Imágenes de páginas

beaten with sticks in his presence, or whipped with rods, or fined. And if the quality of the offender exempted him from such punishments, he would severely reprove him, saying: " Are you willing to have that done in your own field, which you do in another's ?” And he would • often use a saying, which he had heard from some Jews or Christians, and which he well remem• bered: and when any one was corrected, he ordered the cryer to proclaim : “ What you * would not have done to yourself, that do not you do to another.” Which saying he so highly • esteemed, that he ordered it to be engraved upon his palace, and upon public buildings.' These and other things, mentioned

by Lampridius, are very honourable to this emperor. III. His mother Mammæa also is greatly commended by some Christian writers. Eusebius * calls her a pious and religious woman. And Orosius says, she was a Christian. The main foundation of this supposition is, that as Eusebius informs us, she sent for Origen to come to her at Antioch: which might be no more than curiosity to see and discourse with a man, who was then in great reputation for learning. Crevier therefore justly observes: . She is said to have been • a Christian; but that fact is not sufficiently proved. And Basnage « has offered divers arguments, sufficient to overthrow that supposition.



I. His time. II. A passage of Lactantius concerning his work of the Duty of a Proconsul, in

which he says, that Ulpian had collected all the edicts of former emperors against the Christians. III. Observations of learned men concerning Ulpian, and his work. IV. Qu. Whether there remain, in the Pandects, any laws against the Christians.

1. Domitius ULPIANUS," or Ulpian, was a native of Tyre in Phoenicia. After he had distinguished himself as a great lawyer in former reigns, he was made præfect of the prætorium by Severus Alexander ; but was murdered by the prætorian soldiers, as is computed, in the year 228. I place him at the year 222, when the emperor Alexander began his reign.

II. •Lactantius,' among other cruelties practised by worshippers of idols, or heathen deities, reckons laws of princes, and decrees of lawyers, against good men, worshippers of the true · God.' • Domitius, writing of the office of a proconsul, in the seventh book of that work, put • together the wicked edicts, that he might shew what punishments ought to be inflicted upon those who professed themselves to be worshippers of God.'

III. Herman Witsius supposeth, that : Ulpian was very averse to the Christians: but the emperor was favourable to them. He saw that Alexander would never enact any laws against • them, which should bring them into any danger of their lives : Ulpian therefore put together * the laws which had been made against the Christians in former times, that the proconsul might * see how they might treat them.'

V. cap. 11. fi.

· H. E. 1. vi. cap. 21.

stitutiones sacrilegæ, et disputationes Jurisperitorum leguntur Cujus mater Mammæa, Christiana, Origenem presbyte. injustæ. Domitius de Officio Proconsulis, libro septimo, rerum audire curavit. Oros. I. vii. cap. 18.

scripta nefaria collegit, ut doceret, quibus pænis affici oporc Hist. of the Rom. Emperors. vol. viii. p. 277.

teret eos qui se cultores Dei profiterentur. Lactant. Inst. I. d. Ann. 222. num. iv.

e Vid. Dion. Cass. lib. 80. Eutrop. I. viii. c. 23. Zos. & Cujus collectionis hanc credibile est fuisse occasionem, 1. 1; P: 638. Spartian. de Pescennio Nigro. cap. 7. Lam- Ulpianus Alexandrum Severum regebat, et ejus nomine Proprid. in Alexandro Severo. cap. 26. 31. 51. Victor. de consulibus in provincias ituris mandata dabat. Sed quum Cæsarib. cap. 24. Tillem. L'Emp. Alexandre. art. xvii. videret abs Christianis non alienum, ab eorum sanguipe certe Crevier in his Lives of the Roman Emperors. Vol. viii. p. abhorrentem, vix impelli posse, uti iis exterminandis aliquid 112. &c. Fabric. Bib. Lat. Tom. i. p. 820.

ediceret; videtur vetera impiorum tyrannorum rescripta Pro| Hoc est Deorum disciplina. Ad hæc

cultores suos opera consulibus objecisse, ut ex iis suum in hoc officium

genere erudiunt. Hæc sacra desiderant. Quinetiam sceleratissimi æstimarent. Wits. se Legion. Fulmin. num. Ixv. homicidæ contra pios jura impia condiderunt. Nam et con

Tillemont a thinks that work was published before the reign of Alexander. Basnage likewise is of opinion, that this work was composed some good while before in the time of Septimius Severus. Nor can he believe that Ulpian would publish such a thing in the time of Alexander, when it would be far from being acceptable.

