of a few half-Jews and half-Chriftians under

Nero t.

+ Tacitus's words are: Quos per flagitia invifos vulgus Chriftianos appellabat.

It is hardly probable that the name of Christian was already known in Rome; Tacitus wrote in the reigns of the emperors Vefpafian and Domitian; and he speaks of the Christians in the manner that it was cuftomary in his time. And here I muft venture to affert, that the words Odio humani generis convicti, may equally well be rendered agreeable to the ftile of this writer, Convicted of being hated by mankind, as convicted of hating all

mankind.

And indeed, what was the employment of thefe firft miffionaries at Rome? They laboured to gain a few profelytes, by preaching up a pure and fimple moral doctrine; the humility of their hearts, and the modesty of their manners, were equal to the lowlinefs of their condition and circumstances. Having been fo lately separated from the Jews, they were hardly known in the world as a different fect; how then could they be hated by, or convict

ed of hating all mankind, to whom they were in a manner unknown?

The Roman Catholics have been accufed as the incendiaries of the city of London in the year 1666, but not till they had firft occafioned civil wars on account of religion; and that feveral of that faith, though unworthy to be fo, had been legally convicted of the Gunpowder-Plot.

But furely the cafe of the primitive Chriftians in the time of Nero was very different. It is no eafy matter to clear up the obfcurities of history. Even Tacitus himself fays nothing that can afford a reafon to fufpe&t Nero of having fet fire to Rome; and we might, with a greater appearance of probability, charge Charles II. with having lighted up the flames that laid London in afhes, in revenge for the blood of his father, that had been fo lately fhed upon the fcaffold, to fatisfy a rebellious people who thirfted for that blood. Charles had at least fome excufe for fuch an action; whereas, Nero had neither excufe, pretence, or interest for the deed attributed to him. Reports of this kind have been common in every country among

the

the populace, and even our own times have furnished us with fome equally falfe and ridiculous.

Tacitus, who was fo well acquainted with the difpofition of princes, could not have been a ftranger to that of the common people, who are ever vain, inconstant, and violent in the opinions they adopt, incapable of difcerning truth from falfhood, and ready to believe, affert, and forget every thing.

Philo fays, "That Sejanus perfecuted the Jews "under Tiberius, but that after the death of Seja"nus, the emperor reinstated them in all their "privileges." One of which was, that of being denizens of Rome, notwithstanding the contempt they were held in by the Romans. As fuch they had a fhare in the diftribution of corn, and whenever such distribution happened to be made on the day that was their fabbath, the portion allotted them was put by till the next day: this indulgence might probably be granted them in favour of the great fums of money with which they furnished the state; for they have purchased toleration in every country at a pretty high rate, though, it must be confeffed, that they have foon found means to reimburse themselves.

This paffage of Philo's clearly explains one in Tacitus, where he fays, "That four thousand

Jews or Egyptians were banished to Sardinia, where, if they had all perifhed, through the badnefs "of the climate, it would have been no great "lofs." Vile damnum.

Before I clofe this note, I fhall obferve, that' Philo fpeaks of Tiberius as a wife and juft prince. I am very ready to believe that he was fo, only where the being fuch was agreeable to his intereft;. but the good character given him here by Philo, makes me at the fame time greatly fufpect the truth of thofe terrible crimes, with which Tacitus and Suetonius reproach him. Nor can I think it likely, that an infirm old man of feventy, would have retired into the island of Caprea, to indulge himfelf in the uninterrupted exercise of a refined debauchery, which appears to be hardly natural, and was, even in those days of licentiousness, unknown. to the most abandoned of the Roman youth. Neither Tacitus nor Suetonius were acquainted with. that emperor; but took these stories upon the credit of vulgar reports; Octavius and Tiberius Cæfar, and their fucceffors, had been juftly detefted for reigning over a free people without their confent. All hiftorians have taken a delight in befpattering their characters, and the world has taken

them.

them upon their words for want of authentic memorials or chronicles in those times. Befides, as these writers do not quote any authority for what they advance, who could contradict them? They blackened whom they pleafed, and wantonly diercted the judgment of pofterity. The wife and impartial reader will, however, readily perceive, how far the veracity of hiftorians is to be depended on, and what degree of credit is due to public facts attefted by authors of reputation, born in a learned and enlightened nation, as well as what bounds to fet to our belief of anecdotes, when related by thefe fame authors, without any authority to fupport them.