THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY SCHREYER HONORS COLLEGE

DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY

HEROIC DEATH: THE ROLE MARTYRDOM PLAYED IN THE SPREAD OF CHRISTIANITY THROUGHOUT THE ROMAN EMPIRE PRIOR TO THE FIRST COUNCIL OF NICAEA

KARA FESOLOVICH SUMMER 2019

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for baccalaureate degrees in History, Political Science, and Classics and Ancient Mediterranean Studies with honors in History

Reviewed and approved* by the following:

Thomas Lawrence Associate Teaching Professor of History Thesis Supervisor

Cathleen Cahill Associate Professor of History Honors Adviser

* Signatures are on file in the Schreyer Honors College. i

ABSTRACT

This thesis examines the cross-cultural phenomenon of the honorable or heroic death.

Namely, it looks at how Christian martyrdom fit into the cultural milieu of the Roman empire. It focuses on the first three centuries of the common era, prior to the first Council of Nicaea and

Emperor Constantine’s conversion to Christianity. This way, we can examine what Christianity looked like within the empire before it was legitimized by imperial powers. This thesis looks at

Greco-Roman precursors to Christian martyrs as well as Christian martyrdom tales themselves, and how Christians viewed martyrdom in the early church. We see that while there were instances of Christian persecution occurring within the empire, the spread of Christianity relied on an interplay of its own ideas along with existing cultural practices. ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... iii

Introduction ...... 1

Chapter 1 ...... 7

Chapter 2 ...... 28

Chapter 3 ...... 52

Conclusion ...... 75

BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 78

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would first like to thank my thesis supervisor, Dr. Thomas Lawrence for all of his help and guidance over the past year. There were times when I wasn’t sure where to go next with my research and without having his notes and direction, this thesis would not have been possible.

I would also like to thank my friends at Penn State for listening to me ramble on about this subject and genuinely seeming interested in it (or at least pretending to be for my benefit).

And of course, I couldn’t be where I am today without my parents. Thank you for your endless support, I am eternally grateful. 1

Introduction

The Roman empire reached its height in terms of both territory and stability during the first three centuries of the common era. At the same time, individuals within the empire embraced classical Hellenistic education and cultural practices while, for the most part, still worshiping the traditional Greco-Roman polytheistic gods. 1 This time period of renewed classical thought, however, coincided with the expansion and the spread of Christianity throughout the empire. Tensions soon emerged between the empire and Christian followers because, while Christianity was never technically deemed illegal, it was condemned by various political leaders. This thesis examines the importance of one aspect of Christianity that helped the religion to spread and grow within an empire that did not accept it — the idea of a heroic death.

Prior to Christianity, Greek and Roman cultures had a tradition of respect for an individual dying in a heroic or honorable way outside of a religious capacity. This idea of an honorable death intersected with the prevalence of Christian martyrs, or Christians who were killed because of their religious beliefs. The term martyr comes from the Greek word for

“witness.” Martyrs, when they were killed, were considered witnesses of Christ. This phenomenon was rooted in the ideas of the early church, as Christians were supposed to live their lives as witnesses to the life and examples of Christ. If they were persecuted, they were instructed to confess and suffer the consequences just as Christ did during his humiliation and

1 W.H.C. Frend, The Rise of Christianity (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984), 164-165. 2 crucifixion. 2 This thesis examines how martyrdom fits into the existing notion of a cross-cultural understanding of the value of the heroic death.

In Rome, the state and religion were closely intertwined. Within this polytheistic empire, the citizens feared the disruption of Christianity, as they did not wish to upset the pax deorum, or the “peace of the gods.” Christians were perceived to put the empire at the risk of upsetting the gods since they would not participate in traditional Greco-Roman polytheistic rituals to satiate the deities or make offerings to the emperor. Because they did not take part in these traditions, critics saw Christianity as a dangerous cult that was potentially detrimental to Rome.

Furthermore, its citizens were vulnerable to the wrath of the gods due to Christian defiance.

Therefore, Christians were persecuted by Romans, not because of their religion per se, but because the practices of the religion effectively made them traitors of the state. Depending on the ruling emperor, the extremity of the persecutions varied. Both Trajan and Hadrian had similar policies when it came to dealing with the rising Christian population: Don’t seek them out. 3

Neither emperor thought it was necessarily right or worth the time to track down every Christian throughout the empire to persecute.

However, throughout the first three centuries of the common era, individuals periodically died at the hands of Roman authorities. Martyrdom accounts played an important role in the early church, establishing the literary genre of hagiography. Observers of the Roman persecutions began to write down what they were witnessing. Often times, they depicted a worshiper following in the footsteps of Jesus. Many of the accounts were also written in the form of letters from one church to another, which was a way to establish connections between

2 W.H.C. Frend, Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church (Oxford: Alden Press, 1965), 79. 3 Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 150-151. Hadrian’s policy can be found in a written rescript which is recorded by Eusebius in his History of the Church. 3 churches. Early on, there were disparate communities within the church. Followers had different ideas about Christian doctrine, and since there was no central power to say what was right and what was wrong, it was hard for the church to become more cohesive. Some of the main points of contention among these early church communities include the humanity of Christ, how

Christianity connected to Judaism (if at all), and the idea of the Holy Trinity. This changed in

325 C.E. when Emperor Constantine called the Council of Nicaea and the imperial state attempted to solidify the “correct” doctrine. Constantine was the first Roman emperor to convert to Christianity and began to transition it as the dominant religion within the empire. For the purposes of this thesis, we will focus on the time period prior to the Council of Nicaea when

Christianity was still forming within an empire that did not accept it.

The first chapter will examine more closely how Rome reached the point of persecuting

Christians because of their actions. It will begin by taking a look at the attitudes of Rome towards unknown and outside religions and cults other than just Christianity. For instance, years before Christianity’s establishment, the Hellenistic Bacchanalian cult was attacked for its mysteriousness and secrecy. This chapter will also discuss how the idea of an honorable death was engrained into the cultural milieu of the Roman empire. Examples of a moral self-sacrifice include the legendary figures of Socrates, Lucretia, and the Maccabees. None of them were

Christian, but the reason for their deaths were quite similar to that of the Christians. They all died to ensure that they remained honorable and loyal to their personal moral compass. This chapter will conclude that even though many Romans were quite wary of Christians for multiple reasons, one aspect of the religion that they could relate to were these martyrs approaching their deaths in a philosophically Stoic way. 4 Chapter two will move from looking at precursors and the events leading up to the persecution of Christians, to examining the actual Christian martyrdom accounts themselves.

Martyrdoms referenced include Stephen, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, the

Martyrs of Lyons, and Felicitas and Perpetua. The chapter will look at how each martyrdom account is structured, and how authors describe each martyr approaching their death. In terms of structure, most martyrdoms are written in the form of a letter or circulated pamphlet. They were recorded so that various churches within the empire would be aware of persecutions happening elsewhere, and they could therefore pray for their fellow Christians. Furthermore, the letters worked as a way of connecting the church and reinforcing particular ideas, even if it was on the back of tragedy. While each martyrdom account is different, one commonality is an acceptance of death. This is evocative of what the first chapter examined in the precursors to Christian martyrdom and the honorable death. While Socrates, Lucretia, the Maccabees, and the Christians sacrificed themselves for different ideological principles, they all wanted to find or to express the truth in death. Every Christian martyrdom was held quite publically, so presumably, many

Romans who had not been familiar with the intricacies of Christianity could have witnessed the way in which the persecuted Christians were approaching death and found it similar to stories they knew about the honorable deaths of figures such as Socrates and Lucretia.

The third and final chapter will expand upon the cross-cultural idea of the honorable death found within Christianity and Greco-Roman polytheistic culture by examining the works of Christian apologists who believed philosophy and Christianity were intertwined. The three main Christian-philosophers to be examined are Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, and

Origen. This chapter will also look at the life and writings of Tertullian who, like the others, was a Christian apologist, but vehemently denied any connection between philosophy and 5 Christianity. However, Tertullian was a strong believer in the importance of martyrs in the spread of Christianity saying in chapter 50 of his Apologeticus, “The more you mow us down, the thicker we rise; the Christian blood you spill is like the seed you sow, it springs from the earth again, and fructifies the more.” 4 While the three Christian philosophers wrote about their ideas on the junction of philosophy and Christianity as a whole, they also all had specific ideas about the philosophical action of the Christian martyrs. The main aspect each pointed out was the stoic way that martyrs faced their death. Stoicism originated as a school of Hellenistic philosophy and this particular school centered around the idea of maintaining a set of personal ethics to maintain one’s virtue and not be influenced by the want of pleasure or the fear of pain.

Described in chapter one, it is the way Socrates and Lucretia progress to their deaths, and in the second chapter, it is how the martyrs are often described as approaching public persecution. In the final chapter, Justin, Clement, and Origen bring these together to show there was both a cultural and philosophical a connection between the Greco-Roman “martyrs” and the Christian martyrs.

The first three centuries of the common era were difficult times for Christian and Roman relations. During this time, the Roman empire had a far reach across Europe, Asia, and Africa.

While there was a policy of live and let live under certain emperors when it came to Christians living within the figurative walls of the empire, the religion was still quasi-illegal. There was severe punishment for those Christians who presented a danger to the empire because of their religious beliefs. Therefore, it became a sign of the times for Christians to die for their religion, thus making martyrdom somewhat of a familiar occurrence for the early church. For some early

4 Tertullian, Apologeticus I.50.5. In other words, Tertullian is saying that martyrdom actually encourages the Christians to move forward and spread their mission across the empire. 6 Christian writers, the idea of martyrdom and its prevalence within the religion meant, in one way or another, it was integral to the foundations and the spread of Christianity throughout the expanding empire. Martyrdom was the most notable aspect of the early church that could appeal to observers from every background because the idea of a Stoic, honorable death was already rooted within the cultural milieu of the Greco-Roman sphere.

7

Chapter 1

When Christianity was established, it was unlike most religions the Roman empire had interacted with. It seemingly sprouted out of nowhere as a group of individuals who followed

Jesus, a man who was executed for treason against the empire. Because it was so new, it was hard for missionaries preaching across the Roman empire to get non-followers to understand the religion. One aspect of Christianity that potentially piqued the interest of those on the outside was the idea of martyrs and martyrdom tales. Christian martyrs in the early centuries of the common era approached death in a stoic manner. Many wanted to seek the truth that came with dying, and therefore faced death with no fear. This fearlessness toward death is something associated with philosophers in the Hellenistic world, as well as other religious martyrs prior the

Christians. The first part of this chapter will examine how Romans, prior to Christianity, dealt with uncommon religions that existed within the empire, and how these incidents inform our understanding of the persecution of Christians. The second part will look at the cultural “milieu” of the honorable death. Going back to ancient Greece, the public respected an individual who sacrificed themselves for a cause, whether it be for their honor, their morals, or their religion.

This chapter will look at some ideological precursors to Christian martyrs. They are stories and themes of an honorable death that many non-Christians who witnessed persecution of Christians would have been familiar with. It will conclude that the idea of dying to maintain one’s morals and honor, as seen in many Christian martyrdoms, was already engrained into the cultural milieu 8 of the Roman empire. These pre-Christian accounts therefore link this aspect of Christianity to already existing traditions.

To Romans, Christianity was something mysterious. They understood regular Greco-

Roman polytheistic religions and other polytheistic religions of the East and West. They also accepted, with some exceptions, Judaism because of its antiquity. 5 When Christianity emerged, many Romans did not know how to view it or how to deal with its spread across the empire. It was a new, monotheistic religion, which was a rarity in itself in the Mediterranean world at the time. There were philosophers before the common era, however, who suggested the idea of a quasi-monotheistic view of the traditional Greco-Roman polytheistic religion. Philosophers like

Socrates and Plato identified as worshipers of the traditional polytheistic gods; however, they put forth ideas arguing that the traditional “gods” were actually different parts or aspects of one singular entity. 6 Nevertheless, there were tensions between the empire and Christianity from the start. We can even trace this friction back to Jesus’s crucifixion. While the historical Jesus was not a “Christian,” per se as there is no solid evidence pointing toward the fact that he intended to begin a new religion, the fathers of Christianity used his teachings and purported “resurrection” to form the foundation of the religion in the years following his death. 7 The main issue with

5 One instance of the persecution of the Jewish population came in the form of the Maccabean revolt which I will discuss later in this chapter. 6 Richard Janko, "God, Science, and Socrates," Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 46 (2002): 1- 18. It would be inappropriate to label these philosophers as practicing monotheism. However, their commentary on the subject does provide some curious insight to Greco-Roman “awareness” for lack of a better word on the subject. 7 E.P. Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985) 31-32. There is a lot of back and forth within the academic community regarding Jesus’s intentions as to if he wanted to create a new religion, reform Judaism, or just simply be a messenger of God. Historically speaking, there is virtually no evidence pointing toward Jesus wanting to establish Christianity as a religion. As Sanders states, Jesus was a member of the Jewish community who had certain views that many practicing the Jewish faith at that time did not agree with. So, while the world may never know Jesus’s true intentions, evidence we have does not prove he pioneered the term or intended to break with Judaism. 9 Jesus in the eyes of the Roman government was not necessarily his religion, it was that he claimed to be a king, which was a treasonous act in the eyes of the empire.

Roman society was extremely religious, with the government and “state cult,” so to speak, intertwined. New religious tendencies, new deities, and the acceptance of outside “cults” all depended on their acceptance by the ruling class. 8 If the elites accepted new ideas or new people, this acceptance was often allowed to filter down to the rest of the citizenry. In the eyes of the Romans, different cults could coexist with each other under the empire, so long as they did not threaten Roman traditions which were essential to maintaining a cohesive empire. This is not to say that the government legitimized every foreign cult that existed within the Roman empire, but rather that members of a new cult were allowed to exist as long as they did not violate

Roman morals or commit cultural taboos. 9 There was immediate suppression of any cult or religion that did in fact throw the Roman status quo into question. For this reason, the Roman government never persecuted someone based solely on their religion. However, they strongly disliked anything that resembled or acted like a secret society. While the attempt to suppress

Christianity is the focus of this paper, there were earlier persecutions and attacks on quasi- religious groups.

The Roman historian Livy recalls the notable conflict of the Bacchanalian affair, which occurred in 186 B.C.E. Livy was born much later, around 59-64 B.C.E. and he utilized court documents to recall this event. In Book 39 of his history, Livy writes about the senatorial investigation and punishment of the Bacchanalian cult. The Bacchanalian cult was a Greek group

8 Sarlota A. Takács, “Politics and Religion in the Bacchanalian Affair of 186 B.C.E.,” Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 100. (2000): 301-310. The ruling class defined would include members of the senate and Roman citizens who held political power. 9 Takács, “Politics and Religion in the Bacchanalian Affair of 186 B.C.E.,” 303. 10 with a large amount of female members who worshiped Bacchus, god of wine and festivals. In his history, Livy details the “crimes” of the cult, painting them in a poor light. While his writing does provide some insight, it also must be read with some skepticism. Livy claims that followers of Bacchus were free of all morals and that they were suppressed for their violation of social mores. 10 When talking about the members’ initiation into the cult, Livy states:

“Pleasures of wine and feasts were incorporated into the ceremony to entice the adhesion of more individuals; and once wine had roused their spirits, and darkness and the intermingling of men with women, and those of tender age with their elders, had obliterated all bounds of modest behavior, perversions of every kind began to make their first appearance, for each person had at hand the pleasure of gratifying the nature of that lust to which he was more inclined.” 11

According to Livy, the consul who was investigating the cult called on a member, by the name of

Hispalia, to inform the senate of what was going on in its rituals. From Hispalia, officials learned that the cult was primarily made up of women, and men had not normally been allowed into the cult. Livy also claims that Hispalia said that those who chose not to go along with “breaking morals” were sacrificed. In addition, Livy states that “Within the past two years it had been ordained that no-one over twenty should be initiated; young people susceptible to both deviant behavior and sexual abuse were being sought out.” 12 Here, Livy is making sure the reader knows the cult was attempting to corrupt the minds of young people, something the Roman government took very seriously. The portrayal of this group breaking Roman morals combined with its dense composition of women in the cult made it threatening to Roman society. Giving women, who possessed little status or authority in the Roman empire, any type of power would potentially disrupt the status quo. At a base level, it was a secret cult, run primarily by women, with

10 Takács, “Politics and Religion in the Bacchanalian Affair of 186 B.C.E.,” 305. 11 Livy, The History of Rome, XXXIX.7-8. 12 Livy, The History of Rome, XXXIX.13-14. 11 unsavory rumors circulating around about it. Therefore, it posed a threat to the morals of Roman society.

While the cult was not terribly large, Livy recounts that the proconsul and the senate believed the strength of the “conspiracy” was greatly increasing by the day. The senatorial decree preserved by Livy outlines what the Roman senate did to suppress the Bacchanalian cult.

