Gaius Pliny, governor in Asia Minor, to the Emperor Trajan:
It is my custom, Sire, to re****t to you everything about which I am in
doubt, for who could better guide my uncertainty or instruct my
ignorance?
I have never been present at trials of Christians; therefore I do not
know what or how much to punish or to investigate. I am also very unsure
whether age should make any difference, or whether those who are of
tender age should be treated just the same as the more robust; whether
those who repent should be pardoned, or whether one who has once been a
Christian shall gain nothing by having ceased to be one; finally, whether
the name [of Christian] as such should be punished even if there is no
crime, or whether only the crimes attributed to this name should be
punished.
Meanwhile I have followed this procedure with those who were denounced to
me as Christians: I asked them whether they were Christians. If they
confessed I repeated the question a second and third time and, moreover,
under threat of the death penalty. If they persisted I had them led away
to their death, for I had no doubt that, whatever it was that they
confessed, their stubbornness and inflexible obstinacy certainly deserved
to be punished.
There were several others, Roman citizens, who showed the same madness,
and I noted them to be sent to the city. As often happens during legal
investigations, the crime became more widespread and there were some
particular incidents. An anonymous accusation was presented denouncing a
large number of persons by name. I felt that I should acquit those who
denied that they were or had been Christians if they followed my example
and called upon the gods; if they offered before your image incense and
wine, which I had ordered to be brought for this purpose with the statues
of the gods; and if they reviled Christ besides. It is said that those
who really are Christians cannot be compelled to do any of these things
in any cir***stances. Others, whose names had been given by an informer,
first said they were Christians but then soon denied it, saying in fact
they had been but had ceased to be, some saying three years ago, others
longer, and some as long as twenty years ago. All of these wor****pped
your image and the statues of the gods and cursed Christ.
They continued to maintain that the sum of their guilt or error lay in
this, that it was their custom to meet on a fixed day before daylight
and, alternating with one another, to sing a hymn to Christ as to a god.
They also bound themselves mutually by an oath, not in order to commit
any crime, but to promise not to commit theft, robbery, or adultery; not
to break their word; and not to deny entrusted goods when claimed. After
doing this, it was their custom to part from one another and then to meet
again to share an ordinary and harmless meal. But even this they said
they had ceased to do since my edict in which, in compliance with your
injunction, I had forbidden closed societies.
I thought it all the more necessary, then, to find out finally what was
true by putting to torture two girls who were called serving girls. But I
found nothing but a depraved and enormous superstition. Consequently I
adjourned the investigation and now turn to you for advice.
The matter seems to me worthy of consultation especially because of the
large number of those imperiled. For many of all ages, of every rank, and
of both ***es are already in danger, and many more will come into danger.
The contagion of this superstition has spread not only in the cities but
even to the villages and to the country districts. Yet I still feel it is
possible to check it and set it right. Of this much I am sure, that
people are beginning once more to frequent the beautiful temples which
have been almost deserted, so that the long-neglected sacred rites are
being restored and so that fodder for the animals to be sacrificed, for
which there was until now scarcely any demand, is being bought and sold
again. From this it is evident that a very great number of people can be
brought back to better ways if they are given the op****tunity to repent.
Greg G. wrote:
> In the same year [A.D. 95] Domitian had executed, among many others,
> the Consul Flavius Clemens even though he was a cousin of his, and his
> wife, Flavia Domitilla, who was also related to Domitian. The
> accusation against both was that of atheism. On the basis of this
> accusation, many others who had adopted the customs of the Jews were
> also condemned. Some of them suffered death. Others were at least
> deprived of their property. Domitilla was merely banished to the
> island of Pandateria.
>
> Dio Cassius, Roman History 67, ch. 14 (after A.D. 200).
>
|
