| |
Easton's Bible Dictionary
The most celebrated city in the world at the time of
Christ. It is said to have been founded B.C. 753. When the New Testament was written,
Rome was enriched and adorned with the spoils of the world, and contained a population
estimated at 1,200,000, of which the half were slaves, and including representatives
of nearly every nation then known. It was distinguished for its wealth and luxury
and profligacy. The empire of which it was the capital had then reached its greatest
prosperity.
On the day of Pentecost there were in Jerusalem "strangers from Rome,"
who doubtless carried with them back to Rome tidings of that great day, and were
instrumental in founding the church there. Paul was brought to this city a prisoner,
where he remained for two years ( Acts 28:30 , 28:31 ) "in his own hired
house." While here, Paul wrote his epistles to the Philippians, to the Ephesians,
to the Colossians, to Philemon, and probably also to the Hebrews. He had during
these years for companions Luke and Aristarchus ( Acts 27:2 ), Timothy (Philemon
1:1 ; Colossians 1:1 ), Tychicus ( Ephesians 6:21 ), Epaphroditus (Philippians
4:18 ), and John Mark ( Colossians 4:10 ). (See PAUL
.)
Beneath this city are extensive galleries, called "catacombs," which were used
from about the time of the apostles (one of the inscriptions found in them bears
the date A.D. 71) for some three hundred years as places of refuge in the time
of persecution, and also of worship and burial. About four thousand inscriptions
have been found in the catacombs. These give an interesting insight into the history
of the church at Rome down to the time of Constantine.
Hitchcock's Dictionary of Bible Names
strength; power
Smith's Bible Dictionary
The famous capital of the ancient world, is situated
on the Tiber at a distance of about 15 miles from its mouth. The "seven hills,"
( Revelation 17:9 ) which formed the nucleus of the ancient city stand on the
left bank. On the opposite side of the river rises the far higher side of the
Janiculum. Here from very early times was a fortress with a suburb beneath it
extending to the river. Modern Rome lies to the north of the ancient city, covering
with its principal portion the plain to the north of the seven hills, once known
as the Campus Martius, and on the opposite bank extending over the low ground
beneath the Vatican to the north of the ancient Janiculum. Rome is not mentioned
in the Bible except in the books of Maccabees and in three books of the New Testament,
viz., the Acts, the Epistle to the Romans and the Second Epistle to Timothy.
Jewish inhabitants. --
The conquests of Pompey seem to have given rise to the first settlement of Jews
at Rome. The Jewish king Aristobulus and his son formed part of Pompeys triumph,
and many Jewish captives and immigrants were brought to Rome at that time. A special
district was assigned to them, not on the site of the modern Ghetto, between the
Capitol and the island of the Tiber, but across the Tiber. Many of these Jews
were made freedmen. Julius Caesar showed them some kindness; they were favored
also by Augustus, and by Tiberius during the latter part of his reign. It is chiefly
in connection with St. Pauls history that Rome comes before us in the Bible. In
illustration of that history it may be useful to give some account of Rome in
the time of Nero, the "Caesar" to whom St. Paul appealed, and in whose reign he
suffered martyrdom.
The city in Paul's time. --
The city at that time must be imagined as a large and irregular mass of buildings
unprotected by an outer wall. It had long outgrown the old Servian wall; but the
limits of the suburbs cannot be exactly defined. Neither the nature of the buildings
nor the configuration of the ground was such as to give a striking appearance
to the city viewed from without. "Ancient Rome had neither cupola nor camyanile,"
and the hills, never lofty or imposing, would present, when covered with the buildings
and streets of a huge city, a confused appearance like the hills of modern London,
to which they have sometimes been compared. The visit of St. Paul lies between
two famous epochs in the history of the city, viz, its restoration by Augustus
and its restoration by Nero. The boast of Augustus is well known, "that he found
the city of brick, and left it of marble." Some parts of the city, especially
the Forum and Campus Martius, must have presented a magnificent appearance, of
which Nieburs "Lectures on Roman History," ii. 177, will give a general idea;
but many of the principal buildings which attract the attention of modern travellers
in ancient Rome were not yet built. The streets were generally narrow and winding,
flanked by densely crowded lodging-houses (insulae) of enormous height. Augustus
found it necessary to limit their height to 70 feet. St, Pauls first visit to
Rome took place before the Neronian conflagration but even after the restoration
of the city which followed upon that event, many of the old evils continued. The
population of the city has been variously estimated. Probably Gibbons estimate
of 1,200,000 is nearest to the truth. One half of the population consisted, in
all probability, of slaves. The larger part of the remainder consisted of pauper
citizens supported in idleness by the miserable system of public gratuities. There
appears to have been no middle class, and no free industrial population. Side
by side with the wretched classes just mentioned was the comparatively small body
of the wealthy nobility, of whose luxury and profligacy we learn so much from
the heathen writers of the time, Such was the population which St. Paul would
find at Rome at the time of his visit. We learn from the Acts of the Apostles
that he was detained at Rome for "two whole years," "dwelling in his own hired
house with a soldier that kept him," ( Acts 28:16 ; 30 ) to whom apparently, according
to Roman custom, he was hound with a chain. ( Acts 28:20 ; Ephesians 6:20 ; Philemon
1:13 ) Here he preached to all that came to him, no man forbidding him. ( Acts
28:30 , 28:31 ) It is generally believed that on his "appeal to Caesar" he was
acquitted, and after some time spent in freedom, was a second time imprisoned
at Rome. Five of his epistles, viz., those to the Colossians, Ephesians, Philippians,
that to Philemon, and the Second Epistle to Timothy, were in all probability written
from Rome, the latter shortly before his death ( 2 Timothy 4:6 ) the others during
his first imprisonment. It is universally believed that he suffered martyrdom
at Rome.
