Patrick Hurley

This article challenges the allegation by the ancient, pro-Constantinian Church historians Lactantius and Eusebius of Caesarea that the Roman emperor Aurelian (a.d. 270-75) was a persecutor of the Christians. Despite Aurelian's positive relations with the Christian Church during his reign (here his arbitration in the Paul of Samosata affair is highlighted), such an accusation was nevertheless leveled against him by both individuals, and has a ten- dency to be repeated by many modern scholars as more or less true. The idea of Aurelian launching a persecution would not have hap- pened given the practicality (or lack thereof) of such plans. This paper examines the allegation that the Roman emperor Aurelian, who reigned from a.d. 270-75, was a potential persecutor of the Chris- tians during his reign. The two major sources that assert such a view, Eusebius' Historia Ecclesiae (afterwards HE) 1 and Lactantius' De Mor- tibus Persecutorum (afterwards DMP), 2 stated that Aurelian was plan- ning a persecution but was killed before he could carry it out. Some scholars, however, have argued that these rumors were essentially true and that Aurelian was nevertheless motivated to persecute the Chris- tians before his death. This is strange, as Aurelian's previous record with the church, via the affair of Paul of Samosata, was more or less cordial. Indeed, the idea that Aurelian was planning a persecution might have less to do with any truth that might exist in such allegations, and more to do with the fact that both Lactantius and Eusebius, who were patronized by the emperor Constantine I (306-337), may have been trying in fact