The Jesus Archive
Titian, The Tribute Money

Hadrian’s Rescript to Minucius Fundanus (Eusebius, Church History 4.9)

An imperial ruling to the proconsul of Asia: Christians may be prosecuted only by formal accusation in court and convicted of acting against the laws, and false accusers are to be punished. Many historians accept it as genuine; its exact meaning is weighed here.

About this witness

A rescript was an emperor’s written answer to an official’s query, with the force of law. This one is addressed by Hadrian (emperor 117–138) to Minucius Fundanus, proconsul of Asia in the mid-120s, in reply to a letter from his predecessor Serennius Granianus about popular accusations against Christians.

It survives because Justin Martyr appended it, in Latin, to his First Apology (c. 155), and the church historian Eusebius translated it into Greek in his Church History (4.8–9), the form given here in A. C. McGiffert’s English translation (1890). No independent Roman copy survives.

The rescript forbids governors to act on mere petitions and outcries. Accusers must bring a formal charge in court; if Christians are shown to be acting against the laws, the governor is to judge according to the offence, and malicious accusers are to be punished. Like Trajan’s reply to Pliny, it assumes that Christians were a recognised group facing local hostility.

Its authenticity has long been debated. McGiffert, whose notes are included, thought the sentence implying that only actual crimes were punishable betrays a Christian forgery; many later historians accept the document as genuine but read it as a procedural ruling against tumultuous accusations, not a grant of toleration.

Accusations must go to court

If, therefore, the inhabitants of the province can clearly sustain this petition against the Christians so as to give answer in a court of law, let them pursue this course alone, but let them not have resort to men’s petitions and outcries. For it is far more proper, if any one wishes to make an accusation, that you should examine into it.

Church History 4.9.2
Find it in the text ↓
Judgment by the laws; punishment for calumny

If any one therefore accuses them and shows that they are doing anything contrary to the laws, do you pass judgment according to the heinousness of the crime. But, by Hercules! if any one bring an accusation through mere calumny, decide in regard to his criminality, and see to it that you inflict punishment.

Church History 4.9.3
Find it in the text ↓
The text

The text of the rescript as quoted by Eusebius, Church History 4.9, in A. C. McGiffert’s translation (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series 2, vol. 1), with his footnotes. Eusebius’s introduction to it in 4.8 is not included.

Church History 4.9

The Epistle of Adrian, decreeing that we should not be punished without a Trial.

  1. “To Minucius Fundanus. I have received an epistle, written to me by Serennius Granianus, a most illustrious man, whom you have succeeded. It does not seem right to me that the matter should be passed by without examination, lest the men be harassed and opportunity be given to the informers for practicing villainy.
  2. If, therefore, the inhabitants of the province can clearly sustain this petition against the Christians so as to give answer in a court of law, let them pursue this course alone, but let them not have resort to men’s petitions and outcries. For it is far more proper, if any one wishes to make an accusation, that you should examine into it.
  3. If any one therefore accuses them and shows that they are doing anything contrary to the laws, do you pass judgment according to the heinousness of the crime. But, by Hercules! if any one bring an accusation through mere calumny, decide in regard to his criminality, and see to it that you inflict punishment.“

Such are the contents of Adrian’s rescript.

Translator’s notes

  • epistle: Greek, epistolen; Latin, litteras.
  • the men: Greek, hoi anthropoi; Latin, innoxii.
  • according to the heinousness of the crime: This is the only really suspicious sentence in the edict. That Hadrian should desire to protect his Christian subjects as well as others from tumultuous and illegal proceedings, and from unfounded accusations, would be of course quite natural, and quite in accord with the spirit shown by Trajan in his rescript. But in this one sentence he implies that the Christians are to be condemned only for actual crimes, and that the mere profession of Christianity is not in itself a punishable offense. Much, therefore, as we might otherwise be tempted to accept the edict as genuine,—natural as the style is and the position taken in the other portions of it,—this one sentence, considered in the light of all that we know of the attitude of Hadrian’s predecessors and successors toward the Christians, and of all that we can gather of his own views, must, as I believe, condemn it as a forgery.
  • decide in regard to his criminality: Compare this sentence with the closing words of the forged edict of Antoninus Pius quoted by Eusebius in chap. 13. Not only are the Christians to be released, but their accusers are to be punished. Still there is a difference between the two commands in that here only an accusation made with the purpose of slander is to be punished, while there the accuser is to be unconditionally held as guilty, if actual crimes are not proved against the accused Christian. The latter command would be subversive of all justice, and brands itself as a counterfeit on its very face; but in the present case the injunction to enforce the law forbidding slander against those who should slanderously accuse the Christians is not inconsistent with the principles of Trajan and Hadrian, and hence not of itself alone an evidence of ungenuineness.
  • see to it that you inflict punishment: Greek, hopos an ekdikeseias; Latin, suppliciis severioribus vindices.
SourceEusebius, Church History 4.9, tr. A. C. McGiffert, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series 2, vol. 1; CCEL — https://www.ccel.org/ccel/s/schaff/npnf201/cache/npnf201.txt LicencePublic domain Cited asA05

Read alongside