The rise and fall of religions can, often times, be linked to the rise and fall of the empires in which they exist, or the tides of favor that sweep over a people when choosing a faith. Not too often, however, does an empire and its people actually become a religion, or does that religion become an empire. Such, however, happens to be the case when looking at the metamorphosis of Christianity from the time of Roman Emperor Constantine to when the Empire became Christian. For there exists between the two a definite tie that becomes coupled - so intertwined that separation would mean the fall of one or both. The Roman Empire became Christian, and, in turn, and perhaps more importantly, Christianity became the Roman Empire.

Gaius Aurelius Valerius Diocletianus, better known as Diocletian, assumed the throne of Emperor in AD 284, ending almost 50 years of anarchy, with over twenty-five men claiming the throne "with at least some measure of acceptance."1 He stabilized the government and then divided it into four parts, with his colleague Maximium ruling the larger but poorer eastern Empire as co-Emperor. Underneath Diocletian was chosen a successor by the name of Galerius, and Maximium's successor was Constantius Chlorus, who ruled over most of Britain. In 305, however, Diocletian abdicated and forced Maximium to, as well. This left Constantius and Galerius as co-emperors. Maximium's son, Maxentius, however, had himself declared Emperor in Rome. Neither Galerius nor Constantius liked this, and Galerius sent an army to crush Maxentius, but that army was defeated. Before Constantius could send an army, however, he died, and his son, Constantine, was declared Emperor by his troops. In 311, Galerius died, and left his son Maximin as his heir.2

In AD 312, Constantine invaded Rome. He held a rightful claim to being Emperor, and at that point regained his throne by defeating his enemy, Maxentius. According to sources, Constantine used a Christian insignia he had seen in a dream to adorn his men's shields, and then they won. He then also conquered Maximin, and ruled as sole Emperor over the mighty Roman Empire.3

Sources differ, however, when discussing whether or not Constantine was authentically a Christian. Some sources believe that Constantine was really just a wily politician, and used Christianity as a means to unify his empire, as opposed to suppressing something he perhaps saw as inevitable.4 Other sources believe that he had been truly converted, had acknowledged the Christian god as supreme, and had determined to obey Him.5 In any case, Constantine went down in history as the first Christian monarch.

In 330, Constantine founded a new capital of the Roman Empire, known as Constantinopolis, (or as the "New Rome"), in the Eastern half of the Empire.6 The division between the eastern and western Roman Empires had existed for hundreds of years. In the time of the Roman Republic, the senate had elected two consuls: one to command the army in the western area and one to head the army in the eastern. This started the decay of Rome, the old capital, that lasted past its sack in 410. One item of note, however, was that Constantinople was an undeniably Christian city. No temples dedicated to the pagan gods were visible, and, indeed, "[f]rom its very inauguration the New Rome was ostensibly and officially Christian."7

This sets the stage for the conversion of the Roman Empire into a Christian Empire. Prior to Constantine's reign, the Roman Empire had been heavily persecuting the Christians. This was a widely accepted practice, and had been officially sanctioned on occasion, such as by the infamous Emperor Nero in AD 64.8 "The emperors had indeed opposed Christianity as disloyal and revolutionary... [and] had more that once put forth their whole strength to root it out. But the unity of the Empire, and the ease of communication through[out] its parts, had favored the spread of the new faith: persecution had scattered the seeds more widely, had forced on it a firm organization, had given it martyr-heros and a history."9 This clearly shows the strength and effectivness of the religion in unifying the populace, a force Constantine used when unifying the Empire.

Another of the irrevocable effects of Christianity was the fact that it destroyed belief whilst creating it. "[T]hat is, if you credited it, you had ... to credit the view that went with it, denying the character of god to all other divine powers whatsoever. Let us suppose ... a hundred pagans confronted with competing miracles wrought by the holy men, ... some [attributed to a] pagan deity and [some attributed to] the Christian deity; and let us suppose the miracles to have been wonderful in the same degree, and to have produced the same number of converts - fifty each. Yet in the end only the pagan ranks will have been diminished. Fifty pagans have simply added one more name to the pantheon they venerate; but the remaining fifty now deny that pantheon entire. It was this result, destruction, that the non-Christians of the time perceived as uniquely Christian..."10 This was one way that Christianity could spread - all who embraced it therefore scorned all other gods. This combined with a strict moral code that "seemed to have something to please everyone,"11 led to its quick spread. Also, there was great appeal to a religion that said those who were faithful in this world needed no money, for they would receive the kingdom of heaven. The religion had instant appeal to the lower classes. There is a smooth transition from the Roman Empire into a Christian Empire. The rise of the Christian Empire came only out of the ashes of the already decaying Roman Empire. "... [T]hat great body was invaded by open violence, or undermined by slow decay..."12 What was wrought was only because of the needed filler to occupy the otherwise empty husk of a government. Christianity was both the catalyst and the result of the revitalization of the Roman Empire, under one god. But an erroneous idea would be to consider the change as happening overnight. Indeed, although Constantine proclaimed himself to be a Christian monarch, most of the populous was not.13 In fact, it was only when he died that Christians approached being a majority in his empire.14

