more exact and copious than any that had appear'd before For he thought that St. Jerom and Beda had handled this matter too carelesly and it is even reported That the Emperor Charles the Bald to whom he dedicated his Book had set him at work And therefore it is more likely that he did every thing answerable to the Zeal of his Age for Martyrs and Reliques Which notwithstanding his diligence and all the care he took could effect no more than the Discovery which he made of two other Theb. Souldiers namely Cassius and Florentius who are also recorded by Helinand But further had it passed for current at that time that the three Saints in St. Maximus's Sermon were Theb. Souldiers 't is very improbable that they could have escaped the diligent Search of Vsuard If after this any one should alledge to us the Lives of Saints as the Legends of Octavius Aventitius and Soluter we have no other Answer for them but that there are none so blind as they that will not see But since it hath so fallen out that Maximus his Sermon hath given us an occasion to speak of St. Ambrose we ought not to pass by without some Reflection the Silence of this Father in this particular viz. concerning the Theb. Legion and their Martyrdom though in an hundred places of his Works he speaks of Saints and famous Martyrs in general The time he lived was not long after that wherein it is supposed that the Theb. Legion was cut off He was Bishop at Milan not very far distant from Agaunum where this Martyrdom is said to have happened and he had conversed sometimes with Theodorus Bishop of Octodurum or Martigni where Agaunum is situated Both these Bishops were present at the Council of Aquileia assembled to give a decision in the cause of Palladius and Secundianus Arrian Bishops in Illyria They met again at Milan where Theodorus signed the Letter which St. Ambrose and the other Bishops wrote to Pope Siricius concerning the condemnation of Jovinian who had uttered blasphemous Expressions against the Virginity of the Blessed Mother of God And though the false St. Eucherius in the Letter already related does write to the Bishop Salvius That Theodorus whom he calls vir anterioris Temporis had informed Isaac Bishop of Geneva of all the circumstances of the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion it does not appear that he ever spoke of it to St. Ambrose seeing there is not the least notice tak'n of it in all the Works of this Father But let us come now to another sort of Writers and ask the Fathers who have composed Chronologies or Church-Histories These perhaps will tell us something of the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion for this is not so inconsiderable a Transaction as can be suppos'd to have been overlook'd or lost amongst the Croud of those great Events which they had to relate It is a memorable matter of Fact worthy of their Pens and to be recommended to Posterity for it is the Martyrdom of a whole Legion and the most Famous Historians of the Church either liv'd at the time of this suppos'd Martyrdom or wrote about a hundred Years after I mean Eusebius Socrates Sozomen Theodoret Evagrius Jerom Orosius Sulpitius Severus If this Martyrdom were true it is impossible that they should have been ignorant of it and had they known it 't is not to be imagin'd they would all have conspired together to leave us in the dark about it To begin with Eusebius of whom those who favour him least as Joseph Scaliger do yet agree that with great care he hath search'd into the Original Pieces concerning the Foundation of the First Sees the succession of their Bishops the Persecutions moved by enraged Pagans against the Primitive Christian Religion the many Conflicts of the Blessed Martyrs for its Defense and the Victories which their Faith and constancy have obtained over Infidelity and Errour St. Jerom or whosoever is the Author of the Letter to Chromatius and Heliodorus agrees with the Remarks of President Cousin upon the care and diligence of Eusebius in collecting the Acts of the Martyrs It is said in that Letter that the Emperour Constantine at his arrival at Cesarea permitted Eusebius to ask him whatever he had most a mind to and that Eusebius desired him to command that they should send him from all the Courts and Tribunals of Judicature throughout the Empire all the Processes Tryals and Sentences concerning Martyrs that so he might be particularly inform'd of their right Names Qualities and Numbers and also of the different kinds of their Torments and Death and of the Provinces Towns and Days of their Excecutions and lastly with what Patience and Courage they had suffered their Torments Therefore Antipater Bishop of Bostra in Arabia thinking to obscure the Glory and Reputation of Eusebius said in his confutation of Origen's Apology I allow Eusebius to be excellently vers'd in History and that there is nothing in the Monuments of Antiquity which he is unacquainted with but the Emperours Authority favouring his design it was an easy thing for him to gather up whatever Writings were scattered all over the World So that Eusebius having so many ways of being imformed of the Truth of the Agaunian Martyrdom no body can deny but he is a well qualify'd Witness to be call'd and heard upon this Matter of Fact And so much the rather because he not only was alive at the time of this Martyrdom but of age to know what was then transacted In the first Book of Constantine's Life he saith that in his youth he first saw this Prince in Palestina in the Retinue of the Emperour Dioclesian And in the Third Book of his Church History speaking of Dionysius of Alexandria he saith that it was in his time that he was raised to the Honour of the Episcopal Chair seeing therefore that it is agreed on all hands that Dionysius of Alexandria dyed in the twelfth Year of the Empire of Gallienus's Reign Eusebius his Birth must necessarily precede the Death of this Prince The Learned Doctor Cave conjectures that he was born about the Year 270. As to the time of Gallienus's Death we are under great uncertainties Cardinal Baronius placeing it in the Year 269 upon the Testimony of Eusebius who will have him to have Reigned but fifteen years but Antonio Pagi is of a different opinion and thinks he lived some few Years longer and this upon the Authority of a Medal of Gallienus spoken of by Mezabarba with this Inscription P. M. TR. PO. XVI CON. VII So that it appears to be a difficult thing to assign precisely the time of Eusebius his birth But it is not our business here to cast the Horoscope of this Father or to make an exact Calculation of the time of his Nativity it is sufficient to our purpose that the circumstances here specify'd will make it appear that Eusebius was at least fifteen or sixteen Years old when Maximian went into