Restrictions included, but were not limited to, the following: men could not become a priest of

Bacchus, no man or woman could be a chief officer of the cult, there could not be a fund, and no members were allowed to “exchange oaths, vows, pledges or promises, nor were they allowed to pledge faith to each other.” 13 There was also a call for the dismantling of all Bacchic places of worship. 14 The Roman government wanted complete political and social power over its people.

If there was a cult that was secretive, they viewed it as a political threat. While this is true for the

Bacchus cult, it is also how the Romans viewed Christianity, another “cult” they were wary of because of its secrecy. The senate did not specifically outlaw the Bacchanalian cult, just as it did not outlaw Christianity, but it did attempt to limit its reach and power through the decree before it got out of hand so that it would be weakened and no longer feared as a threat.

On top of upsetting the status quo, Romans feared Christians would disrupt the pax deorum that existed between the empire and the gods. The pax deorum, or “peace of the gods,” required Romans to follow proper civic rules and rituals in order to gain or maintain the favor of the gods. A pillar of Roman religion was that the divine deities paved the empire’s path to either glory or peril. For this reason, if Romans followed the proper rituals and respected the gods, they

13 Takács, “Politics and Religion in the Bacchanalian Affair of 186 B.C.E.,” 308. Women had no political power, so they were not able to harm the government if they were a priestess. 14 Livy, The History of Rome, XXXIX.18-19. 12 believed that the empire would prosper through its relationship with the gods. 15 The emperors themselves and Roman religion were closely intertwined. All Emperors assumed the office of pontifex maximus, meaning that the emperor was the head of the priesthood in Rome as well as the head of the state. 16 Christians and others who violated the pax deorum put the state at risk.

From the Roman point of view, it was therefore right to persecute them. This fear of secret societies and a wariness of breaking the pax deorum can be traced back to that Bacchanalian affair.

Some respected Roman scholars were outspoken about their fear and hatred of

Christianity, many times because of its secrecy. One of those individuals was Marcus Cornelius

Fronto, who was a tutor to the emperor Marcus Aurelius. Much of the information preserved describing Fronto’s unflattering view of the Christians comes from Octavius, a writing by the

Christian apologist Marcus Minucius Felix. It is a dialogue between a Christian and a non-

Christian, and some of the portions from the non-Christian’s perspective are most likely drawing from Fronto, specifically chapters eight and nine. In chapter eight, Fronto speaks about how the

Christians are lurking in “hiding places” and are “blasphemous conspirators.” 17 Fronto also claims, “They have collected from the lowest possible dregs of society the more ignorant fools

15 Yanir Schocat, “The Change in the Roman Religion at the Time of the Emperor Trajan,” Latomus 44. 2 (1985): 316-336. 16 Schocat, “The Change in the Roman Religion at the Time of the Emperor Trajan,” 327. Pliny the Younger spoke about his ideas of how emperors and the divine were connected. There were good and bad emperors; the good emperors were the ones sent by the divine, and the bad emperors were not chosen by the gods. According to Pliny, it was merely by chance a bad emperor would find his way to the throne; the gods were not capable of appointing someone not suitable for the position. At this point when Pliny is writing, he is good friends with the emperor Trajan, and he believed Trajan was a gift from the gods. When there is a good emperor like Trajan, the gods are looking after the empire and making sure to protect it. Whereas when there is a bad emperor by mistake, there is no divine higher power presiding over the empire. However, it is likely Pliny may have been attempting to get on Trajan’s good side, and was just showering him with compliments. It is not known if this belief was terribly widespread. 17 Minucius Felix, Octavius, 8.4. 13 together with gullible women (readily persuaded, as is their weak sex).” 18 Roman culture respected women if they were good mothers or wives. Outside of the home, women were not held to a high esteem in Rome’s patriarchal society. Like the Bacchanalian cult, a lot of early

Christian followers were women. 19 As Romans perceived Christianity as a secret society, not a state authorized or regulated religion, Christian women were apparently unsupervised by the government. Giving women power without male supervision violated the male status quo.

In chapter nine of the dialogue, Felix confirms that the words recorded were those of

Fronto’s. 20 In the chapter, Fronto refers to the banquets of the Christians in an unflattering manner. “There, flushed with the banquet after such feasting and drinking, they begin to burn with incestuous passions.” 21 Incest was a common trope non-Christians used to defame

Christians since it was such a cultural taboo in Rome. Fronto uses this act as a means to highlight the lack of morals of the Christians, and because Christians were somewhat secretive, it disadvantaged them. The secrecy allowed gossip to circulate about what their rituals and their inductions were like.

To the traditional Roman, Christians were odd individuals who were also often rule breakers and potential traitors, reminiscent of those who had threatened the Roman status quo before, i.e. the Bacchanalian cult. However, it was not until the fire of 64 C.E. that the fear of

Christians became increasingly widespread. The event of the city’s fire was recorded by Tacitus,

18 Minucius Felix, Octavius, 8.4. It is also interesting to note it was well known that the Bacchanalian cult was made up of largely women, so here, Fronto could be attempting to get his listeners to associate this new cult-like religion — Christianity — with the cult of Bacchus, something many Romans hated and did not forget. Nevertheless, it is a reiteration of the misogyny found within the Roman empire. 19 This can even be dated to the story of Jesus’s “resurrection” when, as the story goes, three women discovered his body was missing from the tomb. 20 Minucius Felix, Octavius, 9.6. This is because in the response to this section later on, the writer is referred to as “tuus Fronto.” 21 Minucius Felix, Octavius, 9.6. 14 a Roman senator and historian who lived from 56 C.E. until 120 C.E. The true cause of the massive fire is unknown, but Emperor Nero blamed the Christians. As Tacitus states in The

Annals, “Therefore, to scotch the rumour, Nero substituted as culprits, and punished with the utmost refinements of cruelty, a class of men, loathed for their vices, whom the crowd styled

Christians.” 22 Nero was a largely unpopular emperor at the time, but as the emperor, he was the individual to whom citizens looked for an explanation as to why their city burned. Because of the uneasiness many felt toward Christians, they were an easy target to blame for the tragedy.

During the remainder of his reign, Nero famously persecuted known Christians throughout the city. A Christian apologist, Tertullian, wrote about the phenomenon of Romans blaming the

Christians for every bad occurrence within the empire, whether they were to blame or not. In

Chapter 40 of his Apologetics, Tertullian said:

“…that they [pagans] 23 think the Christians the cause of every public disaster, of every affliction with which the people are visited. If the Tiber rises as high as the city walls, if the Nile does not send its waters up over the fields, if the heavens give no rain, if there is an earthquake, if there is famine or pestilence, straightway the cry is, ‘Away with the Christians to the lion!’” 24

While his statement may be a bit of an exaggeration, it is true many non-Christians blamed them for upsetting the gods by not worshiping or participating in rituals, therefore bringing turmoil to the empire through violating the sacred pax deorum. Almost every instance of blame or persecution that came upon the Christians can likely be traced back to this idea.

22 Tacitus, The Annals, XV.44. Aside from the obvious information regarding Nero and the fire that this account provides, it is also interesting to note that Tacitus himself was not a Christian and was able to recognize the public distrust and hatred of the group as seen in this quote. It is perhaps representative of the intense uneasiness most Romans felt for the group. 23 Throughout this paper, I attempt to avoid using the word pagan and instead use “a follower of Greco- Roman polytheism.” This is because “pagan” is often associated with negative connotations. Many Christians used it as a derogatory term, especially in their writing. In Tertullian’s Apologetics, he often uses the term pagan which is why I used it in this context. 24 Tertullian, Apologetics XL. Tertullian and his writing will be further examined in the third chapter. 15 Nevertheless, persecution of Christians was more sporadic and regional than it was a central mission handed down by the emperor himself. Christianity was never specifically made illegal, but it was not technically legal either. The level of persecution Christians met correlated with who was in power at the time and who the provincial governor was. Instead of referring to

Christian relations with the Roman government as an “official, state-authorized” persecution, it is more accurate to view it as a repression of religion. Between government officials and the

Christian church, there was a level of a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. Some Roman magistrates throughout the empire were legitimately confused as to how to deal with accused Christians.

Under Trajan, Pliny the Younger functioned as the governor of the Roman province, Bithyna, which was located in the region of Anatolia. Pliny wrote to Trajan, inquiring about what to do with Christians or accusations of Christianity throughout his province, specifically anonymous accusations. Trajan responded, telling Pliny not to react to any anonymous reports of

Christianity. Trajan stated under no circumstances should Christians be sought out by Pliny or his officials for persecution. 25 Persecution might still occur unless the Christian disavowed themselves from the religion after they were brought before the magistrate. In an instance like this, they were pardoned. Otherwise, they would be punished.

According to a rescript from Emperor Hadrian to proconsul Minucius Fundanus, Hadrian only wanted to prosecute those Christians who had sufficient charges brought against them, rather than simply pursuing “importunate demands and mere outcries” of the mob. 26 In other words, a mob could not come after a group of Christians simply for being Christian. There had to be a clear reason for their prosecution. While this did not grant freedom of worship, it does

25 Pliny the Younger, Letter to Emperor Trajan 112 C.E. 26 Eusebius, History of the Church, IV.9. 16 provide some sort of uniform guidance for officials. 27 Since Christianity was not a crime, there were a number of charges a Christian could be brought before the magistrate for committing, including committing treason, engaging in sorcery, being sacrilegious, or being a member of a secret society. 28 While no law explicitly states that an individual can be arrested simply because they are a Christian, individuals following the Christian religion implicitly opened themselves up to such charges. Romans dealt with the Bacchanalian affair years before in a similar way. The cult was never illegal by name, but rituals or other things connected to it were outlawed.

Following the arrest of an individual accused of one of these crimes, committed because of their relationship to Christianity, the individual was usually granted a trial by a local magistrate. While the trial itself may have been conducted in private or in public, if they were found guilty, they were executed in public. During their trial, the accused would often be questioned repeatedly about their devotion to Christianity. 29 The accounts of these trials and eventual executions of admitted Christian followers were recorded as martyrdoms, since these were individuals dying for their religion. Even though the circulation of the martyrdom tales aided in connecting individual churches throughout different provinces within the empire, their public executions also had the potential to appeal to the Greco-Roman polytheists witnessing the persecution.

The idea of a “heroic death” was not something new to Roman thought. It was something engrained in society, partially due to the Hellenistic culture prior to the first century before the

27 Michael Lapidge, The Roman Martyrs, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018). 7. 28 Lapidge, The Roman Martyrs, 12. 29 Lapidge, The Roman Martyrs, 17-18. If these individuals held such an intense love for their God, it could be considered a form of treason within the empire as it lessoned the authority of the ruling, and gave more power to their true “king,” Jesus. Their association with Christianity could be interpreted as violating any of the laws mentioned previously. 17 common era. There was a largely philosophical, Stoic view of dying a moral death. Perhaps one of the most famous examples of this self-sacrifice from a philosophical viewpoint, comes from the trial and death of Socrates. Socrates was an ancient Athenian philosopher who was known for his insights on a variety of subjects, including morality. He lived from around 470 B.C.E. until he was put to death by the Athenian government in 399 B.C.E., following the Peloponnesian

War. His death came after the end of the war, when Athens was defeated and looking for scapegoats anywhere. In addition to his thoughts on philosophy, he was also an instructor of the subject in Athens. Among his students was the philosopher Plato, who recorded the death of

Socrates in his writing, Phadeo. Socrates was arrested by authorities in Athens because he was accused of educating traitors of the city-state of Athens. He was brought to trial around 400 or

399 B.C.E. 30 Two of these traitors were Alcibiades and Critias. Even though they had since died, the government believed the instruction of Socrates caused them to be treasonous, and therefore did not feel secure letting him walk and teach freely. Formally, Socrates was charged with impiety: one count of not worshipping the gods of the state, and one count of corrupting the young. 31

Socrates did not retreat into voluntary exile in the time he was waiting for his trial to begin. He stayed in Athens and was ready to accept the fate the court brought to him. In his defense before the court, he does not state that he wants a penalty of death. Rather, he wants the process to be carried out fairly, justly, and with nothing but honesty. Eventually, he was found

30 A.E. Taylor, Socrates (Garden City: Doubleday Press, 1953), 101-102. 31 Taylor, Socrates, 106. The first charge regarding impiety and not worshipping the gods of the state is relatively unclear and scholars are not entirely sure what constituted this charge to be brought before the court. The second, however, is more straightforward as the politicians believed Socrates educated two traitors of Athens, therefore corrupting the youth. His impiety can possibly be traced to his thoughts on the structure of the gods, and how there was a possibility all of the gods were combined into one entity. 18 guilty by the court and was asked to suggest a sentence for himself other than death, which would presumably be some type of banishment. However, he only suggested a mere fine, as he did not wish to leave Athens, and so the court rejected his suggestion and sentenced him to death. Socrates could have easily chosen banishment and saved his own life; however, he believed his mission in life was to stay and educate the people of Athens. If he could not do that,

Socrates would accept the fate he was given, even if it was death.32 While he was awaiting his execution, a few friends of Socrates tried to help him escape his imprisonment. However, even when the opportunity arose, Socrates refused to escape based on his own principles. Even though he did not agree with the court’s decision to find him guilty, Socrates wished to respect the principles and “legitimacy” of the court.

Socrates believed he was wronged not by Athens, but by the men who brought the charges against him to the court, Anytus and Meletus. Therefore, if he escaped prison, he would not be righting the wrongs of those two men, he would be violating the Athenian court. 33

Socrates preached a respect for morality and maintaining a conscious within himself and the public for the greater good. Eventually, it came time for his execution, which is recorded in

Plato’s Phaedo. In the time immediately leading up to his execution by poison, Socrates does not seem afraid. Rather, he has accepted his fate and is intrigued by finding the truth in death. He is recorded as saying, “But come now, Crito [his friend], let us drink his bidding, let someone bring the poison if it is ready; if not, get the man to prepare it.” 34 Crito tells him not to rush, he can take his time as others who awaited execution have done in the past and delay his inevitable death. Socrates acknowledges that he respects those people’s decisions to wait to take the poison,

32 Taylor, Socrates, 120-121. 33 Taylor, Socrates, 124. 34 Plato, Phaedo, CXVI. 19 but that was not for him. “…I don’t think I shall gain anything at all by drinking the poison a little later. I should only make myself ridiculous in my own eyes if I clung to life, prolonging the hours when there is no more profit in them.” 35 In his situation, Socrates believes he would gain more from death than to go on living. Once he calls to the slave boy to fetch the man with the poison and it is brought to him, he makes a prayer to the gods to ensure that his “…departure hence be fortunate.” With that wish for a good death, he drank the poison out of the bowl. His friends that were with him became visibly distraught, according to Plato. But Socrates himself was not, even commenting on how ridiculous their actions of weeping and sadness were. 36

Eventually, the poison numbs his body and he passes away peacefully.

During his trial, his imprisonment, and his death, Socrates displayed complete composure of his mind and body. He was wrongfully tried as a relative scapegoat for the treasonous acts of two of his acquaintances, but still respected the ruling of the court and, therefore, his fate.

Socrates provided a template for what could be described as a good and moral death. But, even though he accepted what had happened to him, many protested the Athenian conviction and his execution. This Stoic approach to death is why many refer to him as a philosophical martyr. 37

While he did not die for religious reasons as did Christians hundreds of years later, he died because of his beliefs. Socrates would not sacrifice his belief in morality, Athens, and respect for law by escaping or choosing to flee the city he rarely left. Likewise, Christians refused to denounce their religion or claim to not worship their God. Socrates believed he would find an

35 Plato, Phaedo, CXVI. 36 Plato, Phaedo, CXVII. In Phaedo, Socrates states “My chief reason for sending away the women was to prevent them from behaving in this absurd fashion, for I have heard that it is best to die in silence. Keep quiet now and be brave.” 37 It is important to note that while I mention some of his practices are Stoic in nature, Socrates was not a follower of the philosophical school of Stoicism. 20 unknown truth once he died, which is why he did not fear it. Similarly, Christians believed they would discover the truth of the “Kingdom of God” after their death, which was something they welcomed rather than feared.

One of the foundational tales of the Roman empire is the story of the Rape of Lucretia.

Romans know the story as the reason that they drove out the Etruscan kings, thus establishing the

Roman republic. The Rape of Lucretia is supposed to have taken place around 510 B.C.E. during the reign of the last “king” of Rome, Lucius Tarquinius Superbus. The king sent his son, Sextus

Tarquin, to the region of Collatia for military purposes. The governor of the region was Lucius

Tarquinius Collatinus, the son of the Lucius’s nephew, and Lucretia was the wife of Collatinus.

