Chapter XXVIII: Destruction Of Paganism.—Part I

Final Destruction Of Paganism.—Introduction Of The Worship Of
Saints, And Relics, Among The Christians.

The ruin of Paganism, in the age of Theodosius, is perhaps the
only example of the total extirpation of any ancient and popular
superstition; and may therefore deserve to be considered as a
singular event in the history of the human mind. The Christians,
more especially the clergy, had impatiently supported the prudent
delays of Constantine, and the equal toleration of the elder
Valentinian; nor could they deem their conquest perfect or
secure, as long as their adversaries were permitted to exist. The
influence which Ambrose and his brethren had acquired over the
youth of Gratian, and the piety of Theodosius, was employed to
infuse the maxims of persecution into the breasts of their
Imperial proselytes. Two specious principles of religious
jurisprudence were established, from whence they deduced a direct
and rigorous conclusion, against the subjects of the empire who
still adhered to the ceremonies of their ancestors: that the
magistrate is, in some measure, guilty of the crimes which he
neglects to prohibit, or to punish; and, that the idolatrous
worship of fabulous deities, and real daemons, is the most
abominable crime against the supreme majesty of the Creator. The
laws of Moses, and the examples of Jewish history, 1 were
hastily, perhaps erroneously, applied, by the clergy, to the mild
and universal reign of Christianity. 2 The zeal of the emperors
was excited to vindicate their own honor, and that of the Deity:
and the temples of the Roman world were subverted, about sixty
years after the conversion of Constantine.

1 (return) [ St. Ambrose (tom. ii. de Obit. Theodos. p. 1208)
expressly praises and recommends the zeal of Josiah in the
destruction of idolatry The language of Julius Firmicus Maternus
on the same subject (de Errore Profan. Relig. p. 467, edit.
Gronov.) is piously inhuman. Nec filio jubet (the Mosaic Law)
parci, nec fratri, et per amatam conjugera gladium vindicem
ducit, &c.]

2 (return) [ Bayle (tom. ii. p. 406, in his Commentaire
Philosophique) justifies, and limits, these intolerant laws by
the temporal reign of Jehovah over the Jews. The attempt is
laudable.]

From the age of Numa to the reign of Gratian, the Romans
preserved the regular succession of the several colleges of the
sacerdotal order. 3 Fifteen Pontiffs exercised their supreme
jurisdiction over all things, and persons, that were consecrated
to the service of the gods; and the various questions which
perpetually arose in a loose and traditionary system, were
submitted to the judgment of their holy tribunal. Fifteen grave
and learned Augurs observed the face of the heavens, and
prescribed the actions of heroes, according to the flight of
birds. Fifteen keepers of the Sibylline books (their name of
Quindecemvirs was derived from their number) occasionally
consulted the history of future, and, as it should seem, of
contingent, events. Six Vestals devoted their virginity to the
guard of the sacred fire, and of the unknown pledges of the
duration of Rome; which no mortal had been suffered to behold
with impunity. 4 Seven Epulos prepared the table of the gods,
conducted the solemn procession, and regulated the ceremonies of
the annual festival. The three Flamens of Jupiter, of Mars, and
of Quirinus, were considered as the peculiar ministers of the
three most powerful deities, who watched over the fate of Rome
and of the universe. The King of the Sacrifices represented the
person of Numa, and of his successors, in the religious
functions, which could be performed only by royal hands. The
confraternities of the Salians, the Lupercals, &c., practised
such rites as might extort a smile of contempt from every
reasonable man, with a lively confidence of recommending
themselves to the favor of the immortal gods. The authority,
which the Roman priests had formerly obtained in the counsels of
the republic, was gradually abolished by the establishment of
monarchy, and the removal of the seat of empire. But the dignity
of their sacred character was still protected by the laws, and
manners of their country; and they still continued, more
especially the college of pontiffs, to exercise in the capital,
and sometimes in the provinces, the rights of their
ecclesiastical and civil jurisdiction. Their robes of purple,
chariotz of state, and sumptuous entertainments, attracted the
admiration of the people; and they received, from the consecrated
lands, and the public revenue, an ample stipend, which liberally
supported the splendor of the priesthood, and all the expenses of
the religious worship of the state. As the service of the altar
was not incompatible with the command of armies, the Romans,
after their consulships and triumphs, aspired to the place of
pontiff, or of augur; the seats of Cicero 5 and Pompey were
filled, in the fourth century, by the most illustrious members of
the senate; and the dignity of their birth reflected additional
splendor on their sacerdotal character. The fifteen priests, who
composed the college of pontiffs, enjoyed a more distinguished
rank as the companions of their sovereign; and the Christian
emperors condescended to accept the robe and ensigns, which were
appropriated to the office of supreme pontiff. But when Gratian
ascended the throne, more scrupulous or more enlightened, he
sternly rejected those profane symbols; 6 applied to the service
of the state, or of the church, the revenues of the priests and
vestals; abolished their honors and immunities; and dissolved the
ancient fabric of Roman superstition, which was supported by the
opinions and habits of eleven hundred years. Paganism was still
the constitutional religion of the senate. The hall, or temple,
in which they assembled, was adorned by the statue and altar of
Victory; 7 a majestic female standing on a globe, with flowing
garments, expanded wings, and a crown of laurel in her
outstretched hand. 8 The senators were sworn on the altar of the
goddess to observe the laws of the emperor and of the empire: and
a solemn offering of wine and incense was the ordinary prelude of
their public deliberations. 9 The removal of this ancient
monument was the only injury which Constantius had offered to the
superstition of the Romans. The altar of Victory was again
restored by Julian, tolerated by Valentinian, and once more
banished from the senate by the zeal of Gratian. 10 But the
emperor yet spared the statues of the gods which were exposed to
the public veneration: four hundred and twenty-four temples, or
chapels, still remained to satisfy the devotion of the people;
and in every quarter of Rome the delicacy of the Christians was
offended by the fumes of idolatrous sacrifice. 11

