*Christian literature.* It was in Africa also that a Latin Christian literature first arose, and it was the African Christian writers who made Latin the language of the church in Italy and the West. Of these Christian apologists the earliest and most influential was Tertullian of Carthage, whose literary activity falls in the time of the Severi. Cyprian and Arn.o.bius continued his task in the third century. In Minucius Felix, a contemporary of Tertullian, the Christian community at Rome found an able defender of the faith.

*Jurisprudence.* In all other sciences the Romans sat at the feet of the Greeks, but in that of jurisprudence they displayed both independence and originality. The growth of Roman jurisprudence was not hampered but furthered by the establishment of the princ.i.p.ate, for the development of a uniform administrative system for the whole empire called for the corresponding development of a uniform system of law. The study of law was stimulated by the practice of Augustus and his successors who gave to prominent jurists the right of publicly giving opinions (_jus publice respondendi_) by his authority on the legal merits of cases under trial. A further encouragement was given by Hadrian's organization of his judicial council. The great service of the jurists of the princ.i.p.ate was the introduction into Roman law of the principles of equity founded on a philosophic conception of natural law and the systematic organization and interpretation of the body of the civil law. Roman jurisprudence reached its height between the accession of Hadrian and the death of Severus Alexander. The chief legal writers of this period were Julian in the time of Hadrian, Gaius in the age of the Antonines, his contemporary Scaevola, the three celebrated jurists of the time of the Severi-Papinian, Paul and Ulpian, all pretorian prefects,-and lastly Modestine, who closes the long line of cla.s.sic juris-consults.

*Greek literature.* If we except the brief period of the Augustan age, the Greek literature of the princ.i.p.ate stands both in quant.i.ty and quality above the Latin. Even Augustus had recognized Greek as the language of government in the eastern half of the empire, and with the gradual abandonment of his policy of preserving the domination of the Italians over the provincials Greeks stood upon the same footing as the Latin speaking provincials in the eyes of the imperial government. In Rome the Greek author received the same recognition as his Roman _confrere_. Greek historians, geographers, scientists, rhetoricians and philosophers wrote not only for Greeks, but for the educated circles of the whole empire. And it was in Greek that the princeps Marcus Aurelius chose to write his Meditations. Nor should it be forgotten that Greek was the language of the early Christian writers, beginning with the Apostle Paul. By the opening of the third century the champions of the new faith had begun to rank among the leading authors of the day in the East as well as in the West.

*Plutarch (c. 50120 A. D.) and Lucian (c. 125200 A. D.)**.* The best known names in the Greek literature of the princ.i.p.ate are Plutarch and Lucian. Plutarch's _Parallel Lives_ of famous Greeks and Romans possess a perpetual freshness and charm. Lucian was essentially a writer of prose satires, a journalist who was "the last great master of Attic eloquence and Attic wit." In the realm of science, Ptolemy the astronomer, and Galen the student of medicine, both active in the second century, profoundly influenced their own and subsequent times.

*Philosophy.* As we have seen, the doctrines of Stoicism continued to appeal to the highest instincts of Roman character. Besides Seneca and Marcus Aurelius this creed found a worthy exponent in the ex-slave Epictetus, who taught between 90 and 120 A. D. at Nicopolis in Epirus.

With Plotinus (204270 A. D.), Greek philosophy became definitely religious in character, resting upon the basis of revelation and belief, not upon that of reason.

*Art.* Roman art found its chief inspiration in, and remained in close contact with, Roman public life. The artists of the princ.i.p.ate may well have been Greeks, but they wrought for Romans and had to satisfy Roman standards of taste. Realism and careful attention to details may be said to be the two great characteristics of Roman art. This is true both of Roman sculpture, which excelled in statues, portrait busts, and the bas-reliefs depicting historical events with which public monuments were richly decorated, and of the repousse and relief work which adorned table ware and other articles of silver, bronze and pottery. The Roman fondness for costly decorations is well ill.u.s.trated by the elaborateness of the frescoes and the mosaics of the villas of Pompeii, and other sites where excavations have revealed the interiors of Roman public and private buildings. The erection of the many temples, basilicas, baths, aqueducts, bridges, amphitheatres and other structures in Rome, Italy and other provinces supplied a great stimulus to Roman architecture and engineering.

