History of the World/History of the World (Bureau Development, Inc.)(1992).BIN/dp/0158/01582.txt

Text File | 1992-10-11 | 34KB | 521 lines

$Unique_ID{how01582}
$Pretitle{}
$Title{History Of The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire
Part V.}
$Subtitle{}
$Author{Gibbon, Edward}
$Affiliation{}
$Subject{athanasius
footnote
tom
bishops
constantius
emperor
church
might
alexandria
bishop}
$Date{1782 (Written), 1845 (Revised)}
$Log{}
Title:       History Of The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire
Book:        Chapter XXI: Persecution Of Heresy, State Of The Church.
Author:      Gibbon, Edward
Date:        1782 (Written), 1845 (Revised)

Part V.

     But the injustice of these ecclesiastical judges had not been
countenanced by the submission, or even by the presence, of Athanasius.  He
resolved to make a bold and dangerous experiment, whether the throne was
inaccessible to the voice of truth; and before the final sentence could be
pronounced at Tyre, the intrepid primate threw himself into a bark which was
ready to hoist sail for the Imperial city.  The request of a formal audience
might have been opposed or eluded; but Athanasius concealed his arrival,
watched the moment of Constantine's return from an adjacent villa, and boldly
encountered his angry sovereign as he passed on horseback through the
principal street of Constantinople.  So strange an apparition excited his
surprise and indignation; and the guards were ordered to remove the
importunate suitor; but his resentment was subdued by involuntary respect; and
the haughty spirit of the emperor was awed by the courage and eloquence of a
bishop, who implored his justice and awakened his conscience. ^107 Constantine
listened to the complaints of Athanasius with impartial and even gracious
attention; the members of the synod of Tyre were summoned to justify their
proceedings; and the arts of the Eusebian faction would have been confounded,
if they had not aggravated the guilt of the primate, by the dexterous
supposition of an unpardonable offence; a criminal design to intercept and
detain the corn-fleet of Alexandria, which supplied the subsistence of the new
capital. ^108 The emperor was satisfied that the peace of Egypt would be
secured by the absence of a popular leader; but he refused to fill the vacancy
of the archiepiscopal throne; and the sentence, which, after long hesitation,
he pronounced, was that of a jealous ostracism, rather than of an ignominious
exile.  In the remote province of Gaul, but in the hospitable court of Treves,
Athanasius passed about twenty eight months.  The death of the emperor changed
the face of public affairs and, amidst the general indulgence of a young
reign, the primate was restored to his country by an honorable edict of the
younger Constantine, who expressed a deep sense of the innocence and merit of
his venerable guest. ^109

[Footnote 107: Athanas. tom. i. p. 804.  In a church dedicated to St.
Athanasius this situation would afford a better subject for a picture, than
most of the stories of miracles and martyrdoms.]

[Footnote 108: Athanas. tom. i. p. 729.  Eunapius has related (in Vit.
Sophist. p. 36, 37, edit. Commelin) a strange example of the cruelty and
credulity of Constantine on a similar occasion.  The eloquent Sopater, a
Syrian philosopher, enjoyed his friendship, and provoked the resentment of
Ablavius, his Praetorian praefect.  The corn-fleet was detained for want of a
south wind; the people of Constantinople were discontented; and Sopater was
beheaded, on a charge that he had bound the winds by the power of magic.
Suidas adds, that Constantine wished to prove, by this execution, that he had
absolutely renounced the superstition of the Gentiles.]

[Footnote 109: In his return he saw Constantius twice, at Viminiacum, and at
Caesarea in Cappadocia, (Athanas. tom. i. p. 676.) Tillemont supposes that
Constantine introduced him to the meeting of the three royal brothers in
Pannonia, (Memoires Eccles. tom. viii. p. 69.)]