3 (return) [ See the outlines of the Roman hierarchy in Cicero,
(de Legibus, ii. 7, 8,) Livy, (i. 20,) Dionysius
Halicarnassensis, (l. ii. p. 119-129, edit. Hudson,) Beaufort,
(Republique Romaine, tom. i. p. 1-90,) and Moyle, (vol. i. p.
10-55.) The last is the work of an English whig, as well as of a
Roman antiquary.]

4 (return) [ These mystic, and perhaps imaginary, symbols have
given birth to various fables and conjectures. It seems probable,
that the Palladium was a small statue (three cubits and a half
high) of Minerva, with a lance and distaff; that it was usually
enclosed in a seria, or barrel; and that a similar barrel was
placed by its side to disconcert curiosity, or sacrilege. See
Mezeriac (Comment. sur les Epitres d’Ovide, tom i. p. 60—66) and
Lipsius, (tom. iii. p. 610 de Vesta, &c. c 10.)]

5 (return) [ Cicero frankly (ad Atticum, l. ii. Epist. 5) or
indirectly (ad Familiar. l. xv. Epist. 4) confesses that the
Augurate is the supreme object of his wishes. Pliny is proud to
tread in the footsteps of Cicero, (l. iv. Epist. 8,) and the
chain of tradition might be continued from history and marbles.]

6 (return) [ Zosimus, l. iv. p. 249, 250. I have suppressed the
foolish pun about Pontifex and Maximus.]

7 (return) [ This statue was transported from Tarentum to Rome,
placed in the Curia Julia by Caesar, and decorated by Augustus
with the spoils of Egypt.]

8 (return) [ Prudentius (l. ii. in initio) has drawn a very
awkward portrait of Victory; but the curious reader will obtain
more satisfaction from Montfaucon’s Antiquities, (tom. i. p.
341.)]

9 (return) [ See Suetonius (in August. c. 35) and the Exordium of
Pliny’s Panegyric.]

10 (return) [ These facts are mutually allowed by the two
advocates, Symmachus and Ambrose.]

11 (return) [ The Notitia Urbis, more recent than Constantine,
does not find one Christian church worthy to be named among the
edifices of the city. Ambrose (tom. ii. Epist. xvii. p. 825)
deplores the public scandals of Rome, which continually offended
the eyes, the ears, and the nostrils of the faithful.]