hath spoken of the Rule which King Sigismond caused to be established there adds that this Rule was strictly observed there usque â—odie to this very day So that were it true that St. Eucherius was the Author of this Work he must of necessity not only have been contemporary to King Sigismond but more than that he must have out-lived him many Years But now it happens to be quitâ— contrary for St. Eucherius was dead when Sigismond was yet on the Throne Most Historians do reckon the Death of this King of Burgundy to have happen'd about the Year 520 and place that of St. Eucherius in the Year 441. 'T is true that Mr. Dupin refers it to the Year 454. upon the Authority of Prosper's Chronicle Some on the contrary carry it as far back as the Year 421. Amongst whom are Gennadius and Ado. But there is much reason to suspect in both these Authors the disingenuity of some Transcriber since it could not be unknown to Gennadius and Ado that St. Eucherius was present at the Council of Orange where his Name is found amongst the Subscribers and that it is agreed on by every Body that this Council was held about the Year of our Lord 441. Some indeed to save this Anachronism pretend that there have been two Eucherius's like the Jews who to mend their desperate Cause have invented two Messia's to reconcile in both the fulfilling of the Oracles which they cannot apply to one alone But in short 't is not possible that St. Eucherius Bishop of Lions should be the Author of the Passion of the Thebean Legion unless we allow him to have had the gift of Prophecy and make him speak Prophetically of those Rules which were to be settled in the Monastery of Agaunum several Ages after his Death Should some Person now put out any Writings under the Name of Monsieur de Marca or of Cardinal Duperron and mention therein the establishment and Foundation of St. Cyr. To shew that these Writings ought not to be ascribed to these two great Men it would suffice to make it appear that they were dead several Years before Lewis the 14 th made this Foundation Nevertheless this so plain a demonstration of Forgery hath not hindered Surius in his Relation of the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion on the 22. of September from confidently asserting that St. Eucherius was the Author of the Acts of their Passion 'T is very strange that Baronius should make the same blunder both in his Annals and in his Notes on the Roman Martyrology And indeed this would seem yet more strange were it not plain that this Learned Cardinal undertook in his Annals not so much to give us the History of the Church as to defend the prejudices and ambitious pretensions of the Church of Rome Therefore when it s an advantage to him to overlook some supposititious and Counterfeit Writing he pretends he sees neither contradiction nor Anchronism in it he is no longer that able Critick whose pierceing knowledge nothing can escape and who clears and extricates the most obscure and knotty things of Antiquity In a word he is no more Baronius Cardinal Bellarmine whose Zeal for the glory of the Roman Church did not yield to that of Baronius hath taken another way to save the â—ruth of the Passion of the Thebean Legion that it might not be objected to his Church that it worshipped some for Saints who never had so much as a being in the World For since Men would at the very first sight be startled to see so long an interval of time between St. Eucherius and St. Sigismond he hath endeavoured to cut it much shorter and to render it so little as that it might pass wholly unobserved or however be but very little minded He tells us that this Bishop of Lions lived till the Year 499. and he grounds his conjecture upon a place in the Life of St. Cesarius Bishop of Arles compos'd by Cyprian the Priest where it is said that these two Bishops being in company together restored a Woman to her former health who was afflicted with a very sore Distemper If there were any certainty in this Conjecture of Cardinal Bellarmine Eucherius would have been almost contemporary with King Sigismond For Messanius a Priest and Stephen a Deacon two other Disciples of St. Cesarius in the Book they have added to the Life of this Holy Prelate say that he dyed forty Years after he had been made a Bishop and since every body knows that he succeeded Ennoius about the Year 504. his Death should be placed in the Year 544 or 545. For it is certain that he was present at the Council of Arles in 524 and at the second Council of Orange in 529 And to prove that he was alive in 528. we have a Letter that Pope Vigil wrote to him under the Consulship of John and Volusian But though we should grant Cardinal Bellarmine's Conjecture not to be groundless yet he would be but little the better for it 'T is not enough to prolong St. Eucherius's Life to the Year 499. 'T is to no purpose likewise to prove that St. Eucherius might have seen St. Cesarius Bishop of Arles King Sigismond dyed about the Year 520. and they must make it appear that St. Eucherius out-lived him a great many Years to make good the usque hodie of the place we have before quoted Now it is so far from being true that St. Eucherius did out-live St. Sigismond that on the contrary there is no likely-hood that he liv'd till the Year 499. according to Cardinal Bellarmine's Conjecture It appears by the Subscriptions of the first Council of Orange that he was Bishop of Lions in 4â—1 and consequently he must have been then at least thirty or forty Years Old for at that time it was not usual to raise any person under that age to the Dignity of a Bishop Bishopricks being not yet bestowed as rewards upon Families and the Holiness of Canons holding yet out against the Vanity of the Clergy and the Usurpations of Kings Now since we are certain of this can we think it probable that St. Eucherius should live to see St. Cesarius Bishop of Arles who was not raised to that Dignity till after the Death of Ennoius about the Year 504 Indeed I think a Man must needs be very bold in his Conjectures who can allow St Eucherius to have lived above a Hundred Years if he have no other Warrant for it but that place of the Life of St. Cesarius Those who shall carefully examine this Life of St. Cesarius will agree that it ought not to be rely'd upon too much 'T is true it is polite and judicious enough for that Age and seems not unworthy of him who had been one of the Disciples of St. Cesarius and who for his great Piety and Merits was raised to the Dignity of a Bishop as appears by his Name found in the Subscriptions of the second Council of
Orange But what if some Impostour here disguised himself under the Name of a Famous Disciple of St. Cesarius At least this pretended Disciple seems not to be much inform'd of his Masters Affairs He saith in one place that St. Cesarius sent some Grave and Learned Men to a Council Assembled at Valence to Condemn the Opinions of Pelagius Which having given me occasion to examine the Acts of the Councils held at Valence I â—ind nothing in them concerning the Heresie of Pelagius wherein St. Cesarius could have any hand So that being mistaken in a matter of Fact of this Importance he might as well have been over-seen in joyning Eucherius and Cesarius in the Cure of that Diseased Woman It appears that the Learned Doctor Cave relyed a little too much upon this Life of St. Cesarius He saith in his History of Ecclesiastical Writers that this Holy Bishop understanding that he was suspected of Pelagianism caused a Council to be Assembled at Valence to clear himself of this accusation and being hindred by reason of the illness of his Health from going to it he maintained there publickly by his Legates that Man in the state of Sin cannot work out his Salvation without a preventing Grace But if instead of following this Cyprian Disciple of St. Cesarius and who was afterwards Bishop of Thoulon Doctor Cave had given himself the trouble to look over the Councils of Valence he would have observed that in the first which was held in the Year 734. their whole business was about Bigamy that in the Second which met in 599. some place it in the Year 684 and some in 589. they were wholly taken up with the great Donatives which Guntran King of Burgundy had bestowed upon the Church And that the Third in which Pelagius Hinmark and John Scot were Condemned and the Acts whereof are cited by Forbesius in his Instructions was not called till the