It was in the use of the arch and the vault, particularly the vault of concrete, that the Roman architects excelled, and their highest achievements were great vaulted structures like the Pantheon and the Baths of Caracalla. The most striking testimony to the grandeur of Rome comes from the remains of Roman architecture in the provinces-from such imposing ruins as the Porta Nigra of Treves, the theatre at Orange, the Pont du Gard near Nimes, the bridge over the Tagus at Alcantara and the amphitheatres of Nimes in France and El-Djemm in Tunisia. But, like the literature, the Roman art of the princ.i.p.ate in time experienced a loss of creative power. It reached its height under the Flavians and Trajan and then a steady deterioration set in.

*Causes of intellectual decline.* The third century A. D. witnessed a general collapse of ancient civilization, no less striking in its cultural than in its political and economic aspects. This cultural decline was the result of political causes which had been gradually undermining the foundations of a vigorous intellectual life. The culture of Greece culminated in its scientific achievements of the third century B. C. At that time in comparison with the Greeks the neighboring, peoples were at best semi-barbarians; in the eastern Mediterranean the Greeks were the dominant race, still animated by a strong love of political freedom. But the Roman conquest with its ruthless exploitation of the provinces ruined the Greek world economically and broke the morale of the Greek peoples, forcing them to seek their salvation in fawning servility to Rome. The consequence was that as the Greeks came under the dominion of Rome their creative impulses withered, their intellectual progress ceased and their eyes were turned backward upon their past achievements. And the Italians themselves were on too low an intellectual level to develop a culture of their own. They had not progressed beyond the adoption of certain aspects of Greek culture before the century of civil wars between 133 and 30 B. C.

resulted in the establishment of a type of government which gradually crushed out the spirit of initiative in the Latin speaking world. The material prosperity and peace during the first two centuries of the princ.i.p.ate made possible the diffusion of a uniform type of culture throughout the empire as a whole, but after the age of Augustus this is characterized both in the East and in the West by its imitation of the past and its lack of creative power. The third century A. D. with its long period of civil war, foreign invasions, and economic chaos, dealt a fatal blow to the material basis of ancient civilization. The collapse of Graeco-Roman culture was rapid and complete, resembling the breakdown of the civilization of the Aegean Bronze age toward the close of the second millennium before the Christian era. Culturally, the fourth century A. D.

belongs to the Middle Ages.

III. THE IMPERIAL CULT AND THE ORIENTAL RELIGIONS IN ROMAN PAGANISM

*The religious transformation of the Roman world.* The religious transformation of the Roman world during the princ.i.p.ate was fully as important for future ages as its political transformation. This religious development consisted in the diffusion throughout the empire of a group of religions which originated in the countries bordering the eastern sh.o.r.es of the Mediterranean and hence are generally known as Oriental cults. And among these oriental religions are included both Judaism and Christianity.

*The state cults.* However, the worship of the divinities of Graeco-Roman theology by no means died out during the first three centuries of the Christian era. It continued to flourish in the state cult of Rome, and the munic.i.p.al cults of the Italian and provincial towns. With the romanization of the semi-barbarous provinces Graeco-Roman deities displaced or a.s.similated to themselves the G.o.ds of the native populations. Druidism, the national religion of Gaul and Britain, was suppressed chiefly because it fostered a spirit of resistance to Roman rule. But the most widespread and vigorous of the state cults was the worship of the princeps.

*The imperial cult.* We have already discussed the establishment of the imperial cult by Augustus, as a visible expression of the loyalty of the provincials and their acknowledgment of the authority of Rome and the princeps. We have also seen how this cult was perpetuated by the provincial councils organized for that purpose. After the death of Augustus the imperial cult in the provinces gradually came to include the worship of both the ruling Augustus and the _Divi_, or deceased emperors, who had received deification at the hands of the Senate. This practise was established in all the eastern provinces after the time of Claudius, and in the West under the Flavians. In Rome where the cult of the ruling princeps was not practised, Domitian converted the temple of Augustus into a temple of the _Divi_ or the Caesars.

*The pagan Oriental cults.* The pagan Oriental cults whose penetration of the European provinces is so marked a feature in the religious life of the princ.i.p.ate were the cults of the peoples of western Asia and Egypt which had become h.e.l.lenized and adapted for world expansion after Alexander's conquest of the Persian empire. From this time onward they spread throughout the Greek culture world but it was not until the establishment of the world empire of Rome with its facilities for, and stimulus to, intercourse between all peoples within the Roman frontiers that they were able to obtain a foothold in western Europe. Their penetration of Italy began with the official reception of the cult of the Great Mother of Pessinus at Rome in 205 B. C., but the Roman world as a whole held aloof from them until the close of the republic. However, during the first two centuries of the princ.i.p.ate they gradually made their way over the western parts of the empire.