     The death of that prince exposed Athanasius to a second persecution; and
the feeble Constantius, the sovereign of the East, soon became the secret
accomplice of the Eusebians.  Ninety bishops of that sect or faction assembled
at Antioch, under the specious pretence of dedicating the cathedral.  They
composed an ambiguous creed, which is faintly tinged with the colors of
Semi-Arianism, and twenty-five canons, which still regulate the discipline of
the orthodox Greeks. ^110 It was decided, with some appearance of equity, that
a bishop, deprived by a synod, should not resume his episcopal functions till
he had been absolved by the judgment of an equal synod; the law was
immediately applied to the case of Athanasius; the council of Antioch
pronounced, or rather confirmed, his degradation: a stranger, named Gregory,
was seated on his throne; and Philagrius, ^111 the praefect of Egypt, was
instructed to support the new primate with the civil and military powers of
the province.  Oppressed by the conspiracy of the Asiatic prelates, Athanasius
withdrew from Alexandria, and passed three years ^112 as an exile and a
suppliant on the holy threshold of the Vatican. ^113 By the assiduous study of
the Latin language, he soon qualified himself to negotiate with the western
clergy; his decent flattery swayed and directed the haughty Julius; the Roman
pontiff was persuaded to consider his appeal as the peculiar interest of the
Apostolic see: and his innocence was unanimously declared in a council of
fifty bishops of Italy. At the end of three years, the primate was summoned to
the court of Milan by the emperor Constans, who, in the indulgence of unlawful
pleasures, still professed a lively regard for the orthodox faith.  The cause
of truth and justice was promoted by the influence of gold, ^114 and the
ministers of Constans advised their sovereign to require the convocation of an
ecclesiastical assembly, which might act as the representatives of the
Catholic church.  Ninety-four bishops of the West, seventy-six bishops of the
East, encountered each other at Sardica, on the verge of the two empires, but
in the dominions of the protector of Athanasius.  Their debates soon
degenerated into hostile altercations; the Asiatics, apprehensive for their
personal safety, retired to Philippopolis in Thrace; and the rival synods
reciprocally hurled their spiritual thunders against their enemies, whom they
piously condemned as the enemies of the true God. Their decrees were published
and ratified in their respective provinces: and Athanasius, who in the West
was revered as a saint, was exposed as a criminal to the abhorrence of the
East. ^115 The council of Sardica reveals the first symptoms of discord and
schism between the Greek and Latin churches which were separated by the
accidental difference of faith, and the permanent distinction of language.

[Footnote 110: See Beveridge, Pandect. tom. i. p. 429-452, and tom. ii.
Annotation. p. 182.  Tillemont, Mem. Eccles. tom. vi. p. 310-324.  St. Hilary
of Poitiers has mentioned this synod of Antioch with too much favor and
respect.  He reckons ninety-seven bishops.]

[Footnote 111: This magistrate, so odious to Athanasius, is praised by Gregory
Nazianzen, tom. i. Orat. xxi. p. 390, 391.

     Saepe premente Deo fert Deus alter opem.

For the credit of human nature, I am always pleased to discover some good
qualities in those men whom party has represented as tyrants and monsters.]

[Footnote 112: The chronological difficulties which perplex the residence of
Athanasius at Rome, are strenuously agitated by Valesius (Observat ad Calcem,
tom. ii. Hist. Eccles. l. i. c. 1-5) and Tillemont, (Men: Eccles. tom. viii.
p. 674, &c.) I have followed the simple hypothesis of Valesius, who allows
only one journey, after the intrusion Gregory.]

[Footnote 113: I cannot forbear transcribing a judicious observation of
Wetstein, (Prolegomen. N.S. p. 19: ) Si tamen Historiam Ecclesiasticam velimus
consulere, patebit jam inde a seculo quarto, cum, ortis controversiis,
ecclesiae Graeciae doctores in duas partes scinderentur, ingenio, eloquentia,
numero, tantum non aequales, eam partem quae vincere cupiebat Romam
confugisse, majestatemque pontificis comiter coluisse, eoque pacto oppressis
per pontificem et episcopos Latinos adversariis praevaluisse, atque
orthodoxiam in conciliis stabilivisse.  Eam ob causam Athanasius, non sine
comitatu, Roman petiit, pluresque annos ibi haesit.]

[Footnote 114: Philostorgius, l. iii. c. 12.  If any corruption was used to
promote the interest of religion, an advocate of Athanasius might justify or
excuse this questionable conduct, by the example of Cato and Sidney; the
former of whom is said to have given, and the latter to have received, a bribe
in the cause of liberty.]

[Footnote 115: The canon which allows appeals to the Roman pontiffs, has
almost raised the council of Sardica to the dignity of a general council; and
its acts have been ignorantly or artfully confounded with those of the Nicene
synod.  See Tillemont, tom. vii. p. 689, and Geddos's Tracts, vol. ii. p.
419-460.]