Crevier expresseth himself after this manner : • Ulpian has been praised by all the pagans * without exception, and without reserve. The Christians have reproached him with carrying • his aversion so far, as contrary to the inclination of his sovereign, who did not dislike them, * to collect all the edicts which former emperors had published against them. Let us pity a blindness, in which he was confirmed even by his regard for the laws, which he had so much studied.'

So Crevier. But a part of those remarks depends upon a supposition that these books of the Duty of a Proconsul were published in the time of Alexander ; which, as we have just seen, is far from being certain.

As for Ulpian's having been ' praised by all the pagans,' (which Crevier repeats after Tillemont,) it is acknowledged that he has been commended by several heathen authors, and the confidence placed in him by Alexander, is much to his honour. Nevertheless by “ Dion Cassius, or by Xiphilinus from him, he is said to have killed Flavian and Chrestus, that he might succeed them. And Zosimus, giving an account of Ulpian's death, says, “The soldiers • were much offended with him: the reason he could not say exactly, because the accounts were • different.'

IV. There are in the Pandects several fragments of his, which by some learned men are understood to relate to the Christians. I shall here allege one or two.

1. In a treatise of his concerning Courts of Justice were these words. • They' may be - reckoned physicians, who undertake the cure of the body, or of any particular distemper, in • the ears, the throat, the teeth : but, if they use incantations, or invocations, or, to use the

common word of impostors, exorcisms; these are no sort of medicine, although there are people who boast of having received benefit by them.'

Whether Ulpian here refers to Jews or Christians, or heathens, I cannot certainly say. Bingham says: • Some think the order (of exorcists,) was as old as Tertullian, because Ulpian • the great lawyer who lived in Tertullian's time, in one of his books speaks of exorcising as a • thing used by impostors, by whom, probably, he means the Christians. Gothofred thinks, he * means the Jewish exorcists, who were commonly impostors indeed.?

2. From the third book of his work, Concerning the Duty of a Proconsul, are cited these words: “The deified Severus and Antoninus have permitted those who follow the Jewish • superstition to enjoy magistracies. But they imposed upon them some conditions, which did * not prejudice their superstition.'

When Ulpian wrote that book of his work, as Schulting' says, Antoninus Caracalla was living. Therefore the blessed, or deified, is to be understood of Septimius Severus only, and not to be applied to both the emperors here mentioned.

Whether by • the Jewish superstition,' be here meant the Jewish religion only, or whether the Christians also were intended, has been doubted.

3. However, it may not be improper for me, before I conclude this chapter concerning a Ubi supra, note e.

| Medicos fortassis quis accipiet etiam eos, qui alicujus Quæ collectanea edidisse existimamus, imperante Severo, partis corporis, vel certi doloris sanitatem pollicentur ; ut, cum Papiniano in consiliis fuit. Regnante quidem Alexandro, uta, si auricularum, si fistulæ, vel dentium ; non tamen, si nil perniciei Christianis machinatus est Ulpianus, quos Mam- incantavit, si imprecatus est, si (ut vulgari verbo impostorům mææ et filio ejus acceptos esse noverat. Ad dominorum ergo utar) exorcizant. Non sunt ista medicinæ genera, tametsi suorum studia sese composuit aulicus homo. Nec Alexandri sint, qui hos sibi profuisse cum prædicatione adfirment. D. Mammææque gratiam retinuisset, si Ecclesiam, cui favebant, lib. 1. Tit. 13. 1. 1. sect. 3. De extraordinariis Cognitioniad - sanguinem usque persecutus fuisset. Basnag. aun. 228,

bus, &c. As before,'p. 46.

6 Bingham's Antiquities, &e. B. 3. ch. iv. sect. 3. 1 Τον δε δη Φλαβιανον, τον τε Χρησoν αποκλεινας, ένα αυθες h Eis, qui Judaïcam superstitionem sequantur, D. Severus διαδεξηίαι, και αυτος και πολλω υπερον υπο των δορυφορωον, επι- et Antoninus honores adipisci permiserunt; sed et necessitates θεμενων οι νυκτος, καλεσφαίη. Dio. Cass. 1. 80. p. 1369. eis imposuerunt, quæ superstitionen eorum non læderent. De

• Εν υποψια δε τοις στρατοπεδοις γενομενος, (τας δε αιλιας Decurionibus, &c. D. L. 1. Tit. 2. 1. iii. sect. 3. ακριβως εκ εχω διεξελθειν διαφορα γαρ ισορηκασι περι της Adeoque legendum Divas Severus, et Antoninus, non αυίδ ωροαιρεσεως) αναιρείται. Ζος. 1. i. p. 638.

