Constantine was the first Christian emperor.  In my book The Triumph of Christianity (Simon & Schuster, 2018), I devote two chapters to how, when, and why he converted (and if he did!), and to what difference it made to the world.  Here is a taste of it for those of you interested in checking out the book.  And for those of you who are not.

******************************

Few events in the history of civilization have proved more transformative than the conversion of the emperor Constantine to Christianity in the year 312 CE.  Later historians would sometimes question whether the conversion was genuine.  But to Constantine himself and to spiritual advisors close to him, there appears to have been no doubt.  He had shifted from one set of religious beliefs and practices to another.  At one point in his life he was a polytheist who worshiped a variety of pagan gods — gods of his hometown Naissus in the Balkans, gods of his family, gods connected with the armies he served, and the gods of Rome itself.  At another point he was a monotheist, worshiping the Christian God alone.  His change may not have been sudden and immediate.  It may have involved a longer set of transitions than he later remembered, or at least said.  There may have been numerous conversations, debates with others, and reflections within himself.  But he dated the event to October 28, 312.  At that point he began to consider himself a Christian.

The results were tremendous, but not for the reasons often claimed.  It is not that Constantine eventually made Christianity the state religion.  Christianity would not become the official religion of Rome until nearly eight decades later under the reign of emperor Theodosius I.  And it is not that Constantine’s conversion was the single decisive turning point in the spread and success of the Christian religion, the one moment that changed all history and made the Christian conquest a success.  At the rate it was growing at the time, Christianity may well have succeeded otherwise.  If Constantine had not converted, possibly a later emperor would have done so, say, one of his sons.   Instead, what made Constantine’s conversion revolutionary was that the imperial apparatus that before then had been officially opposed to Christianity and worked hard, in some regions of the empire, to extirpate it completely, suddenly came to support it, promoting Christianity instead of persecuting it.  Constantine did not make Christianity the one official and viable religion.  He made it a licit religion, and one that enjoyed particular, even unique, imperial privileges and funding.  This support did indeed advance the Christian cause.  The recognition that this faith was now favored from on high appears to have contributed to the already impressive numbers adding to the Christian growth, including the conversion of increasing numbers of imperial and local elites, whose resources had until then funded (and thus made possible) the religious practices of their pagan world.

As important as Constantine’s conversion was to the welfare of the Christian movement, it is surprisingly difficult to describe what he converted from.  Modern historians of religion who speak of conversion can mean a variety of things by it.  Possibly it is simplest to keep the meaning broad and use the term to refer to a decided shift away from one set of religious practices and beliefs to another.   That certainly happened with Constantine.  At a moment that seemed, at least later in hindsight, to be clear and well-defined, he stopped being a pagan and became a Christian.

Conversion was not a widely known phenomenon in antiquity.  Pagan religions had almost nothing like it.  They were polytheistic, and anyone who decided, as a pagan, to worship a new or different god was never required to relinquish any former gods or their previous patterns of worship.  Pagan religions were additive, not restrictive.

Christians, on the other hand, did require a choice.  Converts were expected to forego the worship of all the other gods and revere the Christian God alone.   Only Judaism had similar expectations and demands.  Among pagans – that is among the 93% or so of the world that by custom, habit, and inclination worshiped multiple gods – worshiping a range of divine beings was not a religion that anyone chose.  It was simply what people did.  Being a pagan meant participating in the various religious activities associated with the official state gods, local municipal gods, personal family gods, and any other gods that were known to be involved with human experience.  For everyone except Jews, and then Christians, this was more a way of life than a conscious decision.  It  was a matter of doing what everyone had always done, very much like participating in the life of the local community, with the exception that most people were involved with only one community but could be engaged in the worship of a virtually incalculable number of gods.