The expansion of the Oriental cults followed the lines of the much frequented trade routes along which they were carried by travelers, merchants and colonies of oriental traders. The army cantonments were also centers for their diffusion, not only through the agency of troops recruited in the East but also through detachments which had seen service there in the course of the numerous wars on the eastern frontiers.

Likewise the oriental slaves were active propagandists of their native faiths.

The explanation of the ready reception of these cults among all cla.s.ses of society is that they guaranteed their adherents a satisfaction which the official religions were unable to offer. The state and munic.i.p.al cults were mainly political in character, and with the disappearance of independent political life they lost their hold upon men who began to seek a refuge from the miseries of the present world in the world of the spirit and the promise of a future life. This want the Oriental cults were able to meet with the doctrines of a personal religion far different from the formal worship of the Graeco-Roman deities.

Certain characteristics of doctrine and ritual were common to the majority of the Oriental cults. They had an elaborate ritual which appealed both to the senses and to the emotions of the worshippers. By witnessing certain symbolic ceremonies the believer was roused to a state of spiritual ecstasy in which he felt himself in communion with the deity, while by the performance of sacramental rites he felt himself cleansed from the defilements of his earthly life and fitted for a purer spiritual existence. A professional priesthood had charge of the worship, ministered to the needs of individuals, and conducted missionary work. To an age of declining intellectual vigor, when men gave over the attempt to solve by scientific methods the riddle of the universe, they spoke with the authority of revelation, giving a comforting theological interpretation of life. And they appealed to the conscience by imposing a rigid rule of conduct, the observance of which would fit the believer for a happier existence in a future life.

The most important of these oriental divinities were the Great Mother of Pessinus, otherwise known as Cybele, worshipped in company with the male deity Attis; the Egyptian pair Isis and Serapis; Atayatis or the Syrian G.o.ddess, the chief female divinity of North Syria; a number of Syrian G.o.ds (Ba'als) named from the site of their Syrian shrines; and finally Mithra, a deity whose cult had long formed a part of the national Iranian religion. Towards all these cults the Roman state displayed wide toleration, only interfering with them when their orgiastic rites came into conflict with Roman conceptions of morality. But in spite of this toleration it required a long time before the conservative prejudices of the upper cla.s.ses of Roman society were sufficiently undermined to permit of their partic.i.p.ation in these foreign rites. For one hundred years after the introduction of the worship of the Magna Mater Romans were prohibited from enrolling themselves in the ranks of her priesthood. A determined but unsuccessful attempt was made by the Senate during the last century of the republic to drive from Rome the cult of Isis, the second of these religions to find a home in Italy, and in 42 B. C. the triumvirs erected a temple to this G.o.ddess. Augustus, however, banished her worship beyond the _pomerium_. But this restriction was not enforced by his successors, and by 69 A. D. the cult of the Egyptian G.o.ddess was firmly established in the capital. The various Syrian deities were of less significance in the religious life of the West, although as we have seen Elagabalus set up the worship of one of them, the Sun G.o.d of Emesa, as an official cult at Rome.

The Oriental cult which in importance overshadowed all the rest was Mithraism, one of the latest to cross from Asia into Europe. In Zoroastrian theology Mithra appears as the spirit who is the chief agent of the supreme G.o.d of light Ormuzd in his struggle against Ahriman, the G.o.d of darkness. He is at the same time a beneficent force in the natural world and in the moral world the champion of righteousness against the powers of evil. Under Babylonian and Greek influences Mithra was identified with the Sun-G.o.d, and appears in Rome with the t.i.tle the Unconquered Sun-G.o.d Mithra (_deus invictus sol Mithra_). Towards the close of the first century A. D. Mithraism began to make its influence felt in Rome and the western provinces, and from that time it spread with great rapidity. Mithra, as the G.o.d of battles, was a patron deity of the soldiers, who became his zealous missionaries in the frontier camps. His cult was also regarded with particular favor by the emperors, whose authority it supported by the doctrine that the ruler is the chosen of Ormuzd and an embodiment of the divine spirit. It is not surprising then that Aurelian, whose coins bore the legend _dominus et deus natus_ (born G.o.d and lord), made the worship of the Unconquered Sun-G.o.d the chief cult of the state.