Divi, ut habet Florentinus. Schulting. Jurispr. Vet. p. 552.

num. iii,

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

Ulpian, to observe, that some learned lawyers are of opinion, that in our Corpus Juris, or Col.
· lection of ancient Roman laws, there is not preserved one edict against the Christians, nor any
thing that is against them.'

says Witsius in the place to which we referred just now: The books of Ulpian concerning the Duty of a Proconsul are not now extant. But there are in the Pandects many fragments of them; in which, however, there is not one word about the Christians. From the • third book of that work is cited a law of Severus and Antoninus, allowing the Jews to possess * magistracies : but it is not at all probable, that Christians are here included. The design of • Ulpian was to collect the laws against the Christians: the same malignity of temper would • induce him to suppress every thing that was favourable to them.

That being our case, we must submit to it. Through a mistaken friendship, and misguided zeal, all edicts against the Christians have been suppressed, and none of them admitted into the Pandects.

Since, therefore, the collections of Ulpian, so far as they related to the Christians, are entirely lost, we can only make some general reflections upon them: which every reader is able to do. I have cited the passage of Lactantius, and have also alledged the observations of divers learned moderns relating to this subject, and need not add any thing more. I shall that if ever the seventh book' of that work of Ulpian should be found, it would be a great curiosity, and would afford us a great deal of light and instruction.

Dr. Jortin, in his Discourses concerning the Christian religion, at p. 58, says, • If Ulpian's • treatise on the Duty of Proconsuls were extant, we should know what edicts had been pub• lished against the Christians by the emperors, down to the time of Alexander Severus.'

I shall only say,



1. His work and time. II. His account of the siege, and taking of Jerusalem by Titus. III. His

account of Domitian's persecution of the Christians. IV. Nerva's favourable treatment of the Christians. V. That Marcia, concubine of Commodus, was friendly to the Christians. VI. His account of the shower, by which Marcus Antoninus, and his army, were saved in Germany.

1. Dion Cassius COCCEIANUS · son of Apronianus, who in the reigns of Trajan and Adrian was governor of Cilicia, and afterwards of Dalmatia, was a native of Nice in Bithynia. He was made a senator of Rome in the reign of Commodus, and had the honour of several considerable posts and employments under the succeeding emperors. He was twice consul, the second time with Severus Alexander, in the eighth year of that emperor's reign, A. D. 229. After which, with the emperor's leave, he retired into his own country, and dwelt at Nice. He wrote the

Istud addo, in corpore juris nostro nullum contra Chris- Ulpianus, quo magis Christianos ureret, hoc commemoravit? tianos edictum, imo nihil, quod illis adversum existimari certo . Ut Julianus Imperator odio Christianorum favisse Judæis possit, inveniri. In quâ sententiâ etsi Balduinus non fuit, sed • dicitur.' Quum ergo totus in eo fuerit Ulpianus, ut ea quæ Ulpianum cumprimis accusat, quod Christianos, I. i. sect. 3. ff. adversa Christianis erant, ad eos vexandos colligeret, faventia de extraordin. cognit. exorcistas appellavit; sunt tamen viri vero imaligne supprimeret, non est probabile, hoc, quod de docti, qui plane alterius conimatis homines eo homine com- Judæis prodere voluit, ad Christianos pertinere. Wits. ut prebendi existimant. N. H. Gundling. Præf. ad Balduin.

supra, num. lxii. Comm. de Constant. Imp. Leg. Ecc. et Civilibns, p. 16, 17. • Suid. V. Διων, ο Κασιος χρηματισας, ο επικλης Κοκηιος"

Non exstant quidem hi de Officio Proconsulis libri os de Koxxnlaros. Phot. cod. 71. p. 105. Voss. Hist. Gr. i. ii. Domitii. Multa tamen in Pandectis supersunt eorum frage cap. 15. Fabr. Bib. Gr. l. iv. cap. 1o. Tom. 3. p. 319. &c. menta: sed in his nullum verbum de Christianis. Unus locus Reimarus de Vitâ et Scriptis Dionis. ap. Dion. T. ii. P.

1533. exstat ex libro tertio, ubi laudatur hoc, de quo disputamus, &c. Cav. H. L. Tom. ii. p. 146. Tillem. Hist. des Emp. Severi et Antonini rescriptum, quo Judæis permittitur honores T. ii. Alexandre, art. 7, 28, Crevier's Hist, of the Roni. adipisci. Hæc cum retulisset Balduinus, ita infit: 'An Emp. Vol. viii. p. 347, &c.