Year 855. as appears by the Acts of it being presented to the Emperour Lothary and to Charles the Bald. Now St. Cesarius was unborn at the time of the First Council since Doctor Cave brings him into the World only in the Year 469. And he was Dead when the Second met according to the same Doctor who places his Death in the Year 542. And 't is I think needless to add that he was not concern'd in the Third which was held in 855. and in which the Pelagian Opinions were Condemned This short digression which we have thought necessary to remove St. Cesarius from St. Eucherius's times will not seem I hope unseasonable It appears then that Bellarmine for all his Conjecture cannot bring St. Eucherius near enough to St Sigismond King of Burgundy The distance is too great to admit of any means of reconciling the Dispute We shall observe by the way that Usuard and Aimonius have commited the like mistake But because it is but a matter of three or four Years difference they may perhaps find Friends to help them out These two Writers say that Clovis was delivered from a dangerous Sickness by the Vows and Prayers of St. Severine Abbot of Agaunum And it is certain that Clovis was Dead three or four Years before Sigismond had founded that Monastery Gregory of Tours saith that he caused the same to be Built and richly Endowed it after the Death of his Father Gombaldus But Marius Bishop of Avanches marks precisely the Year in his Chronicle and saith that Sigismond founded the Agaunian Monastery under the Consulship of Florentius and Anthemius viz. Four Years after the Death of Clovis This Remark is owing to Monsieur de Valois in his Notice of the Gauls where he saith that he cannot understand how Severine could have been Abbot of that Monastery in Clovis's time Nevertheless the Miraculous recovery of a great King being of great Credit to the Prayers and Suffrages of Monasteries Usuard and Aimonius who were both Monks caused Prayers to be made for Clovis in Agaunum even before King Sigismond had it in his thoughts to build a Monastery there 'T is true that Bollandus would fain perswade us that this Prince did only repair and beautifie it But this he asserts without any ground since both the Ancient and Modern Writers who speak of the first Foundation of the Agaunian Monastery do all generally agree that 't was St. Sigismond King of Burgundy who caused it to be Built to the Honour of the Thebean Legion which suffered Martyrdom in that place CHAP. VI. That the Acts of the Council of Agaunum concerning the Thebean Legion are as false as the Acts of their Passion BUT whether King Sigismond only beautified the Monastery of Agaunum or whether he laid the first Foundations thereof 't is all one to us 'T is enough that we can prove that the Passion which we assert to be false is posteriour to all this And that it is so cannot be deny'd since mention is made there of the Basilick which was Dedicated at Agaunum to the Memory of the Thebean Souldiers If you are not pleased to rely upon the History of their Passion as it is related in Surius and Baronius and wherein notice is taken of the Rules made by St. Sigismond in the Agaunian Monastery we shall willingly pitch upon and refer our selves to the latter Acts that are mended since in these as well as in the others mention is made of a Miracle that happen'd when the Church of Agaunum was a building to the Honour of the Thebean Legion For if King Sigismond did only repair and Adorn that Church the time of these Works must necessarily be plac'd in the Year 500. and consequently St Eucherius could not have made mention of them seeing all do agree that he dyed about the Year 440. We may strengthen this Argument with another taken from the Acts of a Council supposed to have been assembled by order of King Sigismond at Agaunum and in which Sixty Bishops put it into his Head to gather the Bones of the Thebean Souldiers and to Dedicate a Basilick or stately Church to them Though this Council is visibly false and supposititious yet it will be of good help to discover the falsity of the Passion of the Souldiers of Agaunum Fathered upon St. Eucherius The Acts of this pretended Council are set down in the Fourth Tome of the Councils by Labbe and Cossart These two Learned Jesuites were very sensible of the Forgery of these Acts but it would have been too much against the grain to have confessed it They were therefore content to say they wondered they did not see amongst the Subscriptions the Name of Avitus Archbishop of Vienna who both by reason of his Eminent Qualities and for the Dignity of his See ought of course to have been present at that Council The Oratory-Priests being fairer dealers than the Jesuites Le Cointe one of them freely declares in his Annals that the Acts of this Council were altogether false However as false as they are they
contradictions Instead of one Thebean Legion which is suppos'd to have suffered Martyrdom he relates the Passions of two Thebean Legions He saith that the Legio Secunda Flavia Constantia Thebaeorum was raised by Constantius and put in the room of the Second Thebean who were Christians and had been Massacred at Treves by Rictiovarus a Prefect of the Emperour Maximian And as for the Legio Secunda Felix Valentis Thebaeorum Pancirollus will have it that the Emperour Valens raised it to make up the loss of the Legion which perished at Agaunum on this side of the Alpes for refusing to take the Military Oaths with the Pagan Ceremonies That which led him into this Errour was his having read in other Legends that Maximian having passed the Alpes made a Detachement of some Cohorts of the Thebean Legion with some other Troops to reinforce the Army wherewith he designed to oppose Carausius Thus this famous Antiquary of these few Cohorts hath made an entire Legion Which is so far from being true that in the following Chapters the same Thebean Souldiers who are now supposed to have been sent against Carausius will furnish us with new proofs against the Martyrdom of the whole Thebean Legion CHAP. XIII That if the History of this Legion were true there would not be so much uncertainty of the time wherein it happened ANother Character of falshood in the History of the Thebean Legion which deserves our observation is the uncertainty and contrariety of the Writers of the Church of Rome concerning the time in which they suppose the Thebean Legion suffered The Martyrdom of a whole Legion is so Memorable an Event that if it were true it would certainly have been written and described in all its circumstances in the Annals of the Church And though the Ecclesastical writers had been so negligent as to be silent therein yet Aurelius Victor Eutropius Jordanes or some other Author would undoubtedly have made amends for this Omission Titus Livius failed not to relate the Tragical end of that Legion whereof all the Souldiers were Condemned to Death for Mutining and possessing themselves of Rhegium during the War of the Romans with Pyrrhus And yet some would have it that Six Thousand Six Hundred Sixty and six Officers and Souldiers were Massacred by the Emperour's Order upon their refusal to swear by his false Gods and to joyn with the other Troops that were Heathens in shedding of Christians Blood though not one word is to be found either in Profane or Ecclesiastical Writers whereby to discover the exact time of an Event which so many circumstances render so extraordinary and wonderful Neither do the ablest writers of the Romish Church agree upon the Year the Pope or the Consul under whom it happened Cardinal Baronius puts their Martyrdom under the