*Philosophy.* Attention has already been called to the value of Stoicism in supplying its adherents with a highly moral code of conduct. Other philosophical systems, notably Epicureanism, likewise inculcated particular rules of life. But the philosophical doctrines which were best able to hold their own with the new religions were those of Neoplatonism and Neopythagoreanism, which came into vogue in the course of the second century, and exhibited a combination of mysticism and idealism well suited to the spirit of the age.

*Astrology and magic.* Throughout the princ.i.p.ate all cla.s.ses of society were deeply imbued with a superst.i.tious fatalism which caused them to place implicit belief in the efficacy of astrology and magic. Chaldean and Egyptian astrologers enjoyed a great reputation, and were consulted on all important questions. They were frequently banished from Rome by the emperors who feared that their predictions might give encouragement to their enemies. However, these very emperors kept astrologers in their own service, and the decrees of banishment never remained long in force. The almost universal belief in miracles and oracles caused the appearance of a large number of imposters who throve on the credulity of their clients.

One of the most celebrated of these was the Alexander who founded a new oracle of Aesculapius at Abonoteichus in Paphlagonia, the fame of which spread throughout the whole empire and even beyond its borders. In his expose of the methods employed by this false prophet, the satirist Lucian gives a vivid picture of the depraved superst.i.tion of his time.

At the close of the princ.i.p.ate the pagan world presented a great confusion of religious beliefs and doctrines. However, the various pagan cults were tolerant one of another, for the followers of one G.o.d were ready to acknowledge the divinity of the G.o.ds worshipped by their neighbors. On the contrary, the adherents of Judaism and Christianity refused to recognize the pagan G.o.ds, and hence stood in irreconcilable opposition to the whole pagan world.

IV. CHRISTIANITY AND ITS RELATION TO THE ROMAN STATE

*The Jews of the Roman empire.* Alexander the Great's conquest of the Near East had thrown open to the Jews the whole Graeco-Macedonian world, and Jewish settlements rapidly appeared in all its important commercial centers. The Jewish colonies were encouraged by the h.e.l.lenistic monarchs who granted them immunity from military service, protection in the exercise of their religion, and a privileged judicial status in the cities where they were established. In course of time the number of Jews in these _diaspora_ became much greater than in Judaea itself. Although the Jews resident outside of Syria had adopted the Greek language, and were influenced in many ways by their contact with h.e.l.lenistic culture, they still formed part of the religious community presided over by the High Priest at Jerusalem, and in addition to the annual contribution of two drachmas to the temple of Jehovah, every Jew was expected to visit Jerusalem and offer up sacrifice in the temple at least once in the course of his life. Moreover, they were active in proselytizing and made many converts among the Greeks and other peoples with whom they came into contact. However, their connection with Judaea was purely religious and not political in character.

The privileged status which the Jews had enjoyed in the h.e.l.lenistic states was recognized by the Romans and was specifically confirmed by Augustus, although this policy caused considerable dissatisfaction among their Greek fellow townsmen. Furthermore, in deference to the peculiarity of their religion, the Jews were not required to partic.i.p.ate in the imperial cult.

However, the imperial government made no attempt to foster settlements of the Jews in the western provinces, and during the early princ.i.p.ate the only considerable Jewish colony west of the Adriatic was that in Rome.

With the exception of Caligula, who tried to force the imperial cult upon the Jews, the successors of Augustus did not interfere with the Jewish religion, except to forbid its propaganda. The expulsions of the Jews from Rome under Tiberius and Claudius were not religious persecutions but police measures taken for the maintenance of good order within the city.

*Christianity and Judaism.* The Christian religion had its origin in Judaea as a result of the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified by the Roman authorities in the princ.i.p.ate of Tiberius, after having been condemned for blasphemy by the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high court for the enforcement of the law of Moses. From Judaea Christianity spread to the Jewish _diaspora_ through the missionary activity of the disciples and other followers of Jesus, particularly the Apostle Paul.

Although the Christian propaganda was not confined to these Jewish communities, it was among them that the first Christian congregations arose, and this, with the Jewish origin of the new faith, caused the Christians to be regarded by the Roman government as a sect of the Jews.

