er the name itself should be
visited, though clear of flagitious acts (_flagitia_), or only when
connected with them." He says he had ordered for execution such as
persevered in their profession after repeated warnings, "as not
doubting, whatever it was they professed, that at any rate contumacy and
inflexible obstinacy ought to be punished." He required them to invoke
the gods, to sacrifice wine and frankincense to the images of the
Emperor, and to blaspheme Christ; "to which," he adds, "it is said no
real Christian can be compelled." Renegades informed him that "the sum
total of their offence or fault was meeting before light on an appointed
day, and saying with one another a form of words (_carmen_) to Christ,
as if to a god, and binding themselves by oath (not to the commission of
any wickedness, but) against the commission of theft, robbery, adultery,
breach of trust, denial of deposits; that, after this they were
accustomed to separate, and then to meet again for a meal, but eaten all
together and harmless; however, that they had even left this off after
his edicts enforcing the imperial prohibition of _hetaeriae_ or
associations." He proceeded to put two women to the torture, but
"discovered nothing beyond a bad and excessive superstition"
(_superstitionem pravam et immodicam_), "the contagion" of which, he
continues, "had spread through villages and country, till the temples
were emptied of worshippers."

In these testimonies, which will form a natural and convenient text for
what is to follow, we have various characteristics brought before us of
the religion to which they relate. It was a superstition, as all three
writers agree; a bad and excessive superstition, according to Pliny; a
magical superstition, according to Suetonius; a deadly superstition,
according to Tacitus. Next, it was embodied in a society, and, moreover,
a secret and unlawful society or _hetaeria_; and it was a proselytizing
society; and its very name was connected with "flagitious," "atrocious,"
and "shocking" acts.

Now these few points, which are not all which might be set down, contain
in themselves a distinct and significant description of Christianity;
but they have far greater meaning when illustrated by the history of the
times, the testimony of later writers, and the acts of the Roman
government toward its professors. It is impossible to mistake the
judgment passed on the religion by these three writers, and still more
clearly by