A great

[ocr errors][merged small]

Roman History in eighty books, from the very beginning to the reign of Alexander. A
part of his work is lost. There is, however, an epitome of his work from the time of Pompey
to the end of it in the reign of Alexander, which was made by John Xiphilinus, nephew to the
patriarch of Constantinople. But then, as Dion's History is justly admired, notwithstanding
some defects, so Xiphilinus's Epitome is likewise in good esteem. And in some places we find
fragments of Dion himself: and the Epitome oftentimes represents Dion in his own words.

Though Dion's History was not published till some time afterwards, I may well place him in the year 230, he having then been, from the time of his admission into the senate, almost forty years in a public character. And he was employed above twenty years in this work, ten years in making collections, and twelve more in digesting his materials, and putting them in order. And it is likely, that his work was published soon after the year

230. II. I begin my extracts from this author, with his account of the siege and taking of Jerusalem, to which a reference was made formerly.

• In the mean time,' says he, • Titus, who was appointed general in the war with the Jews, * endeavoured to gain them by embassies and fair promises. When they refused to enter into - treaty, he determined to subdue them by the force of arms. For a while they fought with

equal success: but having gained some advantages over them, he laid siege to Jerusalem, · which was encompassed by three walls. The Romans drawing near, attacked and battered * them with their engines. And indeed they had a numerous army, having in their camp large supplies from divers barbarian kings, who joined them as auxiliaries. The Jews likewise were very numerous, having with them the people out of the country, and others who agreed with • them in their religious rites, and not only such of their nation as lived in other parts of the • Roman empire, but also people from the countries situate beyond the Euphrates. And as they

fought from the walls, they had an advantage in throwing darts and stones: and as often as • favourable opportunities offered, they made sallies, and annoyed the Romans, by overthrow

ing and destroying their platforms and batteries, and by other ways. Moreover the Romans • were in want of water, and were forced to go a great way to fetch it; though sometimes they * got none but what was very indifferent. At such seasons the Jews made excursions, and fell

upon the soldiers as they were dispersed abroad in the country. For they undermined the ground, and made passages under their very walls, to come at the Romans : but afterwards • Titus stopt up all those passages.

' • While these things were doing, many were wounded and killed on both sides. Titus himself was wounded by a stone on the left shoulder, which weakened his arm ever after. At length the Romans became masters of the outer wall: and then encamping between the two • walls, they attacked the inner wall; but with doubtful success : for the besieged being now • inclosed in a lesser compass, were the better able to make a vigorous defence. However, • Titus now renewed to them offers of peace by heralds, which he sent to them: but they pe* remptorily refused to accept of them. Moreover, if any of them were taken prisoners, and

they who deserted, privately corrupted the water of the Romans, and killed them when they • found any of them alone: for which reason Titus determined to receive no more of them. In * the mean time the Romans were greatly dispirited, as is common in long sieges, and suspecting * the truth of what was given out, that the city was impregnable, some went over to the be• sieged: who, though they were themselves in great want of provisions, readily received them, • and cherished them, to let the besiegers know, that they also had deserters.'

Though the Roman engines battered down the inner wall, yet the Jews were not overcome, “ but killed many who were striving to get within it.' However, at length the Romans pre

a See Vol. iii. p. 532.

Sed hæc aut comparate intelligenda sunt, aut a pacis auctore • Dion. lib. 76. p. 746. &c. al. p. 1079-1082. Judæis jactata. Probabilius Dio aquæ inopià Romanos dicit

• Το δε δη πλεισαν οι Ρωμαιοι τη ανυδρια εκακοπαθεν, και laborasse. Nam fontes totâ Palæstinâ rari, circa Hierosolyφαυλον και πορρωθεν ύδωρ επαύομενοι. p. TOSO.

mam rarissimi : plurima aqua ex cisternis : et imbribus cesOn the contrary, Josephus, 1. v. cap. ix. sect. 3. p. 350. santibus, majus sitis quam famis periculum; ut testatur in Havercamp. represents the Ronians to have had great Hieronymus ad Amos, cap. iv. T. 3. edit. Martianæi. p. 1401. plenty of water. Reimar thinks this account of Dion more Conf. 2 Chron. xxxii. 3. Joel i. 20. Strab. xvi. p. 701. probable. I shall transcribe part of his note upon the place. Accedebat, bello sæviente, multorum fontium et cisternarum Josephus contra vices mutatas refert, ut fontes Judæis etiam obturatio. Reimar. p. 1080. sect. 30. ante Titi adventum exaruerint, nunc Tito uberiores manârint.

