self. Speaking of the reign of Maxentius, Gibbon says: "The wealth of Rome supplied an inexhaustible fund for his vain and prodigal expenses, and the ministers of his revenue were skilled in the art of rapine. It was under his reign that the method of exacting a free gift from the senators, was first invented; and the sum was insensibly increased, the pretences of levying it, a victory, a birth, a marriage, or an imperial consulship, were proportionally multiplied." And a little farther on he also says; "He filled Rome and Italy with armed troops, connived at their tumults, suffered them with impunity to plunder, and even to massacre the defenceless people; and indulging them in the same licentiousness which their Emperor enjoyed, Maxentius often bestowed on his military favorites the splendid villa or the beautiful wife of a senator."* The treatment of the conquered nations evinced a like barbarity and utter disregard for human life. This the reader may infer from a simple expression of Tacitus: "To kill and to rob, that was the age; the Romans made a solitude and called it peace."+ Indiscriminate slaughter and ferocity marked the progress of the Roman arms, wherever the Roman standard was erected. "For four hundred miles," says Maxentius, in a letter to the Senate, "we have burned all the German villages, we have carried off all their cattle, and we have taken as captives, those who were unarmed, while we killed all who were found with arms." Still more inhuman and barbarous is the description by St. Salvian of, the destruction of Treves. "The first city of Gaul," says

he, "was twice destroyed. The whole town had become one sepulchre. I myself have seen, lying in every place, the corpses of men and women, naked, unchastly of fending the eye, and mangled by birds and dogs. The funereal smell of the dead, was a deadly pestilence for the * Gibbon, vol. I., p. 473. + Agricola.

living; death was exhaled from death." In fine, upon the taking of Jerusalem by Titus, 90,000 of the inhabitants were either sold into slavery, or worried to death by beasts in the Roman amphitheatre.

CHAPTER V.

ARGUMENT FOR THE PROBABLE NUMBER OF THE MARTYRS CONTINUEDGIBBON'S REASONING REGARDING THE NUMBER OF THE MARTYRS ERRONEOUS BOSIO'S ESTIMATE OF THE NUMBER OF THE PRIMITIVE MARTYRS-GENEBRARDS ESTIMATE OF THE SAME-THE WRITER'S CON

CLUSION

From what has been stated in the foregoing chapter one can readily judge how it must have fared with the poor, unoffending Christians when all the power and weight of authority in the empire was directed towards their destruction. What leniency, what compassion, what favor were they likely to meet with from men whose whole existence and associations were colored and drenched with blood? How forcible, too, self interest, avarice and the desire of commending themselves to the favorable notice of Cæsar must have operated in the case of the prefects, consuls and lesser officers of the crown, to the detriment of the Christian faithful while at the same time the fear of being regarded as derelict in their duty must also have acted as a considerable stimulant in urging these agents of goverment to give effect to the instructions they received. To these may be added personal animosity, hatred, private revenge and that implacable detestation caused by conversion to the faith and the consequent abandonment of idolatory.

By keeping these considerations before the mind the reader will be enabled to form a fair conjectural opinion regarding the slaughter that must have ensued on the publication of the

edicts of Diocletian. The situation at the moment was somewhat if not actually this. Scattered through the entire empire enjoying a perfect repose, and wholly unapprehensive of any sudden outburst of danger were thirty or more millions of Christians intermingling with quadruple the number of pagan inhabitants, To this is to be added the emperor's firm determination of wholly abolishing the Christian religion. "The resentment or fears" says Gibbon, "of Diocletian at length transported him beyond the bounds of moderation which he had hitherto preserved, and he declared in a series of cruel edicts his intention of abolishing the Christian name." To understand the full force of the foregoing and especially that part of the historian's assertion. regarding the emperor's resolve of abolishing the Christian religion, we must keep in view the power with which he was then vested both in his civil and military capacity, but especially in the latter. The Roman army at that time numbered considerably over a million men distributed throughout the empire so as to be able to execute with impunity at any moment their imperial master's command. Supporting these was a pagan population of quadruple the number of the Christians in every locality. What then we ask was there to prevent the Christians from falling victims to the fury of their enemies? Was it inability on the part of the pagans to destroy them? Was it lack of power? No; for we have seen that in numbers the former vastly exceeded the latter, while the army alone at the command of the emperor was more than sufficient for any purpose of that nature. Was it a hesitancy and unwillingness on the part of the emperor to push matters to extremes? By no means; for according to the testimony just quoted he had resolved to abolish and obliterate the very name of Christianity. Was the safety of the Christians, in fine, to be attributed to the humanity of the multitude and their horror

of shedding the blood of their fellow-men? To this we have already sufficiently responded when we instanced the inhuman characteristics of the times and the delight that society then took in shedding the blood of its members. Added to this is also to be taken into account the alarmingly excited condition of the country at large consequent on the alleged attempt on the life of the emperor, and the burning of his palace by the Christians. In fine, neither the will nor the power was wanting on the part of the authorities to effect the destruction of an alarmingly great number of the Christian community. The emperor's published proclamation avowing his unalterable determination of wholly abolishing the Christian religion is a sufficient evidence of the one, while the military power then under his command, backed up and supported by the entire pagan community, is an undeniable proof of the other. There was not wanting then the will nor the means. Taking all these considerations, then, into account what is there unreasonable in affirming that the sword of persecution reached the one tenth of the entire Christian population? Is not this a very moderate computation, and yet limiting the number of victims to this we would still arrive at the very considerable figure of 3,000,000 who died for the faith in this persecution alone; for, as we have shown, the Christian population of the time must have been in the region of thirty or more millions.

The inflexible determination of the emperor to unchristianize the empire, the appalling character of the torments inflicted, added to the time during which the persecution was protracted, all lead to the same conclusion, and testify to the millions that must have perished in this dreadful conflict between the Church on the one side and the powers of darkness on the other. To the first of these considerations we earnestly invite the reader's serious attention and for its proper appreciation refer him to that passage of