Pontificate of Marcelline in which Errour he was followed by two Learned Fathers of the Oratory Namely le Cointe and Morin Anthonius Pagi refers this Martyrdom to the first Years of Emperour The Jesuite Labbe forsakes here the Opinion of his Baronius and 't is he perhaps whom Anthonius Pagi followed His words are these 'T is said that about the Year 286 Sebastianus Tiburtinus Tranquillus Marcellinus Zeus Mauricius and several others with the Thebean Legion suffered Death for the Faith of Jesus Christ at Agaunum at the entrance of the Pennine Alpes This agrees very well with the Pontificate of Cajus and the beginning of the Empire of Dioclesian And whereas Cardinal Baronius refers the Martyrdom of the Thebean Souldiers to the Year 297. it happened according to Father Labbe's computation in the Year 286 viz. immediately after that Carinus was killed and that Dioclesian had taken Maximian into the Government Which if true what will become of Mr. Duchesne's Argument in his History of Popes who to prove that Pope Marcelline did not Sacrifice to Idols in the time of Persecution as is most commonly believed saith that this Pope adminstred the Sacrament of Confirmation to the Thebean Legion when they passed by Rome and earnestly exhorted them to Piety and to perseverance in Religion Here Labbe and Pagi put the Martyrdom of this Legion several Years before the Pontificate of Marcelline In the mean while we may take notice of the extraordinary fair dealing of this Jesuite who does not give us the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion as a thing whereof he himself is very well assured and of which he hath found any Authentick Records and Proofs but only with an It is said or given out and this no doubt he does as being unwilling to vouch for a Relation which he found to be somewhat fabulous Now if it be reply'd that it is not fairly done to deny a matter of Fact meerly because its Epoche is uncertain it may be answered that there is a great deal of difference between one Transaction and another that there are in Ecclesiastical History several Relations of matters of Fact concerning which this Argument would prove of no great force But the Martyrdom of a whole Legion is a thing so extraordinary so singular and so remarkable in it self that the uncertainty of the time in which they say it happen'd makes it very suspitious And for the same Reason several Person doubt of the Dispute of St. Peter with Simon Magus and of the surprizing Death of this wicked Man whom the Devils let fall to the ground after they had born him up for some considerable time in the Air. 'T is true that Eusebius Sulpitius Severus and St. Austin take Notice of this Memorable Event But those who believe it to be false do reply that one ought not always to trust to the Relations of the Ancient Ecclesiastical Authors because the Zeal they had for Religion made 'em not always very Nice in the choice of Proofs and Examples and sometimes they had a mind to oppose one Miracle to another seeing that the whole Pagan Religion was Built upon the Belief of Miracles and the Apparitions of their false Gods They add farther that had this Event happened as it is reported it would have occasioned so much Noise in Rome and through the whole Empire that some Footsteps thereof would have been preserved in the Writings of Pagan Authors And that after all though it was believed by Eusebius Sulpitius Severus and St. Austin this does not make it less dubious since those three Writers do not agree about the time wherein it happn'd Eusebius puts it under the Empire of Claudius St. Austin and several others under that of Nero about the Year of our Lord 67. and Sulpitius Severus refers it to the time when St. Paul came to Rome towards the Year 57. And this is the very argument we urge against the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion CHAP. XIV That the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion cannot be referred either to a General or to a Local and particular Persecution ANother Character of falshood yet more palpable and in the very Fact is this that if
If it could be applied to any particular one it must be to that which was raised at Rome and in which Baronius relates that St Sebastian suffered Martyrdom rather than to any other But of this the Cardinal observes that it extended not much further than Rome and consequently not so far as the Alpes and to Agaunum In short before the time of the General Persecution we find some Christians Condemned to Death in some parts of the Empire but before the unhappy Congress at Nicomedia 'ts not possible to shew any-where during the whole Reign of Dioclesian any such Massacre as that of a whole Legion CHAP. XV. That the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion cannot be reconciled with the History and Years of the Emperour Maximian THE Character of Forgery which we have dispatched in the Precedent Chapter will appear yet more Evident by considering further that 't is supposed that the Thebean Legion suffered Death by Order of Maximian whereas there is no room for this Martyrdom either in the Life or Years of this Emperour The Copies of Surius and Chifflet and all the Legend-Writers who have followed them agree in this that this Emperour caused the Thebean Souldiers to be put to Death in an Expedition which he made into Gaul Accordingly then a place must be found for their Martyrdom in some of Maximian's Voyages on the other side of the Alpes Lactantius in his History of the Deaths of the Persecutors makes mention of three of them The First was occasioned by the Marriage of his Daughter Fausta with Constantine to whom he gave the Title of Augustus he having had only that of Caesar before He was forc'd to undertake the Second to shun the fury of his Souldiers who were extreamly incensed against him for designing to deprive his Son Maxentius of the Empire by whom he had been restored to the Purple which he had freely Abdicated before And he came the third time into Gaul at his return from his Journey into Hungary whither he went but unsuccessfully to Sollicite Dioclesian to resume the Government and it was then that Constantine perceiving the ill Design he had formed to destory him thought it necessary to prevent him and caused him to be strangled But the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion does not answer to any of these Expeditions since they are all posterior to the Year 306. and all Historians agree that the General Persecution at that time began to abate in the West Besides it is certain that Maximian in none of these Progresses passed the Alpes with an Army and that his Fortune and the posture of his Affairs at that time did not put him into a condition to deprive himself of a whole Legion Where shall we then find a fourth Expedition of Maximian into Gaul in which this Emperour might be supposed to have Murthered the whole Thebean Legion There is none left but that which is mentioned by Eutropius and Aurelius Victor These two Historians agree that some Troops of Banditi or Rapperees who were called Bagauds having raised a Tumult in Gaul and put themselves under the Conduct of Amandus and Aelianus Dioclesian made Maximian his Partner in the Government and sent him in all haste with an Army to punish those Rebels But the time of this Expedition is not agreed upon Father Petau relates at large the different Opinions of the Learned concerning it in his Book of the Doctrine of times He thinks that Maximian's Reign began in the Year of our Lord 285. Dioclesian being then Emperour and vested the second time with the Tribunitian