According to Livy’s account, Sextus Tarquin and Collantinus, along with a few other men, were at a festival of sorts drinking wine and conversing about each other’s wives. Each man claimed to have the best wife, but Collantinus would have none of that, suggesting they go ride to where

Lucretia was to see what she was doing. Therefore, he could prove the rest of his friends, who included Sextus Tarquin, wrong while showing off his dutiful wife. When they arrived to her,

Lucretia was spinning yarn, and welcomed everyone with open arms like a good Roman woman.

Then, according to Livy, “When Sextus Tarquin set eyes upon her, he was seized by the evil desire to debauch her, spurred on as he was by her beauty and redoubtable chastity.” 38

Sextus Tarquin returned to Collatia a few days later unannounced, but was welcomed into the household once again. After everyone was asleep, he snuck up on a sleeping Lucretia with a sword saying, “‘Say no word, Lucretia. I am Sextus Tarquin. There is a sword in my hand. You die if you make a sound.’” She was resolute in that she would not have sex with him, even if he was threatening her life. When he realized this fact, he also threatened to kill her and place a

38 Livy, The History of Rome, LVII. 21 dead body of a slave in bed with her so it looked like she was murdered for committing adultery with the slave; in the wake of that proposition, he raped Lucretia and left the house with the

“conquest of the woman’s honour.” 39 After that transpired, Lucretia was completely disgraced, and sent for her father and her husband to come to her. When they came, Lucretia collapsed crying in front of them, delivering a speech about what had happened. In her speech, she calls out Sextus Tarquin by name, but does not completely excuse herself of all of the guilt. She asks them to make sure the perpetrator is found and punished, and before she stabs herself, she ends by saying, “‘It is up to you,’ she said, ‘to punish the man as he deserves. As for me, I absolve myself of wrong, but not from punishment. Let no unchaste woman hereafter continue to live because of the precedent of Lucretia.’ She took a knife she was hiding…and drove it into her breast.” 40 While she was not outright killed, she died because of the actions of another.

After her death, her father, husband, and family friend Brutus pledged to drive out the king and make the prince pay for his actions. They grieved the death of Lucretia, but understood her actions as the honorable thing to do. Even though it was not her fault, she was still unfaithful to her husband and had not remained “chaste.” Therefore, as she explained in the last part of her speech very stoically, she still needed to be punished. She did not want to set a precedent for

Roman women in the future to use her situation as an excuse to be unfaithful to their husbands. If her memory was to be kept alive, it would be as an honorable woman and future Roman women should follow her example. This is similar to the memory of Christ which is kept alive by martyrs following in his footsteps. In the beginning of the tale of Lucretia, Livy talks about how her husband brags about having the perfect wife, the ideal Roman woman. She carries this

39 Livy, The History of Rome, LVII. 40 Livy, The History of Rome, LVII. 22 reputation to her death, as she dies so she can set a good example for women in the future to follow. Lucretia believed if women were to be unfaithful, they must be punished and she did not want to set a precedent proving otherwise. As twisted as it sounds to the modern ear, she refused to sacrifice her personal morals and beliefs because of an outside force. With the Christians, with

Socrates, and with what is seen in Lucretia’s story, none of them necessarily had to die. They could have survived, but in order to do that, they would have had to sacrifice their morals and their honor. The Christians would have had to denounce their God, Socrates would have had to break the law of the Athenian government, and Lucretia would have set an example for other

Roman women that it is okay to be unchaste, no longer the model of the ideal Roman woman.

The story of Lucretia also illustrates how deep the cultural milieu of an honorable death went in Roman society. This is an account that is entirely intertwined with the establishment of the Roman empire. Because, as the story goes, once Lucretia’s husband and father set out for revenge, the Etruscan kings were driven out, and thus the shift from a kingdom to a republic occurred. That is one of the hallmarks of the Roman empire — there were no kings. While the empire did eventually crown emperors and give out the title of “emperor for life,” the term king or the Latin equivalent rex was never utilized. Therefore, when the Romans observed the Stoic manner of martyrs persecuted in the face of honor, they could have had the image of Lucretia in the back of their minds, the picture of the model Roman woman dying a sacrificial death much like these Christians.

Though Socrates and Lucretia are not examples of precursors to Christian martyrdom that exhibit an individual dying for their religion, there certainly were instances prior to the establishment of Christianity where people died a heroic death for their religion. Perhaps one of the most famous examples of this is the Maccabean Revolt. Judaism existed within various 23 kingdoms and empires relatively inconspicuously. However, there were several instances of persecution and attacks on the Jewish community by the ruling groups over the years. The

Maccabean revolt occurred from around 167 B.C.E. to around 160 B.C.E. when Judea was under the rule of the Seleucid empire, which was established after the division of Alexander the Great’s

Macedonian empire. It was named after Seleucus Nicator, ruler of Babylon, who gained the territory after a military victory at the Battle of Ipsus in 301 B.C.E. The battle was between successors of Alexander the Great who were fighting for control of the land. Due to its roots with

Alexander, it was heavily influenced by Hellenic culture. Eventually, the region the Seleucid’s controlled, which included Iran, Syria, Judea, Anatolia, and Iraq, was conquered by the Roman general Pompey in 63 B.C.E. 41

When Antiochus IV (reigned from 175 B.C.E.-164 B.C.E.) was away at battle in Egypt, there were rumors of his death swirling around the regions he ruled over, Judea and Palestine, but he had not died. However, as a result of the rumors, two Jewish high priests who had already been causing internal conflict within the city, Jason and Menelaus, fought to rule the region themselves. 42 When Antiochus received word of this fighting, he was furious and returned to

Judea angered and prepared to put a stop to what was happening. According to 2 Maccabees,

Antiochus was responsible for the massacre of 40,000 Jewish people and the enslavement of a similar number. He wanted to ensure everyone understood that he was the ruler of the region and no one else. To do this, he installed officials into government positions to make sure the Jewish population would not attempt to take over again. 43 Then, he directed a mercenary commander by

41 Leah McKenzie, "Patterns In Seleucid Administration: Macedonian or Near Eastern?" Mediterranean Archaeology 7 (1994): 61-68. 42 2 Maccabees 5:5-10 43 2 Maccabees 5: 11-14 and 22-23. 24 the name of Apollonius and his army of 22,000 to kill all adult males in the city and sell all of the women and children into slavery. 44 Instead of attacking immediately, Apollonius launched his massacre on the Sabbath. At that time, many were killed, the city was ransacked, and some parts of it were set on fire. 45 After, the Seleucids installed a military grasp on Jerusalem by establishing a military colony of the Akara. 46

Then Antiochus turned his sights to target the Jewish community’s faith, something not done by any of his predecessors. He issued a decree that would prohibit the practice of Judaism within the Seleucid empire. 47 In the Hebrew Bible, it states, “Then the king wrote to his whole kingdom that all should be one people, and that all should give up their particular customs.” 48

The passage goes on to state how many from the region of Israel had given up their religion to worship the Hellenistic gods, therefore becoming Hellenized Jewish people. The goal was to make Jerusalem a Hellenized Greek polis. At the time, the Jewish people of Jerusalem, still under Greek rule, did not practice traditional Greek political structures. 49 While it began with policies pushing the Jewish people to stop their practice, it gradually increased to desecration of the Jewish temples. One of these instances was the installation of a podium of sorts onto the alter of a Jewish temple in order to honor the Greco-Roman polytheistic god Zeus, meaning a Jewish temple was therefore rededicated to the chief Hellenistic god. Antiochus also demanded the burning of the Hebrew Bible, and anyone who was found practicing Judaism or reading the book

44 2 Maccabees 5: 24. 45 2 Maccabees 5: 24-26. 46 1 Maccabees 1: 33-40. 47 Konrad Schmid, The Old Testament, A Literary History (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2012), 212. 48 1 Maccabees 1:41 49 2 Maccabees 4:1-9. 25 would be sentenced to death stating, “‘And whoever does not obey the command of the king shall die.’” 50

According to 2 Maccabees, Antiochus and other Greco-Roman polytheists set out to defile the Jewish temples, force the Jewish people to eat “pagan” sacrifices, and participate in

Dionystic festivals throughout the city. 51 During this time of religious persecution, there were sects of Jewish people who would resist what was happening. They were tortured and executed by the Seleucids, therefore becoming martyrs for their religion. 52 Mattathias was a Jewish priest who began the galvanization of Jewish forces against the empire and the conformed, Hellenized

Jewish population. 53 Mattathias fled with his sons following his dissidence, and died in 166 C.E.

However, a military revolt was carried out by his son, Judah Maccabee. His army, referred to as the Maccabees, attacked Judea, resulting in several battles over the course of about seven or eight years. During this time, Antiochus had died while on campaign in the East. Without

Antiochus in power, the army no longer had direction and vastly weakened. Once the Maccabees drove out the Seleucid army, they destroyed the Greco-Roman temples and rededicated them to their Jewish faith.

There is no clear answer as to why this persecution of the Jewish people by Antiochus IV had actually occurred. The measures he took against them in Judea were nothing even close to what policy was under past rulers. The consensus seems to be that Antiochus saw himself as a crusader of Hellenization in the East, and the Jewish people of Judea who refused any

50 1 Maccabees 1:51 51 2 Maccabees 6:2-9. Here, I chose to utilize the word pagan because in this context, Jewish writers, who did not like worshipers of the traditional Greco-Roman polytheism for obvious reasons, utilized the term pagan. 52 2 Maccabees 6:10-11. 53 There were factions of the Jewish Population that chose to adapt to the Hellenization of the region instead of facing persecution. 26 Hellenization were halting his mission. 54 While this seems like the most reasonable explanation for the measures he took to tamp down Judaism within the region, the way the Jewish people responded to his actions shows a resilience and a loyalty to their religion. What is common with the death of Socrates, the rape and suicide of Lucretia, and the persecution and revolt of the

Maccabees is the idea of a truth within death. All of these individuals had the opportunity to turn their backs on their morals, their principles, or their religion in order to save their lives.

However, they chose to sacrifice their lives in order to stay true to their beliefs.

This is also how the Christians eventually viewed martyrdom within their faith — as a truth. Like the individuals who sacrificed their lives before them, the Christians were content in dying if it meant they would live out their final days in alignment with their beliefs. Socrates believed there was something exciting about death, as it is unknown. He believed there was a truth that came with dying, and so he faced his execution fearlessly. For Christians, they believed death meant they were saved by their God and bearing witness to their religion. They were not scared because they believed God would ensure they would be rewarded in Heaven. These Stoic and fearless qualities all of the martyrs showed in the face of death is what made outsiders pay attention. Since the establishment of the Roman empire and the era of Socrates, there was an idea of dying with honor engrained into the cultural milieu of the ancient Mediterranean.

Whether it was a philosophical martyr, an honorable Roman woman committing suicide, or a religious group fighting for freedom from persecution, there are many examples of individuals not breaking from their belief system and accepting death. All three of these stories were also

54 Erich S. Gruen, "Hellenism and Persecution: Antiochus IV and the Jews," in The Construct of Identity in Hellenistic Judaism: Essays on Early Jewish Literature and History, (Berlin; Boston: De Gruyter, 2016), 333-58. This makes sense since the Seleucid empire came from the break up of Alexander’s Macedonian empire. Alexander’s mission was to spread Hellenistic culture as far as he could, and this seems like it could have been a continuation of that mission. 27 quite famous and revered by various groups, namely polytheistic and Jewish communities.

Therefore, since this idea of death was known and admired already, by the time Christians were persecuted so publically, non-Christians may have looked on with honor. The next chapter will examine more closely instances of Christian martyrs and martyrdoms themselves, and how they not only connected the church that already existed by exchanging correspondences of various martyrdom tales, but also how the public persecutions could have caught the attention of non-

Christians within the Roman empire.

28

Chapter 2

The previous chapter examined the relationship between Rome and the Christians during the first three centuries of the common era, as well as the cultural milieu that surrounded the idea of an honorable death in Greek and Roman society. It found there was a cultural value throughout the ancient Mediterranean of sacrificing one’s life for morals or principles. That idea, which was established and existed for centuries before Christianity, may have indirectly created a precedent for Christian martyrs to become revered for their actions within the empire. This chapter will examine the accounts of a few pivotal Christian martyrs prior to the first council of

Nicaea in 325 C.E. These martyrs include Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, the martyrs of Lyons,

Perpetua and Felicitas, as well as a brief look at Stephen and Justin Martyr. The chapter will look at how the public display of the persecutions of the martyrs themselves may have piqued the interest of polytheistic or Jewish onlookers who respected or were inspired by the way the

Christians accepted their death like Socrates, Lucretia, and the Maccabees. This chapter will also examine the way written martyrdoms were transmitted and how that aided in connecting the various church diocese across the empire to reinforce a unified community of congregations and to create a stronger sense of “proto-orthodox” doctrine.

As mentioned previously, martyr means “witness.” Some Christians believed they should live as a witness of Christ, but that did not necessarily mean they needed to sacrifice their life for their religion. However, some early Christian writers and followers believed that to be a true 29 witness, or martyr, one must experience some type of suffering. Paul, an early letter writer and

Christian missionary, believed the “symbol” of his religiosity would be beatings, suffering, and death. 55 To Paul, Christians suffered in order to ensure their shared glory in the Second Coming of Jesus and to bask in eternal bliss. 56 There are also different groups of martyrs that many

Christian writers discuss. There were those who were sought out by Roman soldiers during periods of regional Christian persecution who refused to denounce their religion when faced with death. There were also those who, to a degree, sought out martyrdom as they thought it was their duty to bear witness to Christ through death. Those who sought out martyrdom are often referred to as “voluntary martyrs.”

Many times, as long as Christians kept their practice from being detected, they could escape persecution. 57 Some Christians, however, sought out persecution because they believed that would be their only way of salvation and to prove their love to God. Others believed that while martyrdom was one way to prove their love, there were other routes to devotion as well.

Clement of Alexandria (150-215 C.E.) and Tertullian (160-220 C.E.) were two Christian apologists in the third century of the common era. 58 Both put a heavy emphasis on martyrdom in their writings and believed it was part of the foundations of the church moving forward.

However, Clement believed that there were many ways a confessor of Christ could seek salvation, and while martyrdom happened to be one, Christians should not seek it out. Clement

55 Acts of the Apostles, 14:22. In this verse, Paul and Barnabas preach “We must go through many hardships to enter the kingdom of God.” Frend, Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church, 85. 56 Frend, Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church, 86. 57 This is referencing the idea of Christians violating the pax deorum that was discussed in the first chapter. In terms of secrecy, it is also interesting to think about the mutual relationship Christianity as a “secret cult” had to the Roman government. Romans were wary of it because of its secrecy, but Christians kept their practices secret out of presumed fear of persecution. 58 Both of these apologists will be discussed more in depth in the following chapter when I discuss the prevalence of martyrs and martyrdoms in Christian apologetic writing. 30 wrote that if Christians found themselves facing persecution in a certain city, they should move on to somewhere they would be safe, not stay and face the enemy. Tertullian, however, wrote that martyrdom was the only way one could be sure they would be granted salvation. 59

On top of the issue of voluntary martyrs, there was also the issue of citizenship when it came to Christian persecution. If an individual was a Roman citizen, they could not be thrown violently to the beasts or face other degrading punishments or executions, sometimes referred to as “spectacle” deaths. Citizens could still be executed by the Roman government in a less violent way, but most of the time, they would be sent to Rome for the emperor to decide their fate. For example, Paul was a Christian but also a citizen of Rome, so he was sent to Rome for a trial before the emperor. The first martyr dying as a witness of Christianity is Stephen. Paul writes about the death of Stephen and it is recorded in the Acts of the Apostles. Stephen was a deacon of the church in Jerusalem and was engaged in a dispute with the Sadduceean high priesthood there. Stephen was eventually stoned to death. 60 There is no true martyrdom account of

Stephen’s death written in the format of the others discussed in this chapter, but he is often referred to as the very first Christian martyr because of the mention of his death in the New

Testament.

Collectively, martyrdom accounts belong to the literary genre of hagiography.61 This literature about Christianity developed in the early centuries of the common era, and assisted in the spread of the religion throughout the Roman empire and its surrounding area. While many early Christian writings revolved around interpretations of scripture, sermons, and homilies,

59 Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 358. 60 Acts of the Apostles, 7:54-8:2. Frend, Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church, 88. 61 Broadly, hagiography can mean any writing that idolizes an individual, but when I use the term in this paper, I am referring to writings about the Christian martyrs. 31 perhaps the most popular selection was the writing of martyrdom accounts. As the church grew in size and spread to new regions, one of the common interests that drew people in were the tales of individuals standing up to the Roman imperial powers as martyrs. 62 There were different forms of martyrdom accounts, especially in the earlier years of Christianity; some were written as a first-person narrative of an individual who was imprisoned, some were written by an observer of the persecution, and many were written in the form of letters. 63 A major theme throughout the accounts was the martyr walking in the steps of Jesus Christ. In broad terms, even before Stephen, Jesus can be considered the first martyr or at least a prototype for martyrdom accounts. 64 He was persecuted by Pontius Pilate for his words and his actions. 65 Another major theme in the accounts are the presence of visions that come to the martyrs, usually regarding their future deaths or visions of the afterlife. Martyrs were believed to walk a sacred path beginning with their confession and ending with their death.