     During his second exile in the West, Athanasius was frequently admitted
to the Imperial presence; at Capua, Lodi, Milan, Verona, Padua, Aquileia, and
Treves.  The bishop of the diocese usually assisted at these interviews; the
master of the offices stood before the veil or curtain of the sacred
apartment; and the uniform moderation of the primate might be attested by
these respectable witnesses, to whose evidence he solemnly appeals. ^116
Prudence would undoubtedly suggest the mild and respectful tone that became a
subject and a bishop.  In these familiar conferences with the sovereign of the
West, Athanasius might lament the error of Constantius, but he boldly
arraigned the guilt of his eunuchs and his Arian prelates; deplored the
distress and danger of the Catholic church; and excited Constans to emulate
the zeal and glory of his father.  The emperor declared his resolution of
employing the troops and treasures of Europe in the orthodox cause; and
signified, by a concise and peremptory epistle to his brother Constantius,
that unless he consented to the immediate restoration of Athanasius, he
himself, with a fleet and army, would seat the archbishop on the throne of
Alexandria. ^117 But this religious war, so horrible to nature, was prevented
by the timely compliance of Constantius; and the emperor of the East
condescended to solicit a reconciliation with a subject whom he had injured.
Athanasius waited with decent pride, till he had received three successive
epistles full of the strongest assurances of the protection, the favor, and
the esteem of his sovereign; who invited him to resume his episcopal seat, and
who added the humiliating precaution of engaging his principal ministers to
attest the sincerity of his intentions. They were manifested in a still more
public manner, by the strict orders which were despatched into Egypt to recall
the adherents of Athanasius, to restore their privileges, to proclaim their
innocence, and to erase from the public registers the illegal proceedings
which had been obtained during the prevalence of the Eusebian faction.  After
every satisfaction and security had been given, which justice or even delicacy
could require, the primate proceeded, by slow journeys, through the provinces
of Thrace, Asia, and Syria; and his progress was marked by the abject homage
of the Oriental bishops, who excited his contempt without deceiving his
penetration. ^118 At Antioch he saw the emperor Constantius; sustained, with
modest firmness, the embraces and protestations of his master, and eluded the
proposal of allowing the Arians a single church at Alexandria, by claiming, in
the other cities of the empire, a similar toleration for his own party; a
reply which might have appeared just and moderate in the mouth of an
independent prince.  The entrance of the archbishop into his capital was a
triumphal procession; absence and persecution had endeared him to the
Alexandrians; his authority, which he exercised with rigor, was more firmly
established; and his fame was diffused from Aethiopia to Britain, over the
whole extent of the Christian world. ^119

[Footnote 116: As Athanasius dispersed secret invectives against Constantius,
(see the Epistle to the Monks,) at the same time that he assured him of his
profound respect, we might distrust the professions of the archbishop.  Tom.
i. p. 677.]

[Footnote 117: Notwithstanding the discreet silence of Athanasius, and the
manifest forgery of a letter inserted by Socrates, these menaces are proved by
the unquestionable evidence of Lucifer of Cagliari, and even of Constantius
himself.  See Tillemont, tom. viii. p. 693]

[Footnote 118: I have always entertained some doubts concerning the retraction
of Ursacius and Valens, (Athanas. tom. i. p. 776.) Their epistles to Julius,
bishop of Rome, and to Athanasius himself, are of so different a cast from
each other, that they cannot both be genuine.  The one speaks the language of
criminals who confess their guilt and infamy; the other of enemies, who
solicit on equal terms an honorable reconciliation.

     Note: I cannot quite comprehend the ground of Gibbon's doubts. Athanasius
distinctly asserts the fact of their retractation.  (Athan. Op. i. p. 124,
edit. Benedict.) The epistles are apparently translations from the Latin, if,
in fact, more than the substance of the epistles.  That to Athanasius is
brief, almost abrupt.  Their retractation is likewise mentioned in the address
of the orthodox bishops of Rimini to Constantius. Athan. de Synodis, Op t. i.
p 723-M.]

[Footnote 119: The circumstances of his second return may be collected from
Athanasius himself, tom. i. p. 769, and 822, 843.  Socrates, l. ii. c. 18,
Sozomen, l. iii. c. 19. Theodoret, l. ii. c. 11, 12.  Philostorgius, l. iii.
c. 12.]

