The censorship of the Church of Rome and its influence upon the production and distribution of literature, volume 1 (of 2)Putnam, George Haven
History
The censorship of the Church of Rome and its influence upon the production and distribution of literature, volume 1 (of 2)
Putnam, George Haven
Freedom of the press; Liberty of conscience; Prohibited books
There are instances of literary censorship on the part of the
imperial authorities of Rome before the institution of the Christian
Church. These are outside of the range of my present subject, but
certain examples may be cited as curiosities.
=Early Prohibitions of Literature.=--Tacitus remarks that Augustus
was the first ruler who undertook to punish a word written or spoken
(that is to say, a word unaccompanied by action). While the law of the
Roman Republic had recognised as deserving of punishment only criminal
deeds, the Emperor brought the authority of the law to bear upon
writings described as libellous or scandalous (_libelli famosi_).
He ordered, for instance, that the writings of Labienus should be
publicly burned. His successor, Tiberius, issued a still stronger
regulation for the supervision of undisciplined or insubordinate
writings. Cremutius Cordus was driven from his occupation and left
to die through poverty for the offence of speaking of Gaius Cassius
as “the last Roman.” His writings were ordered to be burned by the
Aediles. Tacitus speaks with scorn of those who, in the possession
of a little momentary power, undertake to crush out opinions not in
accord with their own, or to prevent such opinions from being handed
down to posterity. The writings of Vejinto were prohibited by Nero.
Concerning this prohibition, Tacitus writes: “So long as the possession
of these writings was attended with danger, they were eagerly sought
and read; when there was no longer any difficulty in securing them,
they fell into oblivion.” An edict ascribed to Domitian ordered that
the historian Hermogenes and any book-dealers who concerned themselves
with the distribution of certain writings of his which had libelled
the Emperor should be crucified.[13] The German historian Schmitz
is, however, of opinion that this so-called edict of Domitian was
apocryphal. It appears certainly, however, to have been the case that
the policy of these earlier emperors was decidedly opposed to any
freedom of expression of thought. If it is the case that in the later
centuries of imperial rule there are fewer instances of punishments of
writers or orders for the suppression of literature, the explanation
may be that literary activity had already been substantially repressed.
Justinian deposed from office Severus and certain other bishops
because they had been lax in their supervision of literature, and had
permitted the wide circulation throughout the realm of prohibited
books and pernicious writings. With the development of the Church of
Rome to the ecclesiastical headship of the world, the claim for the
supervision of literature and for the control of the productions of
authors was asserted by the Church as the legitimate successor of the
imperial authority. It is the opinion of Lea that the earliest act of
censorship, and perhaps the most sweeping, of the Christian Church
is that contained in the “Apostolic Constitutions” which purport to
have been written by St.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account