The localities in and about Rome especially connected with the life of Paul are--
(1) The Appian Way, by which he approached Rome. ( Acts
28:15 ) [APPII FORUM]
(2) "The palace," Or "Caesars court" (praetorium,) ( Philemon 1:13 ) This may
mean either the great camp of the Praetorian guards which Tiberius established
outside the walls on the northeast of the city, or, as seems more probable, a
barrack attached to the imperial residence on the Palatine. There is no sufficient
proof that the word "praetorium" was ever used to designate the emperors palace,
though it is used for the official residence of a Roman governor. ( John 18:28
; Acts 23:35 ) the mention of "Caesars household," ( Philemon 4:22 ) confirms
the notion that St. Pauls residence was in the immediate neighborhood of the emperors
house on the Palatine.
(3) The connection of other localities at home with St. Pauls name rests only
on traditions of more or less probability. We may mention especially--
(4) The Mamertine prison, of Tullianum, built by Ancus Martius near the Forum.
It still exists beneath the church of St. Giuseppe dei Falegnami. It is said that
St. Peter and St. Paul were fellow prisoners here for nine months. This is not
the place to discuss the question whether St. Peter was ever at Rome. It may be
sufficient to state that though there is no evidence of such a visit in the New
Testament, unless Babylon in ( 1 Peter 5:13 ) is a mystical name for Rome yet
early testimony and the universal belief of the early Church seems sufficient
to establish the fact of his having suffered martyrdom there. [PETER]
The story, however, of the imprisonment in the Mamertine prison seems inconsistent
with ( 2 Timothy 4:11 )
(5) The chapel on the Ostian road which marks the spot where the two apostles
are said to, have separated on their way to martyrdom.
(6)The supposed scene of St. Pauls martyrdom, viz., the church of St. Paolo alle
tre fontane on the Ostian road. To these may be added --
(7) The supposed scene of St. Peters martyrdom, viz., the church of St. Pietro
in Montorio, on the Janiculum.
(8) The chapel Domine que Vadis, on the Aypian road,the scene of the beautiful
legend of our Lords appearance to St. Peter as he was escaping from martyrdom.
(9) The places where the bodies of the two apostles, after having been deposited
first in the catacombs, are supposed to have been finally buried --that of St.
Paul by the Ostian road, that of St. Peter beneath the dome of the famous Basilica
which bears his name. We may add, as sites unquestionably connected with the Roman
Christians of the apostolic age--
(10) The gardens of Nero in the Vatican. Not far from the spot where St. Peters
now stands. Here Christians, wrapped in the skins of beasts, were torn to pieces
by dogs, or, clothed in inflammable robes, were burnt to serve as torches during
the midnight games. Others were crucified.
(11) The Catacombs. These subterranean galleries, commonly from 8 to 10 feet in
height and from 4 to 6 in width, and extending for miles, especially in the neighborhood
of the old Appian and Nomentan Ways, were unquestionably used as places of refuge,
of worship and of burial by the early Christians. The earliest dated inscription
in the catacombs is A.D. 71. |
Nothing is known of the first founder of the Christian Church at Rome. Christianity
may, perhaps, have been introduced into the city not long after the outpouring
of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost by the "strangers of Rome, who were
then at Jerusalem, ( Acts 2:10 ) It is clear that there were many Christians at
Rome before St. Paul visited the city. ( Romans 1:8 , 1:13 , 1:15 ; 15:20 ) The
names of twenty-four Christians at Rome are given in the salutations at the end
of the Epistle to the Romans. Linus, who is mentioned ( 2 Timothy 4:21 ) and Clement,
Philippians 4:3 are supposed to have succeeded St. Peter as bishops of Rome.
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
rom:
The capital of the Roman republic and empire, later the center of Lot Christendom,
and since 1871 capital of the kingdom of Italy, is situated mainly on the left
bank of the Tiber about 15 miles from the Mediterranean Sea in 41 degrees 53'
54 inches North latitude and 12 degrees 0' 12 inches longitude East of Greenwich.
It would be impossible in the limited space assigned to this article to give even
a comprehensive outline of the ancient history of the Eternal City. It will suit
the general purpose of the work to consider the relations of the Roman government
and society with the Jews and Christians, and, in addition, to present a rapid
survey of the earlier development of Roman institutions and power, so as to provide
the necessary historical setting for the appreciation of the more essential subjects.
I. DEVELOPMENT OF THE REPUBLICAN CONSTITUTION
1. Original Roman State
The traditional chronology for the earliest period of Roman history is altogether
unreliable, partly because the Gauls, in ravaging the city in 390 BC, destroyed
the monuments which might have offered faithful testimony of the earlier period
(Livy vi.1). It is known that there was a settlement on the site of Rome before
the traditional date of the founding (753 BC). The original Roman state was the
product of the coalition of a number of adjacent clan-communities, whose names
were perpetuated in the Roman genres, or groups of imaginary kindred, a historical
survival which had lost all significance in the period of authentic history. The
chieftains of the associated clans composed the primitive senate or council of
elders, which exercised sovereign authority. But as is customary in the development
of human society a military or monarchical regime succeeded the looser patriarchal
or sacerdotal organs of authority. This second stage may be identified with the
legendary rule of the Tarquins, which was probably a period of Etruscan domination.