In 313 Constantine issued an edict (The Edict of Milan) that made Christianity a lawful religion within the Empire.15 This, though, by no means pinpointed the time when the Roman Army became Christian. Suffering under many years of hard persecutions, there were, in turn, very few Christians actually remaining within the army. When Constantine fought the first time in 312, with the insignia on his men's shields, very few of them were Christian. This slowly changed under the influence of Constantine. First, Constantine declared several days (Sundays, holy days, etc.) where his Christian soldiers didn't have to work. This, in and of itself, caused a portion of the army to convert over time. Second, the effect of having a Christian Emperor influenced another chunk of the army, in an effort not to offend their own emperor. These men were known to shout monotheistic phrases, inciting their own ranks.16 Another mistake that might be made would be to think that just because Rome was sacked in 410 by the Visigoths the Roman Empire was doomed to fail. The Western Empire "fell" in a sense, but the very real Eastern Empire, which also had an emperor, continued to thrive long afterwards.17 "... [H]istory has already shown that the powers of government were divided rather than removed."18 Also, "... the Emperor Justinian (527-565) had repossessed some of the western provinces from their German rulers, demonstrating dramatically that Rome still lived on even if its center was on the Bosporus and even though some lands had been irretrievably lost to the barbarians."19 One of the strong points of the Eastern Empire was Constantinople itself. It was well placed militarily, for example, historically it was one of the few places that successfully resisted Philip of Macedon in 339 BC. It was easily well defended. The advantage, however, that Constantinople had was its location. It occupied an area near a strait that all ships needed to go through to get from the plains north of the Black Sea to the lands of Greece, Asia Minor, and Syria.20 Indeed, the West had "nothing comparable to a city like Constantinople."21 It was a strong city from which to rule the stronger half of the Empire, from which the seeds of Christianity could germinate and continue spreading outward into the rest of the Empire and the known world. Over the span of more than 350 years (over 50 emperors), the Roman empire absorbed and was absorbed by Christianity. It got to the point where "Christianity as well as civilization became conterminous with the Roman Empire. To be a Roman was to be a Christian: and this idea soon passed into the converse. To be a Christian was to be a Roman."22

Other arguments against the embrace of the Christianity by the Empire say: "Christianity was the downfall of the Roman Empire." This is unarguably false. Christianity can be viewed as an unstoppable rising tide.23 This tide was an uncontrollable outside event that happened to the Roman Empire. The occurrence of Christianity was like a dominant genetic mutant strain in the body that was the Empire. Prior to Constantine, Christians were seen as atheists24 and, on occasion, cannibals. (They would eat the body and drink the blood of their god.) The empire could fight this strain over countless generations, however, doing so would cripple an already decaying empire. Christianity would eventually erode away the empire, to be washed away forever. The emperors for the first three centuries after the spark of Christianity was lit failed to see this, and much of the energy of the empire was spent trying to purge itself of this new way of thinking.25

Constantine saw that the only way for the empire to coexist with this new organization was to stop fighting it and embrace it. Because of this decision, he allowed the empire to go on and fight for many more years before the barbarian tribes descended on it, and even then the eastern empire didn't fall.26

After the reign of Constantine was Constantiuus. (He was one of three sons of Constantine, but Constans and Constantine II were killed, one by his brother, and one by his general.)27 These sons were the first Emperors to be brought up with a Christian education. They were, unfortunately, cruel, and whittled away at each other until they only numbered one, and that was the sole Emperor, Constantius. His successor was Julian, second son of Constantine's half brother. Julian was an "ardent non-Christian"28 and he was quite successful militarily, re-taking parts of Gaul and successfully attacking the Persians. He, however, died in 363 from a spear wound to the belly. He was the last pagan emperor on the Roman throne.29

By AD 407 Christianity had become the state religion and almost a state institution. Non-Christians, like the Christians until 313, became virtual outlaws, with the destruction or conversion of their temples having long since taken place.30 Millions of people constituting almost all of the Roman Empire had converted, some by logic, some by force.31 The transformation of Christianity into the Roman Empire and Rome into a Christian Empire was complete but for one tiny detail: The Roman Empire was collapsing slowly, evolving from the pressures and conquests of barbarian hordes. This eventually, under Germanic influence, would become the Holy Roman Empire.

