AURELIAN

AURELIUS, MARCUS 229

ef hw predecessors, Bishops Amator and Germa-nus, to be written. His remains, buried atAuxerre, were held in great veneration for theirmiraculous powers. They were disinterred andenclosed in a golden chest, which was plunderedby the Huguenots in 1567. The relics, however,though partially dispersed, are said to have beenpreserved in a hollow pillar in the crypt. ( ActaSS. Boll. Sept. vii. 86-111.) [C. D.]

AURELIAN, a.d. 270-275. The few factswhich connect the name of this emperor withthe history of the Christian Church are asfollows :—(1) He is said (Vopiscus, c. 20) to havereproached the Roman Senate for not consultingthe Sibylline books, as their fathers would havedone, at a time of danger and perplexity. “ Itwould seem,” he said, “ as if you were holdingyour meetings in a Church of the Christiansinstead of in the Temple of all the Gods.” Thewords imply, it is clear, a half-formed suspicionthat the decline of the old faith was causedby the progress of the new, and shew that thebuildings used for the worship of Christians werebecoming more and more conspicuous. Thedecree of Gallienus recognising Christianity as areligio licita had apparently stimulated their ac-tivity in this direction. (2) Startled by therapid progress which the rival creed was making,Aurelian is said to have resolved towards theclose of his reign on taking active measures forits repression. The edict of Gallienus was to berescinded. A thrill of fear pervaded the Chris-tian population of the empire. The emperor wassurrounded by counsellors who urged on him apolicy of persecution. His death, however, hin-dered the execution of his plans, and the conflictwas for a time deferred. (3) In the interval wefind him connected, singularly enough, with theaction of the Church in a case of heresy. Paulof Samosata had been chosen as bishop of An-tioch in A.D. 260. A synod of bishops includingFirmilianus of the Cappadocian Caesarea, Gre-gory Thaumaturgus, and others, had condemnedhis teaching; but on receiving promises of amend-ment had left him in possession of the see. An-other (a.d. 270) deposed him and Domnus wasappointed in his place. Paul, however, relyingperhaps on the support of Zenobia, queen ofPalmyra, refused to submit to their decision andkept possession of the episcopal residence. Suchwas the position of affairs at Antioch when Au-relian, having conquered Zenobia, became masterof the city. The orthodox bishops appealed tothe emperor to settle the question at issue, sofar as it affected the rights of property, and hegave judgment that the house should belong tothose to whom the bishops in Italy and in Romehad addressed their epistles. So far as the Chris-tian society was recognised at all, it was betterthat it should be as a society having a cen-tralized organization, the heads of which wereunder the immediate control of the imperial go-vernment. (Euseb. H. E. viii. 27-30). [E. H. P.]AURELIAN, praefect of the east and consul,succeeded Proculus as praefect of Constantinoplem 392. His name appears in the title of severalof Theodosius* laws {Cod. Theod. Chronol. tom. i.?■ 127, tom. vi. p. 352). On the fall of Eutropiusin 399, he was charged with the duty of con-ducting the eunuch to his place of banishment inCyprus; and when he was recalled to Constanti-

nople, Aurelian presided at the commission atChalcedon, by which he was condemned andexecuted {Cod. Theod. tom. xi. p. 312; Philo-storg. xi. 6). In 400 he became consul. Duringhis consulship he owed his life to the mediationof Chrysostom. Gainas had marched his troopsto the neighbourhood of Constantinople, andrefused to lay down his arms unless the heads ofAurelian and Saturninus were given him. Thefeeble Arcadius dared not refuse, and the twohighest functionaries of the state were sent outto the camp of Gainas at Chalcedon. Chrysostom,“ as the common father of his flock,” on hearingof their impending fate, set out at once for thebarbarian’s headquarters, and gave him no rest,until he had obtained a promise to spare theirlives. Gainas, however, did not set his prisonersfree till he had made them suffer all the horrorsof death. The sword was actually drawn andraised as if in act to strike. They were thenbanished to the Goths, whence they returned onthe fall of Gainas (Soc. vi. 6 ; Soz. viii. 4 ; Zosim.v. p. 759; Chrysost. Homil. iii. pp. 405 sq.; ed.Montf.). He is probably the same to whomSynesius addressed several letters {Ep. xxxi.xxxiv. xxxviii.), from the first of which, writtenin 416, it would appear that he held a secondprefecture under Theodosius II. with the title ofPatrician. We learn from an epigram {Anthol,lib. iv. c. 4, § 17, H. Stephens 156fi) that agilt statue was erected to him by the senateof Constantinople for having delivered the cityfrom serious apprehension. He built a churchat Constantinople dedicated to St. Stephen, inwhich St. Isaac was buried (Ducange, Urb. Con*stant. descriptio ) vol. iv. p. 138). [E. V.]

AURELIUS, MARCUS, Emperor, a.d. 161-180. The policy adopted by Marcus Aureliustowards the Christian Church cannot ue sepa-rated from the education which led him toembrace Stoicism, and the long training whichhe had, after he had attracted the notice ofHadrian and been adopted by Antoninus "'.ius, inthe art of ruling. In the former he had learnt,as he records with thankfulness, from his master,Diognetus {Medit. i. 6), the temper of incredulityas to alleged marvels, like those of seers and di-viners. Under Hadrian and Antoninus Piushe had acquiesced, at least, in a policy of tolera-tion, checking false accusations, requiring fromthe accusers proofs of some other crime than themere profession of Christianity. It might havebeen expected that he would have adhered tothe same line of action. Philosophical scepti-cism, natural humanity, strict conscientiousnessmight all seem to give guarantees for the main-tenance of a system under which Christianswould have been comparatively free in the pro-fession of their faith. It is startling at first tofind that he takes his place in the list ofpersecutors along with Nero and Domitian andDecius. The annals of martyrdom place in hisreign the death of Justin. Martyr at Rome(a.d. 166), that of Polycarp at Smyrna (a.d.167), that of Blandina and Potheinos, and theother sufferers at Lyons (a.d. 177). The lat-ter year seems indeed to have witnessed anoutburst of popular fury against the new sect,and this could not have been allowed to ragewithout the emperor’s sanction, even if therewere no special edicts like those of which Melito