Constantine the Great: The reorganization of the Empire and the triumph of the ChurchFirth, John B. (John Benjamin)
History
Constantine the Great: The reorganization of the Empire and the triumph of the Church
Firth, John B. (John Benjamin)
Church history -- Primitive and early church, ca. 30-600; Constantine I, Emperor of Rome, -337
As we have said, there is no evidence of any disloyalty on the part of
Crispus, but he may have let incautious expressions fall from his lips
which would be carried to the ears of his father, and he may have chafed
to see himself supplanted by the young princes, his half-brothers. The
boy Cæsar, Constantius, was named consul with his father for the
festival year 326, a distinction which Crispus may justly have thought
to belong by right to himself, and he may have seen in this another
proof of the ill-will of the Empress Fausta, and of her influence over
the Emperor. Possibly Crispus was goaded by anger into some indiscreet
action, which confirmed Constantine’s suspicions; possibly even he
committed some act of disobedience which gave Constantine the excuse he
sought for. At any rate, in the July or August of 326, Crispus was
arrested in Rome and summarily banished to Pola in Istria. Tidings of
his death soon followed. Whatever the manner of his death, whether he
was beheaded or was poisoned or committed suicide, all the authorities
agree that he came to a violent end and that the responsibility rests
upon his father, Constantine. Nor was Crispus the only victim. With him
fell Licinianus, the son of Licinius and Constantia. He was a promising
lad (_commodæ indolis_, says Eutropius) who could not have been more
than twelve years of age and could not, therefore, have been guilty of
any crime or intrigue against his uncle.
One cannot pass by altogether without mention the story of Zosimus that
the reason of Fausta’s implacable hatred of Crispus was not ambition for
her own children, but a still more ungovernable and much less pardonable
passion. Zosimus declares that Fausta was enamoured of her step-son, who
rejected her overtures, and so fell a victim, like another Hippolytus,
to the vengeance of this Roman Phædra. Most modern historians have
rejected the story, as emanating from the lively imagination of a Greek
at a loss for a plausible explanation of a mysterious crime, and we may,
with tolerable certainty, acquit Fausta of so disgraceful a passion. If,
as we suppose, she was the untiring enemy of Crispus, it is at once more
charitable and more probable to suppose that the motive of her hate was
her fierce ambition for her own sons. For the moment the Empress
conquered. But her triumph did not last long. Eutropius tells us that
soon afterwards—_mox_—a vague word equally applicable to a period of
days, weeks, or even months—Fausta herself was put to death by
Constantine. What was her offence? Philostorgius[110] declares that she
was discovered in an intrigue with a groom of the stables—an amour
worthy of Messalina herself. But the story stands suspect, especially
when taken in conjunction with the legend of her passion for Crispus.
The one seems invented to bolster up the other and add to its
verisimilitude. The truth is that nothing is known for certain; and the
whole episode was probably kept as a profound palace secret. One
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account