As previously mentioned, the martyrdom accounts in this chapter all occurred prior to the first Council of Nicaea, which was held in 325 C.E. This ecumenical council marked the first step toward unifying the church through an established “orthodoxy” or “correct belief.” This chapter looks at the structure and the content of the martyrdom accounts that were written prior to the creation of the unified church. This way, we can see how these martyrdoms perhaps played a role in the unification of the Christian religion. Prior to 325 C.E. and the first Council of

Nicaea, Christianity was extremely fragmented. There were different congregations across the

62 Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 417. 63 The letters notifying others that a martyrdom had occurred and asking for prayers was a way to connect various diocese across the empire and encouraged communication throughout the church. 64 There are some issues with a statement like that since, as mentioned in the previous chapter, there is no solid evidence Jesus was Christian, so he could not die as a witness of the religion. 65 There was an issue in monotheistic religion where the God was idolized as a king, which would mean it would take power away from the emperor and therefore, the empire. 32 empire, often with different ideas of what the foundational beliefs of Christianity were. One of the main points of contention was who or what Jesus Christ actually was. Individuals like

Ignatius and Polycarp strongly believed that Jesus was a real human who was persecuted and died at the hands of the Roman empire. However, there were churches across the empire who had a different view of Jesus; some believed he was more of a figurative idea rather than an actual man. This mainly came from a group called the Gnostics, a philosophical Christian group that will be discussed more in depth in the next chapter. On top of these disagreements happening within the church, Christians were always under a threat of persecution. While most of the time, Christians were not sought out by Roman officials, psychologically, Christians always knew persecution was a possibility. Therefore through the circulation of letters and hagiographic writing, Christians tried to make sure the “right” version of Christianity was spreading to the churches. Much of this hagiography was sent to churches in the form of letters by the martyrs themselves, or by individuals who witnessed the martyrdom occur. Individuals like Polycarp and Ignatius are important to understanding early Christianity because, through their martyrdom accounts, they give modern-day individuals a look into how the “pre-Nicene” or

“proto-orthodox” beliefs of the church were constructed on the backs of sacrifice.

The life and letters of Ignatius of Antioch date to 108 C.E. under the emperor Trajan. His martyrdom account comes in the form of a collection of personal letters written by him to churches throughout the empire. Ignatius was most likely the second bishop of Antioch in Syria following Peter, or the third following both Peter and Euodius. Nevertheless, he was a powerful figure within the church in the second century of the common era. The context of his letters is what makes them so intriguing; Ignatius was writing while he was on his way to his own 33 martyrdom in Rome. 66 Because of the persecution taking place in Antioch, Ignatius and other

Christians were ordered to Rome by force of armed guard. Since Ignatius was sent to Rome to be persecuted, it was most likely true that he was a citizen of the Roman empire. There is still debate as to the cause of persecution. Due to his language when he writes to other churches, saying “peace” had been restored to Antioch, Bart Ehrman, editor of The Apostolic Fathers, believes there may have been an internal conflict within the Christian church there. 67 This language paired with his frequent condemnations of unspecified “heretics” in his writings leads

Ehrman to believe that internal friction was the reason for his persecution. However, Ehrman does state there is nothing explicitly said about the reason behind his death, so it is not definite. 68

Through his letters, the reader follows Ignatius on his journey from Antioch to Rome, and comes to understand his message of calling for unity within the church and his mission to become a martyr. 69

We get a clear understanding of his position as a voluntary martyr. In Ignatius’s letter to the Romans, he explicitly says, “I am writing all the churches and giving instruction to all, that I am willingly dying for God, unless you hinder me. I urge you, do not become an untimely kindness to me. Allow me to be bread for the wild beasts; through them I am able to attain to

God.” 70 Ignatius believes that by sacrificing himself like this, he is truly becoming a disciple of

Christ. He viewed death in terms of a sacrifice, and as a bond that connected him with Jesus

Christ, therefore meaning he was a witness to Christ’s sacrifice. 71 Sentiments that echo

66 Bart Ehrman, The Apostolic Fathers, (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003). 203-204. 67 Frend, Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church, 197-98. Peace was often a word used in other Christian texts to describe conflict resolution within the church. 68 Ehrman, The Apostolic Fathers, 208. 69 Ehrman, The Apostolic Fathers, 204. 70 Ignatius, Letter to the Romans, V. 71 Frend, Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church, 198. 34 Ignatius’s idea of sacrifice, while abundant in his letter to the Romans, can also be found in his letter to the Magnesians: “If we endure in him all the abusive treatment of the ruler of this age and escape, we will attain to God.” 72 Here, Ignatius states his belief that Christians like himself will be rewarded by God if he allows the Roman authorities to make him suffer. Since he was a citizen and lived under the reign of the fairly tolerant Emperor Trajan, Ignatius most likely could have survived a persecution if he had not invited it.

Because of the nature of his journey, Ignatius interacted with a variety of different individuals from a collection of places. One of those people happened to be Polycarp, who was the bishop of Smyrna at the time. In addition, Ignatius met with the leaders of churches in various cities including Ephesus, Magnesia, and Tralles. Later in his journey, he would write to those leaders preaching his message. Within the letters, he preached his message of unity within the church, an eradication of heretical teachings, a loyalty to bishops, and his desire for martyrdom. 73 As a leader in the church, Ignatius wrote in his letters about the friction he believed Christianity was experiencing during this time in the early 2nd century. As he was traveling for the purpose of his martyrdom, he used that opportunity to spread his thoughts on how the church should connect. Most likely, he was sending his letters to churches with similar viewpoints as his own in order to strengthen that belief coalition. In his Letter to the Trallians, he reiterates their understanding of Jesus Christ being fully human, most likely taking aim at

Gnostic teachers who believed Jesus was a phantom rather than human. “Jesus Christ, who was from the race of David and from Mary, who was truly born, both ate and drank, was truly persecuted at the time of Pontius Pilate, was truly crucified and died…He was also truly raised

72 Ignatius, Letter to the Magnesians, I. 73 Ehrman, The Apostolic Fathers, 204. 35 from the dead, his Father having raised him.” 74 Ignatius believes Jesus was fully man — not a phantom figure — and was raised from the dead by God, his father. Ignatius believed in the pure form of Christianity certain regional churches believed in, and with statements like these, established what would become the Christian creed, or statement of belief. 75

The letters of Ignatius of Antioch are different from other martyrdom accounts. If anything, the collection is similar to the letters of Paul since they narrate his journey around the

Mediterranean region of the empire until he reaches Rome. There are no records that explicitly state that Paul was martyred in Rome once he arrived there, but it is widely accepted that was his fate since he was a Roman citizen. So too was the fate of Ignatius, mentioned briefly in

Polycarp’s letter to the Philippians. However, this journey Ignatius was sent on shows how even in the face of adversity, persecuted Christians were able to get their message across to not only non-Christians, but to different sects of Christianity. It is clear through his letters, Ignatius knew what issues within the church needed to be agreed upon, which is why he preached his message to the different regions of Christians he passed through. His devotion to martyrdom and his focus on ironing out Christian doctrine show how much he valued the idea of an honorable death.

Living before a unified Christian “orthodoxy,” Ignatius believed that martyrdom was a central component to Christianity. Since he was a future martyr himself, he had the ethos to preach about its importance. And, by making that clear in his letters to churches across the empire, word spread of the emphasis Christians should put on self-sacrifice and martyrdom.

74 Ignatius, Letter to the Trallians, IX. One of the major debates within Christianity that was discussed in 325 C.E. in Nicaea was whether or not Jesus was fully man or was also divine. This statement almost resembles a prototype for the Nicaean Creed — a Christian belief system. 75 Ehrman, The Apostolic Fathers, 207. 36 The martyrdom of Polycarp is dated to around 167 C.E. under the emperor Marcus

Aurelius. 76 The persecution in Smyrna, where Polycarp was a bishop, began with the voluntary martyr, Quintus. 77 He is depicted as the wrong way a Christian should face persecution, since not only did he come forward on his own volition in Smyrna, but he also did not conduct himself in a Stoic manner when faced with death. On the other hand, Polycarp is described as a good martyr, as he approached his persecution stoically and much in the way Jesus did. 78 The hagiographical account of Polycarp is a good example for what Christian writers believed martyrdom accounts should contain and how martyrs should “conduct” their deaths. In the

Martyrdom of Polycarp, we see the theme of a martyr walking in the steps of Jesus, but also, we see the idea of visons playing a role in martyrdom accounts. Days before his execution, Polycarp had a vison while he slept that he needed to be “burnt alive.” 79 Since his martyrdom is considered one of the earliest surviving accounts of a martyr, it set a precedent for future martyrdom accounts. The events were recorded by those who had witnessed the persecution of

Polycarp in a letter to other congregations.80

Polycarp was well-respected in his region, as he had held the title of bishop for sixty years. 81 During the persecution, he was discovered living on a farm. The guards gave him some personal time to eat and pray before he would be taken away to the amphitheater to face a brutal

76 There is no verification that is the exact date. But, he was most likely persecuted under the reign of the emperor Marcus Aurelius so the timeline matches. 77 Smyrna is located in the region of Anatolia. 78 The Martyrdom of Polycarp, I.3-4. 79 The Martyrdom of Polycarp, I.4. 80 Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 182. The letter was translated into several different languages, which illustrates how far reaching and popular the document was for others to read. Because of its popularity, it could have been a source of influence to get polytheists to convert. 81 Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 182. 37 death. 82 Because of this, Polycarp was most likely not a citizen of the Roman empire as he was not taken to Rome, but rather, was violently killed. At the time of his discovery, he could have moved to a different house to continue his evasion of death, but he said “God’s will be done.” 83

On his way and once he reached the amphitheater, the proconsul and other officials attempted to convince him to save himself. If he denounced Jesus, he would be free. “The governor persisted and said: ‘Swear and I will let you go. Curse Christ!’ But Polycarp answered: ‘For eighty-six years I have been his servant and he has done me no wrong. How can I blaspheme against my kind and savior?’” 84 Here, Polycarp is pledging his allegiance to Jesus Christ, even though he would save his life if he denounced his name. He did not, but rather, he confessed his faith in

Christ, and was burned and killed.

A notable point about the Martyrdom of Polycarp is the way it is structured. Because of its origin as a means to notify other churches throughout the empire of what had transpired, it is written as a letter, which was eventually translated into several different languages across the empire. In his History of the Church, Eusebius refers to the document as a letter from the church of Smyrna. In the beginning, there is a greeting from the “The church of God that temporarily resides in Smyrna to the church of God that temporarily resides in Philomelium…” which implies those who survived in Smyrna are writing to a neighboring congregation in Anatolia —

Philomelium. 85 Here, it is clearly stated that this is at least written in part to notify other

82 Frend, Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church, 270. This is interesting to note, as it illustrates a moment of sympathy the, presumably polytheistic, guards had for persecuted Christians. 83 Eusebius, The History of the Church, IV.15.10. Upon introducing the martyrdom, Eusebius states “Polycarp found fulfilment in martyrdom,” which is reminiscent of Socrates’s attitude toward death mentioned in the first chapter. Both believed there was a truth in death that they looked forward to discovering. 84 The Martyrdom of Polycarp, I.9. 85 The Martyrdom of Polycarp, I.1. 38 Christians within the empire of the atrocities that had occurred at Smyrna. When there was word of a Christian giving his or her life for the sake of their religion, churches would ask for each other’s prayers and, through that prayer, churches came to be intertwined. By distributing the account, it is also giving a type of narrative template of what should be included in martyrdom accounts.

Polycarp is also an example of, as mentioned before, how a martyrdom account can be written in the style of walking in the steps of Jesus, or imitatio christi in Latin. As mentioned previously, in loose terms, Jesus can technically be viewed as a martyr himself. So, many martyrs and those recording martyrdoms drew upon that model of an individual approaching death for religious reasons. Having been written in this style, these martyrdom accounts could have been attempting to appeal to potential converts who could gain inspiration from these regular people who were brave enough to walk the same path as the alleged son of God. Polycarp is sought out by Roman officials as Jesus was, and he refuses to state what they want to hear, a statement that would save his life. Unlike Jesus, however, he is bound to the stake and not nailed.

This was at the request of Polycarp, who said “‘Leave me thus. For he who has given me the strength to endure the flames will grant me to remain without flinching in the fire even without the firmness you will give me by using nails.’” 86 This draws a clear distinction between

Polycarp and Jesus, however it still portrays him as a sacrificial character like Jesus and biblical

Isaac.87

86 The Martyrdom of Polycarp, I.13-14. 87 Candida R. Moss "Nailing Down and Tying Up: Lessons in Intertextual Impossibility from the ‘Martyrdom of Polycarp.’" Vigiliae Christianae 67. 2 (2013): 117-36. 39 While the parallel is not exact, the Martyrdom of Polycarp definitely emulates the story of the crucifixion of Jesus, as it even mentions the gospel as something the writer drew upon. 88

Even from the beginning of the martyrdom account in the address, there is a parallel drawn between Jesus and Polycarp when he states “…Polycarp who put a stop to the persecution by his own martyrdom as though he were putting a seal upon it.” 89 In Christianity, it is taught that

Jesus died so that all Christians could live and flourish throughout the world until his return. In that statement from the Martyrdom, the writer is saying something similar about Polycarp; he died to put a stop to the persecution in Smyrna, therefore saving the lives of many Christians. 90

Being one of the earliest martyrdom accounts, the theme of walking with Christ and a martyr having visions become two main themes for most future accounts. His death also further connected the Christian church through the letters recounting his persecution that were transmitted not just within Smyrna, but across the empire to churches who held the same beliefs about Christianity. It also had the potential to teach new converts to Christianity how to live as a witness to Christ.

Through Ignatius and Polycarp, observers and readers witnessed how much martyrdom meant to extremely devout Christians in the early church. Ignatius insisted on accepting whatever was put forth for him instead of fighting the charges. This idea is also seen in the way Eusebius describes the martyrdom of Justin, who was persecuted around 165 C.E. under the emperor

Marcus Aurelius. 91 In Eusebius’s introduction to Justin’s martyrdom account in his History of

88 Moss, “Nailing Down and Tying Up,” 20. 89 The Martyrdom of Polycarp, I.1. 90 This is also reminiscent of the Maccabean revolt. The Maccabees fought against the Seleucid empire, not fearing death, so that they and future Jewish decedents could live and worship freely. 91 Eusebius, The History of the Church, IV.16.3. Here, I just wanted to briefly describe how Justin’s martyrdom account was viewed. I will go more in depth about the life and teachings of Justin in the next 40 the Church, he states, “At the same period, Justin, whom I mentioned a little way back, after presenting a second book in defense of our doctrines to the rulers already named, was honoured with a divine martyrdom..” Justin Martyr was a Christian apologist who wrote two defenses of

Christianity. In the next chapter, the life and thought of Justin will be described more in depth as he was not only martyred, but was someone who believed Christianity was the completion of philosophy. 92 In this statement from Eusebius about Justin’s death, he says Justin was “honored” by being martyred. This illustrates the reverence martyrdom was viewed with in the early church.

Even though martyrdom meant death, it provided an opportunity for Christians to confess how devout they were to their religion, their God, and Christ.