For that reason, paganism should not be thought of as a solitary “thing” but as hundreds – thousands – of things.  Those who practiced traditional religions – in other words, just about everyone – would never have recognized themselves as participating in something called “paganism” or, indeed, any kind of “ism.”   There was not a thing there, nothing that could be named so as to sum up the totality of all the non-Jewish religious observances or beliefs or cultic practices of prayer and sacrifice ubiquitous in the culture.  No pagan would have understood what it would mean to call themselves pagan.  They were simply acting in time-honored ways of worshiping the gods.Constantine did not make Christianity the one official and viable religion.  He made it a licit religion, and one that enjoyed particular, even unique, imperial privileges and funding.

Constantine, like everyone else who was not raised Jewish or Christian, participated in this worship.  But he gave it up to follow the one God of the Christians.  The narrative of how Constantine became a Christian is both intriguing and complex.  It involves issues that we today would consider strictly social and political and other issues that we would consider strictly religious.  But in the early fourth century – as in all the centuries of human history before that time – these two realms, the socio-political and the religious, were not seen as distinct.  They were tightly and inextricably interwoven.  On just the linguistic level, there were no Greek or Latin terms that neatly differentiated between what we today mean by “politics” and “religion.”   On the practical level, the gods were understood to be closely connected with every aspect of the social and political life of a community, from the election of officials, to the setting of the annual calendar, to the laws and practices that governed social relations, such as marriage and divorce, to the administration of civil justice, to the decisions and actions of war, to all the other major decisions of state.    The gods were active in every part of social and political life, and the decisions made and actions taken were done in relation to them.

On the imperial level this meant that it was widely known (and genuinely believed, by most) that it was the gods who had made the empire great.  The empire responded by sponsoring and encouraging the worship of the gods.  Doing so would promote the commonweal.  There was no sense that there was, should be, or could be a separation of church and state.

Starting in the mid-third century, the emperors themselves sensed this full well and acted accordingly.  That is why, some years before Constantine converted, the Christian religion had been persecuted by order of the state.  The Christians refused to worship or even acknowledge the gods of empire, claiming in fact that these were evil demonic beings, not beneficent deities that promoted the just cause of the greatest empire the world had ever known.  The refusal to worship was seen by others to be dangerous to the well-being of empire and thus to the security of state.  And so the decision to persecute – which seems to us, perhaps, to be a strictly religious affair – was at the time inherently socio-political as well.  The Christians were to be removed like a cancer from the body of state.  No emperor came to believe this more firmly – in no small part because of the alarming growth of this cancer – than Constantine’s predecessor on the throne, Diocletian, who instigated the most vicious empire-wide persecution ever seen.  Constantine himself was later to rescind the demands of this persecution.  But while it was still in process, he converted.

This conversion proved to be a lynchpin of imperial history, not just for the fate of the Christian religion but also for the workings of the Roman state.  We will look at the persecution of Diocletian in a later chapter, and at the broader biography of Constantine in another.  For now we are interested specifically in his conversion and how it radically changed the balance of power, both for the persecuted Christians and for the running of the Roman government.  To make sense of the conversion we need to understand some of the political and religious backdrop to the story.

Over $2 Million Donated to Charity!

We have two goals at Ehrman Blog. One is to increase your knowledge of the New Testament and early Christianity. The other is to raise money for charity! In fact, in 2022, we raised over $360,000 for the charities below.

Become a Member Today!

2024-08-24T09:45:51-04:00August 27th, 2024|Constantine|

Share Bart’s Post on These Platforms

10 Comments

  1. Colin Milton August 27, 2024 at 7:30 am

    I think there’s a strong case that the “Return of the Son of Man” prophecy was fulfilled by Constantine.
    Constantine, who apostates from the Roman Imperial Cult, is no longer to his fellow Romans a Son of God (Emperor), he is a now a Son of Man because he no longer acknowledges his father emperor as a god or divine being.

    Matthew 24:26. So if anyone tells you, ‘There he is, out in the wilderness,’ do not go out; or, ‘Here he is, in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. 27For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 28Wherever there is a carcass, there the vultures will gather.

    Constantine unites the east and western empires after a series of wars under one emperor, himself.

