Underground Christian Rome

ONE of the most remarkable facts connected with the spread of the Christian faith in Rome during the first and second centuries is, that the memory of some leading events is to be found, not in early church annals, or calendars, or acta martyrum, ” or itineraries, but in passages written by pagan annalists and historians. Thus, no mention is made in ecclesiastical documents of the two Domitillæ, although one of them, the younger, was known and venerated all over the Christian world in the fourth century, as is certified by S. Jerome. Her name appears for the first time in the so-called Small Roman Martyrology, the author of which collected his information, not from the authentic calendars of the church, but from legends and traditions. The magnificent discovery made by Commendatore de Rossi, in 1888, of a crypt in which members of one of the noblest Roman houses had been buried, and worshiped as martyrs of the faith, can be illustrated only by a recourse to Roman historians and biographers of the time of Dumitian; their names are utterly ignored by the sacred fasti which have come down to us. This fact proves that, when the official feriale, or calendar, was resumed. after the persecution of Diocletian, preference was given to the names of confessors and martyrs, whose recent deeds were still fresh in the memory of the living; and little attention. necessarily, was paid to those of the first and second centuries, whose acts had not been written, or if written had been lost during the persecutions.

The discovery above alluded to took place in the catacombs of Priscilla, near the second milestone of the Via Safari a (nova), within the inclosure of the Villa Ada, formerly belonging to King Victor Emmanuel, and now to Count Telfener. These catacombs, like all those excavated in the first century. consisted originally of small hypogœa, or crypts, independent one of the other, and occupied by a single family, or by a restricted number of families connected by friendly or religious ties. The work of connecting and merging, as it were, the crypts into an extensive underground cemetery by means of a network of galleries was done at a later period, when the only ambition of the faithful seems to have been that of securing a grave as near as possible to the cubiculum of one of the great champions of the faith. The task of reconstructing the original plan of the catacombs by investigating the date of the various groups of excavations is a very difficult one, in which Commendatore de Rossi reveals his wonderful knowledge, which may almost be called an intuition.

In exploring that portion of Priscilla’s catacombs which is near the (modern) entrance from the Via Salaria, he saw at once that the labyrinth of more recent galleries converged toward an original crypt, shaped like a Greek Γ(αμμα), and decorated with fresco paintings of the second century. The desire to find the name and the history of the first occupants of this noble tomb, whose memory seems to have been so dear to the faithful, was strongly roused, and the earth which filled the place was carefully sifted, in the hope of discovering a clue to the mystery, overlooked or disregarded by the first explorers or devastators of the crypt. Commendatore de Rossi’s exertions were rewarded by finding a fragment of a marble sarcophagus, on which the following letters were engraved : —

ACILIO GLABRIONI

FILIO

Did this fragment, inscribed with the name of an Acilius Glabrio, son of a personage of the same illustrious name, really pertain to the Γαμμα crypt, or had it been thrown there by mere chance? And, in case of its pertaining to the crypt itself, was it an isolated record, or did it belong to a group of graves of the Acilii Grlabriones? A first answer to these queries was given by the recovery of another marble fragment, inscribed as follows: —

M’ACILIVS V . . . .

c . v .

et PRISCILLA . C . . .

Manius Acilius V. . . c(larissimus) v(ir) et Priscilla c(larissima femina, or puella). These two personages are well known in the history of the Acilian family, as we shall presently see.

Once on the right track, it was easy for Commendatore de Rossi to collect additional evidence. The three following inscriptions, discovered within or very near the Γαμμα crypt, are graved on marble slabs of an oblong shape, with rims still incrusted with cement; in other words, they are engraved on slabs belonging to the very loculi with which the sides of the galleries adjoining the crypt¹ are honeycombed. The first reads as follows : αΚΕΙΛΙΟϹ ΡΟϒΦΕΙΝΟϹ

