Perpetua. A Tale of Nimes in A.D. 213Baring-Gould, S. (Sabine)
History
Perpetua. A Tale of Nimes in A.D. 213
Baring-Gould, S. (Sabine)
Nîmes (France) -- History -- Fiction
When day broke, Litomarus was released. His brother was a pagan and had
easily satisfied the magistrate. This brother was in the firm, and
traveled for it, buying fleeces from the shepherds on the limestone
plateaux of Niger and Larsacus. He had been away the day before, but on
his return in the morning, on learning that Julius was arrested, he spoke
with the duumvir, presented him with a ripe ewe’s milk cheese just brought
by him from Larsacus, and obtained the discharge of Julius without further
difficulty.
Baudillas remained in prison that morning, and it was not till the
afternoon that he was conducted into court. By this time the duumvir was
tired and irritable. The _flamen_ had arrived and had spoken with
Atacinus, and complained that no example had been made, that the
Christians were being released, and that, unless some sharp punishments
were administered, the people, incensed at the leniency that had been
exhibited, would break out in uproar again. Petronius Atacinus, angry,
tired out, hungry and peevish, at once sent for the deacon.
The head of the god had been found in his house, and he had been seen
conveying the rescued virgin from the fountain, and must certainly know
where she was concealed.
It was noticeable that nothing had been said about the punishing of
Æmilius. Even the god, as interpreted by the priestess, had made no demand
that he should be dealt with; in fact, had not mentioned him. The duumvir
perfectly understood this reticence. Æmilius Lentulus belonged to a good
family in the upper town, and to that most powerful and dreaded of all
professions—the law. Even the divine founder shrank from attacking a
member of the long robe, and a citizen of the upper town.
When Baudillas appeared in court, the magistrate demanded an explanation
of the fact of the broken head being found in his house, and further asked
of him where Perpetua was concealed.
Baudillas would offer no explanation on the first head; he could not do so
without incriminating his brother in the ministry. He denied that he had
committed the act of violence, but not that he knew who had perpetrated
the outrage. As to where Perpetua was, that he could not say, because he
did not know. His profession of ignorance was not believed. He was
threatened with torture, but in vain. Thereupon the duumvir sentenced him
to be committed to the _robur_, and consigned to the lowest depth thereof,
there to remain till such time as he chose to reveal the required
information.
Then Petronius Atacinus turned and looked at the _flamen_ with a smile,
and the latter responded with a well‐satisfied nod.
A Roman prison consisted of several parts, and the degree of severity
exercised was marked by the portion of the _carcer_ to which the prisoner
was consigned. Roman law knew nothing of imprisonment for a term as a
punishment. The _carcer_ was employed either as a place for temporary
detention till trial, or else it was one for execution.
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