The confederacy of clans was welded into a homogeneous political entity, and society
was organized for civic ends, upon a timocratic basis. The forum was drained and
became a social, industrial and political center, and the Capitoline temple of
Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva (Etruscan pseudo-Hellenic deities) was erected as a
common shrine for all the people. But above all the Romans are indebted to these
foreign kings for a training in discipline and obedience which was exemplified
in the later conception of magisterial authority signified by the term imperium.
The prerogatives of the kings passed over to the consuls. The reduction of the
tenure of power to a single year and the institution of the principle of colleagueship
were the earliest checks to the abuse of unlimited authority. But the true cornerstone
of Roman liberty was thought to be the lexicon Valeria, which provided that no
citizen should be put to death by a magistrate without being allowed the right
of appeal to the decision of the assembly of the people.
2. The Struggle between Patricians and Plebeians
A period of more than 150 years after the establishment of the republic was consumed
chiefly by the struggle between the two classes or orders, the patricians and
plebeians. The former were the descendants of the original clans and constituted
the populus, or body-politic, in a more particular sense. The plebeians were descendants
of former slaves and dependents, or of strangers who had been attracted to Rome
by the obvious advantages for industry and trade. They enjoyed the franchise as
members of the military assembly (comitia centuriata), but had no share in the
magistracies or other civic honors and emoluments, and were excluded from the
knowledge of the civil law which was handed down in the patrician families as
an oral tradition.
The first step in the progress of the plebeians toward political equality was
taken when they wrested from the patricians the privilege of choosing representatives
from among themselves, the tribunes, whose function of bearing aid to oppressed
plebeians was rendered effective by the right of veto (intercessio), by virtue
of which any act of a magistrate could be arrested. The codification of the law
in the Twelve Tables was a distinct advantage to the lower classes, because the
evils which they had suffered were largely due to a harsh and abusive interpretation
of legal institutions, the nature of which had been obscure (see ROMAN LAW). The
abrogation, directly thereafter, of the prohibition of intermarriage between the
classes resulted in their gradual intermingling.
3. The Senate and Magistrates
The kings had reduced the senate to the position of a mere advising body. But
under the republican regime it recovered in fact the authority of which it was
deprived in theory. The controlling power of the senate is the most significant
feature of the republican government, although it was recognized by no statute
or other constitutional document. It was due in part to the diminution of the
power of the magistrates, and in part to the manner in which the senators were
chosen. The lessening of the authority of the magistrates was the result of the
increase in their number, which led not only to the curtailment of the actual
prerogative of each, but also to the contraction of their aggregate independent
influence. The augmentation of the number of magistrates was made necessary by
the territorial expansion of the state and the elaboration of administration.
But it was partly the result of plebeian agitation. The events of 367 BC may serve
as a suitable example to illustrate the action of these influences. For when the
plebeians carried by storm the citadel of patrician exclusiveness in gaining admission
to the consulship, the highest regular magistracy, the necessity for another magistrate
with general competency afforded an opportunity for making a compensating concession
to the patricians, and the praetorship was created, to which at first members
of the old aristocracy were alone eligible. Under the fully developed constitution
the regular magistracies were five in number, consulship, praetorship, aedileship,
tribunate, and quaestorship, all of which were filled by annual elections.
Mention has been made of the manner of choosing the members of the senate as a
factor in the development of the authority of the supreme council. At first the
highest executive officers of the state exercised the right of selecting new members
to maintain the senators at the normal number of three hundred. Later this function
was transferred to the censors who were elected at intervals of five years. But
custom and later statute ordained that the most distinguished citizens should
be chosen, and in the Roman community the highest standard of distinction was
service to the state, in other words, the holding of public magistracies. It followed,
therefore, that the senate was in reality an assembly of all living ex-magistrates.
The senate included, moreover, all the political wisdom and experience of the
community, and so great was its prestige for these reasons, that, although the
expression of its opinion (senatus consultum) was endowed by law with no compelling
force, it inevitably guided the conduct of the consulting magistrate, who was
practically its minister, rather than its president.
When the plebeians gained admission to the magistracies, the patriciate lost its
political significance. But only the wealthier plebeian families were able to
profit by this extension of privilege, inasmuch as a political career required
freedom from gainful pursuits and also personal influence. These plebeian families
readily coalesced with the patricians and formed a new aristocracy, which is called
the nobilitas for the sake of distinction. It rested ultimately upon the foundation
of wealth. The dignity conferred by the holding of public magistracies was its
title to distinction. The senate was its organ. Rome was never a true democracy
except in theory. During the whole period embraced between the final levelling
of the old distinctions based upon blood (287 BC) and the beginning of the period
of revolution (133 BC), the magistracies were occupied almost exclusively by the
representatives of the comparatively limited number of families which constituted
the aristocracy. These alone entered the senate through the doorway of the magistracies,
and the data would almost justify us in asserting that the republican and senatorial
government were substantially and chronologically identical.
The seeds of the political and social revolution were sown during the Second Punic
War and the period which followed it. The prorogation of military authority established
a dangerous precedent in violation of the spirit of the republic, so that Pub.
