admitted any sentiments but those of grief. And this behaviour, which, in the reign of Claudius, escaped with impunity, afterwards turned to her glory." Ann lib. 13. c. 32.

I shall next adduce from Tacitus the wellknown passage, in which he notices the christians as falsely accused by Nero. "The next care was to propitiate the gods. The Sibylline books were consulted, and the consequence was, that supplications were decreed to Vulcan, to Ceres, and to Proserpine. A band of matrons offered their prayers and sacrifices to Juno, first in the Capitol and next on the nearest margin of the sea, where they supplied themselves with water to sprinkle the temple, and the statue of the goddess. A select number of women, who had husbands actually living, laid the deities on the sacred beds, and kept midnight vigils with the usual solemnity. But neither these religious ceremonies, nor the liberal donations of the prince, could efface from the minds of men the prevailing opinion, that Rome was set on fire by his own orders. The infamy of that horrible transaction still adhered to him. In order, if possible, to remove the imputation, he determined to transfer the guilt to others. For this purpose he punished with exquisite torture a race of men, detested for their evil practices, and by the vulgar called christians. The name was derived from Christ,

EE

who was crucified in the reign of Tiberius, under Pontius Pilate, the procurator of Judea. By that event, the sect of which he was the founder, received a blow, which for a time checked the growth of a dangerous superstition. But it revived soon after, and spread with recruited vigour, not only in Judea, the soil that gave it birth, but even in the city of Rome, the common sink into which every thing infamous and atrocious flows, like a torrent, from all quarters of the world. Nero proceeded with his usual artifice. At first they only were arrested, who professed to be of that sect, and by their information a vast multitude were brought to light and condemned, not so much for the crime of burning the city, as for their enmity to mankind. They were put to death with exquisite cruelty, and to their sufferings Nero added mockery and derision. Some were covered with the skins of wild beasts, and left to be devoured by dogs; others were nailed to the cross; numbers were burnt alive; and many covered with inflammable matter, were lighted up, when the day declined, to serve as torches during the night. For the convenience of seeing this tragic spectacle, the emperor lent his own gardens. He added the sports of the circus, and assisted in person, sometimes driving a curricle, and occasionally mixing with the rabble in his coachman's dress. At length the cruelty of these

proceedings filled every breast with compassion. Humanity relented in favour of the christians, though they were guilty, and deserving of the the most exemplary punishment: but they fell a sacrifice not for the public good, but to glut the rage and cruelty of one man only."

Here we see the christians expressly distinguished as a new sect, independent of the Jews; and Tacitus appears to have been the first pagan writer who made the distinction. Nevertheless, it may be inferred, that all those who believed in Jesus did not go by the name of Christians. This appellation was applied to them by way of reproach, and that by the rabble or vulgar. Many acquiesced in the name, and no doubt gloried in it; but the narrative implies, that there were others who from prudence did not assume that title, but sheltered themselves under the established institutions and denomination of Jews. Tacitus asserts, that Nero used great artifice in punishing the professors of the new religion; having first seized those who with the religion openly professed the name, and then by their information discovered those who, without the ignominious name, embraced the religion of Christ. Tacitus needed not to be informed, that christianity was a species of judaism. The wicked Jew and his Egyptian associates had long ago professed to teach it in Rome, as the wisdom of the

laws of Moses; and to the atrocities of which those men were guilty Tacitus alludes, when he says, that to that city flowed every thing infamous and atrocious, thus artfully involving the whole sect, in the enormities which a few unworthy men had committed.

Pilate pronounced our Lord innocent, and yet delivered him up to be punished. Tacitus has acted in the same manner in regard to his followers in Rome. He asserts their innocence of the crime imputed to them by Nero, and yet represents them as deserving all the cruelty which that monster inflicted on them. 66 They were hated," says he, "on account of their enormities." The assertion carries a tacit opposition to the complaint of the believers, that they were hated and persecuted not because any guilt could be found in them, but because of the name by which they were called*.

* Justin. Apol. i. εφ ημων δε το ονομα ὡς ἔλεγχον λαμβάνετε, καιπερ όσον γε εκ του ονοματος τους κατηγορουν τας μαλλον κολάζειν οφειλετε. χρισιανοι γαρ είναι κατη γορούμεθα· το δε χρησον μισεσθαι ου δικαιον. And Athenagoras asks, τι ήμιν το ονομα προς κακιαν τελει. Tertullian writes with his usual point, Oditur in hominibus innocuis etiam nomen innocuum. Tacitus felt the iniquity of hating and punishing men on account of their name. He therefore virtually denies it, and affirms that they were thus,

As Tacitus justifies the cruelties of Nero, so the Author of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire justifies the inhumanity of Tacitus. He is greatly galled by the concession made by the Roman historian, that so great a multitude of christians flourished at this early period in Rome; and assuming the appearance of candour, he artfully endeavours, in pleading for the innocence, to establish the obscurity, of the new sect. His words are too important to be omitted; and they shew, that Mr. Gibbon, with all his celebrity, has displayed more zeal than ability in his attempts to undermine christianity. "Tacitus," says he, “very frequently trusts to the curiosity

treated on account of their crimes.-Per flagitia invisos, that is, per flagitia, et non per nomen, invisos. He adds, Vulgus christianos appellabat. This shews that the believers, though they might not be ashamed of the name, did not themselves assume it, but were called so by the vulgar among their enemies. We are here left to conclude, that even among their adversaries, the politer or more candid part avoided the use of it, as a term of calumny and reproach. What Arnobius says is really wonderful; Christianorum nomen ethnicis execrabile et invisum habebatur, ominisque pessimi, adeo ut ad ejus mentionem inhorrescerent, et rabidorum effervescerent ardoribus." The name of Nazarenes, as appears from Mungo Park, is still held by the Moors in similar dread and abhorrence. The benevolent Jesus foresaw and predicted this circumstance. "All these things they will do unto you for my name sake." John xv.

21.