"Between Nero's persecution in AD 64 and the Decian persecutions in 250, there's very little evidence for state-led persecutions of Christians." "So though the

"Between Nero's persecution in AD 64 and the Decian persecutions in 250, there's very little evidence for state-led persecutions of Christians." "So though there's one small persecution in 64, then two medium-sized persecutions in the 250s, then a massive persecution in the 300s, between these Christianity is either ignored or tolerated by the Roman state. There's evidence of mobs of Roman citizens attacking Christians independently of any state backing, but aside from that, Christians were largely left alone for a 200 year period." That's reductionist and misleading. Sure, the state did not always actively mandate pogroms, as you quote Trajan ("they are not to be sought out"), except at least for the dates you describe (and not only those) when it actively did. But for the rest of the time, neither did the state uphold the rights of Christians. The rights of Christians were at times essentially nil. The state tolerated the persecution of Christians and often partook when requested. Governors were free to execute Christians merely on the basis of being denounced. If anything else, the Trajan letter you quote should make that clear. To say therefore that this lack of active mandate by the state implies a lack of persecution is careless, and against the grain of evidence.