Cornelius Scipio was really the forerunner of Marius, Julius Caesar, and Augustus.
The stream of gold which found its way from the provinces to Rome was a bait to
attract the cupidity of the less scrupulous senators, and led to the growth of
the worst kind of professionalism in politics. The middle class of small farmers
decayed for various reasons; the allurement of service in the rich but effete
countries of the Orient attracted many. The cheapness of slaves made independent
farming unprofitable and led to the increase in large estates; the cultivation
of grain was partly displaced by that of the vine and olive, which were less suited
to the habits and ability of the older class of farmers.
The more immediate cause of the revolution was the inability of the senate as
a whole to control the conduct of its more radical or violent members. For as
political ambition became more ardent with the increase in the material prizes
to be gained, aspiring leaders turned their attention to the people, and sought
to attain the fulfillment o.f their purposes by popular legislation setting at
nought the concurrence of the senate, which custom had consecrated as a requisite
preliminary for popular action. The loss of initiative by the senate meant the
subversion of senatorial government. The senate possessed in the veto power of
the tribunes a weapon for coercing unruly magistrates, for one of the ten tribunes
could always be induced to interpose his veto to prohibit the passage of popular
legislation. But this weapon was broken when Tib. Gracchus declared in 133 BC
that a tribune who opposed the wishes of the people was no longer their representative,
and sustained this assertion.
4. Underlying Principles
It would be foreign to the purpose of the present article to trace the vicissitudes
of the civil strife of the last century of the republic. A few words will suffice
to suggest the general principles which lay beneath the surface of political and
social phenomena. Attention has been called to the ominous development of the
influence of military commanders and the increasing emphasis of popular favor.
These were the most important tendencies throughout this period, and the coalition
of the two was fatal to the supremacy of the senatorial government. Marius after
winning unparalleled military glory formed a political alliance with Glaucia and
Saturninus, the leaders of the popular faction in the city in 100 BC. This was
a turning-point in the course of the revolution. But the importance of the sword
soon outweighed that of the populace in the combination which was thus constituted.
In the civil wars of Marius and Sulla constitutional questions were decided for
the first time by superiority of military strength exclusively. Repeated appeals
to brute force dulled the perception for constitutional restraints and the rights
of minorities. The senate had already displayed signs of partial paralysis at
the time of the Gracchi. How rapidly its debility must have increased as the sword
cut off its most stalwart members! Its power expired in the proscriptions, or
organized murder of political opponents. The popular party was nominally triumphant,
but in theory the Roman state was still an urban commonwealth with a single po1itical
center. The franchise could be exercised only at Rome. It followed from this that
the actual political assemblies were made up largely of the worthless element
which was so numerous in the city, whose irrational instincts were guided and
controlled by shrewd political leaders, particularly those who united in themselves
military ability and the wiles of the demagogue. Sulla, Crassus, Julius Caesar,
Antony, and lastly Octavian were in effect the ancient counterpart of the modern
political "boss." When such men realized their ultimate power and inevitable rivalry,
the ensuing struggle for supremacy and for the survival of the fittest formed
the necessary process of elimination leading naturally to the establishment of
the monarchy, which was in this case the rule of the last survivor. When Octavian
received the title Augustus and the proconsular power (27 BC), the transformation
was accomplished.
LITERATURE.
The standard work on Roman political institutions is Mommsen and Marquardt, Handbuch
der klassischen Altertumer. Abbott, Roman Political Institutions, Boston and London,
1901, offers a useful summary treatment of the subject. |
II. EXTENSION OF ROMAN SOVEREIGNTY
See ROMAN EMPIRE AND CHRISTIANITY, I.
LITERATURE.
Only the most important general works on Roman history can be mentioned: Ihne,
Romische Geschichte (2nd edition), Leipzig, 1893-96, English translation, Longmans,
London, 1871-82; Mommsen, History of Rome, English translation by Dickson, New
York, 1874; Niebuhr, History of Rome, English translation by Hare and Thirlwall,
Cambridge, 1831-32; Pais, Storia di Roma, Turin, 1898-99; Ferrero, Greatness and
Decline of Rome, English translation by Zimmern, New York, 1909.
III. THE IMPERIAL GOVERNMENT
1. Imperial Authority
Augustus displayed considerable tact in blending his own mastery in the state
with the old institutions of the republican constitution. His authority, legally,
rested mainly upon the tribunician power, which he had probably received as early
as 36 BC, but which was established on a better basis in 23 BC, and the proconsular
prerogative (imperiurn proconsulare), conferred in 27 BC. By virtue of the first
he was empowered to summon the senate or assemblies and could veto the action
of almost any magistrate. The second title of authority conferred upon him the
command of the military forces of the state and consequently the administration
of the provinces where troops were stationed, besides a general supervision over
the government of the other provinces. It follows that a distinction was made
(27 BC) between the imperial provinces which were administered by the emperor's
representatives (legati Augusti pro praetore) and the senatorial provinces where
the republican machinery of administration was retained. The governors of the
latter were called generally proconsuls (see PROVINCE). Mention is made of two
proconsuls in the New Testament, Gallio in Achaia (Acts 18:12) and Sergius Paulus
in Cyprus (Acts 13:7). It is instructive to compare the lenient and common-sense
attitude of these trained Roman aristocrats with that of the turbulent local mobs
who dealt with Paul in Asia Minor, Judea, or Greece (Tucker, Life in the Roman
World of Nero and Paul, New York, 1910, 95).
