PLINY the YOUNGER (Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus). – Nephew on his mother’s side Elder (v.), born at Como in AD 62, he came to Rome where he had Quintilian as his teacher; he was consul in AD 100 and was sent as proconsul (‘legatus Augusti pro praetore’) to Bithynia in 111–12; he died in Rome in 113 just after returning from his mission.
As an orator he composed various speeches, of which only the Panegyricus Traiano dictus survives, a work written to thank the Emperor for appointing him consul; the composition is bombastic and dictated according to the norms of the rhetoric of the time. His poetic output is lost. What remain are nine books of Epistulae covering the years 96 to 109, in all 247 letters, written with a view to publication and assembled without regard for chronological order; they therefore lack the freshness of spontaneous correspondence, but in compensation they offer a valuable and varied picture of the life of the aristocracy of the time, both in town and in the country. Moving are those that describe the fearless death of his uncle (VII, 16, 20), brilliant is the one on the sources of the Clitumnus (VIII, 8). To the nine books was later added Book X containing the correspondence between P. and Trajan during his mission in Bithynia. There are 122 letters (72 reports by P. and 50 replies by Trajan) from the mission in Bithynia, which show with what scrupulous care as an upright official P. carried out his task. This book, preserved only in a Parisinus codex now lost, has in the past been wrongly questioned as to its authenticity, having been included in the editions of Avanzio (1502), of Aldo (1508) and cited by the humanist and philologist G. Budé (1506). Moreover, Tertullian (Apolog., 2, 6 sqq.) already knew and cited in AD 197 the contents of a letter by P. included in this book and Trajan’s reply (Epp. 96 and 97). These deserve special mention. In the first, P. asks Trajan for instructions on how to proceed against the Christians, given: 1) their great number in the cities and countryside; 2) the harmlessness of their meetings, which take place on fixed days before sunrise, for the purpose of alternately singing a hymn to Christ as to a god, and in which the assembled bind themselves by oath not to commit theft, robbery, adultery, or breach of faith, nor to refuse to return a deposit received; and after this they separate and later meet again to partake of a common and harmless meal; 3) that after having subjected two maidservants or ministers of that sect to trial and torture he had obtained only the profession of a depraved and immoderate superstition (prava et immodica). In his reply Trajan, who held a high view of the authority of the State and opposed unauthorized associations, orders him not to seek out Christians but to punish them if denounced (though not by anonymous libels), except those who deny that they are Christians and demonstrate this by sacrificing to the gods of the Empire. This correspondence shows that a procedure against the profession of Christianity already existed by the end of the 1st century; P., being a magistrate, knows this, but since he has never taken part in inquiries (cognitiones) against Christians he does not know what and to what extent (quid et quatenus) should be prosecuted and punished in them: whether the name of Christian or the crimes connected with that name; he is also deterred by the great number of Christians.
Trajan in his reply justifies P.’s hesitation by suggesting a legally illogical norm (against which Tertullian quite rightly rails: ‘if you condemn them because you do not prosecute them? and if you do not prosecute them why do you not acquit them?’), but one that is practically understandable given the spread of Christianity in Asia Minor at the dawn of the 2nd century; this norm circumscribes the cases of persecution, placing the burden on individual and not anonymous accusers.