Around 177 C.E. under the reign of the emperor Marcus Aurelius, there was an attack on

Christianity in the region of Lyons in modern day France. Most of the Christians who resided in

Lyons were immigrants from territories in Asia, bringing their religion with them. This also means many of them were likely not citizens of the Roman empire, opening them up to violent persecution. This lack of protection of citizenship is possibly why the persecution broke out in the first place. 93 Early Christians were often characterized by scholars of the time as being lower class and illiterate individuals. However, the Christians of Lyons and the neighboring region of

Vienne did not fall into that stereotype. For most, they knew Latin, owned slaves, and held esteemed positions within society whether it was as a physician, advocate, or politician. 94 In fact, the source Eusebius used to record the events of the massacre in Lyons was from a letter

chapter since it focuses on the apologists and Christian philosophers of the early church. However, it is still important to note that his death was viewed as honorable in the eyes of his Christian peers. 92 Eusebius, The History of the Church, IV.16.3. 93 This implies that many persecuted may not have been Roman citizens, therefore making them a target for persecution already. If they were Roman citizens, they traditionally could not be persecuted in such violent ways. They could still be executed, but not excessively. 94 Frend, Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church, 4. 41 written from a survivor to the church of Asia proving literacy. The events leading up to the persecution of many Christians began gradually. In 177 C.E., there were sanctions implemented on Christians, as they could not use the baths or visit the marketplace. 95 Eventually, they were not allowed in any public space. The government’s reasoning behind these restrictions was that the Roman gods watched over these spaces, so a Christian presence in those areas would anger the gods since the Christians did not respect them. 96

Total violence did not break out until the provincial governor was absent from the city of

Lyons and a mob attacked any known or thought to be Christian openly. Citizens stoned and beat

Christians and on order by the city’s magistrates, Christians were brought to the Forum where they were imprisoned after confessing their religion. Once the governor returned and found the plethora of imprisoned Christians, he decided to hold a public trial for those arrested. Authorities decided the Christians could not be held based on their religion only, but must be charged with some form of treason. This led Roman soldiers to arrest the servants of Christians, who were often worshipers of the traditional Greco-Roman polytheistic gods, and torture them into admitting their masters engaged in cannibalism or incest. As mentioned in the previous chapter,

Fronto often attempted to depict Christians in this violent and amoral way. The torture of the imprisoned Christians and their slaves continued, and many actually died there before the major persecution occurred, including the first Bishop of Lyons, Pothinus. 97 He is described as a 90

95 These types of sanctions seem to be the way most persecutions began in the Roman empire. It is what happened with regard to the Bacchanalian Affair, and it is also how the persecution of the Maccabees began. 96 Frend, Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church, 6. Again, this leads us back to the idea of Romans wanting to maintain the pax deorum within the empire. 97 Frend, Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church, 6-7. This is an example of the regional and sporadic persecution mentioned in the first chapter. The martyrdom of Lyons did not occur because of a decree made by the emperor, rather it was approved by the local officials. 42 year old man and extremely physically weak. According to the letter, he reached a quite brutal end when he was brought in front of the tribunal and many citizens of the mob. “Thereupon he was mercilessly dragged along beneath a rain of blows, those close by assailing him viciously with hands and feet and showing no respect for his age…Scarcely breathing, he was flung into prison, and two days later he passed away.” 98 The vicious treatment of Christians described in the letter is quite graphic, which the author possibly intended in order to establish pathos.

In June, Christians named Sanctus, Maturus, Blandina, and Attalus, were taken to the

Lyons amphitheater to fight the “beasts.” Sanctus and Maturus died, Blandina — a Christian woman — was horribly injured, and Attalus presented a problem for the governor.99Attalus was a Roman citizen, so legally he could not be given to the beasts. The governor decided to pause the trial and write to Marcus Aurelius. He responded, saying that those who insist on confessing their Christianity should be killed, citizens by beheading, others given to the beasts. However, if the accused do not admit to being a Christian, they should be released. 100 Soon after, a Christian doctor, Alexander, was interrogated by authorities. Alexander was quite open about his religion, and angered the governor when he answered the question of who he was with “A Christian.” 101

Alexander, along with Attalus by demand of the mob, were given to the beasts which was a violation of the law. Both were tortured to death in the amphitheater, pledging their allegiance to

98 Eusebius, The History of the Church, V.1.27. The way in which this is written is very graphic and dramatic. By having an older man dying in such a vicious way, the author may have been trying to gain sympathy from readers of the martyrdom account. This would imply that the Christians are not the monsters, rather the Romans putting a feeble old man to death are. 99 Eusebius, The History of the Church, V.1.39-51. The resilience of Blandina is very apparent. Women were viewed by Roman society as weak, but she was putting up a fight against the “evil.” This illustrates Christians breaking the status quo by giving masculine resilience to a woman. 100 Eusebius, The History of the Church, V.1.39-51. This shows that Christians in Lyons had a way out if they did not want to die. They could have denounced their religion, but to maintain their honor and their morals, they confessed to their Christian beliefs. 101 Eusebius, The History of the Church, V.1.51. 43 God until their final breath. Attalus is recorded as shouting, “‘Look! Eating men is what you are doing: we neither eat men nor indulge in any malpractices.’” 102 Finally, Blandina was sacrificed in the amphitheater, dying by being ravaged by a bull, along with a younger male Christian,

Ponticus.

Like The Martyrdom of Polycarp, the story of the Lyons martyrs was originally written in the format of a letter from survivors of the massacre to the church of Asia. The introduction, recorded in Eusebius’s History of the Church, illustrates the connection between the churches.

“The servants of Christ at Vienne and Lyons in Gaul to our brothers in Asia and Phrygia who have the same faith and hope of redemption as we: peace, grace, and glory from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.” 103 Lyons in Gaul and Phrygia were quite far apart for that time period. Most likely, communication between the two churches would have been very miniscule.

Since, as mentioned previously, many of the Lyons martyrs were immigrants, this could have been where they were originally from. This atrocity, however, was so significant, it connected

Christians from very different regions of the empire. By doing so, it made the overall ideas of the church stronger. A massacre like the one at Lyons could have happened in any community of

Christians as they were the minority in the empire. There was a psychological fear among them that, no matter the particular diocese, every Christian shared. This mutual feeling of fear and hope expressed through the letters of martyrdom accounts built a connection within a very new, and currently very disconnected, religion.

102 Eusebius, The History of the Church, V.1.51. It was quite rare for a Roman citizen to be given to the beasts like this, so it is a bit peculiar as to why the governor gave into the mob and sent Attalus to the beasts. His quote also seems to aim at the onlookers to become introspective of themselves and to take a look at the monstrosities happening at their hands. 103 Eusebius, The History of the Church, V.1.4. 44 The Martyrdom of Lyons is also an example of a very public persecution of many

Christians. In the writing, every Christian that is killed is described as approaching their death without fear. Particularly, Blandina and Ponticus are both referenced as unwavering in the face of death. “They subjected them to every horror and inflicted every punishment in turn, attempting again and again to make them swear, but to no purpose.” 104 Furthermore, when

Bladina is described as “…rejoicing and exulting at her departure as if invited to a wedding supper not thrown to the beasts,” it shows how she was not just indifferent to death, she was actually excited at the prospect. 105 It was not just the other Christians who took notice of this attitude the martyrs had, either. Toward the end of the letter Eusebius cites, the writer mentions some in the mob observing the persecution were not as violent as some others were. Some of the

Greco-Roman polytheists rejoiced in seeing the Christians brutally mauled, even calling for more violence. However, there were others who seemed more pensive about the situation than anything else. “While those who were more reasonable, and seemed to have a little human feeling, exclaimed with the utmost scorn: ‘Where is their god? And what did they get for their religion which they preferred to their own lives?’” 106 This quote still rings of criticism from polytheists toward the Christians, but what is important is that they are noticing, and are interested in, the reasoning behind the martyrs’ devout love of their religion and brave death.

What could be so powerful, these individuals valued it more than their lives? Presumably, the only way they could answer that question is by learning more about Christianity. That was the

104 Eusebius, The History of the Church, V.1.51. 105 Eusebius, The History of the Church, V.1.51. This excitement Bladina is described as having is another example of martyrs looking forward to discovering the truth in death, as Socrates had described in Phaedo. 106 Eusebius, The History of the Church, V.2.1. The quote illustrates a level of interest and sympathy polytheists in Lyons had for the Christian martyrs and is a very good example of how public persecutions were utilized to spread Christianity to polytheists. 45 goal of early Christian missionaries, to spread the word. So, even something as dark and brutal as this massacre could potentially grow the reach of the Christian church.

The Martyrdom of Saints Perpetua and Felicitas is dated to 203 or 204 C.E. in Carthage under the proconsul T. Salvius Rufinus Minicius Opimianus and the emperor Septimus Severus.

107 Carthage was a city in the North African region of the Roman empire and had a fairly large

Christian population. There are some claims that the persecution was an empire wide decree by

Severus, however there are differing accounts. 108 Viba Perpetua is the main focus of the martyrdom account. She was a young, married woman with a small son who was with her upon her arrest. She was not the only Christian targeted when she was imprisoned and martyred; she was joined by her slave, Felicitas and a small group of others who eventually included her teacher, Saturus, who voluntarily joined her. 109 Perpetua came from a family that was split religiously between Greco-Roman polytheists and Christians; both of her parents and one of her brothers were traditional polytheists, and she and her other brother were Christian. This illustrates an underlying theme of familial tensions in the martyrdom account. She was brought before the procurator at the time, Hilarianus, once her father could not “control” her choices anymore. In her writing, she describes interacting with her father once she was imprisoned, and he was angry with her continuing to confess her Christian faith. “Then my father, excited by this name [Christian], jumped at me as if to tear out my eyes. But he only shook me and, defeated, he left with the devil and his arguments.” 110 She wanted to reject all of the religious traditions that

107 Éric Rebillard, Greek and Latin Narratives About the Ancient Martyrs, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017), 296. 108 Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 294. 109 Martyrdoms of Perpetua and Felicitas. 110 Martyrdoms of Perpetua and Felicitas, III.1-4. It is interesting to note her defiance of what her father wants. One of the reasons Romans viewed the Bacchanalian cult as a risk to social norms was its 46 she was taught growing up in a Greco-Roman polytheistic household, even if that meant standing up to authorities. 111

The martyrdom account is arranged differently than others. It is not a letter or a series of letters, but rather a grouping of a few different texts. The first, and perhaps most notable, section is the diary entries of Perpetua, who recorded her experiences of imprisonment and torture. Then, there is a text written by her instructor, Saturus, who cites a dream and vision he had that focused on Perpetua. Finally, there is the narrative written anonymously, that gives context to the two other texts and speaks to both Perpetua and Saturus’ deaths. 112 There is no exact reason given for why or how Perpetua was able to keep the diaries, so the motive behind it is not entirely clear. Perpetua recounts dreams and visions from God that she experiences. This type of account can loosely be connected to what many Christian women, otherwise known as mystics, claimed to have experienced during medieval times. 113 But, it also falls in line with the template of visions found in hagiography.

It is important to note the status of Perpetua and her companions who were martyred, as they were laymen within the church. While it was not the case in Lyons, Ignatius and Polycarp were both bishops, and therefore members of the clergy. With Perpetua, there is first person literature of a lay member of the church speaking about her connection to martyrdom and God.

association with giving power to women. Here, it is clear Perpetua feels empowered enough by her religion to make her own decisions, which was a risk to Roman, misogynistic, tradition. 111 Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 291. 112 Heidi Vierow, “Feminine and Masculine Voices in the ‘Passion of Saints Perpetua and Felicitas’,” Latomus 58. 3 (1999): 600-619. 113 There was a group of women called mystics who often claimed to be visited by God by way of dream or vision. As to not paint with a broad brush, there were various types of mystics, some were more extreme than others and inflicted pain upon themselves in order to be recipients of these visions. So, the comparison between Perpetua and Christian mystic women of later centuries like Julian of Norwich is not perfect, but these diaries kept by Perpetua can be seen as an early template for these later women to follow. 47 114 While it is important to read and understand the influence of the martyrdom accounts of those who were higher up in the church, it is also significant to consider the influence the deaths of normal Christians had within their sphere. Someone like Perpetua, who showed such devotion to her faith, really displayed the message many Christians wanted to convey. It does not matter an individual’s role within the church, everyone can attain the same feeling of such love for God and no longer fear death. On top of that, Perpetua was also a young woman in the church, somewhat of a rarity among early Christian martyrs. So far in this chapter, the only other woman who was discussed was Bladina, who was martyred in Lyons. The rarity is especially true since a portion of her martyrdom account is written in the first-person point of view. Since Perpetua shared her personal views about her situation through her diaries, readers are awarded insight into how she viewed her circumstances.

As mentioned previously, Perpetua speaks about dreams and visions she receives from

God; she believes she is the recipient of them because of her status as a Christian confessor. 115

During her writing, Perpetua describes three main visions. In one, she envisions climbing a ladder to heaven, however she faces obstacles on the ladder along the way.

“I see a bronze ladder of wondrous size reaching all the way to heaven and very narrow, so that only one could climb at a time, and all along the sides of the ladder were fixed all sorts of iron blades…so that if anyone climbed carelessly or without looking upwards, they would be mangles and their flesh stuck with iron.” 116

Underneath the ladder, she describes seeing a serpent who had set the traps for whoever was climbing to heaven. 117

114 Rebillard, Greek and Latin Narratives About the Ancient Martyrs, 298. 115 Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 291. 116 Martyrdoms of Perpetua and Felicitas, IV.3-9. Based on Christian tradition, the snake is a metaphor for Satan and in Christianity, many believe that the devil is what convinces people to sin and to not follow the word of God or Jesus Christ. 117 Martyrdoms of Perpetua and Felicitas, IV.5-9. 48 Eventually, Perpetua goes on to explain how, in her dream, she follows the lead of her instructor, Saturus, and is able to climb the ladder in order to reach heaven. This scene is later referenced during the description of the actual deaths of Perpetua and Saturus, the narrator saying, “All the others received the blade still and silent. Saturus especially, who was the first to climb the ladder, was the first to five up his spirit.” 118 Perpetua describes stepping on the head of the serpent in order to step up the ladder. In other words, if she rejects temptations from Satan to say she is not Christian in order to preserve her own life. She will die, but she will also be accepted into heaven. This is what many claim to be the draw of non-Christians to martyrs and martyrdom accounts. Perpetua describes how even though she must first face all of these threats around her, in the end she will be welcomed into heaven. 119 Again, these visions of her future death are reminiscent of that of Polycarp, who had visions of his own death as well.

Moving from her first person diaries and into the account of Perpetua’s last days of imprisonment and her death, her attitude of being untroubled by fear continues. She is able, to a degree, to convince the prison guard to have some sympathy for her and her companions by allowing them to have proper hygiene, “So it was that he gave the order that they were to be more humanely treated; and he [the guard] allowed her brothers and other persons to visit, so that the prisoners could dine in their company.” 120 There is another instance of a polytheist connecting with a persecuted Christian when Saturus is killed. He is killed by a leopard, and as he is dying, he asks for a ring from the hand of the Roman soldier, Pudens. Saturus dips the ring

118 Martyrdoms of Perpetua and Felicitas, XXI.8. 119 Martyrdoms of Perpetua and Felicitas, IV.7-8. The dreams received by Perpetua and Saturus made them feel better about dying, and opened their eyes to what death can bring them. It will bring them the truth they cannot access on Earth. 120 The Martyrdom of Perpetua and Felicitas, IX.1. This is an instance of sympathy of a polytheist for a Christian. 49 in his blood, and when handing it back to Pudens, he says, “Good-bye. Remember me, and remember the faith. These things should not disturb you but rather strengthen you.” 121

Throughout the account of Perpetua’s death, there are some subtle, but also blatant, misogynistic comments regarding her sex. For example, the author describes how a cow was brought into the arena rather than the typical beasts, “…the devil had prepared the most savage of cows, an animal not customarily provided for the games, in order to match their sex with that of the beast.” 122 However, within some of these comments, her resolve to act as though the attacks happening around her were not affecting her attitude is illustrated. 123 Perpetua and

Felicitas were escorted into the arena wearing tunics because at first when they were stripped,

“the crowd was horrified to see that one was a lovely young woman and that the other had just given birth, her breasts still wet with milk.” 124 This is in reference to Felicitas, who had given birth while imprisoned. While this is clearly a comment riddled with improper sexualization and sexism, by providing Perpetua with a tunic, it allows her to feel as though she is in a normal situation by preserving modesty. Because then once they are led back out, Perpetua is thrown by the cow onto her side and her tunic is ripped apart. The fall must have caused immense pain; however, it is noted that she immediately reattached her tunic, “more mindful of her modesty than her pain.” 125 In a similar fashion, Perpetua is also described as searching for a pin to fix

“her disheveled hair,” hair that is disheveled because she was thrown by a cow. However, in the next line, her actions are justified by the writer, “For it was not proper to suffer martyrdom with

121 The Martyrdom of Perpetua and Felicitas, XXI.1-6. 122 Martyrdoms of Perpetua and Felicitas, XX.1. 123 This is similar to the resolve illustrated by Bladina in Lyons. 124 Martyrdoms of Perpetua and Felicitas, XX.2-3. This is an interesting duality because even though the way it is written is extremely sexist, it shows that the crowd felt at least something for Felicitas and Perpetua, and recognized that they were human. 125 Martyrdoms of Perpetua and Felicitas, XX.4-5. 50 hair unpinned, lest in her glory she seem to be mourning.” 126 As a final note of her fearlessness of death, Perpetua eventually guides the sword of the gladiator who was fighting the Christians in the arena, to her neck, “Perhaps so great a woman, who was feared by the unclean spirit, could not otherwise be killed unless she willed it herself.” 127

Throughout the first-person narrative of Perpetua’s imprisonment and the writing accounting her vicious death at the hands of a gladiator, the constant is her security with death because of her religion. This is something to be said for most martyrdom accounts, especially early Christian examples. Death is something everyone has in common, and something everyone has had a common fear of throughout history. By breaking gender norms and showing bravery in the face of death, Perpetua shows not to fear it. Rather, look toward it, and face it willingly. To drive home that point, the narrator of her martyrdom account ensures that attitude is remembered during her imprisonment and her actual death.