     But the subject who has reduced his prince to the necessity of
dissembling, can never expect a sincere and lasting forgiveness; and the
tragic fate of Constans soon deprived Athanasius of a powerful and generous
protector.  The civil war between the assassin and the only surviving brother
of Constans, which afflicted the empire above three years, secured an interval
of repose to the Catholic church; and the two contending parties were desirous
to conciliate the friendship of a bishop, who, by the weight of his personal
authority, might determine the fluctuating resolutions of an important
province.  He gave audience to the ambassadors of the tyrant, with whom he was
afterwards accused of holding a secret correspondence; ^120 and the emperor
Constantius repeatedly assured his dearest father, the most reverend
Athanasius, that, notwithstanding the malicious rumors which were circulated
by their common enemies, he had inherited the sentiments, as well as the
throne, of his deceased brother. ^121 Gratitude and humanity would have
disposed the primate of Egypt to deplore the untimely fate of Constans, and to
abhor the guilt of Magnentius; but as he clearly understood that the
apprehensions of Constantius were his only safeguard, the fervor of his
prayers for the success of the righteous cause might perhaps be somewhat
abated.  The ruin of Athanasius was no longer contrived by the obscure malice
of a few bigoted or angry bishops, who abused the authority of a credulous
monarch. The monarch himself avowed the resolution, which he had so long
suppressed, of avenging his private injuries; ^122 and the first winter after
his victory, which he passed at Arles, was employed against an enemy more
odious to him than the vanquished tyrant of Gaul.

[Footnote 120: Athanasius (tom. i. p. 677, 678) defends his innocence by
pathetic complaints, solemn assertions, and specious arguments.  He admits
that letters had been forged in his name, but he requests that his own
secretaries and those of the tyrant might be examined, whether those letters
had been written by the former, or received by the latter.]

[Footnote 121: Athanas. tom. i. p. 825-844.]

[Footnote 122: Athanas. tom. i. p. 861.  Theodoret, l. ii. c. 16.  The emperor
declared that he was more desirous to subdue Athanasius, than he had been to
vanquish Magnentius or Sylvanus.]

     If the emperor had capriciously decreed the death of the most eminent and
virtuous citizen of the republic, the cruel order would have been executed
without hesitation, by the ministers of open violence or of specious
injustice.  The caution, the delay, the difficulty with which he proceeded in
the condemnation and punishment of a popular bishop, discovered to the world
that the privileges of the church had already revived a sense of order and
freedom in the Roman government.  The sentence which was pronounced in the
synod of Tyre, and subscribed by a large majority of the Eastern bishops, had
never been expressly repealed; and as Athanasius had been once degraded from
his episcopal dignity by the judgment of his brethren, every subsequent act
might be considered as irregular, and even criminal.  But the memory of the
firm and effectual support which the primate of Egypt had derived from the
attachment of the Western church, engaged Constantius to suspend the execution
of the sentence till he had obtained the concurrence of the Latin bishops.
Two years were consumed in ecclesiastical negotiations; and the important
cause between the emperor and one of his subjects was solemnly debated, first
in the synod of Arles, and afterwards in the great council of Milan, ^123
which consisted of above three hundred bishops.  Their integrity was gradually
undermined by the arguments of the Arians, the dexterity of the eunuchs, and
the pressing solicitations of a prince who gratified his revenge at the
expense of his dignity, and exposed his own passions, whilst he influenced
those of the clergy.  Corruption, the most infallible symptom of
constitutional liberty, was successfully practised; honors, gifts, and
immunities were offered and accepted as the price of an episcopal vote; ^124
and the condemnation of the Alexandrian primate was artfully represented as
the only measure which could restore the peace and union of the Catholic
church.  The friends of Athanasius were not, however, wanting to their leader,
or to their cause.  With a manly spirit, which the sanctity of their character
rendered less dangerous, they maintained, in public debate, and in private
conference with the emperor, the eternal obligation of religion and justice.
They declared, that neither the hope of his favor, nor the fear of his
displeasure, should prevail on them to join in the condemnation of an absent,
an innocent, a respectable brother. ^125 They affirmed, with apparent reason,
that the illegal and obsolete decrees of the council of Tyre had long since
been tacitly abolished by the Imperial edicts, the honorable reestablishment
of the archbishop of Alexandria, and the silence or recantation of his most
clamorous adversaries.  They alleged, that his innocence had been attested by
the unanimous bishops of Egypt, and had been acknowledged in the councils of
Rome and Sardica, ^126 by the impartial judgment of the Latin church.  They
deplored the hard condition of Athanasius, who, after enjoying so many years
his seat, his reputation, and the seeming confidence of his sovereign, was
again called upon to confute the most groundless and extravagant accusations.
Their language was specious; their conduct was honorable: but in this long and
obstinate contest, which fixed the eyes of the whole empire on a single
bishop, the ecclesiastical factions were prepared to sacrifice truth and
justice to the more interesting object of defending or removing the intrepid
champion of the Nicene faith.  The Arians still thought it prudent to
disguise, in ambiguous language, their real sentiments and designs; but the
orthodox bishops, armed with the favor of the people, and the decrees of a
general council, insisted on every occasion, and particularly at Milan, that
their adversaries should purge themselves from the suspicion of heresy, before
they presumed to arraign the conduct of the great Athanasius. ^127