But the Christians formed the least numerous party in the senate
of Rome: 12 and it was only by their absence, that they could
express their dissent from the legal, though profane, acts of a
Pagan majority. In that assembly, the dying embers of freedom
were, for a moment, revived and inflamed by the breath of
fanaticism. Four respectable deputations were successively voted
to the Imperial court, 13 to represent the grievances of the
priesthood and the senate, and to solicit the restoration of the
altar of Victory. The conduct of this important business was
intrusted to the eloquent Symmachus, 14 a wealthy and noble
senator, who united the sacred characters of pontiff and augur
with the civil dignities of proconsul of Africa and praefect of
the city. The breast of Symmachus was animated by the warmest
zeal for the cause of expiring Paganism; and his religious
antagonists lamented the abuse of his genius, and the inefficacy
of his moral virtues. 15 The orator, whose petition is extant to
the emperor Valentinian, was conscious of the difficulty and
danger of the office which he had assumed. He cautiously avoids
every topic which might appear to reflect on the religion of his
sovereign; humbly declares, that prayers and entreaties are his
only arms; and artfully draws his arguments from the schools of
rhetoric, rather than from those of philosophy. Symmachus
endeavors to seduce the imagination of a young prince, by
displaying the attributes of the goddess of victory; he
insinuates, that the confiscation of the revenues, which were
consecrated to the service of the gods, was a measure unworthy of
his liberal and disinterested character; and he maintains, that
the Roman sacrifices would be deprived of their force and energy,
if they were no longer celebrated at the expense, as well as in
the name, of the republic. Even scepticism is made to supply an
apology for superstition. The great and incomprehensible secret
of the universe eludes the inquiry of man. Where reason cannot
instruct, custom may be permitted to guide; and every nation
seems to consult the dictates of prudence, by a faithful
attachment to those rites and opinions, which have received the
sanction of ages. If those ages have been crowned with glory and
prosperity, if the devout people have frequently obtained the
blessings which they have solicited at the altars of the gods, it
must appear still more advisable to persist in the same salutary
practice; and not to risk the unknown perils that may attend any
rash innovations. The test of antiquity and success was applied
with singular advantage to the religion of Numa; and Rome
herself, the celestial genius that presided over the fates of the
city, is introduced by the orator to plead her own cause before
the tribunal of the emperors. “Most excellent princes,” says the
venerable matron, “fathers of your country! pity and respect my
age, which has hitherto flowed in an uninterrupted course of
piety. Since I do not repent, permit me to continue in the
practice of my ancient rites. Since I am born free, allow me to
enjoy my domestic institutions. This religion has reduced the
world under my laws. These rites have repelled Hannibal from the
city, and the Gauls from the Capitol. Were my gray hairs reserved
for such intolerable disgrace? I am ignorant of the new system
that I am required to adopt; but I am well assured, that the
correction of old age is always an ungrateful and ignominious
office.” 16 The fears of the people supplied what the discretion
of the orator had suppressed; and the calamities, which
afflicted, or threatened, the declining empire, were unanimously
imputed, by the Pagans, to the new religion of Christ and of
Constantine.

12 (return) [ Ambrose repeatedly affirms, in contradiction to
common sense (Moyle’s Works, vol. ii. p. 147,) that the
Christians had a majority in the senate.]

13 (return) [ The first (A.D. 382) to Gratian, who refused them
audience; the second (A.D. 384) to Valentinian, when the field
was disputed by Symmachus and Ambrose; the third (A.D. 388) to
Theodosius; and the fourth (A.D. 392) to Valentinian. Lardner
(Heathen Testimonies, vol. iv. p. 372-399) fairly represents the
whole transaction.]

14 (return) [ Symmachus, who was invested with all the civil and
sacerdotal honors, represented the emperor under the two
characters of Pontifex Maximus, and Princeps Senatus. See the
proud inscription at the head of his works. * Note: Mr. Beugnot
has made it doubtful whether Symmachus was more than Pontifex
Major. Destruction du Paganisme, vol. i. p. 459.—M.]

15 (return) [ As if any one, says Prudentius (in Symmach. i. 639)
should dig in the mud with an instrument of gold and ivory. Even
saints, and polemic saints, treat this adversary with respect and
civility.]