Power and he confutes Baronius who was led into a mistake by a passage of Mamertine Mr. Baluze affirms that Dioclesian having been raised to the Empire on the 20 of November in the Year 284. took Maximian into the Government on the First of April in the Year 285. and sets it down as a point universally agreed in History that the I wentieth Year of Maximian ought to answer his Eighth Consulship From whence he concludes that Dioclesian Reigned Twenty Years Five Months and twelve Days and Maximian Twenty Years and a full Month. So that if this Calculation be just the beginning of Maximian's Reign ought to be reckoned from the First of April in the Year 285. Father Pagi followeth the Author of the Alexandrian Chronicle and having placed the beginning of Dioclesian's Reign on the 17 th of September in the Year 284 he adds that Maximian was Created Caesar on the 20 of Novemb. the same Year Eutropius and Aurelius Victor are different in their Expression concerning the Character which Dioclesian gave to Maximian when he sent him into Gaul against the Bagands Eutropius saith Herculeum Caesarem misit and Aurelius Victor saith Imperatoreâ— jubet Which difference occasioneth another Dispute amongst the Criticks viz. Whether Maximian was made first Caesar and then Augustus according to the usual Custom or whether both the Dignities were conferred on him at one and the same time Anthony Pagi and Henry Noris differ onely in the time in which they suppose Maximian was raised to the Dignity of Augustus and they are of Opinion that before this he was made Caesar But though both of them are great Masters and seem able to pronounce upon this Matter yet Mr. Baluze in his Notes on Lactantius is for the contrary and alledges several Laws from whence he gathers that Maximian was first Created Augustus Against which Opinion of his a Medal of Francis Angeloin's inscribed NOBILIS CAESAR and on the Reverse PRINCIPI IVVENTVTIS was thought to make very much But this difficulty the famous Mr. Cuper in his Notes on Lactantius hath removed Where he observes that this Medal ought to be referred to Galerius Maximianus by reason that several of his are found with the same Inscriptions which are not upon any of the Medals of Herculeus Maximianus Collected by Counte Mezabarba But the Subject we have before us does not require that we should trouble our selves about these Chronological questions We are in search of the time when Maximian took another Journey into Gaul not mentioned by Lactantius Now the difficulty is not to find out that time seeing it is circumstanced both in Eutropius and Aurelius Victor by two Memorable Events one of which is his Exaltation to the Empire and the other the Bagaudian Revolt under their Leaders Amandus and Aelianus Both which do shew that he undertook the Gallican Expedition in the Year of our Lord 285. to Wit at the beginning of his Reign and above Eighteen Years before he took his other Journies spoken of by Loctantius But our business is to examine whether we can fix the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion to that time And the Dispute is at an end if we give Credit to those Acts of the Agaunian Martyrs which both Surius and Baronius have followed For there mention is made of the Bagauds of Amandus and Aelianus of Maximian s Assumption to the Empire and of
his Expedition into Gaul with the Thebean Legion All which does agree well enough with the time we have assigned for the same Expedition And it is strange that Cardinal Baronius who hath followed the Acts of Surius and ought consequently to have joined the time of the Bagaudian Revolt with that of the Death of the Thebean Souldiers hath notwithstanding this placed their Martyrdom in the Year 297 viz. Twelve Years after Dioclesian had taken Maximian into the Government and sent him into Gaul to suppress the Rebellion of Amandus and Aelianus And since these two Events fell out so well to the purpose one would wonder Father Chifflet should be so transported upon his finding a Manuscript in which there is not a word spoken of the Begauds noâ— of Amandus nor Aelianus if it were not that King Sigismond unluckily appeared there also amongst the rest For as these two concuring Events very much favoured the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion so what is there related of St. Sigismond made it evident that St. Eucherius could not be the Author of the Acts of that Martyrdom since he Dyed several Years before this Prince came into the World Bollandus thought he might save the Credit of this piece prove it to be the work of this Holy Bishop of Lions and remove the Anachronism by saying that there was formerly a Monastery at Agaunum and that King Sigismond only repaired and beautified it But because it is but a poor shift destroyed both by the Acts of Surius and the Accounts which all the Historjans give of that Martyrdom Father Chifflet was overjoyed upon his finding a Manuscript wherein not the least mention is made of King Sigismond or of the Bagaudian Insurrection We have already declared how good an Opinion we have of Father Chifflet's integrity which we don't pretend to retract Nevertheless if he be not the Man who hath helped this place out of the Acts of the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion no Body ought to find fault with us if we suspect that some others might have conjured it away Whatsoever may be the Antiquity of Father Chifflet's Manuscrpit sure it is that Impopostors are yet much ancienter than it Now I hope Father Ruinart will not except against us for making some advantage of the Advice he himself gives in his Answer to Mr. Dodwel viz. That the Collectors of the Acts of Murtyrs have frequently added too and lop't off such things as they did not like But let us come now to the Matter it self and examine whether the Martyrdom of the Thebean Legion can be made to fall in with Maximian's fourth Expedition into Gaul mentioned by Eutropius and Aurelius Victor The Emperour Dioclesian fearing lest the Gallican Revolt should be of dangerour consequence assumes him into the Government to the end that by his assistance he might with more ease to himself undergo the weight of it He raises an Army with all speed to suppress this threatning Insurrection in its Birth then it is supposed that he sent for the Thebean Legion from the East to serve in the Expedition And yet they needs will have it that having passed the Mountains with them and in a manner facing the Enemy such a Frenzy of superstition on a sudden seized him as made him weaken his Army by the Martyrdom of this whole Legion We took Notice before that the Author of this Romance was not very cautious in observing the Rules of probability But because some things may be true though they do not seem very probable we shall therefore add something of more weight than meer Conjeures for the proof of our Assertion First then let a Man be never so little versed in Roman History he will find no ground there to believe that Maximian being but lately admitted to a share in the Empire should by his own single authority cut off a whole Legion For though Dioclesian had made him Augustus yet were they Masters in Common and joint sharers of the Provinces Arms and Legions of the Empire Galesius and Constantius were the First that shared the Empire This the City of Rome took very ill looking upon it as a diminution of its Power and glory But this sharing of the Empire ending in the Victories which Constantine got over all his Competitors Rome became again the Mistress of the Universe Whereupon the Poet Porphyrius in a Poem