[Footnote 123: The affairs of the council of Milan are so imperfectly and
erroneously related by the Greek writers, that we must rejoice in the supply
of some letters of Eusebius, extracted by Baronius from the archives of the
church of Vercellae, and of an old life of Dionysius of Milan, published by
Bollandus.  See Baronius, A.D. 355, and Tillemont, tom. vii. p. 1415.]

[Footnote 124: The honors, presents, feasts, which seduced so many bishops,
are mentioned with indignation by those who were too pure or too proud to
accept them.  "We combat (says Hilary of Poitiers) against Constantius the
Antichrist; who strokes the belly instead of scourging the back;" qui non
dorsa caedit; sed ventrem palpat.  Hilarius contra Constant c. 5, p. 1240.]

[Footnote 125: Something of this opposition is mentioned by Ammianus (x. 7,)
who had a very dark and superficial knowledge of ecclesiastical history.
Liberius . . . perseveranter renitebatur, nec visum hominem, nec auditum
damnare, nefas ultimum saepe exclamans; aperte scilicet recalcitrans
Imperatoris arbitrio.  Id enim ille Athanasio semper infestus, &c.]

[Footnote 126: More properly by the orthodox part of the council of Sardica.
If the bishops of both parties had fairly voted, the division would have been
94 to 76.  M. de Tillemont (see tom. viii. p. 1147-1158) is justly surprised
that so small a majority should have proceeded as vigorously against their
adversaries, the principal of whom they immediately deposed.]

[Footnote 127: Sulp. Severus in Hist. Sacra, l. ii. p. 412.]

     But the voice of reason (if reason was indeed on the side of Athanasius)
was silenced by the clamors of a factious or venal majority; and the councils
of Arles and Milan were not dissolved, till the archbishop of Alexandria had
been solemnly condemned and deposed by the judgment of the Western, as well as
of the Eastern, church.  The bishops who had opposed, were required to
subscribe, the sentence, and to unite in religious communion with the
suspected leaders of the adverse party.  A formulary of consent was
transmitted by the messengers of state to the absent bishops: and all those
who refused to submit their private opinion to the public and inspired wisdom
of the councils of Arles and Milan, were immediately banished by the emperor,
who affected to execute the decrees of the Catholic church.  Among those
prelates who led the honorable band of confessors and exiles, Liberius of
Rome, Osius of Cordova, Paulinus of Treves, Dionysius of Milan, Eusebius of
Vercellae, Lucifer of Cagliari and Hilary of Poitiers, may deserve to be
particularly distinguished.  The eminent station of Liberius, who governed the
capital of the empire; the personal merit and long experience of the venerable
Osius, who was revered as the favorite of the great Constantine, and the
father of the Nicene faith, placed those prelates at the head of the Latin
church: and their example, either of submission or resistance, would probable
be imitated by the episcopal crowd.  But the repeated attempts of the emperor
to seduce or to intimidate the bishops of Rome and Cordova, were for some time
ineffectual.  The Spaniard declared himself ready to suffer under Constantius,
as he had suffered threescore years before under his grandfather Maximian.
The Roman, in the presence of his sovereign, asserted the innocence of
Athanasius and his own freedom.  When he was banished to Beraea in Thrace, he
sent back a large sum which had been offered for the accommodation of his
journey; and insulted the court of Milan by the haughty remark, that the
emperor and his eunuchs might want that gold to pay their soldiers and their
bishops. ^128 The resolution of Liberius and Osius was at length subdued by
the hardships of exile and confinement.  The Roman pontiff purchased his
return by some criminal compliances; and afterwards expiated his guilt by a
seasonable repentance. Persuasion and violence were employed to extort the
reluctant signature of the decrepit bishop of Cordova, whose strength was
broken, and whose faculties were perhaps impaired by the weight of a hundred
years; and the insolent triumph of the Arians provoked some of the orthodox
party to treat with inhuman severity the character, or rather the memory, of
an unfortunate old man, to whose former services Christianity itself was so
deeply indebted. ^129