    (After a further period of tension, Constantine attacked Licinius in 324, routing him at Adrianople and Chrysopolis (respectively, modern Edirne and Üsküdar, Turkey) and becoming sole emperor of East and West.) https://www.britannica.com/biography/Saint-Helena

    The apocalypse type prophecies of the New Testament, may not have been original to the texts, but were later interpolated and disguised as metaphors about Roman Empire wars.

  2. BriceFinch August 27, 2024 at 10:50 am

    Is it possible that Constantine’s mother, Saint Helena, was already a Chrisitan and Constantine just hid his childhood faith until it was safe to do so? A miraculous conversion story after gaining full imperial power would shield him from accusations of being a lapsed.

    • BDEhrman August 30, 2024 at 12:57 pm

      It’s possible, but there doesn’t seem to be any evidence of it.

  3. kitty August 27, 2024 at 11:18 am

    I have always felt that with Constantine’s conversion Christianity was ruined because it went from being an egalitarian religion to an hierarchical one, one that Jesus would not have agreed with and did not teach.

  4. HugoB August 28, 2024 at 12:02 am

    A question that bothers me is how, when and where did Constantine start associating with Christians in the decade before 312 to the point that he would chose to embrace their beliefs. As a noble prince tasked with fighting wars all along the limes, he wasn’t exactly living a secret life where he could meet any random people while persecutions were formally edicted. I also doubt that his mother should be credited for it, it sounds like a later rewriting of the imperial Christian family history to me.

    So if you had to guess, would you suspect that these Christian influences probably happened while he was commanding armies against Persians in the East (where Christians were numerous but persecuted) or in Brittania (where Christians were fewer but persecutions were loosely enforced), and could it happen in his imperial entourage in plain sight? Do we know any Christian names among his close circle at that time?

    In one article about this subject, historian Jerphagnon points out how it is much more difficult to backtrack the history of ideas and personal thoughts compared to battles, buildings, and other things that kings leave behind them, and it is surely the case here.

    • BDEhrman August 30, 2024 at 1:00 pm

      I wish we knew. I discuss what I think we *can* know in my book Triumph of Christianity. One of the striking things about his conversion, as I point out there, is that he appears to have known very little about what Christianity was all about prior to making his decision.

      • ctdeejay August 31, 2024 at 4:29 pm

        To what extent, do you think, Constantine’s ignorance of the details of Christianity played into things like convoking the Council of Nicaea? What, exactly, was he trying to do? Mollify Christian leaders and get them to stop bothering him about “heresies” and other disagreements? Could he have been trying to unite Christendom under his own wing as a consolidated faction devoted personally to him?

        My own take on it is that he neither understood the religion nor any of its leaders. Whatever his goals were, he was doomed to fail, for that reason alone.

        Also, given how little he understood the faith, just how “Christian” was Constantine, really? It’s easy to say he “converted,” but harder to understand just what that meant and to what degree he was departing from the prevailing religious thinking of the time (as you described). Was he just paying lip service to Christianity or did he genuinely believe?

        • BDEhrman September 2, 2024 at 11:40 am

          We have some pretty good evidence about this; you may want to read my book where I discuss it all. He certainly knew that hte differences between Arius and Alexander were. BUT, he thought the issue was ultimately trivial rather than fundamental. Frankly, most Christians I talk to today who learn the actual difference feel a bit like that too. Constantine certainly understood that Christ was a divine being who became human to die for the sins of the world and is now the Lord over all; and he understood a lot more about Christianity. We know all this because we have some of his writings (including a letter to Arius and Alexander!) and other reports that verify one another on key issues. So I don’t think there’s much doubt he really believed. I devoted a chapter to all this in mybook.

  5. Tigers79 September 5, 2024 at 2:40 am

    What about Zoroastrianism, it was a monotheistic religion that was also Apocalyptic, that was around during ancient times. I believe they would also require a rejection of other Gods

    • BDEhrman September 5, 2024 at 4:08 pm

      Zoroastrians were not monotheists, no.

Leave A Comment