In 49 A. D. Claudius banished the Jews from Rome because of disorders among them between the Christians and the adherents of the older faith.

Nero's persecution of the Christians in 64 A. D. was, as we have seen, not undertaken on religious grounds, and was perhaps due to Jewish instigation. On the whole, the Christians benefited by the att.i.tude of Rome towards their sect, for it gave them the benefit of the immunities which the adherents of Judaism enjoyed.

Although the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A. D. brought about the predominance of the non-Jewish element in the Christian ranks, until the end of the rule of the Flavians the Roman official world made no distinction between Jew and Christian. Domitian apparently exacted the _didrachma_ from both alike. Towards the close of his reign, in 95 A. D., this princeps executed or banished a number of Romans of senatorial rank on charges of atheism or conversion to Judaism. Among the victims were some who professed Christianity. At the same time the Christian communities of Asia Minor seem to have suffered a rather serious persecution on the part of the state. However, this may have been due to disturbances between the Christian and the non-Christian elements in the Greek cities, and there is no definite proof that Domitian made the suppression of Christianity part of the public policy.

*Christianity and the Roman state.* After Domitian, Christians were no longer liable to the _didrachma_, and therefore lost their claim to the privileges and exemptions of the Jews. A conflict with the secular power was rendered inevitable by the very nature of Christianity, which was non-Roman, non-national, and monotheistic, refusing recognition to the cults of the state, and denying the divinity of the ruler. The Romans regarded the imperial cult from the political standpoint and considered the refusal to recognize the divinity of the princeps as an act of treason. On the other hand, Christians looked upon the question as a matter of conscience and morality and regarded the worship of the princeps as an act of idolatry. They could pray for him, but not to him. These two points of view were impossible of reconciliation. Furthermore, since the worship of the state G.o.ds formed such an integral part of the public life of each community, it was inevitable that those who refused to partic.i.p.ate in this worship should be looked upon as atheists and public enemies. On another ground also the Christians were liable to punishment under the _lex maiestatis_, namely, as forming unauthorized religious a.s.sociations.

These const.i.tuted the crimes for which the Christians were actually punished from the close of the first to the middle of the third century of our era.

*Popular accusations against the Christians.* However, throughout this period the state did not take the initiative against Christians as such, but only dealt with those individuals against whom specific charges were laid by private initiative or the action of local magistrates. These popular accusations charged the Christians with forming illegal a.s.sociations, with seeking the destruction of mankind (as _odiatores humani generis_), and with perpetrating all sorts of monstrous crimes in their religious rites. Such accusations were partly due to the belief of the early Christian church in the immediate coming of the kingdom of Christ, to their consequent scorn of wealth and public honors, and to the secrecy which surrounded the exercise of their religion.

*The imperial policy from Trajan to Maximus.* The att.i.tude of the Roman government towards the Christians in the early second century is clearly seen from the correspondence between Trajan and Pliny the younger, the governor of Bithynia in 112 A. D. This correspondence fails to reveal any specific law prohibiting Christianity, but shows that the admission of the name of Christian, accompanied by the refusal to worship the G.o.ds of the state and the princeps, const.i.tuted sufficient grounds for punishment.

Thus a great deal of discretion was left to the provincial governor, who was directed to pay no attention to anonymous accusations but who was expected to repress Christianity whenever its spread caused conflicts with the non-Christian element under his authority. A rescript of Hadrian to Minucius Funda.n.u.s, proconsul of Asia, ordained that Christians should receive the benefit of a regular trial, and that they should not be condemned for the name, but for some definite crime, _e. g._, for treason.

An exception to the general policy of the emperors in the second century was the persecution of the Christian community at Lyons authorized by Marcus Aurelius. With the state straining every nerve in its struggle with the barbarians, he regarded the Christians as defaulters to the cause of the empire, and as unreasonable, ecstatic transgressors of the law. The att.i.tude of Septimius Severus towards the Christians was in harmony with the procedure of Trajan and Hadrian. In 202 A. D. he ordered the governor of Syria to forbid Jewish proselytizing and Christian propaganda, but forbade that Christians should be sought out with the object of persecution. Severus Alexander showed himself well-disposed towards Christianity and the brief persecution of Maximinus the Thracian was merely a spasmodic expression of hatred against those protected by his predecessor.