ζΗϹΗϹ ΕΝ ΘΕΩ

“Acilius Rufinus, may you dwell in God; which acclamation, corresponding to the Latin Vivas in Deo, is characteristic of the Christian epigraphy of the end of the second century, or of the beginning of the third. On the second tombstone mention is made of an Acilius Quintianus and Acilia parents of an Attalus. The broken name ΑΚΕΙΛιος or ΑΚΕΙΛια appears on the third slab. Besides these, two more fragments of marble coffins have been found: one with the initials M(arcus) ACILio . . . , the other with the name of Claudius Acilius Valerius. The hypogæum in which these startling discoveries have taken place seems to have been built or excavated expressly to contain sarcophagi of the largest size, some fragments of which were found still lying scattered on the floor. The walls and ceiling were at first simply whitewashed, or rather plastered with fine white stucco, with plain decorations in fresco colors. At a later period, probably after the peace of Constantine, the niches were profusely ornamented with polychrome mosaics, and the walls inlaid with Oriental marbles. A staircase was also built, to put the hypogËum in direct communication with the ground above. At the southern end of the main gallery an opening was cut through the wall of a cistern, with the purpose of turning it into a chapel. The room is eight metres long, four wide, and contains an altar raised over the coffin of one of the Glabriones. Here, too, we find the same elaborate decorations already seen in the vestibule; that is to say, marble incrustations on the walls, and mosaic paintings on the vault. The altar was flanked by two spiral columns of giallo antico.

Except a few fragments of these columns and a few marble crusts, no other relic, either written or sculptured, has been found in this noble sanctuary. That the mediæval Vandals should have laid their hands on the marbles, to burn them into lime or to use them in new constructions, may easily be understood, but the spirit of destruction of the age seems to have driven them to useless and inexcusable pillage. Every cube of the mosaic paintings was wrenched out of its socket, and even the marble coffins, in which the Glabriones had rested in peace for so many centuries, were split and hammered into atoms, so that all hope of reconstructing them has been given up.

The Manii Acilii Glabriones, the eldest branch of the Acilian family,² came into notoriety toward the middle of the sixth century of Rome by the exploits of Acilius Glabrio, consul in 563, and conqueror of the Macedonians at the battle of the Thermopylæ Livy calls him a new man, homo novas. Two interesting records of his successful career have come down to us: the Temple of Piety, erected by him on the west side of the forum olitorium, and dedicated ten years after the battle of the Thermopylæ; and the pedestal of the equestrian statue of gilt bronze offered to him by his son. The statue was the first of its kind ever seen in Italy, —prima omnium in Italia, as Livy says. The remains of the temple have been transformed into a church of S. Nicholas (S. Nicola in carcere); the pedestal of the equestrian statue was discovered by Valadier in 1808, at the foot of the steps of the temple, and buried over again.

The Acilii Glabriones grew rapidly to honor, splendor, and wealth, so as to cast into shade families whose origin was far more ancient and historical than theirs. When Pertinax was elected Emperor by the unanimous vote of the senate, he stepped toward Manius Aeilius Glabrio, who had been consul for the second time in A. D. 196, took him by the hand, showed him to the imperial throne, and begged the assembly to name him in his place, as the noblest amongst the noble, εὐγενέστατος πάντῶν εὐπατριδῶν (Herodianus, 2, 3).

Toward the end of the republic we find the Glabriones established on the Pincian hill, where they had built a palace, and laid out gardens which extended at least from the Trinité dei Monti to the northern end of the Villa Borghese. This fact was ascertained for the first time in 1868, in consequence of the discovery of a marble tablet inscribed with the following dedication : “ Tychicus, freedman of (Manius Acilius) Glabrio and intendant (or keeper) of his gardens, has dedicated (this shrine) to Sylvanus.” This tablet, found near the Trinité dei Monti gate, is of delicate workmanship, with edges cut sharply in the shape of a swallow’s tail; and, as these edges were found in good condition, it is evident that the tablet must have come to light not far from its original place. Another inscription, found in July, 1742, on the opposite side of the Trinité dei Monti, proves that the gardens of the Acilian family extended south as far as those of Sallust and Lucullus. The discovery of the tomb of the same family on the borders of the Via Salaria shows that the ground above (in which the remains of a farmhouse — villa rustica — have just been excavated) was also their property. It is possible, therefore, that the whole stretch of land which we call Monti Parioli, between the Flaminian and Salarian roads, may have formed one immense estate of the Acilii, embracing within its boundaries the villas Telfener, Borghese, Medici, and the public promenade of the Pincio.