When Christianity was first introduced to the Roman empire, traditional Greco-Roman polytheists were not going to immediately convert to something if they had no idea what it was and what it stood for. To be fair, many Christians could not even agree on what the basic doctrines of Christianity should be. Various polytheistic religions had been around for thousands of years; now, a new monotheistic religion emerged, which must have been intimidating. So, potential converts had to take time to be exposed to some of the new, Christian practices that were forming inside of the religion. Unfortunately, one very public way Christians were able to display their message was through these public martyrdoms that many Greco-Roman polytheists

126 Martyrdoms of Perpetua and Felicitas, XX.5. If she did not have her hair pinned, she would no longer look like a proper woman. By having her regard pinning her hair with such high importance, it shows onlookers and readers that she is not a monster. 127 Martyrdoms of Perpetua and Felicitas, XXI.10-11. 51 witnessed first-hand or read about through accounts second-hand. The honorable death that was discussed in the first chapter was something many Roman citizens had already been familiar with and was something they understood. So, by connecting Polycarp, Ignatius, the martyrs of Lyons, and Felicitas and Perpetua with Socrates, Lucretia, and the Maccabees, it made Christianity more digestible and admirable. The utilization of letter writing also helped future orthodox Christians stabilize and strengthen certain Christian views while tamping down others that they deemed heresy. The next chapter will examine more closely how a few Christian scholars and apologists believed martyrs piqued the public’s curiosity of Christianity through philosophy, and one major way they believed this happened was through the way martyrs approached their deaths in a serene and stoic manner.

52

Chapter 3

The previous chapter discussed Stoic themes within the Christian martyrdoms themselves and how they were transmitted throughout the empire. It also illustrated the connections between those martyrdoms and the pre-Christian martyrs discussed in the first chapter. As seen by this connection, the Greco-Roman theme of an honorable death can be found in many early Christian martyrdoms as well. This chapter will begin by taking a look at the phenomenon known as the

Second Sophistic and how that intersected with Christianity. Before 325 C.E. and the Council of

Nicaea, there were different factions within Christianity that believed different things about their religion. Therefore prior to that council, different ideas floated around about what Christianity really was. For instance, there was a large faction of the church who followed what can be referred to as “proto-orthodoxy.” Then there were the Gnostics who believed Greek philosophy and Christianity were heavily intertwined. Some of their ideas were seen as extreme, and many were deemed heretics by church officials. However, there were Christians who were not

Gnostics, but still believed in a connection between Christianity and philosophy specifically when it came to martyrdom. The majority of this chapter will examine the writings of early

Christian apologists who used Hellenistic philosophy to argue that martyrdom was a major component of the religion.

An “apology” as a genre of writing means the author is arguing in defense of something.

Three apologists who wrote in defense of Christianity, Justin Martyr (100-165 C.E.), Clement of 53

Alexandria (150-215 C.E.), and Origen (184-253 C.E.), believed that martyrdom illustrated a component of philosophy within Christianity. Writing apologies simply meant they were writing in defense of Christianity to plead their case for the religion to non-believers. Justin Martyr believed Christianity was the final and true form of philosophy. Clement of Alexandria understood the importance of martyrdom, but believed voluntary martyrdom was not a good practice. Origen looked at martyrdom almost as a “spiritual war”; martyrs would get ready to fight for their religion. In this chapter, we will examine the lives of Justin, Clement of

Alexandria, and Origen. Their texts illustrate how they incorporated classical and philosophical ideas into Christianity and its practices, specifically martyrdom, and how that, in turn, assisted in making their religion accessible to Greco-Roman polytheists living throughout the Roman empire. It will also take a look at the thought of the Christian apologist Tertullian (160-220

C.E.), who did not accept any connection between Christianity and philosophy, but still strongly emphasized the importance of martyrdom within the religion.

In 146 B.C.E., Rome absorbed the Hellenistic world and established the region as a province of the Roman empire. While this consequently reduced the Greek political sphere of influence, Hellenistic ideas continued to thrive. Illustrating the reverence Romans held for classical Greece, Roman Emperor Hadrian made at least three visits to Athens early in the second century of the common era. By this time, Roman writers and intellectuals were educated in Greek language, literature, and philosophy. Due to Roman support, the cultural phenomenon known as the Second Sophistic emerged. 128 There is an important distinction between sophists

128 Graham Anderson, The Second Sophistic A Cultural Phenomenon in the Roman Empire (London: Routledge Press, 1993), 11. The term “sophistic” is born from the term sophist, which is rooted in classical Greece. A sophist is an individual who is an excellent rhetorician. It originated during the during the 5th and 4th centuries before the common era. 54 and philosophers in the classical world, but both practices were included as a part of this phenomenon. 129 The Second Sophistic became a wide-reaching term for the rebirth of Greek classical culture, and sophists and philosophers were both different pieces to that larger puzzle.

Sophists were extremely well-spoken rhetoricians, but they were not necessarily speaking about new ideas or deep philosophical thoughts. Philosophers on the other hand were preaching from different philosophical schools like Platonism, Stoicism and so on, trying to seek the truth in the world. Because of a perceived lack of truth in the speech of sophists, many philosophers saw the men as amoral.

The Second Sophistic, as a cultural phenomenon intersected with the first three centuries of early Christianity. This chapter looks at how Christianity might fit into this intellectual milieu of the Roman empire during this phenomenon. Because of the polytheistic basis of philosophy, many Christians did not wish to involve outside lessons of philosophy into their teachings.

However, some looked to how they might work together and how this interaction might play to their advantage. Christians had to somewhat market this new religion in a way that Romans, and specifically the Greeks, could understand. Regarded as the second founder of Christianity, Paul is famous for preaching and writing to Greco-Roman polytheists in the Hellenistic world and incorporating lines from Greek literature. By utilizing his education, Paul was appealing to the intellect of the Greeks, trying to convince them to give Christian worship a chance. On a different note than Paul, the rhetorician Lucian lived during the second century in the common era, but was not a Christian. As an example of how far the interaction of Hellenistic philosophy

129 John Muckelbauer, “Sophistic Travel: Inheriting the Simulacrum through Plato’s ‘The Sophist,’” Philosophy & Rhetoric 34. 3 (2001): 225-244. While the phenomenon of the Second Sophistic encompasses rhetoricians as well as practices of philosophy like Neoplatonism and Stoicism, sophists and philosophers are not one in the same. 55 and Christianity had come, he referred to Jesus Christ as a “crucified sophist” in his writing. This term was most likely not meant to be a compliment, but nevertheless, it shows how basic ideas of

Christianity were beginning to permeate the Hellenistic intellectual milieu. 130

During this time, the Roman empire was multicultural and multi-intellectual, so where would Christianity find its place? There were various views as to how this would work, and within the broader conversation of philosophy and Christianity during the first centuries of the common era lay a quite eccentric group: Gnostics. Gnosticism was a branch of Christianity that saw some success, but was not accepted by much of the early church. Many who engaged with the practice were deemed heretics by leaders within Christianity (whom we might call proto- orthodox) because of their extreme and somewhat odd views about the foundations and practices of the church, namely their take on God as one overall “Being” rather than the Holy Trinity. 131

This tension between Christians who were a part of a “proto-orthodoxy” faction and the

“Gnostic” faction existed for several hundred years. These are umbrella terms that encompass smaller factions that existed throughout the empire that held beliefs that aligned more with one or the other.132 A majority of these Gnostic and philosophical-Christian practices grew prior to the First Council of Nicaea in 325 C.E. It was at that meeting, convened by Emperor

Constantine, where a more solid definition of Christian doctrine was drafted with imperial

130 Anderson, The Second Sophistic, 205-206. 131 Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 194-196. Individuals like Justin, Clement, and Origen did not agree with Gnostic practices because of their extremity. Gnosis literally means spiritual knowing. Gnostics believed there were a select few who would understand the truth. This truth is that there exists an evil God which created the material world, and everyone’s divine souls were trapped within the decaying matter. Overall the ideas associated with it were highly discredited by proto-orthodox Christians and Christian- philosophers alike. 132 Here, we have the advantage of utilizing hindsight to label one group “proto-orthodox” as we know what came to be Christian orthodoxy, and it really has nothing to do with the Gnostic ideas. 56 support. Before 325, there was confusion as to who was “right” and who was “wrong” because the religion was completely new; there was no blueprint for people to follow, which is why some interpretations like those of the Gnostics existed.

There were relatively prominent figures on both sides. Some notable Gnostics include

Basilides (died 140 C.E.) and Valentinus (100 - 160 C.E.). Both men were teachers of Gnostics and therefore believed God was a single, unknowable Being rather than three different parts.

Much of the teachings from Gnostics focused on philosophical topics like goodness, morality, and evil. Because of this, often times more traditional Christians who still had a good relationship with philosophy were lumped in with Gnostics and deemed heretics even if they themselves did not agree with Gnostic practices. One Christian apologist who would have been on the side of proto-orthodox Christianity was Tertullian (160-220 C.E.) from Carthage in North

Africa. Throughout his life, Tertullian wrote against heretics, specifically Gnostics and those who attempted to connect Christianity with philosophy or other “pagan” practices. In Tertullian’s work, Prescription Against Heretics, he writes in the context of discussing Valentinus and his followers, “Indeed heresies are themselves instigated by philosophy.” 133 However in that same text is perhaps his most famous quote regarding the relationship between Christianity and philosophy. “What indeed has Athens to do with Jerusalem? What concord is there between the

Academy and the Church? What between heretics and Christians?” 134 Because of this tension that existed for hundreds of years between Christians like Tertullian and Christians like

133 Tertullian, Prescription Against Heretics, VII. 134 Tertullian, Prescription Against Heretics, VII. Tertullian could not fathom why people would try to “taint” Christianity with philosophy, finding it utterly absurd as he describes in this quote. 57

Valentinus, those who followed proto-orthodoxy many times were spooked by any link between their religion and philosophy.

However, as mentioned previously, there were three particularly notable Christians who incorporated philosophical teachings into their writing. These men are Justin Martyr, Clement of

Alexandria, and Origen. While they were not considered Gnostics, they were Christian apologists who had a good relationship with philosophy and believed that they could reconcile it with Christianity. As apologists, they wrote documents primarily in “defense” of Christianity, or

“apologies,” often to appeal to emperors, politicians, and individuals who held power so that they might accept Christianity. The writing style was also used to gain more worshipers from across the empire. So, similarly to Paul, apologists often utilized rhetoric or ideas familiar to polytheists, particularly those living in the post-Hellenistic sphere of influence and those who studied under paideia. 135 The common thread in their works that linked Christianity with philosophy was martyrdom. In this way, Justin, Clement, and Origen looked toward Stoicism.

Stoicism’s main teachings revolve around the idea of practicing virtue and approaching both good and bad fortune with equal serenity. 136 Some argue Paul utilized Stoic rhetoric in his

135 Anderson, The Second Sophistic, 207. A paideia refers broadly to a system of education, but specifically it is connected to the classical cultural education of classical Greece. This system of education was established to make young Greeks the ideal citizen of their city-state, or polis. So, some of the broad practices recognized in paideia were incorporated into the writings of Christian apologists who most likely had this education as well, and who knew their writing would potentially be read by individuals who still held respect for that cultural education. Some apologists just touched upon classical influence, while others embraced it more widely. 136 Frederick Pollack, “Marcus Aurelius and the Stoic Philosophy,” Mind 4. 13 (Jan., 1879): 47-68. Stoicism was also something Roman emperors were extremely familiar with at the time, particularly Marcus Aurelius. He is considered one of the “good” emperors, serving as such from 161 C.E. until 180 C.E. Marcus was a staunch practitioner of Stoicism, so much so, he could be referred to as a philosopher himself. Practitioners like Marcus did not agree with a link between philosophy and Christianity; he was a Greco-Roman polytheist. Actually, it was under Marcus that several famous martyrdoms occurred such as Polycarp and Justin Martyr. Even still, thinkers like Marcus are the types of polytheists Christian- 58 teachings. This idea comes from Paul’s repetition of how a human’s belief in God is innate and naturally a part of every individual’s moral admiration. 137 Stoics believed that much of an individual’s goodness and morality were innate as well. Morality is important in Stoicism as, for

Stoics, individuals are supposed to live a life of “goodness,” working toward complete morality and virtue. 138 However, the overall connection between Christians and Stoics is prevalent when observing the Stoic perception of death. Like life, which people are supposed to live in a good way, humans should also have a good death. Some Christian-philosophers believed martyrs approached death with a Stoic, or a serene and an accepting, attitude. This stems back to the death of the philosopher, Socrates, who lived in the 4th century before the common era in

Athens. 139 This represents some of the Stoic ideas Justin, Clement, and Origen believed to find within the Christian martyrs.

An important distinction to make when discussing these somewhat arbitrary groups of proto-orthodox Christians, Gnostics, and Christian philosophers is that Gnostics did not believe martyrdom was essential to Christianity. In fact, Tertullian believed many of the same things the three Christian philosophers did about martyrs and the way they approached death. Tertullian is famously quoted saying, “The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church.” 140 In other words, by killing these Christians, the Romans were actually assisting in the spread of Christianity

philosophers sought to convert; people who embraced Stoicism and could eventually see the link between it and Christian practices. 137 Letter from Paul to the Colossians. 1:26-27. Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 105. 138 Keith Campbell, “Self-Mastery and Stoic Ethics,” Philosophy 60. 233 (Jul., 1985): 327-340. 139 Eric MacPhail, “Montaigne and the Trial of Socrates,” Bibliotéque d’Humanisme et Renaissance 63. 3 (2001): 457-475. The story of Socrates, which was elaborated upon in the first chapter, is one most individuals within the empire would be familiar with at that time. So, by seeing Christians hold themselves as the great philosopher Socrates did, fearless in the face of execution, it provides a link between a Greco-Roman polytheistic past and the new, Christian religion. 140 Tertullian, Apologetics L. 59 throughout the empire. As a part of their “secret teachings,” Gnostics did not believe in the Holy

Trinity, which also coincided with their belief that Jesus was not human, rather more of a phantom. Christians often viewed martyrs as walking in the footsteps of Jesus which is why martyrdom was revered much of the time. Though from the Gnostic perspective, if Jesus wasn’t a real person, that means he was never crucified. Meaning, there is really no need to follow in the footsteps of him and that there is really no need for martyrs. Specifically, Basilides the Gnostic teacher, believed that any kind of suffering was punishment for prior sins, “I believe that all who experience the so-called tribulations must have committed sins other than what they realize, and so have been brought to this good end.” 141 This is a very different interpretation of the purpose of martyrdom than what Tertullian, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen believed.

Despite Gnostics believing in a strong link between Christianity and philosophy, for the most part they did not discuss martyrs as essential to the church. Keeping in mind these ideas and tensions such as the Second Sophistic and the proto-orthodox Christians dislike of the Gnostics, the next portion of this chapter will examine how the three Christian philosophers dealt with these issues and continued their mission of spreading Christianity.

Justin Martyr was born within the Roman empire near modern day Jerusalem in Flavia

Neapolis. His main idea of Christianity and philosophy was that Christianity was the final form of all other schools of philosophy. In his own writings, Justin described himself as a Gentile, meaning he was not Jewish, even though he lived in an area with a high Jewish population. He does, however describe himself as having Greek roots; his grandfather had a “Greek” name, and

Justin himself did receive a Greek education. He describes his early life as searching for a school

141 Cited by Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies IV.12.82.2 60 of philosophic thought that fit his beliefs. He tried learning under the guidance of a Stoic teacher, a Peripatetic teacher, and a Pythagorean teacher, but none of these options appealed to him.

Eventually, Justin found a match in the school of Platonic philosophy, saying in his Dialogue with Trypho, “…the ideas furnished my mind with wings.” Justin embraced Platonic philosophy and before converting to Christianity, he considered himself a Platonist. 142

Justin’s journey toward Christianity began while he was a Platonist. As he told the story, an old man approached him while he was meditating and described Hebrew prophets as witnesses to the truth. The man said they should be believed, and that the prophets knew God was the creator whose Son was indeed Christ. Before the old man told Justin to look toward the prophets for God and knowledge, he undermined Platonism — which Justin was currently practicing — to essentially poke holes in the Platonic school of philosophical thought. The old man went on to explain how the knowledge is not imparted upon all, but only those who are able to understand it. According to Justin himself, the words spoken to him by this old man further piqued his interest in Christianity and led to his hypothesis that this religion is actually the one true and complete philosophy — something he had been searching for since he was a child. 143

The phrasing and word choice of the old man’s wisdom sounds philosophical to a degree rather than Christian. He refers to the idea of Christianity being “perceived or understood,” which are more so elements of understanding philosophy than religion. Throughout his life after he

142 L.W. Barnard, Justin Martyr His Life and Thought, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967), 5-11. 143 Barnard, Justin Martyr, 7. Here, Barnard says Justin recalled the old man tell him, “Pray that, above all things, the gates of light may be opened to you; for these things cannot be perceived or understood by all, but only by the man to whom God and his Christ have imparted wisdom,” emphasizing a philosophical tone. 61 converted to Christianity, Justin wrote apologies in defense of his religion, utilizing his special ideas describing Christianity as a philosophy.