*The persecutions of the third century.* By the middle of the third century the Christian church was in a flourishing condition. It numbered among its adherents men in all walks of life, its leaders were men of culture and ability, and abandoning the att.i.tude of the early church towards the Kingdom of Heaven, the Christians were taking an active part in the society in which they lived. The number of the Christians was so great as to disquiet the government, since in view of their att.i.tude towards the cults of the state they were still traitors in the eyes of the law. And so in their struggle against the forces which threatened the dissolution of the empire, certain of its rulers sought to stamp out Christianity as a means of restoring religious and political harmony and loyalty among their subjects. The Christians were regarded as enemies within the gates and the calamities of the time were attributed to the anger of the G.o.ds towards these unbelievers. In 250 A. D. Decius reversed the principle enunciated by Septimius Severus and ordained that Christians were to be sought out and brought to trial. This was accomplished by ordering all the citizens of the empire by munic.i.p.alities to perform public acts of worship to the G.o.ds of the state. Those who refused were punished. The persecution of Decius was terminated by his death in 251, but his policy was renewed by Valerian in 257 A. D. In that year Valerian required the Christians to offer sacrifice publicly, forbade their reunions and closed their cemeteries. In 258 he ordered the immediate trial of bishops, priests and other officers of the churches, and set penalties for the various grades of the clergy who persisted in their beliefs. But Valerian's persecution also was brief and ended with his defeat and capture by the Persians in 258 A. D. Naturally, in so large a body as the Christians now were not all were animated by the zeal and sincerity of the early brethren, and under threat of punishment many, at least openly, abjured their faith. However, many others cheerfully suffered martyrdom and by their example furthered the Christian cause.

Truly, "the blood of the martyrs was the seed of the church." The persecutions tried the church sorely, but it emerged triumphant from the ordeal.

*Organization of the Christian church.* The early Christians formed a number of small, independent communities, united by ties of common interest, of belief, and of continual intercourse. Although the majority of their members were drawn, from the humbler walks of life, they were by no means confined to the proletariat. In their organization these communities were all of the same general type, resembling the Roman religious _collegia_, but local variations were common. Each church community was directed by a committee, whose members were called at times elders (presbyters), at times overseers (bishops). These were a.s.sisted by deacons, who, like themselves, were elected by the congregation to which they belonged. Among the presbyters or bishops one may have acted as president. The functions of the bishops were primarily administrative, including the care of the funds of the a.s.sociation, the care of the poor, the friendless, and traveling brethren, and of discipline among the members of the community. The deacons were the subordinates of the bishops, and a.s.sisted in the religious services and the general administration of the community.

But before the close of the princ.i.p.ate this loose organization had been completely changed as a result of separatist tendencies among the Christians themselves and the increasing official oppression to which they were exposed. The opposition to these forces resulted in a strict formulation of evangelic doctrine and a firmer organization of the church communities. This organization came to be centralized in the hands of the bishops, now the representatives of the communities. The episcopate was no longer collegiate, but monarchical, and claimed authority by virtue of apostolic succession. Apparently the president of the committee of bishops or presbyters had become the sole bishop, and the presbyters had become priests subject to his authority, although at times presiding over separate congregations. The bishops were now regularly nominated by the clergy, approved by the congregation, and finally inducted into office by the ceremony of ordination. Besides their administrative powers, the bishops had the guardianship of the traditions and doctrines of the church. The clergy were now salaried officers, sharply distinguished from the laity, who gradually ceased to partic.i.p.ate actively in the government and regulation of worship of their respective communities, and these communities had developed into corporations organized on a juristic basis, promising redemption to their members and withholding it from deserters.

*The primacy of Rome.* In the third century, a movement took place for the organization of the separate churches in larger unions, and in this way the provincial synods arose. In these the metropolitan bishops, that is, those from the provincial administrative centers, a.s.sumed the leadership.

Among the churches of the empire as a whole two rival tendencies made themselves manifest. The one was to accord equal authority to all the bishops, the other to recognize the supremacy of the bishop of Rome. The claim for the primacy of the Roman see was based upon the imperial political status of Rome, and the special history of the Roman church. It was strongly pressed by certain bishops of the second century who laid emphasis upon the claim of the Roman bishopric to have been established by the Apostle Peter.

PART IV

THE AUTOCRACY OR LATE EMPIRE: 285565 A. D.

CHAPTER XXI