Of the members of the family who obtained a prominent place in the history of the Roman Empire during the first century after Christ, the best known is Manias Acilius Glabrio, consul with Trajan in 91. He was put to death by Domitian in 95, as related by Suetonius in the tenth chapter of the Life of that Emperor. “He caused several senators, even ex-consuls, to be executed, on the charge of their complotting against the empire [quasi molitores rerum novaruni] ; among these, Civica Cerealis, governor of Asia, Salvidienus Orfitus, and Aeilius Glabrio, who had already been banished from Rome. ”

The expression “molitores rerum novarum, ” used by the biographer, may have a religious as well as a political meaning. In the present case it seems to express both ideas ; that is to say, a political action against Cerealis and Orfitus, who were stanch pagans, and a religious and political one against Glabrio, who is known, from other sources, to have adopted the Christian faith, technically called nova superstitio by Suetonius and Tacitus, The additional details concerning Glabrio’s fate are given by Dion Cassius, by Juvenal, and by Fronto. We are told by these authors that, during his consulship, A. D. 91, and before his exile, he was compelled by Domitian to fight against a lion and two bears in the amphitheatre adjoining the Emperor’s villa at Albanum.³ This extraordinary event created such an impression in Rome, and its memory lasted so long, that, half a century later, we find it given by Fronto to his imperial pupil Marcus Aurelius as a subject for a rhetorical composition.

Xyphilinus, the abridger of Dion Cassius, relates that in the year 95 some members of the imperial family were condemned by Domitian on the charge of atheism, together with other leading personages who had adopted the “ customs and persuasion of the Jews.” an expression which means the Christian faith. Now, immediately after this passage, Xyphilinus proceeds to describe how Manius Acilius Glabrio, the ex-consul of 91, had been implicated in the same trial and condemned on the same charge with the others. Among these others he mentions Clemens and Domitilla, who were manifestly Christians. Still, if the testimony of the pagan writer as regards the Christianity of Clemens and Domitilla was confirmed by actual discoveries made in the subterranean cemeteries of the Via Ardeatina, no trace had been left of the conversion of Glabrio and of his family, either in history, tradition, or monuments. The evidence is now at hand, and so comprehensive and powerful that no room is left for a doubt.

A particular of the case, related by Juvenal, confirms indirectly the account of Xyphilinus. He says that, in order to mitigate the wrath of the tyrant and avoid a catastrophe, Acilius Glabrio, after fighting in the amphitheatre, feigned an air of stupidity. In this pretended stupidity, alluded to by the satirist, it is easy to recognize the prejudice so common among the pagans, to whom the retirement from the joys of the world, the contempt of public honors, and the humble behavior of the Christians appeared as contemptissima inertia. This is the very phrase used by Suetonius in speaking of Flavius Clemens, murdered by Domitian ex tenuissima suspicione of his faith.

Glabrio was put to death in the place to which he had been already banished, the name and situation of which are not known. His noble end helped, without doubt, the propagation of the gospel among his relatives and descendants, as well as among the servants and freedmen of his house. To this humbler class belonged the parents of Attalus, Acilius Quintianus and Acilia . . mentioned above. In the direct descent from the martyr are, first: Acilius Glabrio, buried in the first sarcophagus, who is thought to have been the consul of 186, and the husband of Plaria Vera Priscilla, a noble lady from Ostia; secondly, Manius Acilius V(erus) and his sister Acilia Priscilla, son and daughter of the consul of 186; thirdly, Claudius Acilius Valerius, son or grandson of Claudius Acilius Cleoboles, who lived in the first half of the third century; and, last ly, Acilius Rufinas, a descendant of Acilius Rufus, consul in 105 and 106.

All these noble Christians were buried in the Γαμμα crypt; the chapel and its altar tomb seem to have been exclusively consecrated to the memory of the first hero, the consul of 91. The date and the circumstances connected with the translation of his relics from the place of exile to Rome are not known.

