CENT.

by him in

the air.

IX. The doubts and difficulties that naturally IV. arise in the mind, concerning the miraculous cross PART I that CONSTANTINE solemnly declared he had seen, A cross seen about noon, in the air, are many and considerable. It is easy, indeed, to refute the opinion of those who look upon this prodigy as a cunning fiction, invented by the emperor to animate his troops in the ensuing battle, or who consider the narration as wholly fabulous [y]. The sentiment also of those, who imagine that this pretended cross was no more than a natural phenomenon in a solar halo, is, perhaps, more ingenious, than solid and convincing [x]. Nor, in the third place, do we think it sufficiently proved, that the divine power interposed here to confirm the wavering faith of Constantine by a stupendous miracle. The only hypothesis, then [a],

which

purposes of a PUBLICOLA, or a TRAJAN. But true Christianity can animate or encourage to nothing that is not just and good. It tends to support government by the principles of piety and justice, and not by the ambiguous flight of birds, and such like delusions.

[y] HORNBECK. Comment. ad Bullam Urbani, viii. de Imagin. cultu, p. 182. OISELIUS, Thesaur. Numism. Antiq. p. 463. TOLLIUS, Preface to the French Translation of LONGINUS, as also his Adnot. ad LACTANTIUM de Mort. Persequut. cap. xliv. CHRIST. THOMASIUS, Observat. Hallens. tom. I p. 380.

[x] Jo. AND. SCHMIDIUS, Dis. de luna in cruce visa, Jo. ALB. FABRICIUS, Diss. de cruce à Constantino visa, in his Biblioth. Graca, vol. vi. cap. i. p. 8, &c.

[a] This hypothesis of Dr MOSHEIM is not more credible than the real appearance of a cross in the air. Both events are recorded by the same authority. And, if the veracity of CONSTANTINE, or of EUSEBIUS, are questioned with respect to the appearance of a cross in the day, they can scarcely be confided in with respect to the truth of the nocturnal vision. It is very surprising to see the learned authors of the Universal History adopt, without exception, all the accounts of EUSEBIUS concerning this cross, which are extremely liable to suspicion; which EUSEBIUS himself seems to have believed but in part, and or the truth of all which he is careful not to make himself answerable. (See that author De vita Constant. lib. ii. cap. ix.

This whole story is attended with difficulties, which render it, both as a miracle and as a fact, extremely dubious, to say

no

IV.

which remains, is, that we consider this famous CE N T. cross as a vision represented to the emperor in apART I. dream, with the remarkable inscription, HAC VINCE, i, e. In this conquer; and this latter opinion is maintained by authors of considerable weight [aa].

X. The joy, with which the Christians were The Chrielated on account of the favourable edicts of CON- stians persecuted by LiSTANȚINE and LICINIUS, was soon interrupted by cinius.

no more. It will necessarily be asked, whence it comes to pass, that the relation of a fact which is said to have been seen by the whole army, is delivered by EUSEBIUS, upon the sole credit of CONSTANTINE? This is the more unaccountable, that EUSEBIUS lived and conversed with many that must have been spectators of this event, had it really happened, and whose unanimous testimony would have pre- . vented the necessity of CONSTANTINE'S confirming it to him by an oath. The sole relation of one man, concerning a public appearance, is not sufficient to give complete conviction; nor does it appear, that this story was generally believed by the Christians, or by others, since several ecclesiastical historians, who wrote after EUSEBIUS, particularly RUFFIN and SozoMEN, make no mention of this appearance of a cross in the heavens. The nocturnal vision was, it must be confessed, more generally known and believed. Upon which Dr LARDNER makes this conjecture, that when CONSTANTINE first informed the people of the reason that induced him to make use of the sign of the cross in his army, he alleged nothing but a dream for that purpose; but that, in the latter part of his life, when he was acquainted with EUSEBIUS, he added, the other particular, of a luminous cross, seen somewhere by him and his army in the day-time (for the place is not mentioned); and that, the emperor having related this in the most solemn manner, EUSEBIUS thought himself obliged to mention it.

[aa] All the writers, who have given any accounts of ConSTANTINE the GREAT, are carefully enumerated by J. A. FABRICIUS, in his Lux Salut. Evang. toti orbi exor. cap. xii. p. 260. who also mentions, cap. xiii. p. 237. the laws concerning religious matters, which were enacted by this emperor, and digested into four parts. For a full account of these laws, see JAC. GODOFRED. Adnotat. ad Codic. Theodos. and BALDUINUS, in his Constantin. Magn. seu de legibus Constantini Eccles. et Civilibus, lib. ii. of which a second edition was published, at Hall, by GUNDLING, in 8vo, in the year 4727.