· vailed: and thus a way was opened for them to the temple. Nevertheless“ tliey did not im

mediately attack it, being restrained by a certain superstitious respect for it: but in the end • they moved forward and took possession of it, Titus compelling them so to do. At which

time the Jews of all sorts, the meaner people, their elders, and the priests, exerted themselves • to the utmost : thinking themselves happy in being employed to fight for the temple, or to die • near it: nor were they overcome, though they were few against many, till a part of the tem• ple was set on fire. Then they willingly surrendered; some yielded themselves to be killed by

the Romans, some killed each other, others killed themselves, and some threw themselves into • the flames: and it appeared to them not a calamity, but victory and safety, to be so happy as 'to perish with the temple.'

Many were taken prisoners, and among them Bargioras their general ; who only was put * to death at the time of the triumph. Thus • Jerusalem was taken on a Saturday, the day still • respected by the Jews above any other. From that time it was appointed, that all who adhere • to their religion should annually pay a didrachm to the capitol of Jupiter. Upon this occasion • both the generals [Vespasian and Titus] received the appellation of emperor : but neither • took the surname of Judaicus, although triumphal arches, and other honours customary after * great victories, were decreed to them.'

Such is the account of this great event, which we have in Dion Cassius. It is indeed short and defective : nevertheless, it is a testimony to the ruin of the temple and city of Jerusalem, and the conquest of Judea under Titus and Vespasian. The account is imperfect : but then we may conclude, that we here have Dion himself, and not his abridger, who was a Christian. We must not much wonder at the conciseness : that may be owing to the contempt which the author had 'for the Jewish people, who were scorned and despised by the great men among the Romans, and by all heathens in general. Dion agrees with Josephus in many particulars, which every reader may be able to recollect

, by comparing our accounts formerly given from Josephus himself. But he differs from him so much, and is so defective, that we may be apt to think he did not borrow from him : indeed, I should very much question, whether Dion had read Josephus's seven books of the history of the Jewish War. If he never read them, it is very likely, that he never read the other works of that Jewish historian. It seems to me, that though Dion spent several years in making collections for his large history of the Romans, he was not very curious or inquisitive about that part of it which related to the Jewish people. By which means he was led to give the very imperfect history, which we have seen, of the final period of their commonwealth. It is in this way that I would account for his saying nothing of the miseries of the grievous famine endured by the Jews in the siege of Jerusalem ; and his omitting the numbers of those who perished, or were made captives, in the siege, and during the war, which are so particularly mentioned by Josephus. However we see in him, that the several parts of the city were taken, one after another, and that the temple was consumed by fire, and that the Jews were very resolute and obstinate in their defence of themselves. Whence it may be inferred, and concluded, that they suffered a great deal, before they were subdued, and overthrown.

III. We now proceed to another remarkable passage, which is in the history of the emperor

* Ου μην και παραχρήμα, δια το δεισιδαιμονησαι, εσεδραμον Jerusalem was taken on the Saturday, the Jewish Sabbath. αλλ' οψε τοτε, το Tile σφας καταναγκασανίος, εισω προεχωρή- And if it had been taken on that day, he would not have cao, p. 1081. And Josephus says, that the Roman soldiers omitted that circumstance. Nec Josephus eà die captam urhad a respect for the temple. Των μεντε σρατιωτων εςιν bem adnotavit, non omissurus, credo, si ita fuisset. Reimar όσις και μετα φρικης εις τον ναον αφευρα, και προσεκύνει. κ. λ. in Dionis loc. Et supra." Notandus autem est error Dionis, De B. I. vi. cap. ii. sect. 3.

ut aliorum, qui Hierosolyma fere semper Sabbatu capta tradi• Ούλω μεν τα Ιεροσόλυμα εν τη τα Κρονα ημερα εξωλετο. derunt, sibi hodiernum persuadent, &c. Ιd. ibid. p. 1081.

• Dion, in his account of the conquest of Judea by Pompey, So writes Dion. But Cardinal Noris computes, that this betrays great ignorance of the Jewish people in several rehappened on Sunday. Eo anno Ebul, mensis in anno Judæo- spects. Vid. lib. 37. p. 121. &c. al. p. 36, 37. rum sextus, juxta hodiernos ipsorum cyclos, ccepit die 26 the Temple, which they had built to their God at JerusaAngusti. Ejus vero dies octavus fuit secundus Septembris, lem, was large and magnificent, but open at the top.'. idemque dies Dominicus, sive Solis, qui postremus urbi toto Which is a great mistake. Και αυτω νεων τε μεξισον και orbe celeberrimæ illuxit. Noris De Epoch Syro-maced. Diss

. nepixardesalov, wary xallocor agarr's te nas arwpodos y, i. cap. 3. p 53. Lipsiæ. 1696.

εξεποιησαν. p. 122. And, as Mr. Reimer observes, Josephus does not say, that

He says,

« AnteriorContinuar »