2. Three Classes of Citizens
Roman citizens were still divided into three classes socially, senatorial, equestrian,
and plebeian, and the whole system of government harmonized with this triple division.
The senatorial class was composed of descendants of senators and those upon whom
the emperors conferred the latus clavus, or privilege of wearing the tunic with
broad purple border, the sign of membership in this order. The quaestorship was
still the door of admission to the senate. The qualifications for membership in
the senate were the possession of senatorial rank and property of the value of
not less than 1,000,000 sesterces (,000; œ9,000). Tiberius transferred the election
of magistrates from the people to the senate, which was already practically a
closed body. Under the empire senatus consulta received the force of law. Likewise
the senate acquired judicial functions, sitting as a court of justice for trying
important criminal cases and hearing appeals in civil cases from the senatorial
provinces. The equestrian class was made up of those who possessed property of
the value of 400,000 sesterces or more, and the privilege of wearing the narrow
purple band on the tunic. With the knights the emperors filled many important
financial and administrative positions in Italy and the provinces which were under
their control. |
IV. ROMAN RELIGION
1. Deities
(1) The Roman religion was originally more consistent than
the Greek, because the deities as conceived by the unimaginative Latin genius
were entirely without human character. They were the influences or forces which
directed the visible phenomena of the physical world, whose favor was necessary
to the material prosperity of mankind. It would be incongruous to assume the existence
of a system of theological doctrines in the primitive period. Ethical considerations
entered to only a limited extent into the attitude of the Romans toward their
gods. Religion partook of the nature of a contract by which men pledged themselves
to the scrupulous observance of certain sacrifices and other ceremonies, and in
return deemed themselves entitled to expect the active support of the gods in
bringing their projects to a fortunate conclusion. The Romans were naturally polytheists
as a result of their conception of divinity. Since before the dawn of science
there was no semblance of unity in the natural world, there could be no unity
in heaven. There must be a controlling spirit over every important object or class
of objects, every person, and every process of nature. The gods, therefore, were
more numerous than mankind itself.
(2) At an early period the government became distinctly secular. The priests were
the servants of the community for preserving the venerable aggregation of formulas
and ceremonies, many of which lost at an early period such spirit as they once
possessed. The magistrates were the true representatives of the community in its
relationship with the deities both in seeking the divine will in the auspices
and in performing the more important sacrifices.
(3) The Romans at first did not make statues of their gods. This was partly due
to lack of skill, but mainly to the vagueness of their conceptions of the higher
beings. Symbols sufficed to signify their existence, a spear, for instance, standing
for Mars. The process of reducing the gods to human form was inaugurated when
they came into contact with the Etruscans and Greeks. The Tarquins summoned Etruscan
artisans and artists to Rome, who made from terra cotta cult statues and a pediment
group for the Capitoline temple.
The types of the Greek deities had already been definitely established when the
Hellenic influence in molding Roman culture became predominant. When the form
of the Greek gods became familiar to the Romans in works of sculpture, they gradually
supplanted those Roman deities with which they were nominally identified as a
result of a real or fancied resemblance. See GREECE, RELIGION IN ANCIENT.
(4) The importation of new gods was a comparatively easy matter. Polytheism is
by its nature tolerant because of its indefiniteness. The Romans could no more
presume to have exhaustive knowledge of the gods than they could pretend to possess
a comprehensive acquaintance with the universe. The number of their gods increased
of necessity as human consciousness of natural phenomena expanded. Besides, it
was customary to invite the gods of conquered cities to transfer their abode to
Rome and favor the Romans in their undertakings. But the most productive source
for religious expansion was the Sibylline Books. See APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE, sec.
V. This oracular work was brought to Rome from Cumae, a center of the cult of
Apollo. It was consulted at times of crisis with a view to discover what special
ceremonies would secure adequate divine aid. The forms of worship recommended
by the Sibylline Books were exclusively Greek As early as the 5th century BC the
cult of Apollo was introduced at Rome. Heracles and the Dioscuri found their way
thither about the same time. Later Italian Diana was merged with Artemis, and
the group of Ceres, Liber, and Libera were identified with foreign Demeter, Dionysus,
and Persephone. Thus Roman religion became progressively Hellenized. By the close
of the Second Punic War the greater gods of Greece had all found a home by the
Tiber, and the myriad of petty local deities who found no counterpart in the celestial
beings of Mt. Olympus fell into oblivion. Their memory was retained by the antiquarian
lore of the priests alone. See ROMAN EMPIRE AND CHRISTIANITY, III, 1. |
2. Religious Decay
Roman religion received with the engrafted branches of Greek religion the germs
of rapid decay, for its Hellenization made Roman religion peculiarly susceptible
to the attack of philosophy. The cultivated class in Greek society was already
permeated with skepticism. The philosophers made the gods appear ridiculous. Greek
philosophy gained a firm foothold in Rome in the 2nd century BC, and it became
customary a little later to look upon Athens as a sort of university town where
the sons of the aristocracy should be sent for the completion of their education
in the schools of the philosophers. Thus at the termination of the republican
era religious faith had departed from the upper classes largely, and during the
turmoil of the civil wars even the external ceremonies were often abandoned and
many temples fell into ruins. There had never been any intimate connection between
formal religion and conduct, except when the faith of the gods was invoked to
insure the fulfillment of sworn promises.
