In the
early Church, Christians would celebrate the anniversary of a martyr's death for Christ (known as the saint's "birth day") by serving an
All-Night Vigil, and then celebrating the
Eucharist over their tomb or place of martyrdom. In the fourth century, neighbouring
dioceses began to transfer
relics,
and to celebrate the feast days of specific martyrs in common.
Frequently, a number of Christians would suffer martyrdom on the same
day, which naturally led to a joint commemoration. In the
persecution of Diocletian
the number of martyrs became so great that a separate day could not be
assigned to each. But the Church, feeling that every martyr should be
venerated, appointed a common day for all.
I have learnt to write the modal verb 'would' in the case of a hypothesis. Marius and a few others taught me this recently.
I don't know the reason to write the modal verb 'would' in the first sentence of the above.
I would write the following:
In the early Church, Christians celebrated the anniversary of a maty'r death for Christ ...
What is wrong with my way of writing in this context ? It was a past event so to write simple past tense is appropriate.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now look at the following:
Frequently, a number of Christians would suffer martyrdom on the same
day, which naturally ...
What is the necessity of writing 'Christians would suffer' here?
I would write the following:
Frequently, a number of Christians suffered martyrdom on the same
day, which naturally ...
Is the above incorrect in the given context?
[People of this country celebrate or rather pay a great attention to All Saint's Day.]