[Footnote 128: The exile of Liberius is mentioned by Ammianus, xv. 7.  See
Theodoret, l. ii. c. 16.  Athanas. tom. i. p. 834-837.  Hilar. Fragment l.]

[Footnote 129: The life of Osius is collected by Tillemont, (tom. vii. p.
524-561,) who in the most extravagant terms first admires, and then
reprobates, the bishop of Cordova.  In the midst of their lamentations on his
fall, the prudence of Athanasius may be distinguished from the blind and
intemperate zeal of Hilary.]

     The fall of Liberius and Osius reflected a brighter lustre on the
firmness of those bishops who still adhered, with unshaken fidelity, to the
cause of Athanasius and religious truth.  The ingenious malice of their
enemies had deprived them of the benefit of mutual comfort and advice,
separated those illustrious exiles into distant provinces, and carefully
selected the most inhospitable spots of a great empire. ^130 Yet they soon
experienced that the deserts of Libya, and the most barbarous tracts of
Cappadocia, were less inhospitable than the residence of those cities in which
an Arian bishop could satiate, without restraint, the exquisite rancor of
theological hatred. ^131 Their consolation was derived from the consciousness
of rectitude and independence, from the applause, the visits, the letters, and
the liberal alms of their adherents, ^132 and from the satisfaction which they
soon enjoyed of observing the intestine divisions of the adversaries of the
Nicene faith.  Such was the nice and capricious taste of the emperor
Constantius; and so easily was he offended by the slightest deviation from his
imaginary standard of Christian truth, that he persecuted, with equal zeal,
those who defended the consubstantiality, those who asserted the similar
substance, and those who denied the likeness of the Son of God.  Three
bishops, degraded and banished for those adverse opinions, might possibly meet
in the same place of exile; and, according to the difference of their temper,
might either pity or insult the blind enthusiasm of their antagonists, whose
present sufferings would never be compensated by future happiness.

[Footnote 130: The confessors of the West were successively banished to the
deserts of Arabia or Thebais, the lonely places of Mount Taurus, the wildest
parts of Phrygia, which were in the possession of the impious Montanists, &c.
When the heretic Aetius was too favorably entertained at Mopsuestia in
Cilicia, the place of his exile was changed, by the advice of Acacius, to
Amblada, a district inhabited by savages and infested by war and pestilence.
Philostorg. l. v. c. 2.]

[Footnote 131: See the cruel treatment and strange obstinacy of Eusebius, in
his own letters, published by Baronius, A.D. 356, No. 92-102.]

[Footnote 132: Caeterum exules satis constat, totius orbis studiis celebratos
pecuniasque eis in sumptum affatim congestas, legationibus quoque plebis
Catholicae ex omnibus fere provinciis frequentatos. Sulp. Sever Hist. Sacra,
p. 414.  Athanas. tom. i. p. 836, 840.]