Before he became a teacher and defender of Christianity, Justin fully converted to the religion. As previously mentioned, in his Second Apology, Justin spoke about witnessing martyrdoms and the “sereneness” at which the Christians approached death. According to Frend,

Christianity to Justin combined truth with a hope toward morality. After converting to

Christianity, Justin accepted it as the true form of philosophy and was the first Christian to do this. He believed the root of his religion was within Stoic and Platonic ideas, or even that the

Christian God had influenced philosophers before Christianity came about. 144 While not many of his contemporaries agreed with him, he recognized it would be hard for potential Roman converts to accept a completely new idea into their lives. Whether or not he purposefully attempted to merge philosophy and Christianity for the purpose of conversion, by saying there must be a connection between this new idea and other schools that have already been respected for hundreds of years, he established a level of ethos in Christianity for potential Greco-Roman polytheistic converts who viewed the religion as sinister.

In the Roman empire, Christianity was seen as treasonous. Therefore, everyone who lived as a Christian must have been evil as well. In his Second Apology, Justin becomes skeptical of this view of Christians. Here, Justin speaks about how it does not make sense why, if Christians are as evil as they are said to be, they are welcoming death. According to Justin, if Christians were evil, they would do anything they could in order to stay alive, not just accept death. 145

144 Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 172-173. 145 Justin Martyr, Second Apology I.12.1. Here, Justin says, “For I myself, too, when I was delighting in the doctrines of Plato, and heard the Christians slandered, and saw them fearless of death, and of all other 62

However, this is what he sees Christians doing, accepting death for what it is. As martyrs,

Christians do not deny their association with the religion. Rather, they approach death with a level of confidence as if they know what is on the other side. This is representative of the Stoic struggle followers of the school believed occurred between the mind and body. In Stoic philosophy, one must overcome the want of their body in order to preserve what, in their mind, they know is the virtuous thing to do. In this regard, no matter how fearful an individual may be to approach death, the proper thing to do is to overcome that fear with their virtue.

In Justin’s First Apology, he states, “For we do not fear death, since it is acknowledged we must surely die.” 146 Death and the threat of persecution was intended to strike fear into people and make them want to disassociate from the religion. Most people would be scared of the prospect of dying; however, Justin believed Christians approached death with indifference, something that set them apart from other individuals. This is similar to the famed quote from

Socrates about philosophers not being scared of dying. 147 Rather than fearing what was unknown or presumed to be scary, Socrates embraced death as something that may actually be good for mankind. Christian martyrs held similar ideas, as they believed after death, they would enter a sort of utopia and be rewarded with heaven from God and Christ. For Justin, this idea set

Christianity apart from the other schools of philosophy Justin had associated himself with up until that point. Once he witnessed the “serene” death of the martyrs, Justin “…accepted

things which are counted fearful, perceived that it was impossible that they could be living in wickedness and pleasure.” 146 Justin Martyr, First Apology I.57.2. 147 As recorded by Plato, as he was approaching death, Socrates spoke about the human and contemporary perception of death: “To fear death, my friends, is only to think ourselves wise, without being wise: for it is to think that we know what we do not know. For anything that men can tell, death may be the greatest good that can happen to them: but they fear it as if they knew quite well that it was the greatest of evils. And what is this but that shameful ignorance of thinking that we know what we do not know?” 63

Christianity as the complete revelation of reality.” 148 With that, he rejected the old Greek philosophy most accepted, and moved to its “complete” version. It is quite possible other Greco-

Roman polytheists felt the same way as Justin. Christianity was not a terribly insane jump from philosophy, rather it was just a more complete and truthful version of what they already knew.

Eusebius of Caesarea included descriptions of Justin and his writings in his own History of the Church. Eusebius lived in the late third and early fourth centuries of the common era and is known as a historian of the early church. Regarding Justin, Eusebius wrote, “But Justin was the most noted of those that flourished in those times, who, in the guise of a philosopher, preached the truth of God, and contended for the faith, also, in his writings.” 149 While Eusebius was by no means a contemporary of Justin, he was credited with knowing more than most about the fathers of the church; here, he is describing Justin as essentially a Christian philosopher, or at least as someone who used elements of philosophy to teach Christianity. And teach he did; students came from across the empire to study under Justin’s school of Christian philosophical thought. Among his most famous pupils was Tatian, who was eventually deemed a heretic by the church in the years after Justin’s death. Tatian was deemed a heretic by traditional Christians because he had particular unpopular views about Gnosticism as a subsect within Christianity. He flew too close to the sun, attempting to intertwine proto-orthodox ideas with Gnostic ideas.

While Justin did not hold unpopular opinions to that degree, he did engage in a lot of debate among his contemporaries over his views of Christianity as a philosophy.

Later in life, Justin himself became a martyr, something he predicted would be his fate in his First Apology. His ideas were not only discussed by his fellow Christians, but by other

148 Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 173. 149 Eusebius, The History of the Church IV.16-18.16-19. 64 philosophers of his time as well. Crescens the Cynic was a philosopher who often criticized

Christians. He and Justin engaged in many public debates over each other’s ideas. Because of their contentious history, Eusebius believed Crescens was the reason Justin was executed. In his

History of the Church, Eusebius claims Crescens reported Justin to authorities under the imperial reign of Marcus Aurelias. 150 Following the martyrs he admired, Justin did not denounce

Christianity when he was faced with death, and he was killed around 162 C.E. While the tale of

Justin’s martyrdom as told by Eusebius may not be the entire truth, Justin did indeed follow in the footsteps of the Christians who moved him to conversion, perhaps sparking an interest of

Christianity in others through his own acceptance of death as part of the one true philosophy.

Clement of Alexandria was not eventually persecuted as Justin was, but Clement’s relationship with Christianity began similarly to that of Justin’s. While he held martyrdom in high regard, he made an important distinction that Christians were not to volunteer themselves for martyrdom. Clement was born a polytheist, but he claims to have never truly embraced the practices. Unsatisfied with it, he traveled in order to find a form of education that piqued his interest and offered something of a moral code, an element he could not find in polytheistic rituals. 151 According to his writing in Outlines, Clement traveled through Greece, Italy, the

Levant, and Egypt. He became fascinated with a man he met in Egypt, Pantaenus. Pantaenus, like Clement, was a Stoic convert to Christianity. He became an early theologian who taught in

Egypt at the Catechetical School of Alexandria. While studying under Pantaenus, Clement’s passion for Christian teachings became more and more pronounced. Eventually, Pantaenus

150 Eusebius, The History of the Church IV.16-18.16-19. 151 Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 252-253. 65 handed over the Catechetical School to him, and Clement became a teacher of philosophical

Christianity in Egypt.152

He was a proponent of converting polytheists to Christianity; Clement believed it was part of the essential duty of being a Christian. In Miscellanies, Clement argues that the one thing that will set Christianity apart from Greek philosophy will be its far reach. 153 Alexandria itself was ripe with opportunities for conversion, and Clement understood this. First, the city was located at a port, with a location accessible for trade between the eastern Mediterranean and locations beyond the Red Sea. 154 By establishing a school where many people with different backgrounds and cultures were coming through, the Catechetical School had the opportunity to convert many different types of people. Alexandria was also an intellectual capital, and upon taking over the school from Pantaenus, Clement aimed to target “Alexandrian Greeks” for conversion.

Like Justin, Clement strongly believed Christianity was the end goal of philosophy, which is why he decided to attempt to appeal to those intellectuals who had studied Greek philosophy. If Greek philosophy and Christianity coincided at one point or another, that would mean God had spoken to those who studied Greek philosophy. 155 This logic would pique the interest in Christianity of philosophical followers; By teaching Christianity, Clement was only adding onto something they already knew. Even on small levels, Clement compared Christian

152 Eusebius, The History of the Church V.12. 153 Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 286. Frend notes a quote from Clement’s Miscellenies where he says, “The word of our teacher did not stay in Palestine as philosophy stayed in Greece, but was poured out over all the world persuading Greeks and barbarians alike,” which explains what Clement means by spreading Christianity more than philosophy was spread throughout the classical era. 154 Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 286. 155 Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 370. 66 practices to philosophical education. In his Exhortation to the Greeks, Clement writes an anecdote about Amphion and Orpheus. Amphion, in Greek mythology, was a hero who had the gift from Hermes of playing the lyre. Similarly, Orpheus also had the gift of music through playing the lyre and through his voice. In classical myth, their music was so beautiful, both

Amphion and Orpheus had the ability to coax animals and nature to move or to perform certain actions. 156 Clement used the tales of these two mythological characters to say the only thing that surpasses the music of Amphion and Orphus is the music of heaven; in other words, Christianity is just a better version of mythology. Clement drew inspiration into his teaching from across different philosophical thought. Learning under Pantaenus, however, who was a converted Stoic philosopher, meant many of Clement’s ideas found roots in Stoicism.

Since Stoicism is based on the qualities of virtue and morality, this is what led Clement to believe Christianity was the fully evolved form of classical Stoicism. His outlook on Christianity was optimistic, believing that all people were created to be good and moral; it is just a matter of if the human will choose to work toward perfection or work toward negation. 157 To be a

Christian, Clement believed like Justin, one had to practice morality as it was an integral component of the religion. Part of keeping morality within the church, for Clement, was making sure martyrdom was not mistaken for suicide. He supported martyrdom as an integral part of

Christianity, knowing that it was actually a way most polytheists learned about Christianity. 158

But in his writing, Stromaties, Clement points out a problem that could arise out of martyrdom.

To begin, Clement describes his own definition of the word martyrdom, which to him simply

156 Alexander Krappe, “The Legend of Amphion,” The Classical Journal 21. 1 (1925): 21-28. 157 Frend, The Rise of Christianity 371. 158 G.W. Bowersock, Martyrdom and Rome (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 66. 67 means “a confession of faith in God…” 159 He does not necessarily mention death as a central component of what martyrdom actually was, which is very different from the definitions of others. Eventually, he writes about martyrdom in the sacrificial sense that is most associated with

Christianity. 160 Clement felt strongly about wanting martyrdom to be used in the sense of

“bearing witness,” not just simply as an “empty death.” 161 Clement described martyrdom as an exhibition of perfection, as it is the ultimate devotion of love. 162 Perfection is something philosophers and Stoics strived for throughout their lives, and in order for them to achieve their perfection, they had to live good lives.

Clement suggests that to achieve “the good” in life, one must live through righteousness.

Therefore, if someone is poor or if someone is persecuted and denied glory from the material world because of their love of God, they will be blessed. 163 Clement also believes that if a

Christian knows themselves, meaning they have repented sins they have committed and followed in their faith, they can save their soul. He elaborates by citing Stoics as well as Plato. According to Clement, Stoics believed that individuals would truly know themselves once “the soul [is] being changed to wisdom.” 164 He goes on to mention that philosophers allow a man who has lived a good life to “exit the world” so long as there is reason. For Christians, if they are faced with death, they must choose between “…the menaces of man or the love of God.” If they know

159 Clement of Alexandria, Stromaties III.1.4. 160 Bowersock, Martyrdom and Rome, 70. Here, Bowersock quotes Celment in Stromaties as saying with certainty, “For we too condemn those who have leapt into death. People who throw themselves in harm’s way are not really Christians, although they share the same Christian name.” 161 Bowersock, Martyrdom and Rome 70. 162 Clement of Alexandria, Stromaties IV.4.2. 163 Clement of Alexandria, Stromaties IV.6.1. 164 Clement of Alexandria, Stromaties IV.6.2. 68 themselves, have wisdom within their soul, and intend to exit the world after a good life, they must choose death in the name of loving God. 165

Clement recognized the broad definition of martyrdom in its rawest form was essential for Christianity, as every worshiper had to confess their devotion, but, logistically, not every

Christian should sacrifice for the church. “It is necessary for everyone to confess, for this lies in our own hands, but it is not necessary for everyone to make a [sacrifice], for this is not a matter that lies in our own hands.” In other words, only those who are persecuted after being discovered, not of their own volition, should die for Christianity. Clement explicitly opposed suicide in the form of martyrdom, even stating it is not a confession of love of God, rather self- murder. In fact, even if an individual claimed to be a Christian and was murdered publically for doing so, Clement did not consider them a martyr, calling it a “vain death.” 166 In supporting his theory, Clement references writing from Plato in his Republic advising against self-harm. 167

Then, in order to find the truth of the world, one must live a healthy life. Suicide, even indirectly, as he stated, is not a part of Christianity. It is interesting to note that Ignatius of Antioch, discussed in the previous chapter, would probably be condemned as a voluntary martyr by

Clement. Later in life, Clement himself did witness the involuntary persecution of Christians under the reign of the emperor, Septimus Severus. 168 In around 203 C.E., Clement was forced to flee Alexandria when there were violent executions of Christians throughout the city. Not much is known of his whereabouts until his death in 215 C.E.

165 Clement of Alexandria, Stromaties IV.6.2. 166 Clement of Alexandria, Stromaties IV.6.4. 167 The quote Clement incorporates states, “that for the sake of harmony of soul, care must be taken for the body,” which implies to have a healthy soul, you should not intentionally hurt your body. 168 Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 293. Here, Frend also mentions the persecutions Clement witnessed were brutal. According to Frend, he recalled “roastings, impalings, and beheadings.” 69

When Clement was teaching at the Catechetical School of Alexandria, one of his pupils was the eventual theologian, Origen. Origen lived from 184 C.E. until 253 C.E. and spent most of his life in Alexandria. Origen examined martyrdom as a spiritual war that Christians would fight. Unlike Clement and Justin, Origen was born into a Christian family, so he did not have the experience of conversion to draw on for his writing. Most of the known information about

Origen comes from Eusebius in The History of the Church. Even though Eusebius was writing nearly 50 years after Origen’s death, he provides highly detailed accounts of Origen’s life enthusiastically. 169 Based on the words of Eusebius, Christianity was a major part of Origen’s early life and his family. When he was young, Origen’s Christian family lived under the reign of

Emperor Septimus Severus, who ordered the persecution of practicing Christians living throughout the empire. During that persecution, Origen’s father was imprisoned. 170

According to Eusebius, Origen was somewhat enthralled with martyrdom even at his young age, so he was willing to go with his father to die for his religion. However, his mother prevented it by hiding all of his clothes from him so he was not able to leave the house. In a letter, Origen wrote to his father, urging him to stay true to what he believed, and not to change his mind to take care of Origen’s mother or himself and his siblings. After his father’s death,

Origen and his mother were destitute. 171 However, he was lucky enough to have been adopted and taken in by a wealthy woman, by whom he was raised as well as had his education sponsored. After his education, Origen was approached by polytheistic individuals asking to hear

169 Eusebius, The History of the Church VI.1. The words Eusebius uses to describe the life of Origen illustrates the respect Origen had from leaders in the church. “There would be a great deal to say if one tried to give a full-length account of his life in writing: the record of his doings would fill up a whole book.” 170 Eusebius, The History of the Church VI.1-2. 171 Eusebius, The History of the Church VI.1-2. 70 about his religion and his God. As he taught Christianity, Origen held the practice of martyrdom in high regard, even somewhat starving himself and making himself uncomfortable in order to have the experience of suffering throughout his life. 172

After his father’s death, Origen included the practice of martyrdom into his writing as a major component of Christianity. To him, those Christians who approach martyrdom with courage are defeating the evil brought about in the world with their morals and virtues; not coincidentally, they are also two of the main themes focused on in Stoicism. Those who are subjected to persecution will face a struggle between the mind and body, and the morals of their mind must overcome. And, to the point of martyrs, when they are sacrificing themselves for their

God, they are illustrating a level of loyalty that is extreme in nature. 173 It is that level of dedication that Origen believed polytheists would see and be attracted to. If an individual is willing to give up their lives for something they believed in, whatever they support must be important. Even more generally, this is the main theory behind martyrdom.

