that now broke out over Christians, but it served as a fire of purification and strengthening for the church. Many of them, weakened during the calm, fell away. There turned out to be whole masses of the so-called lapsi “fallen away”, who, depending on the form of their renunciation, were divided into thurificati or sacrificati (those who made a sacrifice of incense to the image of the emperor), libellatici (buyers of false certificates that they allegedly made a sacrifice) and acta facientes ( those who gave false testimony in the protocols). But no less numerous were the true believers who, despite all the suffering, stood firmly for their confession. They were called confessors if they remained alive after martyrdom; martyrs if they sealed their firmness in faith by death. Among these confessors and martyrs were many members of the clergy and several bishops of Rome. The famous Origen suffered martyrdom in Tire (254). Some of the bishops saved themselves for their churches by flight during persecution, as was the case with Cyprian of Carthage. The legend of the seven sleeping youths dates back to the time of Decius. - The storm of persecution continued throughout the entire (albeit brief) reign of Decius; at imp. Halle (251-253) and at the beginning of the reign of Valerian (253-260) it calmed down from time to time, but during the latter it broke out again with new force according to Decius’ rules (eighth gon.). Then Cyprian suffered, as well as Sixtus of Rome, along with his deacon Lawrence. Valerian's son and successor, Gallienus (260-268), having abolished the rules of his father, returned to Trajan's policy, which from that time remained in force until Diocletian, although in 275 Aurelian issued a persecutory decree, which remained, however, due to the death of the emperor without action. In the person of Diocletian (284-305), the reins of power in the Roman Empire were again in the hands of a strong nature, guided by certain state ideals. In the governmental system that he introduced to maintain state unity, he himself became the head, as a dominus, entitled by his dignity to god-like reverence, as the exponent of the highest deity. Next to him, but obliged to unconditional obedience to the supreme emperor, stood the Caesars with imperial authority, of whom the most capable one had the opportunity to eventually achieve supreme power. Since Diocletian, the son of a freed Dalmatian slave, his elevation to imp. he attributed the throne, which was predicted to him by one druid, to the special favor of the gods, then he tried to find the support of his rule in the most zealous support of pagan piety. According to his political and religious views, he soon inevitably had to come into conflict and struggle with Christianity. Meanwhile, he left Christians alone for a long time. It is unlikely that he would have started this fight on his own initiative. But his priests and representatives of those who sought to revive paganism on the basis of Neoplatonism prompted him to consistently implement their principles, under which they hoped to again seize power into their own hands; Caesar Galerius, a fanatical enemy of Christians, persistently demanded persecution and it began. This was the tenth and most severe race, and it was decided to start it with the army. In 298, an order was issued that all soldiers should perform a sacrifice. The consequence of this was a massive exodus of Christians from the army. In Tingis (Tanger), in Africa, one Christian, the warrior Marcellus, threw off his belt, spear and sword when it was his turn to make a sacrifice, and, denouncing idolatry, exclaimed: “From now on I cease to serve your emperors.” He was executed. The second edict, issued at the insistence of Galerius (303), opened a general, initially non-bloody persecution. Gatherings for worship were prohibited, books of Holy Scripture were ordered to be taken away and burned, churches were destroyed; all Christians who refused to sacrifice were deprived of their positions and civil rights . Even before the appearance of the edict, its effect was manifested in the destruction of the main church in the empire. residences of Nicomedia. In addition to his intentions, Diocletian is involved in bloody persecution. One Christian, having torn off a nailed copy of the imperial. edict, tore it up and was immediately executed. Fires broke out repeatedly in the palace in Nicomedia; Christians were accused of arson and were punished in large numbers; news arrived of disturbances in the eastern provinces, and Christians were again held responsible for this, before the eyes of the emperor. Quickly, one after another, three edicts were issued, the first of which ordered the imprisonment of clergy, the second and third obligated all Christians to make sacrifices. Throughout the state (with the exception of Britain, Gaul and Spain, where Caesar Constantius Chlorus, who was favorable to Christians, ruled), now, due to these edicts, a violent persecution of Christians began. Along with this, with the exception of a few cases of weakness revealed by some Christians in issuing the books of the Holy Scriptures (traditores), and renunciation for fear of torture, among Christians that courageous heroism, which manifested itself in a confession of faith firm to death, was increasingly developed among Christians. In addition to Galerius, Diocletian’s co-ruler, Maximian, burned with particular rage and jealousy for the bloody extermination of Christianity. According to one legend, he ordered the extermination of an entire legion consisting of Christians, the so-called “Thebaid Legion,” with its leader, St. Marcius because he refused to persecute his fellow believers. After Diocletian and Maximian retired from control in 305, Galerius, as the supreme emperor, continued the rut. with redoubled force. Severus and Maximin Daza, whom he appointed Caesars, supported him in this. The suffering of Christians at this time reached its highest degree, and they were subjected to the most exquisite tortures. In order to force Christians to renounce against their will, they even resorted to such means as sprinkling food supplies on the windows with sacrificial wine and sacrificial water. Finally, even among the pagans themselves, disgust arose for such cruel and increasingly intensifying measures of persecution of Christians. Even before his death, Galerius, suffering from a painful illness as a consequence of his criminal life, found himself forced to cancel some measures of persecution and admit their futility. The Edict of 311 brought religious tolerance to Christians, although not full recognition of their citizenship rights. The persecuted obviously won, and the ruler himself was clearly aware of this when, dying, at the end of the edict, he asked Christians to pray for him. However, Christians could not take advantage of the toleration granted by Galerius everywhere. The next supreme emperor, Licinius, together with his co-rulers, Maximin in the east and Maximian’s son Maxentius in the west, again took the side hostile to Christians, and their enmity intensified all the more as the increasingly Christian-friendly mood of Constantine, the son of Constantius Chlorus, became more pronounced. But Maxentius was already defeated in 312 by his Western rival Constantine. An agreement was previously concluded between the latter and Licinius, which Licinius especially needed because he was at enmity with Maximin. The edict of religious tolerance for all religions in the state, issued in 313 in Mediolan, came from both allied heads of the eastern and western empires. After the defeat of Maximin, discord between Licinius and Constantine openly emerged. With the defeat of Licinius (323), the policy favoring paganism ended, and a revolution in favor of Christianity took place throughout the state. A short break in this direction occurred under Constantine's successor, in an attempt to resurrect paganism by the emperor Julian the Apostate (361-363). The storm cloud that rose against the Christians in the person of this “romantic on the throne of the Caesars” cast only a gloomy shadow for a while and threatened with lightning; but no destructive attacks followed. The exclamation with which Julian, during the Persian campaign, being mortally wounded by a spear, wanted to relieve his soul: “You have won, Galilean,” clearly outlined the hopeless position of dying paganism after this last outbreak of struggle, at the same time, indicating the strength that , despite whole centuries of persecution, with all the external weakness of the followers of the Crucified One, led to victory, precisely the strength about which it is said: “Greater is he who is in you than he who is in the world,” and the beloved Apostle John exclaimed enthusiastically: “This is victory , which has conquered the world, is our faith!