Augustus tried in every way to restore the old religion, rebuilding no fewer than
82 temples which lay in ruins at Rome. A revival of religious faith did occur
under the empire, although its spirit was largely alien to that which had been
displayed in the performance of the official cult. The people remained superstitious,
even when the cultivated classes adopted a skeptical philosophy. The formal religion
of the state no longer appealed to them, since it offered nothing to the emotions
or hopes. On the other hand the sacramental, mysterious character of oriental
religions inevitably attracted them. This is the reason why the religions of Egypt
and Syria spread over the empire and exercised an immeasurable influence in the
moral life of the people. The partial success of Judaism and the ultimate triumph
of Christianity may be ascribed in part to the same causes.
In concluding we should bear in mind that the state dictated no system of theology,
that the empire in the beginning presented the spectacle of a sort of religious
chaos where all national cults were guaranteed protection, that Roman polytheism
was naturally tolerant, and that the only form of religion which the state could
not endure was one which was equivalent to an attack upon the system of polytheism
as a whole, since this would imperil the welfare of the community by depriving
the deities of the offerings and other services in return for which their favor
could be expected.
LITERATURE.
Marquardt, Romische Staatsverwaltung, III, 3, "Das Sacralwesen"; Wissowa, Religion
u. Kultus der Romer, Munich, 1902; Boissier, La religion romaine, Paris, 1884.
|
V. ROME AND THE JEWS
1. Judea under Roman Procurators and Governors
Judaea became a part of the province of Syria in 63 BC (Josephus, BJ, vii, 7),
and Hyrcanus, brother of the last king, remained as high priest (archiereus kai
ethnarches; Josephus, Ant, XIV, iv, 4) invested with judicial as well as sacerdotal
functions. But Antony and Octavius gave Palestine (40 BC) as a kingdom to Herod,
surnamed the Great, although his rule did not become effective until 3 years later.
His sovereignty was upheld by a Roman legion stationed at Jerusalem (Josephus,
Ant, XV, iii, 7), and he was obliged to pay tribute to the Roman government and
provide auxiliaries for the Roman army (Appian, Bell. Civ., v.75). Herod built
Caesarea in honor of Augustus (Josephus, Ant, XV, ix, 6), and the Roman procurators
later made it the seat of government. At his death in 4 BC the kingdom was divided
between his three surviving sons, the largest portion falling to Archelaus, who
ruled Judea, Samaria and Idumaea with the title ethnarches (Josephus, Ant, XVII,
xi, 4) until 6 AD, when he was deposed and his realm reduced to the position of
a province. The administration by Roman procurators (see PROCURATOR), which was
now established, was interrupted during the period 41-44 AD, when royal authority
was exercised by Herod Agrippa, grandson of Herod the Great, over the lands which
had been embraced in the kingdom of his grandfather (Josephus, Ant, XIX, viii,
2), and, after 53 AD, Agrippa II ruled a considerable part of Palestine (Josephus,
Ant, XX, vii, 1; viii, 4).
After the fall of Jerusalem and the termination of the great revolt in 70 AD,
Palestine remained a separate province. Henceforth a legion (legio X Fretensis)
was added to the military forces stationed in the land, which was encamped at
the ruins of Jerusalem. Consequently, imperial governors of praetorian rank (legati
Augusti pro praetore) took the place of the former procurators (Josephus, BJ,
VII, i, 2, 3; Dio Cassius lv.23).
Several treaties are recorded between the Romans and Jews as early as the time
of the Maccabees (Josephus, Ant, XII, x, 6; XIII, ix, 2; viii, 5), and Jews are
known to have been at Rome as early as 138 BC. They became very numerous in the
capital after the return of Pompey who brought back many captives (see LIBERTINES).
Cicero speaks of multitudes of Jews at Rome in 58 BC (Pro Flacco 28), and Caesar
was very friendly toward them (Suetonius Caesar 84). Held in favor by Augustus,
they recovered the privilege of collecting sums to send to the temple (Philo Legatio
ad Caium 40). Agrippa offered 100 oxen in the temple when visiting Herod (Josephus,
Ant, XVI, ii, 1), and Augustus established a daily offering of a bull and two
lambs. Upon the whole the Roman government displayed noticeable consideration
for the religious scruples of the Jews. They were exempted from military service
and the duty of appearing in court on the Sabbath. Yet Tiberius repressed Jewish
rites in Rome in 19 AD (Suetonius Tiberius 36) and Claudius expelled the Jews
from the city in 49 AD (Suetonius Claudius 25); but in both instances repression
was not of long duration.
2. Jewish Proselytism
The Jews made themselves notorious in Rome in propagating their religion by means
of proselytizing (Horace Satires i.4, 142; i.9, 69; Juvenal xiv.96; Tacitus Hist.
v. 5), and the literature of the Augustan age contains several references to the
observation of the Sabbath (Tibullus i.3; Ovid Ars amatoria i.67, 415; Remedium
amoris 219). Proselytes from among the Gentiles were not always required to observe
all the prescriptions of the Law. The proselytes of the Gate (sebomenoi), as they
were called, renounced idolatry and serious moral abuses and abstained from the
blood and meat of suffocated animals. Among such proselytes may be included the
centurion of Capernaum (Luke 7:5), the centurion Cornelius (Acts 10:1), and the
empress Poppea (Josephus, Ant, XX, viii, 11; Tacitus Ann. xvi.6).