which he composed in the 15 th Year of this Prince has these words lacera cruentis Imperii pars fessa Poli diversa gemehat Sâ—eptra Ausoniae moerebat perdita jura During the Division of the Empire each Emperour acted as he pleased in his own District and was under no obligation to Communicate his Affairs and Conduct to the other Emperours whereas when the Empire was possessed jointly by two or three Emperours they Consulted one another in all Affairs of Importance because each had an equal right to the whole Aequo Jure as Eutropius saith speaking of Marcus Aurelius and of Lucius Verus Whence we may judge if it be possible in reason to suppose that Maximian would of his own head have Commanded a whole Legion to be put to Death and without so much as Consulting Dioclesian have allarm'd all the Christians throughout the Empire by so violent a Persecution 'T is true indeed if the loss of a whole Legion cut off by the Command of a Cholerick and Enraged Prince were to be look'd upon as a trifling matter and of no consquence to the State there would have been no great need for Maximian upon this occasion to have ask'd the Advice of his Colleague but I question much whether any considering Person will think it so Secondly Let us reflect upon what the Historians tell us of the Reign of Dioclesian and Maximian till the time they begun to persecute the Christians and we shall find that they represent those times to us as times of Ease and Plenty and they speak of their Government as managed with Clemency and Moderation Matermin tells Maximian that no sooner had the Light of his Government shined upon the Empire but it overspread all places with peace and security Eusebius in the 12 th and 13 th Chapter of the 8 th Book of his Church-History cannot forbear making frequent mention of the Happiness which both the Church and Empire enjoyed before Dioclesian and Maximian had resolved to Exterminate the Christians Who can express saith he the Prosperity and Plenty which the Empire enjoyed so long as those who Governed were well and kindly affected towards us He had said before we want Words to express the great value and esteem which the Doctrine of our Blessed Saviour met with amongst the Greeks and Barbarians and the perfect Liberty and Tranquility which the Professours of it enjoyed before the Persecution which was raised against the Church in our Days The particular affection the Emperours shewed towards those of our Religion and the Honour they did them in conferring
into Armenia and Mesopotamia Which hapned several Years after Maximian's Advancement to the Empire and his Bagaudian Expedition CHAP. XVI That it is not true that the Bagauds were Christians and that the Thebean Legion suffered death for refusing to persecute them IT will not be amiss to take notice here of an Objection which may perhaps be made a gainst us Viz. That it is true that the Persecution mentioned in the precedent Chapter did not begin till near the year 298 or 301 But that Maximian was oblig'd to cut off the Theb. Legion upon another account which was that those People who had revolted and went under the nick-name of Bagauds being Christians the Emperour was afraid least the Theb. Souldiers who were of the same Religion should joyn with the Rebels and therefore he thought it the best course he could take to get himself thus rid of them and that This was the chief and indeed the true cause of their Martyrdom Here we are to consider what Mezeray saith in his second Book of the Origin of the French concerning this matter These are his words After Carinus at his departure from Gaule had drawn thence all his Legions to go and encounter Dioclesian the Provinces being freed from the Troops that kept them in awe attempted likewise to shake off the heavy Yoke of settled Taxes and the arbitrary extorsions of their Governours Which lying heaviest upon the Countrey people they took up arms first Aelianus and Amandus two Officers in the Roman Army were so unwise as to put themselves at the head of them Such slaves as were hardly used by their Masters joyned with them some came into this Party of their own accord and others were surprised into it several were sollioited but most of them scorned the invitation This Rising was call'd Bagaud and the followers of it Bagauds or Bagaudians Which word as some say signifies Revolt and perhaps a Revolt of such as lived in the Woods according to the Etymology of the word from the Ancient Celtick Language For it is likely that those People having no other Fortresses and Places to retire to but Woods they there intrenched themselves after the manner of the Germans and Ancient Gauls There were many Woods without doubt in several places of that Countrey but the chiefest and biggest of them was two Leagues from Paris on the River Marne in a place where now stands the Abbey of St. Maur called des Fossez or of the Ditches because they had digged up a very spacious Trench to incamp there Most of them were Christians And who knows but that after so many horrid Persecutions which they had suffered their patience did turn at last into a just fury in arming them both against the Torments and their Tormentors Maximian taking a review of his Troops near the Town of Aoste on this side of the Alpês the Theb. Legion refused to take the Oaths with the Ceremonies used amongst the Pagans and being encouraged by the Speeches of their Tribune Mauritius chose rather to undergo two or three Decimations and at last to be all cut to pieces then to desite themselves by those abominable Rites The whole Legion was not there some Cohorts having been detached who as we shall see hereafter in another place signaliz'd themselves by a like Victory So many brave Men who despised Death would have sold their lives to the Romans at a very dear rate if it had not been more glorious to die for the Faith which they professed than to fight for it I say further that they would have strengthened very much the Bagaudian Party had their Religion permitted them to dissemble till they had joined them However Maximian having defeated some of these Bagauds and received others into his favour and by this means having divided them he besieged their great Intrenchment both by Land and by Water with so great Vigour and Resolution that at last he took it All those who were found in it were put to the Sword without exception and their strong works were so entirely ruin'd and demolish'd that nothing of them but some few Ditches remained We are to believe saith the Author of the Life of St. Baboulene that these Men being Christians and despising their lives for the sake of their Religion pass'd through Martyrdom to the Kingdom of Heaven and though we have not their Acts in writing nevertheless their Memory and Names shall never be blotted out of the Book of Life These are the new Weapons wherewith M. de Mezeray furnishes the Asserters of the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion Now all these difficulties we are very desirous to remove the better to clear this piece of Ecclesiastical History First then it is suppos'd in the Objection that most part of the Bagauds Army were Christians and that the Emperour Maximian caused the Theb. Legion to be cut off for fear so many brave Men should joyn with and strengthen the Rebels Then it is said that this Objection is taken out of an Ancient Anonymous Writer who hath given us the Life of St. Baboulene and who ought therefore to be credited by reason that these Transactions happened in an Age nearer to his than to our times Our Answer to this will not a little contribute I hope to