16 (return) [ See the fifty-fourth Epistle of the tenth book of
Symmachus. In the form and disposition of his ten books of
Epistles, he imitated the younger Pliny; whose rich and florid
style he was supposed, by his friends, to equal or excel,
(Macrob. Saturnal. l. v. c. i.) But the luxcriancy of Symmachus
consists of barren leaves, without fruits, and even without
flowers. Few facts, and few sentiments, can be extracted from his
verbose correspondence.]

But the hopes of Symmachus were repeatedly baffled by the firm
and dexterous opposition of the archbishop of Milan, who
fortified the emperors against the fallacious eloquence of the
advocate of Rome. In this controversy, Ambrose condescends to
speak the language of a philosopher, and to ask, with some
contempt, why it should be thought necessary to introduce an
imaginary and invisible power, as the cause of those victories,
which were sufficiently explained by the valor and discipline of
the legions. He justly derides the absurd reverence for
antiquity, which could only tend to discourage the improvements
of art, and to replunge the human race into their original
barbarism. From thence, gradually rising to a more lofty and
theological tone, he pronounces, that Christianity alone is the
doctrine of truth and salvation; and that every mode of
Polytheism conducts its deluded votaries, through the paths of
error, to the abyss of eternal perdition. 17 Arguments like
these, when they were suggested by a favorite bishop, had power
to prevent the restoration of the altar of Victory; but the same
arguments fell, with much more energy and effect, from the mouth
of a conqueror; and the gods of antiquity were dragged in triumph
at the chariot-wheels of Theodosius. 18 In a full meeting of the
senate, the emperor proposed, according to the forms of the
republic, the important question, Whether the worship of Jupiter,
or that of Christ, should be the religion of the Romans. 1811 The
liberty of suffrages, which he affected to allow, was destroyed
by the hopes and fears that his presence inspired; and the
arbitrary exile of Symmachus was a recent admonition, that it
might be dangerous to oppose the wishes of the monarch. On a
regular division of the senate, Jupiter was condemned and
degraded by the sense of a very large majority; and it is rather
surprising, that any members should be found bold enough to
declare, by their speeches and votes, that they were still
attached to the interest of an abdicated deity. 19 The hasty
conversion of the senate must be attributed either to
supernatural or to sordid motives; and many of these reluctant
proselytes betrayed, on every favorable occasion, their secret
disposition to throw aside the mask of odious dissimulation. But
they were gradually fixed in the new religion, as the cause of
the ancient became more hopeless; they yielded to the authority
of the emperor, to the fashion of the times, and to the
entreaties of their wives and children, 20 who were instigated
and governed by the clergy of Rome and the monks of the East. The
edifying example of the Anician family was soon imitated by the
rest of the nobility: the Bassi, the Paullini, the Gracchi,
embraced the Christian religion; and “the luminaries of the
world, the venerable assembly of Catos (such are the high-flown
expressions of Prudentius) were impatient to strip themselves of
their pontifical garment; to cast the skin of the old serpent; to
assume the snowy robes of baptismal innocence, and to humble the
pride of the consular fasces before tombs of the martyrs.” 21 The
citizens, who subsisted by their own industry, and the populace,
who were supported by the public liberality, filled the churches
of the Lateran, and Vatican, with an incessant throng of devout
proselytes. The decrees of the senate, which proscribed the
worship of idols, were ratified by the general consent of the
Romans; 22 the splendor of the Capitol was defaced, and the
solitary temples were abandoned to ruin and contempt. 23 Rome
submitted to the yoke of the Gospel; and the vanquished provinces
had not yet lost their reverence for the name and authority of
Rome. 2311

17 (return) [ See Ambrose, (tom. ii. Epist. xvii. xviii. p.
825-833.) The former of these epistles is a short caution; the
latter is a formal reply of the petition or libel of Symmachus.
The same ideas are more copiously expressed in the poetry, if it
may deserve that name, of Prudentius; who composed his two books
against Symmachus (A.D. 404) while that senator was still alive.
It is whimsical enough that Montesquieu (Considerations, &c. c.
xix. tom. iii. p. 487) should overlook the two professed
antagonists of Symmachus, and amuse himself with descanting on
the more remote and indirect confutations of Orosius, St.
Augustin, and Salvian.]