On "proselytes of the Gate," GJV4, III, 177, very properly corrects the error
in HJP. These "Gate" people were not proselytes at all; they refused to take the
final step that carried them into Judaism--namely, circumcision (Ramsay, The Expositor,
1896, p. 200; Harnack, Expansion of Christianity, I, 11).
See DEVOUT; PROSELYTE.
Notwithstanding the diffusion of Judaism by means of proselytism, the Jews themselves
lived for the most part in isolation in the poorest parts of the city or suburbs,
across the Tiber, near the Circus Maximus, or outside the Porta Capena. Inscriptions
show that there were seven communities, each with its synagogue and council of
elders presided over by a gerusiarch. Five cemeteries have been discovered with
many Greek, a few Latin, but no Hebrew inscriptions.
LITERATURE.
Ewald, The Hist of Israel, English translation by Smith, London, 1885; Renan,
Hist of the People of Israel, English translation, Boston, 1896; Schurer, The
Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ, English translation by MacPherson,
New York. |
VI. ROME AND THE CHRISTIANS
1. Introduction of Christianity
The date of the introduction of Christianity into Rome cannot be determined. A
Christian community existed at the time of the arrival of Paul (Acts 28:15), to
which he had addressed his Epistle a few years before (58 AD). It is commonly
thought that the statement regarding the expulsion of the Jews from Rome under
Claudius on account of the commotion excited among them by the agitation of Chrestus
(Suetonius Claudius 25: Iudaeos impulsore Chresto assidue tumultuantis Roma expulit),
probably in 49 AD, is proof of the diffusion of Christian teaching in Rome, on
the ground that Chrestus is a colloquial, or mistaken, form of Christus. It has
been suggested that the Christian faith was brought to the capital of the empire
by some of the Romans who were converted at the time of Pentecost (Acts 2:10 ,
41). It would be out of place to discuss here the grounds for the traditional
belief that Peter was twice in Rome, once before 50 AD and again subsequent to
the arrival of Paul, and that together the two apostles established the church
there. Our present concern is with the attitude of the government and society
toward Christianity, when once established. It may suffice, therefore, to remind
the reader that Paul was permitted to preach freely while nominally in custody
(Philippians 1:13), and that as early as 64 AD the Christians were very numerous
(Tacitus Ann. xv.44: multitudo ingens).
2. Tolerance and Proscription
At first the Christians were not distinguished from the Jews, but shared in the
toleration, or even protection, which was usually conceded to Judaism as the national
religion of one of the peoples embraced within the empire. Christianity was not
legally proscribed until after its distinction from Judaism was clearly perceived.
Two questions demand our attention: (1) When was Christianity recognized as distinct
from Judaism? (2) When was the profession of Christianity declared a crime? These
problems are of fundamental importance in the history of the church under the
Roman empire.
(1) If we may accept the passage in Suetonius cited above
(Claudius 25) as testimony on the vicissitudes of Christianity, we infer that
at that time the Christians were confused with the Jews. The account of Pomponia
Graecina, who was committed to the jurisdiction of her husband (Tacitus Ann. xiii.32)
for adherence to a foreign belief (superstitionis externae rea), is frequently
cited as proof that as early as 57 AD Christianity had secured a convert in the
aristocracy. The characterization of the evidence in this case by the contemporary
authority from whom Tacitus has gleaned this incident would apply appropriately
to the adherence to Judaism or several oriental religions from the point of view
of Romans of that time; for Pomponia had lived in a very austere manner since
44 AD. Since there is some other evidence that Pomponia was a Christian, the indefinite
account of the accusation against her as mentioned by Tacitus is partial proof
that Christianity had not as yet been commonly recognized as a distinct religion
(Marucchi, Elements d'archeologie chretienne I, 13). At the time of the great
conflagration in 64 AD the populace knew of the Christians, and Nero charged them
collectively with a plot to destroy the city (Tacitus Ann. xv.44). The recognition
of the distinctive character of Christianity had already taken place at this time.
This was probably due in large measure to the circumstances of Paul's sojourn
and trial in Rome and to the unprecedented number of converts made at that time.
The empress Poppea, who was probably an adherent of Judaism (Josephus, Ant, XX,
viii), may have enlightened the imperial court regarding the heresy of the Christians
and their separation from the parent stock.
(2) In attempting to determine approximately the time at which Christianity was
placed under the official ban of the imperial government, it will be convenient
to adopt as starting-points certain incontestable dates between which the act
of prosecution must have been issued. It is clear that at the time of the great
conflagration (64 AD), the profession of Christianity was not a ground for criminal
action. Paul had just been set at liberty by decree of the imperial court (compare
2 Timothy 4:17). Moreover, the charge against the Christians was a plot to burn
the city, not adherence to a proscribed religion, and they were condemned, as
it appears, for an attitude of hostility toward the human race (Tacitus Ann. xv.
44). While governor of Bithynia (circa 112 AD), Pliny the younger addressed Trajan
in a celebrated letter (x.96) asking advice to guide his conduct in the trial
of many persons who were accused as Christians, and inquiring particularly whether
Christianity in itself was culpable, or only the faults which usually accompanied
adherence to the new faith. The reply of the emperor makes quite plain the fundamental
guilt at that time of adherence to Christianity, and it supposes a law already
existing against it (x.97). It follows, therefore, that the law against Christianity
which was the legal basis for persecution must have been issued between the conflagration
in 64 AD and Pliny's administration of Bithynia.