discover the Falshood of the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion And First in this Account of Mezeray supported by the Authority of that Anonymous Writer we find the Christians divided in their Practice upon a very considerable point of Morality For some of them leaving the Plow take up Arms against their Sovereign and others on the contrary being up in Arms lay them down and patiently submit to the Execution of the barbarous Orders of their Prince Now to what shall we ascribe this difference in their Judgment and practices Was it that the Morality on the other side of the Alps differ'd from that of the Gauls Or must we attribute the cause of this difference to the diversity of their Climates Educations Tempers and Manners But we should spend too much time should we go about to untye this knot therefore the shortest way is to 〈◊〉 it and to 〈◊〉 positively that both 〈…〉 of 〈…〉 that is Christianity would rather loose than get by it The Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion is asserted because it is thought very honourable to Christianity but then to support the Assertion and Insurrection of the first Christians in Gaule is brought in and a rebellious Conspiracy to shake off the Yoak of their Masters So that if those who set up for the defence of an Obedience so intirely passive have in the Example of the Theb. Souldiers a Legion of Martyrs to boast of Those who on the contrary believe that there are some Cases and Times in which Patience ought to give place to other Vertues shall find in the Bagauds a whole Army of Christians in Rebellion against the Empire to oppose to that Legion And shall the Example of one single
the Gospel in Gaule Viz. Gatian at Tours Trophimus at Arles Paul at Narbonne Dionysius at Paris Astremonicus at lermont and Martial at Limoges These are then the new Evangelists sent in the time of Decius to re-kindle the Light of the Gospel in Gaule which had been so long extinguished there From whence it may be gathered that the Christian Religion had not then made any great progress amongst the Gauls since in the Year of our Lord two hundred and fifty there was need to preach it a fresh there and even at Narbonne and Arles Citys rather belonging to Italy then to Gaule and which Sulpitius meant not to speak of if we may believe Father Pagi How is it possible then to imagin that four Years after the Reign of Decius the Christians should be so multiply'd in Gaule as to be in a condition to make up vast Armys and those so formidable as to strike a terrour into Rome it self and to perplex its Emperours This they would fain perswade us by Asserting peremptorily that the Bagauds were Christians and that Maximian destroy'd the Theb. Legion for no other reason but because he was afraid They should joyn with them But Thirdly They are at a very great loss for Arguments to prove the Martyrdom of their Theb. Legion when they are forced to this shift of supposing those Bagauds to have been Christians For they cast no small blemish upon the Ancient Gallican Church who fix such a Character upon her Sons besides they are very much unacquainted with the Morals of the Christians of those Primitive Ages who think they were capable of such injustice and violences as the Bagauds stand charg'd with in History Therefore Mezeray receiving the Bagauds into the Church thought fit to clear them from these odious Aspersions and to justify their proceedings Who knows saith he but that having suffer'd so many horrible Persecutions their Patience turn'd at last into a just Fury in arming themselves both against the Torments and the Tormentors Bucherius endeavours likewise to excuse them saying That the Bagauds were moved to a Rebellion which was in a manner just by reason of the Crueltys and Tyranical Impositions of their Governours Salvianus did the same before them whom perhaps they have both followed He saith That the Bagauds oppressed by their unjust Judges lost all respect for the Majesty of the Empire because they had been Stript of the Rights and Priviledges of Roman Liberty In short the Emperor Augustus the better to procure himself the good Affection of the Gauls had granted to some of them the Roman to others the Latine and to others again the Italic Laws and Liberties Whence Salvian took occasion to say We call the Bagauds Rebels and Profligate Villains when 't is we that have hurried them into these Outrages For how came they to be Bagauds but by our own injustice by our proscriptions of their Persons and violent Vsurpations of their Estates and this is the effect of their being condemned to death and hang'd for the Robberies of their Judges That they are now become like Barbarians because they were not suffered before to live like Romans That Priest of Marseilles who wrote about the year of Our Lord 495 adds several other things whereby the Crimes and Violences which were imputed to the Bagauds are laid to the Charge of the Governours of the Gauls of their Judges and of the Collectors of the Taxes But he never speaks the least Word from whence we may conclude that the Bagauds were Christians but on the contrary his way of speaking on their behalf shews plaingly enough that they did not profess the Christian Religion we need only compare his Apology with those of Athenagoras of St. Austin of Tertullian and especially of Arnobius who lived at the time of the Bagaudian Revolt These Fathers speak of nothing so much as of the Piety Meekness Charity and Innocence of those happy Ages of the Church Whereas Salvian Apologizes for the Bagauds by excusing their Crimes of Injustice Violence and Rebellion Were that true which Mezeray saith of them perhaps Eutropius and Aurelius Victor would have told us something concerning their Religion Prosper might also have taken some notice of it since he makes mention of them in his Chronology so likewise Eumenius in his Panegyrick wherein he informs us that the Bagauds having besieged Autun that City implored the Emperour's Assistance But it is most incredible that Marmertine would have been silent in this Matter in the Panegyrick which he made at Treves in praise of the Emperour Maximian Mr. Cuper saith that he made it in the year 288. The Learned Henry Norris puts it a year later in his curious Dissertations upon the Medal of Dioclesian and Maximian Howsoever it be Mamertine made this publick Speech but few years after the defeat of the Bagauds wherein he endeavours to quicken his discourse by drolling upon their Army and makes a meer jest of it That a Crew of ignorant Rusticks should pretend to the Exercise of Arms and Military Discipline that the Plowman should change his Goad for a Pike the Shepherd leave his Flock to turn Trouper and that the Husband man should plunder and waste his own Estate and destroy the Fruits of his own Labour with as little concern as the most Barbarous Enemy would have done From which sharp and pungent Expressions One may give a shrewd Guess at what he would have added had the Bagauds professed the Christian Religion President Fauchet is One of the French Writers who hath made the greatest discoveries in the Gallick Antiquities But it does not appear that he was of Opinion that the Bagauds were Christians for he saith of them The Gauls being overburdened with publick Subsidies and Taxes rose up in Arms in the year of our Lord 290 or thereabouts under the conduct of Amandus and Aelianus and took the Name of Bagauds which some say signifies in the old Gallick Language Forced Rebels or Traitors and some are of Opinion that they were all Peasants and will have it That the VVord Bagaud signifies Tribute the heavy Taxes being in some parts of France not many years ago called Bagoges These troubles were appeased by Maximian Dioclesians Partner in the Empire Joseph Scaliger saith That Bagaud is not a French VVord but the Name of a Faction or People and that ever since the time of Dioclesian the Highway-men and Robbers were call'd Bagauds Which agrees with what Aurelius Victor saith That Amandus and Aelianus gathered together great numbers of Peasants and Robbers And that which shews it to be the Name of a Faction or Party according to Joseph Scaliger's Observation is that Idacius in his Chronology speaks of the Bagauds who mutined in Spain in the Province of Tarragonia under the Kings Rechila and Theodoricus 'T is also very likely that they wandred from one Countrey to another as the Hordes of the Tartars do