Thus, Christianity clearly became the Roman Empire. All that was Christian was Roman, and all the was Roman was Christian. The definite tie between the Romans and the Christians became untieable, and the Empire continued on for centuries to come, existing in the east if nowhere else. The civilization, in the fifth century, if not already falling quickly, had definitely become a mere eclipse of its former prestige. Christianity, however, was flourishing symbiotically with new hosts like the Germanic Tribes, and would carry with it several centuries of Roman culture, being one religion that would not end with the fall of its own empire.

Notes

1 Asimov, Isaac. The Roman Empire. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1967. p. 140.
2 Asimov, p. 170-1.
3 Asimov, p. 172-4.
4 Asimov, p. 174.
5 MacMullen, Ramsay. Christianizing the Roman Empire Boston: Yale University Press, 1984. p. 43.
6 Asimov, p. 182.
7 Bury, J.B. The History of the Later Roman Empire. 2 vols. London: MacMillan & Co., 1923. p. 74.
8 Bryce, James. The Holy Roman Empire. 4th ed. New York: Macmillan & Co, 1904. p. xxxi.
9 Bryce, p. 9.
10 MacMullen, p. 109.
11 Asimov, p. 68.
12 Gibbon, Edward. The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. 1787; rpt. New York: Washington Square Press, 1963. p. 86.
13 MacMullen, p. 43-51.
14 Asimov, p. 174.
15 Bryce, p. xxxi.
16 MacMullen, p. 44-6.
17 Bryce, p. 26.
18 Gibbon, p. 275.
19 Sullivan, Richard. Heirs of the Roman Empire. New York: Cornell University Press, 1960. p. 3.
20 Asimov, p. 181.
21 Lestocquoy, J. "Origins of Medieval Civilization and the Problem of Continuity." The Pirenne Thesis. Ed. Alfred F. Hauighust. Boston: DC Heath & Co, 1958. p. 47.
22 Bryce, p. 13.
23 Asimov, p. 174.
24 MacMullen, p. 15.
25 Bryce, p. 9.
26 Asimov, p. 220.
27 Asimov, p. 185-6.
28 MacMullen, p. 45.
29 Asimov, p. 192-3.
30 MacMullen, p. 102.
31 MacMullen, p. 90-4.
 
 
 
 
 
 

Bibliography

Asimov, Issac. The Roman Empire. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1967.
 

Easy book to read, with lots of facts and a clear voice that is easy to understand. The drawback is the alleged "facts" are sometimes erroneous or out of order. Interesting perspective because Asimov is obviously not a Christian.

Bryce, James. The Holy Roman Empire. 4th ed. New York: MacMillan & Co., 1904.
 

This book was easy to read and also agreed with my thesis. Biased toward the Empire after the barbarian invasions.

Bury, J.B. The History of the Later Roman Empire. 2 vols. London: MacMillan & Co., 1923.
 

A complete book that delt with everything in a fairly chronological order. It was written in a style, however, that makes gleaning facts difficult.

Gibbon, Edward. The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. 1787; rpt. New York: Washington Square Press, 1963.
 

This was a condensed version, and the index seemed to be "off", since I could never find what I wanted where it said it was. A complete chapter on my subject, however.

Lestocquoy, J. "Origins of Midieval Civilization and the Problem of Continuity." The Pirenne Thesis. Ed. Alfred F. Hauighust. Boston: DC Heath & Co, 1958.
 

A short journel article that didn't really give me much information.

MacMullen, Ramsay. Christianizing The Roman Empire. Boston: Yale University Press, 1984.
 

The most useful book of the lot, it was easy to read and had several good examples. I used this book the most, because the information wasn't padded in useless writing, but got right to the point.

Sullivan, Richard. Heirs of the Roman Empire. New York: Cornell University Press, 1960.
 

A shorter book that dealt with a time period starting shortly before the end of the one with which I dealt.