But the persecution of Christians did not end with his triumph in the Roman Empire. As it spread beyond the borders of this empire, into the depths of the pagan peoples of Asia, it was often subjected to no less, and sometimes even more severe, persecutions than it was in the Roman Empire. Such were the massacres of Christians in Persia, Turkey, Japan (see the words below), and most recently (1900) in China, where at least 30,000 Christians of various confessions died from popular rage, secretly encouraged by the government. In this last fact, the well-known opinion of Gibbon, and after him other historians, who proved the alleged historical unreliability of the news about the massacre of Christians in the Roman Empire, is rebutted. No, these persecutions and mass beatings of Christians have been and will always be until the pagan darkness on earth finally dissipates.

The literature on the issue of persecution is very extensive; we will only note the most important studies, such as: prof. A. P. Lebedeva., The era of persecution of Christians, 2nd ed. Moscow, 1897; Allyara, Gon. on Christians (French edition, and Russian translation by E. A. Lebedeva, published in “Strannik”); Ramsay, Roman Law and Christians; A. P. Mityakina, Christian Church in the Roman Empire; Allener, The Roman Empire and Christians (ed. K. P. Pobedonostsev), etc.

* Alexander Alexandrovich Bronzov,
Doctor of Theology, Professor
St. Petersburg Theological Academy.

Text source: Orthodox theological encyclopedia. Volume 4, column. 515. Petrograd edition. Supplement to the spiritual magazine "Wanderer" for 1903. Modern spelling.