induced to believe that the greatest part of Maximian's Army were Christians only upon the Authority of the Authors of St. Baboulene's Life it will not be amiss to examine what can be built upon this Writer's Authority And iâ— we cast but half an eye upon this Work of his we shall plainly discern that the whole from the beginning to the end of it is made up of nothing but fabulous Legends and Fictions The Manucript is kept at Paris in the Library of St. Germain Des-Prez and James Dubrcuil a Monk of that Abbey made an abrigdment of it and published it in the Year 1614. Mr. Du Chesne inserted it some Years after in his History of France Father Le-Cointe takes notice of it also in his Annals and rejecteth it as altogether unworthy of credit for he observeth that this Writer exactly follows in every thing that Anonymous Impostor who wrote the Acts of the Kings of France of which he gives these following particulars First That he makes Erchenald Major of the Palace in the first Year of Clovis whereas Fredegair calls him who was then in that Office Aeganes Secondly that he confounds Aubert Bishop of Paris under King Clovis with Agilbert who was Bishop of that â—â—e under Clotary Son to Clovis Thirdly that of two Baboulenes one of whom was Abbas Bobâ—ensis and the other Abbas Fosatensis he makes but one Fourthly That he reckons but 85. Years from the Death of Clovis the first to the Death of Clovis the second Fifthly That he makes Clovis the second to succeed his Father Dagobert in the Year of our Lord 643 in the first Indiction And several other faults he finds in the same Author all contrary to the known truth of History But a most notable one is his Saying that the Abbey of St. Maur des Fossez is situate in the place where formerly the Camp of the Bagauds was and that they incamped there because there was then standing an old Castle built by Julius Caesar inclosed with Walls and secured on all sides with large Ditches The truth is that that Abbey of St. Maur is call'd by several Writers of the Later Ages Castrum Bagaudarum Mr. Menage in his Origines upon the Word Bagauds saith that in a Charter of the Abbey of St. Maur granted in the Year 868. St. Maur des Fossez is call'd Castrum Bagaudarum and adds because Anciently it was a Fort of the Bagauds But who told that Anonymus Author that Julius Caesar had built there a noble Castle Nobiliter Constructum He is the only Writer who speaks of that Castle there is not the least mention of it in the Commentaries of Julius Caesar though all his Actions in Gaule are therein Writen with the greatest exactness Moreover this Impostor makes Orosius to say things which he never thought of For Orosius saith that Amandus and Aelianus having got a considerable number of Peasants together raised great disturbances in Gaule which Oblig'd Dioclesian to create Maximianus Herculeus Caesar and to send him thither who being a Man of considerable experience in War easily dispersed that Army of Peasants which was altogether without Order and Discipline But this Anonymous Scribler makes Orosius to say That Amandus and Aelianus were Christians and that they revolted only because they thought that their Religion did not allow them to obey Pagan Princes It is a strange impudence this first to invent Fables and then for the confirmation of them to quote a Famous Historian If we take this Authors quotation out of him for truth Orosius attributes very Noble and Evangelical Morals to the Christians of the Third Century in making them shake off the Authority of their lawful superiours only because they were not of their own Religion Monsieur de Tirlemont makes a Remark very suâ—iable to the purpose It is upon the Acts of St. Maximus related by Baronius in the year 254. There arises saith he yet greater difficulties from what Optimus saith That the Edict of Decius commanded all Christians to forsake their Superstition and to acknowledge their lawful Prince on whom all things depended and to Worship his Gods Against which Mr. Tirlemont with great reason does except thus What does all this mean Should then the Christians have made any difficulty to acknowledg Decius for their Emperour By no means But the truth is that though they were the most Submissive and Truest Subjects to their Princes Nevertheless because they did not prefer them to God himself they were deemed to fall from the duty of their Allegiance In fine this Anonymous Writer of Mezeray's relates the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion very differently both from the counterseit St. Eucherius Surius and Father Chifflet For he saith that Maximian having ordered that all the Souldiers of his Army should swear upon the Altars of his Gods Sacrifice to them and oblige themselves by an Oath that they would persecute the Christians where-ever they should meet with any of them Mauritius answered for the whole Theb. Legion under his Command We know O Emperour how to fight against Rebels and Wicked Persons but we know not how to make War upon Good Men and our own Fellow Subjects Though we are all well Arm'd yet we do'nt make any resistance as being more willing to have our own blood shed than to shed that of others So without any more ado they stretched out their necks to the Executioners and were raised by their Torments to the glory of Paradise And thus this Anonymous Author leads us immediatly to the end of his Romance whereas the supposed St. Eucherius after Maximian hath given his barbarous Orders makes the Theb. Legion to withdraw supposes that it refuses to march saith that it was only decimated at first makes the Emperour to reiterate his Orders relates their Speech to this Prince and so entertaining his Reader with a great number of intervening particulars he at last brings him to the Catastrophe of his Tragedy Whence it follows that the Martyrdom of the Theb. Legion is not originally found but in false and supposititious Writings and was only related at first by Impostours One invented and publish'd the Story of this Martyrdom Another vouch'd for the Truth of that Narrative by another of his own And upon the credit of these two Relators hundreds of others believed it and at last it became a common Opinion in the World For a Tale never misses to be credited when it begins to grow ancient and we see every day that when any Relation hath passed for current for fifty or threescore years it is then almost too late to Contradict or call it in Question CHAP. XVII That it is not True That some Cohorts of the Theb. Legion were detached out of Maximian's Army to March against Carausius TOWARDS the end of the counterfeit Agaunian Acts there is a passage which affords us another proof that this Story of the Theb. Legion is a Forgery It was saith the Author a common report That