     The disgrace and exile of the orthodox bishops of the West were designed
as so many preparatory steps to the ruin of Athanasius himself. ^133
Six-and-twenty months had elapsed, during which the Imperial court secretly
labored, by the most insidious arts, to remove him from Alexandria, and to
withdraw the allowance which supplied his popular liberality.  But when the
primate of Egypt, deserted and proscribed by the Latin church, was left
destitute of any foreign support, Constantius despatched two of his
secretaries with a verbal commission to announce and execute the order of his
banishment.  As the justice of the sentence was publicly avowed by the whole
party, the only motive which could restrain Constantius from giving his
messengers the sanction of a written mandate, must be imputed to his doubt of
the event; and to a sense of the danger to which he might expose the second
city, and the most fertile province, of the empire, if the people should
persist in the resolution of defending, by force of arms, the innocence of
their spiritual father.  Such extreme caution afforded Athanasius a specious
pretence respectfully to dispute the truth of an order, which he could not
reconcile, either with the equity, or with the former declarations, of his
gracious master.  The civil powers of Egypt found themselves inadequate to the
task of persuading or compelling the primate to abdicate his episcopal throne;
and they were obliged to conclude a treaty with the popular leaders of
Alexandria, by which it was stipulated, that all proceedings and all
hostilities should be suspended till the emperor's pleasure had been more
distinctly ascertained.  By this seeming moderation, the Catholics were
deceived into a false and fatal security; while the legions of the Upper
Egypt, and of Libya, advanced, by secret orders and hasty marches, to besiege,
or rather to surprise, a capital habituated to sedition, and inflamed by
religious zeal. ^134 The position of Alexandria, between the sea and the Lake
Mareotis, facilitated the approach and landing of the troops; who were
introduced into the heart of the city, before any effectual measures could be
taken either to shut the gates or to occupy the important posts of defence.
At the hour of midnight, twenty-three days after the signature of the treaty,
Syrianus, duke of Egypt, at the head of five thousand soldiers, armed and
prepared for an assault, unexpectedly invested the church of St. Theonas,
where the archbishop, with a part of his clergy and people, performed their
nocturnal devotions.  The doors of the sacred edifice yielded to the
impetuosity of the attack, which was accompanied with every horrid
circumstance of tumult and bloodshed; but, as the bodies of the slain, and the
fragments of military weapons, remained the next day an unexceptionable
evidence in the possession of the Catholics, the enterprise of Syrianus may be
considered as a successful irruption rather than as an absolute conquest.  The
other churches of the city were profaned by similar outrages; and, during at
least four months, Alexandria was exposed to the insults of a licentious army,
stimulated by the ecclesiastics of a hostile faction.  Many of the faithful
were killed; who may deserve the name of martyrs, if their deaths were neither
provoked nor revenged; bishops and presbyters were treated with cruel
ignominy; consecrated virgins were stripped naked, scourged and violated; the
houses of wealthy citizens were plundered; and, under the mask of religious
zeal, lust, avarice, and private resentment were gratified with impunity, and
even with applause.  The Pagans of Alexandria, who still formed a numerous and
discontented party, were easily persuaded to desert a bishop whom they feared
and esteemed.  The hopes of some peculiar favors, and the apprehension of
being involved in the general penalties of rebellion, engaged them to promise
their support to the destined successor of Athanasius, the famous George of
Cappadocia.  The usurper, after receiving the consecration of an Arian synod,
was placed on the episcopal throne by the arms of Sebastian, who had been
appointed Count of Egypt for the execution of that important design.  In the
use, as well as in the acquisition, of power, the tyrant, George disregarded
the laws of religion, of justice, and of humanity; and the same scenes of
violence and scandal which had been exhibited in the capital, were repeated in
more than ninety episcopal cities of Egypt.  Encouraged by success,
Constantius ventured to approve the conduct of his minister.  By a public and
passionate epistle, the emperor congratulates the deliverance of Alexandria
from a popular tyrant, who deluded his blind votaries by the magic of his
eloquence; expatiates on the virtues and piety of the most reverend George,
the elected bishop; and aspires, as the patron and benefactor of the city to
surpass the fame of Alexander himself.  But he solemnly declares his
unalterable resolution to pursue with fire and sword the seditious adherents
of the wicked Athanasius, who, by flying from justice, has confessed his
guilt, and escaped the ignominious death which he had so often deserved. ^135

[Footnote 133: Ample materials for the history of this third persecution of
Athanasius may be found in his own works.  See particularly his very able
Apology to Constantius, (tom. i. p. 673,) his first Apology for his flight (p.
701,) his prolix Epistle to the Solitaries, (p. 808,) and the original protest
of the people of Alexandria against the violences committed by Syrianus, (p.
866.) Sozomen (l. iv. c. 9) has thrown into the narrative two or three
luminous and important circumstances.]

[Footnote 134: Athanasius had lately sent for Antony, and some of his chosen
monks.  They descended from their mountains, announced to the Alexandrians the
sanctity of Athanasius, and were honorably conducted by the archbishop as far
as the gates of the city.  Athanas tom. ii. p. 491, 492.  See likewise
Rufinus, iii. 164, in Vit. Patr. p. 524.]

[Footnote 135: Athanas. tom. i. p. 694.  The emperor, or his Arian secretaries
while they express their resentment, betray their fears and esteem of
Athanasius.]