OK THE ROMAN EMPIRE.

tine, who, in the same prudent and gradualprogress, acknowledged the truth, and assum-ed the symbol, of Christianity . But the testi-mony of a contemporary writer, who in a for-mal treatise has avenged the cause of religion,bestows on the piety of the emperor a moreawful and sublime character. He affirms, withthe most perfect confidence, that in the nightwhich preceded the last battle against Maxen-tius, Constantine was admonished in a dreamto inscribe the shields of his soldiers with thecelestial sign of God , the sacred monogram ofthe name of Christ; that he executed the com-mands of heaven, and that his valour and obe-dience were rewarded by the decisive victoryof the Milvian bridge. Some considerationsmight perhaps incline a sceptical mind to sus-pect the judgment or the veracity of the rheto-rician, whose pen, either from zeal or interest,was devoted to the cause of the prevailing fac-tion.' 1 He appears to have published his deathsof the persecutors at Nicomedia about threeyears after the Roman victory; but the intervalof a thousand miles, and a thousand days, will

* Caecillus, de M. p. c. 44. It U certain, that this historical decla-mation was composed and published, while Licinius, sovereign of theEast, still preserved the friendship of Constantine, and of the ebria-tians. Every reader of taste must perceive, that the style is of a verydifferent and inferior character to that of Laetantius; and such indeedis the judgment of Le Clerc and Lardner (Bibliotheque Ancienne etIVIoderne, tom. iii, p. 438. Credibility of the Gos'pel, &c. part ii,vol. vii, p. 94). Three arguments from the title of the book, and fromthe names of Donatus and Caecilius , are produced by the advocates forLaetantius (see the P. Lestocq, tom. ii, p. 46-GO). Each of theseproofs is singly weak and defective, but their concurrence has greatweight. I have often fluctuated, and shall tamely follow the Colbertms. in calling the author (whoever he was) Caecilius .

25k

CHAP.

XX