18 (return) [ See Prudentius (in Symmach. l. i. 545, &c.) The
Christian agrees with the Pagan Zosimus (l. iv. p. 283) in
placing this visit of Theodosius after the second civil war,
gemini bis victor caede Tyranni, (l. i. 410.) But the time and
circumstances are better suited to his first triumph.]

1811 (return) [ M. Beugnot (in his Histoire de la Destruction du
Paganisme en Occident, i. p. 483-488) questions, altogether, the
truth of this statement. It is very remarkable that Zosimus and
Prudentius concur in asserting the fact of the question being
solemnly deliberated by the senate, though with directly opposite
results. Zosimus declares that the majority of the assembly
adhered to the ancient religion of Rome; Gibbon has adopted the
authority of Prudentius, who, as a Latin writer, though a poet,
deserves more credit than the Greek historian. Both concur in
placing this scene after the second triumph of Theodosius; but it
has been almost demonstrated (and Gibbon—see the preceding
note—seems to have acknowledged this) by Pagi and Tillemont, that
Theodosius did not visit Rome after the defeat of Eugenius. M.
Beugnot urges, with much force, the improbability that the
Christian emperor would submit such a question to the senate,
whose authority was nearly obsolete, except on one occasion,
which was almost hailed as an epoch in the restoration of her
ancient privileges. The silence of Ambrose and of Jerom on an
event so striking, and redounding so much to the honor of
Christianity, is of considerable weight. M. Beugnot would ascribe
the whole scene to the poetic imagination of Prudentius; but I
must observe, that, however Prudentius is sometimes elevated by
the grandeur of his subject to vivid and eloquent language, this
flight of invention would be so much bolder and more vigorous
than usual with this poet, that I cannot but suppose there must
have been some foundation for the story, though it may have been
exaggerated by the poet, or misrepresented by the historian.—M]

19 (return) [ Prudentius, after proving that the sense of the
senate is declared by a legal majority, proceeds to say, (609,
&c.)—

Adspice quam pleno subsellia nostra Senatu Decernant infame Jovis
pulvinar, et omne Idolum longe purgata ex urbe fugandum, Qua vocat
egregii sententia Principis, illuc Libera, cum pedibus, tum corde,
frequentia transit.

Zosimus ascribes to the conscript fathers a heathenish courage,
which few of them are found to possess.]

20 (return) [ Jerom specifies the pontiff Albinus, who was
surrounded with such a believing family of children and
grandchildren, as would have been sufficient to convert even
Jupiter himself; an extraordinary proselyted (tom. i. ad Laetam,
p. 54.)]

21 (return) [

Exultare Patres videas, pulcherrima mundi Lumina; Conciliumque
senum gestire Catonum Candidiore toga niveum pietatis amictum
Sumere; et exuvias deponere pontificales.

The fancy of Prudentius is warmed and elevated by victory]

22 (return) [ Prudentius, after he has described the conversion
of the senate and people, asks, with some truth and confidence,

Et dubitamus adhuc Romam, tibi, Christe, dicatam In leges transisse
tuas?]

23 (return) [ Jerom exults in the desolation of the Capitol, and
the other temples of Rome, (tom. i. p. 54, tom. ii. p. 95.)]

2311 (return) [ M. Beugnot is more correct in his general
estimate of the measures enforced by Theodosius for the abolition
of Paganism. He seized (according to Zosimus) the funds bestowed
by the public for the expense of sacrifices. The public
sacrifices ceased, not because they were positively prohibited,
but because the public treasury would no longer bear the expense.
The public and the private sacrifices in the provinces, which
were not under the same regulations with those of the capital,
continued to take place. In Rome itself, many pagan ceremonies,
which were without sacrifice, remained in full force. The gods,
therefore, were invoked, the temples were frequented, the
pontificates inscribed, according to ancient usage, among the
family titles of honor; and it cannot be asserted that idolatry
was completely destroyed by Theodosius. See Beugnot, p. 491.—M.]