There has been a prejudice among modern writers on the history of religion, to the effect that during the first three centuries the gospel spread in Rome only among the lowest classes of society. The theory may be true in a certain sense, but the exceptions to the rule are frequent; for, setting aside the Acilii, of whose conversion I have spoken at length, the annals of the early church boast many names illustrious in social as well as in political or military life. I may mention, in the first place, Flavius Sabinus and his sister Flavia Titiana. Their tombstone, seen and copied by Marangoni in 1741, in the catacombs of Domitilla, was rediscovered in 1875 by Commendatore de Rossi, who thinks the persons named were grandchildren or descendants of Flavius Submits, brother of Vespasian. Sabinus was prefect of Rome during the persecution of the Christians by Nero ; but Tacitus describes him as a gentle man, who hated violence, — mitem virum abhorrentem a sanguine et cædibus (Hist. iii. 65, 75). His second son, T. Flavius Clemens, consul A. D. 82, was murdered in 95 for the Christian faith, and Flavia Domitilla, his daughter-in-law, banished for the same cause to the island Pandataria. There is a record of the banishment of another Flavia Domitilla to the island of Pontia, but her genealogy and relationship with the former have not been yet clearly established. The small island where she spent many years in solitary confinement is described by S. Jerome as one of the leading places of pilgrimage in the fourth century of our era.

I may also cite the names of Liberalis, a consul suffectus and a martyr, whose remains were buried in one of the catacombs of the Via Salaria; of Urania, daughter of Herodes Atticus, sophist and preceptor of Marcus Aurelius, and of his second wife, Vibullia Alcia. Her epitaph was discovered in 1850 in the catacombs of Prætextatus, which are within or very near the border line of the villa of Herodes, between the Via Appia and the Via Latina.⁴

A difficulty may arise here in the mind of the reader, namely, how was it possible for these magistrates, generals, consuls, to attend to their official duties without performing acts of idolatry ? As regards the consulship and other high functions of a Roman magistrate, we may recall the constitution of Septimius Severus and Caracalla, described by Ulpianus, De Officio Proconsulis, l. iii., which opened to the Jews the way to the highest honors, making it optional for them to perform or not such ceremonies as might not be in accordance with the principles of their faith. What was granted to the Jews by law of the empire may also have been granted to the Christians by personal benevolence of the Emperor, especially at a time in which the pagans saw or made no difference between the followers of the Old and those of the New Testament. Eusebius praises the kindness of the Emperors who entrusted the governorship of important provinces to Christians, excusing them from the duty of taking a share in idolatrous performances. Still, we cannot be blind to the fact that, for a Christian nobleman wishing to take part in public life, the position was extremely compromising. Hence very often we see baptism deferred until mature or old age, and strange situations created by mixed marriages, and by the bringing up of children in one or the other persuasion, and even acts of decided apostasy.

A curious monument connected with early Christian life in Rome, and illustrating a much-debated point, —that of mixed marriages, — was discovered in 1877, under the following circumstances: —

The Porta del Popolo was, at that time, flanked by two square towers, built about 1480 by Pope Francesco della Rovere (Sixtus IV.). The municipality of Rome, having decided to open an additional archway on each side of the gate, to improve the conditions of traffic, the consent of the archæological commission was asked for the demolition of the towers, which stood across the way. Consent was willingly given, because Sixtus IV. was known to have built them with the spoils of a mausoleum which stood close by, on the site of the modern church of S. Maria dei Miracoli; and there was some probability of recovering a portion of that noble edifice.

The hopes of the commission were fully realized. it was ascertained, by a careful examination of each marble block, that Pope Sixtus had ransacked and put to use not only the mausoleum of S. Maria dei Miracoli, but many other tombs, the remains of which still lined the Flaminian road. One of them belonged to Lucius Nonius Asprenas, consul A. D. 29; another to a wealthy freedman, Numerius Valerius Nicias; a third to Quintus Marcius Turbo, governor of Pannonia, Dacia, and Mauritania, and prefect of the Prætorium under Hadrian; a fourth to Ælius Gutta Calpurnianus, the circus rider, and so forth. The best, fragment recovered from the foundations of the towers is a block of travertine belonging to the pedestal of a tomb, and containing four lines of a Latin inscription. This inscription must have been very prolix, and must have occupied a considerable surface on the front of the tomb, not only above and below, but also on each side of the remaining four lines. The shape of the letters and the quality of the stone on which they are engraved made us believe, at first, that we had to deal with a tomb belonging to the pre-Augustan period; but, on a closer examination, the following strange and enigmatic words were read:

(Si quis) LLIQVIT VOLVERIT FACERE IN SE . . . QVOD FILLA MEA INTER FEDELES FIDELIS FVIT INTER ALieNOS PAGANA EVIT QVOD SI QVIS VOLueRIT OSSA MEA VEXARE

These lines contain portions of the lex monumenti; that is to say, of the rules and obligations set by the builder and owner of the tomb to provide for its preservation. The meaning of the words is this: “If any one dare to do injury to the structure, or to disturb otherwise the peace of the one who is buried inside, because she (my daughter) has been (or has appeared to be) a pagan among the pagans, and a Christian among the Christians ...” Here followed the specification of the penalties which the violator of the rules would have incurred.

It was thought, at first, by some learned men. that the curious phrase quod inter fedeles fidelis fuit inter alienos pagana, fuit had been dictated by the father as a jocose hint to the religious inconsistency of the deceased ; but such an explanation can hardly be accepted. Commendatore de Rossi, by recalling what Tertullian has written in connection with mixed marriages, has led us to the true understanding of that singular epitaph.

In his second book, Ad Uxorem, in trying to dissuade Christian girls from contracting marriages with Gentiles, Tertullian describes, with eloquent and grave words, the state of habitual apostasy to which they willingly exposed or submitted themselves, especially when the husband was kept in ignorance as regarded the Christianity of the bride. He mentions the risk they would incur of betraying their religion and their conscience by accompanying their husbands to state and civil ceremonies and celebrations, thus sanctioning by the simple fact of their presence acts of idolatry. In the book De Corona Tertullian concludes his argument with the following words: “These are the reasons why we do not marry infidels, because such marriages lead us back to superstition and idolatry.” The same considerations are expressed by other early Christian writers.

Another difficulty against the conscientious practice of the faith has been found in the fact that many adepts, whose names or surnames (cognomina) sounded offensive to their new Christian brothers, would have been obliged to change them, thus making public the secret of their conversion. This difficulty has been investigated by Cannegieter, Fassini, Amati, and De Rossi; and the conclusion arrived at is that the practice of imposing a new and Christian-like name upon the convert, on the occasion of his baptism, seems to have been, brought into practice in the third century. Even then, it is a rare case to find names that betray openly the religious persuasion of the initiate. In the early Christian community at Ostia and Portus, by the mouth of the Tiber, we find many Ippolyti, Rufini, and Candidæ, which names, although of no special significance. were dear to the faithful, because they had been borne by the three leading martyrs of the place. The name of John (Johannes) does not appear before the fifth century. Paul is very common, but, being a genuine old Roman cognomen, does not necessarily imply that it was given in recollection of the Apostle. Peter (Petrus) is a decidedly Christian name, and Eusebius says that in his time it was very often given to children; still, it does not appear on the tombstones in the catacombs except under what seem to be special and local circumstances.

One of the most singular monuments connected with this controversy was discovered at Ostia in January, 1867, in a tomb on the Via Severiana, a few steps outside the Porta Laurentina. It is a marble slab, inscribed with the following legend: —

D(iis) M(anibus). M(arco) ANNEO PAVLO PETRO, M(arcus) ANNEVS PAVLVS FILIO CARISSIMO

(This tomb has been raised by Marcus Anneus Paul to his most beloved son, Marcus Anneus Paul Peter.)