Perhaps Origen’s most famous writing regarding the persecution of Christians under the

Roman Empire is his Exhortation on Martyrdom. It was written in about 235 C.E. by Origen under the reign of Emperor Maximin Thrax. 174 Maximin was a former general in the Roman army who took over the empire following the overthrow of Severus Alexander. Under

Alexander, Christians lived fairly well. While Alexander and his mother, Julia Mamea, were by no means Christians themselves, there is record of their interest in the religion. Origen himself even discussed Christianity with Alexander and his mother, and, whenever he was in Antioch,

172 Hans Urs Von Balthasar, Origen (New York: Paulist Press, 1979), 5. 173 Von Balthasar, Origen, 5-11. 174 John Anthony McGuckin, The Westminster Handbook to Origen (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2004), 39. 71

Julia would make sure Origen stayed with her. 175 Because of the tolerance of Christianity during this time, it was perceived by some, namely Maximin, as an internal threat to Rome. Therefore,

Maximin wanted to try and tamp down the rapidly growing religion as an attempt to contain it.

His methods were harsh, leading into another widespread persecution throughout Rome. 176 In doing this, a few of Origen’s contemporaries were caught up in persecution, particularly the

Priest Protoctetus and deacon Ambrose. 177 They were both captured during the round-up of the

Christians, and they served as the inspiration for Origen’s Exhortation. In his writing, he mentions both Protoctetus and Ambrose by name in his opening statements. He speaks to them as he once spoke to his father in his younger days when he was facing death. Origen acknowledges the affliction they are about to face, and encourages them not to refuse it, as those who do not refuse it receive hope in return. 178

The Exhortation proved Origen kept his thoughts about martyrdom steady throughout his lifetime. And while he incorporated philosophy into much of his theology, Origen actually does not directly mention schools of philosophy in the Exhortation. However, how Origen describes

Christian martyrdom relates to Stoic philosophy and how to properly and fearlessly approach death. Throughout his writing, Origen utilizes metaphors to help readers understand more clearly the practices of Christianity. Specifically, he alludes to martyrs as fighting all that is evil and bad in the world in almost a war-like posture. 179 Origen describes this as Christians being able to overcome temptation and evil from the outside through steadiness in their souls. That being said,

175 Paul Keresztes, “The Emperor Maximinus' Decree of 235 A.D.: Between Septimius Severus and Decius,” Latomus 28. 3 (1969): 601-618. 176 Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 309-310. 177 McGuckin, Westminster Handbook, 39. 178 Origen, Exhortation on Martyrdom I.2. 179 Von Balthasar, Origen, 20-21. 72 there is an eternal struggle between the body and soul if a Christian wishes to live this good life and work toward leading a moral one; again, something seen commonly in Stoic philosophy.

In the Exhortation, Origen speaks of this idea by stating that if one attempts to save his soul by giving into temptations of evil that surround him, he is not living like a Christian, and, will therefore lose his soul. But, those who accept martyrdom and remain a good worshiper in their lives will receive salvation. 180 For Origen, Christians needed to look into their soul in order to live a virtuous life and not give into outside temptation. 181 Origen emphasizes the idea of forbearance — or having self-control — restraint, and tolerance. In speaking about it, he quotes

Proverbs from the bible and how it states one who has forbearance also has understanding. 182

Origen says according to the Bible, Christians must illustrate a level of self-control in everything that approaches them. Presumably, this includes how they approach persecution and death. In addition, Christians were often times persecuted not solely because of their religion, but because their religion prevented them from worshiping the gods or performing rituals for them.

Therefore, it would be assumed if a Christian was facing persecution and stated his praise for the gods or other idols, he would be spared his life.

Origen speaks of this scenario in Exhortation. There is a struggle between knowing what is right within one’s soul, and giving into the temptation set forth by the persecutors. The virtuous and moral thing to do is to submit oneself to martyrdom; otherwise, they are “idolaters.”

183 True followers of Christianity should be able to find power within themselves to not feel

180 Origen, Exhortation on Martyrdom XII.1-3. 181 Von Balthasar, Origen, 20-21. 182 Origen, Exhortation on Martyrdom XLIII.1. The direct quote used states, “the man of forbearance has great understanding; but he who has a hasty temper is a fool.” 183 Origen, Exhortation on Martyrdom XXXII.1. Origen states Jesus Christ “empowers” followers to be able not to give into temptation, rather embrace martyrdom. 73 provoked into avoiding death. This fight put up by Christians that Origen describes is illustrated by Perpetua who was discussed in the previous chapter. She was sent into the amphitheater to be killed by beasts, but put up a very strong fight until she held the soldier’s sword to her throat herself. Those doing the provoking, Origen labels as “the Enemy,” and are either used by the

Devil’s followers, or the Devil himself. Clearly, there was no devil in Stoic philosophy, but the idea was, if one leads a good life, they would be rewarded. As Origen references, the book of

Matthew in the Bible had a similar message. 184 In essence, Origen quotes a passage saying that it is not worth giving up one’s soul if it is only to gain status or material in the world. This emphasis on the soul as a guide to leading a moral life falls in line with the Stoic ideas of keeping oneself virtuous by following one’s soul instead of giving into struggles put into place onto the body. 185

Martyrdom was a central component to the curriculum and construction of Justin,

Clement, and Origen’s philosophical Christian thought. However, it is important to note the differences and similarities in the ways each individual characterizes the action. All three, and

Tertullian as well, believed what characterized a good martyr in death was their serene and courageous nature. 186 Justin sees martyrdom as the completeness of Christianity — what makes it the one true philosophy. Clement believes in a more peace driven definition of a martyr by completing their duty to their religion by trusting their good soul. To him, martyrdom is not

184 Origen, Exhortation on Martyrdom XII.1. Origen quotes Matthew 16:26-27, which states, “For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what ransom shall a man give in return for his soul? For the Son of Man is to come with His angels in the glory of His Father, and then He will repay every one for what he has done.” 185 Campbell, “Self-Mastery and Stoic Ethics,” 328. 186 It is actually quite peculiar how Tertullian views martyrdom similarly to the Christian-philosophers, but does not believe there is an intersection between the two. This is especially true when thinking about how he was likely educated in a paideia curriculum, or a Hellenistic curriculum. 74 violent in nature; rather, dying for Christ is a confession, not a war. However, for Origen, it is more of a fight, illustrating martyrs as soldiers of Christ who are at war, standing in the face of pure evil. While they all have these nuances to the practice of martyrdom, it does not change that it is the solid link for each apologist holding together their philosophical-Christian thoughts.

75

Conclusion

Christianity had to evolve over several hundred years to become a somewhat cohesive entity founded on a universally “accepted” doctrine. As it has become the largest religion worldwide today, it is interesting to look at its roots. This thesis examined the role of martyrdom within the early Christian church and how it interplayed with the already existing Greco-Roman culture. Specifically, it looked at the cross-cultural respect and admiration of the heroic death.

This work is important because it shows how this groundwork found in early Christianity relied on the already existing public understanding of what selfless sacrifice meant. With only a quick glance, it can seem like the early church was senselessly attacked and isolated from the rest of the Roman empire. However, Christianity did not grow in a vacuum; it relied on an interplay between its original ideas and practices and the cultural milieu of the Roman empire. There was a level of interaction between traditional Greco-Roman ideas and new Christian practices seen specifically in martyrdom.

For the purposes of this thesis, the 3rd century of the common era marked an appropriate stopping point. The conversion of Constantine in the early 4th century meant not only that the religion was accepted by the empire and therefore persecution subsided, but also that a “correct” or orthodox belief system would have imperial support. For the first time, Christianity would have strong leadership with the support of the emperor. The Council of Nicaea in 325 C.E. was convened by Emperor Constantine so church leaders could gather in one place to discuss what the “correct” belief system should be. It was specifically called to deal with the issue of 76

Arianism. Arianism, named after the Christian teacher Arius who popularized the idea, was a faction within Christianity that believed Jesus was a created being and therefore less than God the Father. This belief came into conflict with what would eventually become the “orthodox” belief of the Holy Trinity consisting of three separate, co-equal, and co-eternal beings in one God head. 187

Constantine, newly converted, called the Council of Nicaea. The exact number of bishops in attendance is unknown, though Eusebius claimed to have counted 250 of the 1,800 invited.

Those in attendance included Alexander of Alexandria and Eustathius of Antioch, two prominent bishops from major Christian sects. At the Council, much was discussed including the Arian question, the date of Easter, as well as other church doctrine questions like what Christianity’s link to Judaism should be. 188 While the Council was ultimately unable to establish a belief system that every follower would immediately adopt, it did solidify most of the ideas found in

“proto-orthodox” church factions as “correct.”

In reality, the term orthodoxy is problematic in and of itself. Orthodoxy means “a correct belief” or doctrine, as established by the church leaders. However, that does not mean every person who considered themselves a Christian completely followed that “correct” belief system.

There would continue to be divisions within Christianity over doctrine, some of which continue to this day. Christians who have different beliefs of what is “correct” all still practice

Christianity, and the same is true for those who argued different doctrinal points in the early church. Origen and Tertullian may have had different ideas about whether Christianity should be linked to philosophy, but both still considered themselves Christians. Ironically, while both are

187 W.H.C. Frend, The Rise of Christianity (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984), 493-495. 188 Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 498-500. 77 considered “Fathers of the Church,” some of their teachings were also condemned at a later time for being heretical. So while there would continue to be internal arguments over aspects of

Christianity in the future, the Council of Nicaea provided a dominant, doctrinal basis for the religion and opened a new era of church-state relations.

Christianity did not exist in an ideological vacuum; rather, it existed as a nexus of thoughts and ideas within the multi-ethnic, multi-faith structure of the Roman empire. People like Justin, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen showed how martyrdom, an important aspect of

Christianity, share similarities with ideals praised in Greco-Roman culture. There exists a cross- cultural connection between the martyrdom accounts of some of the early Christian martyrs and the accounts of the death of Socrates, the myth of Lucrecia, and the Maccabean revolt. This common theme of a virtuous and Stoic death can be traced through Greco-Roman culture as well as early Christianity, suggesting a cross-cultural value of the heroic death.

82

BIBLIOGRAPHY

SECONDARY SOURCES

Anderson, Graham. The Second Sophistic A Cultural Phenomenon in the Roman Empire

London: Routledge Press, 1993.

Barnard, L.W. Justin Martyr His Life and Thought, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

1967.

Bowersock, G.W. Martyrdom and Rome Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

Campbell, Keith. “Self-Mastery and Stoic Ethics.” Philosophy 60. 233 (Jul., 1985): 327-340.

Ehrman, Bart D. The Apostolic Fathers, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003.

Frend, W.H.C. Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church. Oxford: Alden Press, 1965.

Frend, W.H.C. The Rise of Christianity. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984.

Gruen, Erich S. "Hellenism and Persecution: Antiochus IV and the Jews." In The Construct of

Identity in Hellenistic Judaism: Essays on Early Jewish Literature and History, Berlin;

Boston: De Gruyter, 2016, 333-58.

Janko, Richard. "God, Science, and Socrates." Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 46

(2002): 1-18.

Keresztes, Paul. “The Emperor Maximinus' Decree of 235 A.D.: Between Septimius Severus and

Decius.” Latomus 28. 3 (1969): 601-618.

Krappe, Alexander. “The Legend of Amphion.” The Classical Journal 21. 1 (1925): 21-28.

Lapidge, Michael. The Roman Martyrs, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018.

MacPhail, Eric. “Montaigne and the Trial of Socrates.” Bibliotéque d’Humanisme et Renaissance 83

63. 3 (2001): 457-475.

McGuckin, John Anthony. The Westminster Handbook to Origen, Louisville: Westminster John

Knox Press, 2004.

McKenzie, Leah. "Patterns In Seleucid Administration: Macedonian or Near Eastern?"

Mediterranean Archaeology 7. (1994): 61-68.

Moss, Candida R. "Nailing Down and Tying Up: Lessons in Intertextual Impossibility from the

‘Martyrdom of Polycarp.’" Vigiliae Christianae 67. 2 (2013): 117-36.

Muckelbauer, John. “Sophistic Travel: Inheriting the Simulacrum through Plato’s ‘The

Sophist.’” Philosophy & Rhetoric 34. 3 (2001): 225-244.

Pollack, Frederick. “Marcus Aurelius and the Stoic Philosophy.” Mind 4. 13 (Jan., 1879): 47-68.

Rebillard, Éric. Greek and Latin Narratives About the Ancient Martyrs, Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2017.

Sanders, E.P. Jesus and Judaism, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985.

Schmid, Konrad. The Old Testament, A Literary History, Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2012.

Schocat, Yanir. “The Change in the Roman Religion at the Time of the Emperor Trajan,”

Latomus 44. 2 (1985): 316-336.

Takács, Sarlota A. “Politics and Religion in the Bacchanalian Affair of 186 B.C.E.” Harvard

Studies in Classical Philology 100. (2000): 301-310.

Taylor, A.E. Socrates, Garden City: Doubleday Press, 1953.

Vierow, Heidi. “Feminine and Masculine Voices in the ‘Passion of Saints Perpetua and

Felicitas.’” Latomus 58. 3 (1999): 600-619.

Von Balthasar, Hans Urs. Origen New York: Paulist Press, 1979.

84

PRIMARY SOURCES

Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies. Translated by Fenton John Anthony Hort, and Joseph B.

Mayor. New York, NY: Garland Press, 1987.

Clement of Alexandria, Stromaties. Translated by John Ferguson. Washington D.C.: Catholic

University of America Press, 1991.

Eusebius, The History of the Church. Translated by G.A. Williamson. Baltimore, MD: Penguin

Books, 1965.

Hebrew Bible. Translated by Robert Alter. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company, 2019.

Ignatius, Letter to the Magnesians. Translated by Bart Ehrman. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press, 2003.

Ignatius, Letter to the Romans. Translated by Bart Ehrman. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University

Press, 2003.

Ignatius, Letter to the Trallians. Translated by Bart Ehrman. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press, 2003.

Justin Martyr, First Apology. Translated by Thomas B. Falls. Washington D.C.: Catholic

University of America Press, 2008.

Justin Martyr, Second Apology. Translated by Thomas B. Falls. Washington D.C.: Catholic

University of America Press, 2008.

Livy. The History of Rome. Translated by P.G. Walsh. Warminster, England: Aris & Phillips

Ltd., 1994.

Martyrdoms of Perpetua and Felicitas. Translated by Éric Rebillard. Oxford, England: Oxford

University Press, 2017.

Minucius Felix. Octavius. Translated by G.W. Clarke. New York, NY: Newman Press, 1974. 85

Origen, Exhortation on Martyrdom. Translated by Hans Urs. Von Balthasar. New York, NY:

Paulist Press, 1979.

Paul, Letter from Paul to the Colossians. Translated by George Thompson. Cambridge, England:

Cambridge University Press, 1967.

Plato, Phaedo. Translated by John Warrington. London, England: Aldine Press, 1963.

Pliny the Younger, Letter to Emperor Trajan. Translated by Betty Radice. Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University Press, 1969.

Tacitus, The Annals. Translated by John Jackson. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,

1937.

Tertullian, Apologeticus. Translated by Rudolph Arbesmann, Emily Joseph Daly, and Edwin A.

Quain. Washington D.C.: Catholic University of America, 1962.

Tertullian, Prescription Against Heretics. Translated by Peter Holmes. Lighthouse Publishing,

2018.

The Acts of the Apostles. Translated by Joseph Fitzmyer. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press,

1998.

The Martyrdom of Polycarp. Translated by Herbert Musurillo. Oxford, England: Clarendon

Press, 1972.

ACADEMIC VITA

Education The Pennsylvania State University, Schreyer Honors College, University Park, Pa

Bachelor of Arts, History in Honors, Classics and Ancient Mediterranean Studies, and Political Science Minor, English

Experience The Office of Senator Robert Casey, Washington D.C. July 2018 – August 2018 Legislative and Office Intern

The Pennsylvania Democratic Party, State College, Pa August 2016 – November 2016 Fall Campaign Fellow

Program for Public Consultation/Voice of the People, Washington D.C. June 2016 – August 2016 Research Intern

Leadership and Involvement State College Area School District January 2018 – May 2018 Tutor

The Daily Collegian Art and Lifestyle Editor January 2019 – May 2019 Opinions Editor August 2018 – January 2019 Columnist January 2018 – May 2018 Assistant Copy Desk Chief August 2017 – December 2017 Senior Campus and Lifestyle Reporter January 2016 – Fall 2016

UNICEF at Penn State Fall 2015 – Spring 2018 Secretary and Active Member

For the Service – A travel and service organization at Penn State Fall 2016 – December 2018 Secretary and Co-Founder

Global Experience and Honors Athens, Greece Semester Study Abroad Program, Global Penn State Spring Semester 2017 London, England, Literary London Study Abroad Program, Global Penn State Summer 2018 Paterno Fellow and Schreyer Scholar, Penn State University Member, History Major Honor Fraternity, Phi Alpha Theta