suits and access to kings: so extraordinary is the absurdity of it, that a Roman knight of Vocontiæ, who had it in his bosom at a lawsuit, was to my certain knowledge put to death for that, and no other reason, by the deified emperor Claudius".")

If we may judge by these examples, well might Pliny say, The art of magic has seized fast hold on the Gauls, even down to our times:" and he might have added, that the emperor must have been as weak as they, if he supposed that the practice of so foolish a superstition could give any advantage over an adversary in the conduct of a suit. We can hardly doubt that the Roman who suffered was punished for lending himself to a base and prohibited superstition, for the same emperor had publicly abolished Druidism, and

all its practices. "For the reign of Tiberius [Claudius] Cæsar," says Pliny, "put an end to the Druids, and to all that class of bards and healers:" and the same fact is recorded by Suetonius, and at a later period by Aurelius Victor.

The last writer in chronological order who names the Druids and their doctrines is Ammianus Marcellinus, who briefly follows preceding writers, and describes. them as divided into three classes, designated respectively as Bards, Druids, and Euhages. This last name has given some trouble to critics; it has perhaps undergone corruption during the many hundred years that the writings of Ammianus lay in manuscript, and it is now perhaps too late to detect the true reading. The class of men described by it are called Vates by other authors, which is by the Greek writers turned into Greek by OTATHE, [ouhates]. It would not be difficult for

d Ibid. xxix. 12.

Amm. Marc. xv. 9.

N

an ignorant copyist to write ETAPH [euhages], which might easily become the form which occurs in Ammianus.

From these accounts it appears, that the religious system of the Druids received its death-blow in Gaul, from the edict of Claudius: but that in Britain, where it also prevailed, it is hardly wonderful that the Romans should not have extirpated it so soon, because it was only in the reign of Claudius that they began to gain a permanent footing in the island. Forty years later the Druids and the female prophetesses, who made profession of the same religious rites, endeavoured, in the isle of Mona or Anglesey, to make a final stand against the army of Suetonius Paullinus. The contest was unfavourable, the sacred groves were destroyed, and the Druids slaughtered without mercy. If the superstition revived afterwards in Britain, history is nevertheless silent on the fact; and we can be consoled for the sudden extirpation of the religion of our forefathers, by the conviction, that a creed so worthless, proscribed by a people generally so liberal as the Romans, could have nothing but what was prejudicial to the happiness and interests of mankind'.

f

Pliny [Nat. Hist. xxx. 4.] is the only writer besides Tacitus, who alludes to the Druids in Britain. "Why should I speak thus of an art [magic] which has spread even beyond the sea, and to the extremities of nature? Britain cultivates it with so much enthusiasm, and with so many ceremonies, that we may fancy it was from thence that the art was communicated to the Persians." If this was written after the slaughter of the Druids in Anglesey, which took place in A.D. 68, it shews that the superstition still survived, though it did not attract the attention of historians as before. Richard of Cirencester, who wrote about the year 1400, takes notice of the Druids, but the only new information which he gives us is the interpretation of the names of the British Deities. Mars, he tells us, was called Vitucadrus, or, as it appears in an ancient inscription, Bitucadrus; Victory was called Andate; and Justice, Adraste.

CHAP. XII.

WHETHER CHRISTIANITY WAS INTRODUCED INTO BRITAIN BEFORE A.D. 120.-ST. PAUL-ST. PETER-SIMON

GRÆCINA-CLAUDIA—GILDAS.

ZELOTES-POMPONIA

IT has long been a question among the learned, whether Christianity was introduced into the British isles before the period to which our narrative is now arrived. In order to enter upon this question with a greater chance of bringing it to a satisfactory issue, it seems necessary to take a brief view of the facts, which have come down to us in the Book of the Acts, and in the letters of the Apostles. Not that we shall find in those writings the slightest allusion to Britain, or the most distant notice of its conversion to Christianity but we shall at all events gather from such a process all the facts which the first teachers of Christianity have recorded concerning their labours, and so be the better prepared to determine, whether the other writers, nearly contemporary with the Apostles, or following them after an interval of many years, are worthy of credit, on the score of their assertions being consistent with the first Christian records, or with the nature of the case.

That Christianity in Europe, like Mohamedanism in Asia and Africa, spread most rapidly through the different countries, and has continued to be the pre

vailing religion, is a fact so striking in the history of man, that it well deserves to be duly examined and considered by historians of every European country. To trace the smallest source of information, and to gather up every fragment of tradition, which may throw light on the subject, is the imperative duty of every one who writes on the early affairs of Europe. But in fulfilling this task, it is incumbent upon him to exercise the greatest caution and discrimination. To admit a probability as a fact, is a criminal perversion of historic truth, and has been the fertile source of error. In the absence of positive evidence, events must remain in their original uncertainty, and, if possible, in the exact form in which we first meet with them. To alter their appearance, may be highly dangerous to truth, and lead future writers to give a false interpretation of them: hence error is propagated, and mankind are led to adopt a falsehood which suits their tastes or their convenience, but which is entirely the produce of the imagination, having no foundation in fact.

But we

"It is very possible," says Mosheim", "that the light of Christianity may have reached Trans-Alpine Gaul, now called France, before the conclusion of the Apostolic age, either by the ministry of the Apostles themselves, or their immediate successors. have no records, that mention with certainty the establishment of Christian Churches in this part of Europe before the second century." If this is the case with Gaul, we should naturally conclude that Britain, which was more remote from the original scene of the Apostolic labours, would receive Christian missions at a later period still than Gaul. But this proEccles. Hist. vol. i. p. 135.

a

bability, which would be useful to confirm positive evidence, in the absence of all direct testimony, is of little weight. It appears from the New Testament", that soon after Christ's crucifixion, the number of His followers amounted to about 120. On the day of Pentecost, it is said, that about 3000 souls were added to the Church. This occurred in the same year as the crucifixion, about which authors differ, some placing it, according to our chronology, in the year A.D. 29, whilst others, among whom is Eusebius, bring it down to the year A.D. 33. A. D. 33. Within another short space of time, the number of believers is reckoned at 5000", either of new converts, or of the whole body. After this, but of the exact time we are not informed,-there was a great persecution against the Church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judæa and Samaria, except the Apostles"." Then Philip, one of the twelve, preached the Gospel at Samaria', and again at Gaza, Azotus, and Cæsarea, all within the district of the Holy Land.

To this follows Saul's journey to Damascus, whither he went to persecute all Christians whom he should find in that city: but of the date of this journey we have no mention, and it is unsafe to adopt the statements of the chronologists, who, writing after many

b Acts i. 15.

Acts viii. 1.

cases arises from

The difficulty of ascertaining the date in these the use of those vague expressions, And in those days, &c. Acts vi. 1. At that time, Acts viii. 1, &c. To this cause is justly ascribed the impossibility of reducing the events recorded in the Gospels to chronological order.

Acts viii. 5.

Acts viii. 26.

h Acts ix. 1.