Neither the inscription, nor the tomb itself, nor the neighboring ones on the Via Severiana show any suspicion of Christianity. The invocation “ Diis? Manibus ” is a purely pagan one, and appears in Christian epitaphs only as a rare exception to the rule. This being the case, how can we account for the two names, which taken separately give a great probability, taken together give an almost absolute certainty, of having been adopted in remembrance of the two Apostles ? One observation may help us to explain the case, — the preference shown to the name of Paul over that of Peter: the former was borne by the father and the son; the latter appears only as a surname given to the son. This fact is not without importance, if we recollect that the two men who show such partiality for the name of Paul belong to the family of Anneus Seneca, the philosopher, whose friendship with the Apostle has been made famous all over the world by a tradition dating at least from the beginning of the fourth century. This friendship between Paul and Seneca is alluded to in many apocryphal documents, such as the acts attributed to Linus, and the twelve letters exchanged by the two friends; which letters, according to S. Jerome and S. Austin, were frequently consulted and quoted, as genuine documents, by their contemporaries. Although these deserve no credence, they prove, at all events, that the tradition so firmly believed must rest on a foundation of truth. In fact, the Apostle was tried and judged in Corinth by the proconsul, Marcus Anneus Gallio, brother of Seneca; in Rome, he was handed over to Afranius Burro, prefect of the Prætorium, and an intimate friend of Seneca, with whom he bad shared the ungrateful task of directing the education of Nero. We know, also, that the presence of the Jewish prisoner, and his wonderful eloquence in preaching the new faith, created a profound sensation among the members of the Prætorium and of the imperial household. His case must have been inquired into by the philosopher himself, who happened to be consul suffectus at the time. The announcement of the new theories, their social, political, and religious bearing, must have roused a deep interest in a mind like Seneca’s, so used to the impartial investigation of truth. This explains why, in his moral works, we find, sometimes, phrases and ideas imbued with a strong flavoring of Christianity, and showing a striking analogy with some passages of the Epistles. No wonder that Tertullian calls him Seneca sæpe noster, so often one of ours. The discovery of this remarkable tombstone at Ostia, in which the family name of Seneca is so unexpectedly connected with those of Paul and Peter, gives an additional value to the tradition, and proves that the descendants of the philosopher had embraced the Christian faith.⁵

The catacombs of Priscilla contain other records associated with the first announcement of the gospel in Rome. Five names are mentioned in connection with the visit of the two Apostles to the capital of the empire, and two houses are pointed out as those in which they found hospitality and were able to preach the gospel. One of the houses, belonging to Pudens and his daughters Pudentiana and Praxedes, stood halfway up the Vieus Patricias (Via del Bambin Gesii), on the south slope of the Viminal; the other, belonging to Aquila and Prisca (or Priscilla), stood on the spur of the Aventine, which overlooks the Circus Maximus. Both of these have been represented through the course of centuries. and are represented now, by a church which bears the name of the first owner, titulus Pudentis and titulus Priscæ. Christian archæologists have tried to find out the genealogy of Pudens, the friend of the Apostles; but. although it seems probable that he belonged to the noble race of the Cornelii Æmilii, the fact has not been yet clearly established. Not less uncertain are the origin and social condition of Aquila and his wife Prisca, whose names appear both in the Acts and in the Epistles. We know from these sacred documents that, in consequence of the decree issued by the Emperor Claudius against the Jews, they were obliged to leave Rome for a while, and that, on their return, they were able to open a small oratory (eccleSiam domesticam) in their own house. This oratory, one of the very first opened in Rome for divine worship, sanctified, according to all probability, by the presence of the prince of the Apostles, —these walls, which have echoed with the sound of his voice, were discovered in 1776, close to the modern church; but no attention whatever seems to have been paid to the find, in spite of its unrivaled importance. The only record left regarding it is a scrap of paper, in Codex 9697 of the National Library in Paris, in which a man named Carrara speaks of having found a subterranean chapel by S. Prisca, with paintings of the fourth century representing the Apostles. A copy of these frescoes appears to have been made, but no trace of it has yet been found. I cannot understand how, in an age like ours, in which archæological, historical, and religious research are so energetically pursued, the rediscovery of this unique oratory has not been attempted.

In the same excavations of 1776 a bronze tablet was found, offered to Gaius Marius Pudens Cornelianus by the inhabitants of the district of Clunia (near Palencia, Spain), as a token of gratitude for the services which he had rendered them during his governorship. This tablet, dated April 9, A. D. 222. shows that the house owned by Aquila and Prisca in apostolic times had, later on, passed into the hands of a Cornelius Pudens;⁶ in other words, that the connection formed between the two families during the sojourn of the Apostles in Rome had been faithfully kept up by their descendants. One thing is certain: that Pudens, Pudentiana, Praxedes, and Prisca were all buried in the same cemetery on the Via Salaria, the recent excavation of which has revealed to us, for the first time, the secret of the Christianity of the Acilii Glabriones, the noblest among the noble in ancient Rome.⁷

Rodolfo Lanciani.