PART I

CENT the war which broke out between these two prinIV. ces. LICINIUS, being defeated in a pitched battle, in the year 314, made a treaty of peace with CONSTANTINE, and observed it during the space of nine years. But his turbulent spirit rendered him an enemy to repose; and his natural violence seconded, and still further incensed, by the sugges→ tions of the Heathen priests, armed him against CONSTANTINE, in the year 324, for the second time. During this war, he endeavoured to engage in his cause all those who remained attached to the ancient superstition, that thus he might oppress his adversary with numbers; and, in order to this, he persecuted the Christians in a cruel manner, and put to death many of their bishops, after trying them with torments of the most barbarous nature [b]. But all his enterprizes proved abortive; for, after several battles fought without success, he was reduced to the necessity of throwing himself at the victor's feet, and imploring his clemency; which, however, he did not long enjoy; for he was strangled, by the orders of Constantine, in the year 325. After the defeat of Licinius, the empire was ruled by Con

[b] EUSEBIUS, Hist. Eccles. lib. x. cap. viii. Id. De vita Constantini, lib. i. cap. xlix. JULIAN himself, whose bitter aversion to CONSTANTINE gives a singular degree of credibility to his testimony in this matter, could not help confessing that LICINIUS was an infamous tyrant and a profigate, abandoned to all sorts of wickedness. See the CASARS of JULIAN, p. 222. of the French edition by SPANHEIM. And here I beg leave

to make a remark which has escaped the learned, and that is, that AURELIUS VICTOR, in his book de Cæsaribus, cap. xli. P. 435. edit. Arntzenii, has mentioned the persecution under LiCINIUS in the following terms: "Licinio ne insontium qui"dem ac nobilium philosophorum servili more cruciatus adhi"biti modum fecere." The philosophers, whom LICINIUS is here said to have tormented, were, doubtless, the Christians, whom many, through ignorance, looked upon as a philosophical sect. This passage of AURELIUS has not been touched by the commentators, who are too generally more intent upon the knowledge of words than of things.

IV.

CONSTANTINE alone until his death, and the CENT. Christian cause experienced, in its happy progress, PART I. the effects of his auspicious administration. This zealous prince employed all the resources of his genius, all the authority of his laws, and all the engaging charms of his munificence and liberality, to efface, by degrees, the superstitions of Paganism, and to propagate Christianity in every corner of the Roman empire, He had learned, no doubt, from the disturbances continually excited by LICINIUS, that neither himself nor the empire could enjoy a fixed state of tranquillity and safety as long as the ancient superstitions subsisted; and therefore, from this period, he openly opposed the sacred rites of Paganism, as a religion detrimental to the interests of the state.

under the

Great.

XI. After the death of CONSTANTINE, which The state of happened in the year 337, his three sons, Con-the church stantine II. Constantius, and Constans, were, in sons of Conconsequence of his appointment, put in possesion tantine the of the empire, and were all saluted as emperors and Augusti, by the Roman senate, There were yet living two brothers of the late emperor, viz. Constantious Dalmatius and Julius Constantius, and they had several sons. These the sons of Constantine,ordered to be put to death, lest their ambitious views should excite troubles in the empire [c]; and they all fell victims to this barbarous order, except Gallus and Julian, the sons of Julius Constantius, the latter

¥4

[c] It is more probable, that the principal design of this massacre was to recover the provinces of Thrace, Macedon, and Achaia, which, in the division of the empire, CONSTANTINE the GREAT had given to young DALMATIUS, son to his brother of the same name, and Pontus and Cappadocia, which he had granted to ANNIBALIANUS, the brother of young DALBe that as it will, Dr MOSHEIM has attributed this massacre equally to the three sons of CONSTANTINE; whereas almost all authors agree, that neither young CONSTANTINE, BOR CONSTANS had any hand in it at all.

MATIUS.

IV.

PART

CEN T. latter of whom rose afterwards to the imperial dignity. The dominions allotted to CONSTANTINE were Britain, Gaul, and Spain; but he did not possess them long, for, having made himself master, by force, of several places belonging to CONSTANS, this occasioned a war between the two brothers, in the year 340, in which CONSTANTINE lost his life. Constans, who had received, at first, for his portion, Illyricum, Italy, and Africa, added now the dominions of the deceased prince to his own, and thus became sole master of all the western provinces. He remained in possession of this vast territory until the year 350, when he was cruelly assassinated by the orders of Magnentius, one of his conimanders, who had revolted and declared himself emperor. Magnentius, in his turn, met with the fate he deserved; transported with rage and despair at his ill success in the war against Constantius, and apprehending the most terrible and ignominious death from the just resentiment of the conqueror, he laid violent hands upon himself. Thus Constantius, who had, before this, possessed the provinces of Asia, Syria, and Egypt, became, in the year 353, sole lord of the Roman empire, which he ruled until the year 361, when he died at Mopsucrene, on the borders. of Cilicia, as he was marching against JULIan. None of these three brothers possessed the spirit and genius of their father. They all, indeed, followed his example, in continuing to abrogate and efface the ancient superstitions of the Romans and other idolatrous nations, and to accelerate the progress of the Christian religion throughout the empire. This zeal was, no doubt, laudable; its end was excellent; but, in the means used to accomplish it, there were many things worthy of

blame.

. XII. This flourishing progress of the Christian religion was greatly interrupted, and the church

reduced