We cannot define the time of this important act of legislation more closely with
absolute certainty, although evidence is not wanting for the support of theories
of more or less apparent probability. Tradition ascribes a general persecution
to the reign of Domitian, which would imply that Christianity was already a forbidden
religion at that time. Allusions in Revelation (as 6:9), the references to recent
calamities in Rome by Clement in his letter to the Corinthians (1 Ad Cor.), the
condemnation of Acilius Glabrio (Dio Cassius lxvii.13), a man of consular rank,
together with the emperor's cousin Flavius Clemens (Dio Cassius, xiii) and Flavia
Domitilla and many others on the charge of atheism and Jewish customs (95 AD),
are cited as evidence for this persecution. The fact that a number of persons
in Bithynia abandoned Christianity 20 years before the judicial investigation
of Pliny (Pliny x. 96) is of some importance as corroborative evidence.
But there are grounds worthy of consideration for carrying the point of departure
back of Domitian. The letter of Peter from Babylon (Rome ?) to the Christians
in Asia Minor implies an impending persecution (1 Peter 4:12 - 16). This was probably
in the closing years of the reign of Nero. Allard cleverly observes (Histoire
des persecutions, 61) that the mention of the Neronian persecution of the Christians
apart from the description of the great fire in the work of Suetonius (Ner. 16),
amid a number of acts of legislation, is evidence of a general enactment, which
must have been adopted at the time of, or soon after, the proceedings which were
instituted on the basis of the charge of arson. Upon the whole theory that the
policy of the imperial government was definitely established under Nero carries
with it considerable probability (compare Sulpitius Severus, Chron., ii.41). |
3. Persecution
Although the original enactment has been lost the correspondence of Pliny and
Trajan enables us to formulate the imperial policy in dealing with the Christians
during the 2nd century. Adherence to Christianity was in itself culpable. But
proceedings were not to be undertaken by magistrates on their own initiative;
they were to proceed only from charges brought by voluntary accusers legally responsible
for establishing the proof of their assertions. Informal and anonymous information
must be rejected. Penitence shown in abjuring Christianity absolved the accused
from the legal penalty of former guilt. The act of adoring the gods and the living
emperor before their statues was sufficient proof of non-adherence to Christianity
or of repentance.
The attitude of the imperial authorities in the 3rd century was less coherent.
The problem became more complicated as Christianity grew. Persecution was directed
more especially against the church as an organization, since it was believed to
exert a dangerous power. About 202 AD, Septimius Severus issued a decree forbidding
specifically conversion to Judaism or Christianity (Spartianus, Severus, 17),
in which he departed from the method of procedure prescribed by Trajan (conquirendi
non sunt), and commissioned the magistrates to proceed directly against suspected
converts. At this time the Christians organized funerary associations for the
possession of their cemeteries, substituting corporative for individual ownership,
and it would appear that under Alexander Severus they openly held places of worship
in Rome (Lampridius, Alexander Severus, 22, 49). The emperor Philip (244-49) is
thought to have been a Christian at heart (Eusebius, HE, VI, 34). A period of
comparative calm was interrupted by the persecution under Decius (250-51 AD),
when the act of sacrifice was required as proof of non-adherence to Christianity.
Several certificates testifying to the due performance of this rite have been
preserved.
Under Valerian (257 AD) the Christian organizations were declared illegal and
the cemeteries were sequestrated. But an edict in 260 AD restored this property
(Eusebius, VII, 13). A short persecution under Aurelian (274 AD) broke the long
period of calm which extended to the first edict of persecution of Diocletian
(February 24, 303). The Christians seem to have gained a sort of prescriptive
claim to exist, for Diocletian did not at first consider them guilty of a capital
crime. He sought to crush their organization by ordering the cessation of assemblies,
the destruction of churches and sacred books, and abjuration under pain of political
and social degradation. (Lactantius, De Morte Persecutorum, x.11, 12, 13; Eusebius,
VIII, 2; IX, 10). Later he ordered the arrest of all the clergy, who were to be
put to death unless they renounced the faith (Eusebius, VIII, 6). Finally the
requirement of an act of conformity in sacrificing to the gods was made general.
This final persecution, continuing in an irregular way with varying degrees of
severity, terminated with the defeat of Maxentius by Constantine (October 29,
312). The Edict of Milan issued by Constantine and Licinius the following year
established toleration, the restoration of ecclesiastical property and the peace
of the church.
See ROMAN EMPIRE AND CHRISTIANITY, III, IV, V. |
LITERATURE
Allard, Histoire des persecutions, Paris, 1903; Le christianisme et l'empire romain,
Paris, 1903; Duchesne, Histoire ancienne de l'eglise, Paris, 1907 (English translation);
Marucchi, Elements d'archeologie chretienne, Paris, 1899-1902; Hardy, Christianity
and the Roman Government, London, 1894; Renan, L'eglise chretienne, Paris, 1879;
Ramsay, The Church in the Roman Empire, London, 1893.
George H. Allen
Tags:
41.9000, 12.5000; appian way, bible commentary, bible history, bible reference, bible study, capital of the roman empire, catacombs, christian in rome, city, gardens of nero, rome, seven hills
Comments:
|
 |
|
