Leadership, Ideology and Crowds in the Roman Empire of the Fourth Century AD 3515124047, 9783515124041

Citation preview

H A BES

Alte Geschichte

Heidelberger Althistorische Beiträge | 62

Franz Steiner Verlag

Leadership, Ideology and Crowds in the Roman Empire of the Fourth Century AD Edited by Erika Manders and Daniëlle Slootjes

habes Heidelberger Althistorische Beiträge und Epigraphische Studien Begründet von Géza Alföldy Herausgegeben von Angelos Chaniotis und Christian Witschel Beirat: François Bérard, Anthony R. Birley, Kostas Buraselis, Lucas de Blois, Ségolène Demougin, Elio Lo Cascio, Mischa Meier, Elizabeth Meyer, Michael Peachin, Henk Versnel und Martin Zimmermann Band 62

Leadership, Ideology and Crowds in the Roman Empire of the Fourth Century AD

Edited by Erika Manders and Daniëlle Slootjes

Franz Steiner Verlag

Umschlagabbildung: Der heilige Ambrosius und Kaiser Theodosius. Öl auf Leinwand von Peter Paul Rubens, um 1615. Wien, Kunsthistorisches Museum. © akg-images / Erich Lessing Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek: Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über abrufbar. Dieses Werk einschließlich aller seiner Teile ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung außerhalb der engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes ist unzulässig und strafbar. © Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart 2020 Layout und Herstellung durch den Verlag Satz: DTP + TEXT Eva Burri, Stuttgart Druck: Hubert & Co, Göttingen Gedruckt auf säurefreiem, alterungsbeständigem Papier. Printed in Germany. ISBN 978-3-515-12404-1 (Print) ISBN 978-3-515-12407-2 (E-Book)

Table of Contents Acknowledgements

7

Jan Willem Drijvers / Erika Manders / Daniëlle Slootjes Introduction Leadership, Ideology and Crowds in the Roman Empire of the 4th Century AD

9

Verena Jaeschke Architecture and Power Defining Tetrarchic Imperial Residences

19

Adrastos Omissi Rhetoric and Power How Imperial Panegyric Allowed Civilian Elites to Access Power in the Fourth Century

35

Erika Manders Coins against Christianity? Maximinus’ “Persecution Issues” in Context

49

Elisabeth Herrmann-Otto Moral und Rhetorik im Codex Theodosianus Konstantins Strategien zur Beeinflussung der römischen Bevölkerung

61

John Curran “His blood be upon us” Protecting the Jews in Late Antiquity

81

Gerda de Kleijn Imperial Leadership: Constantius II

99

6

Table of Contents

Marianne Sághy Damasus and the Charioteers Crowds, Leadership and Media in Late Antique Rome

117

Carmen Angela Cvetković “Venerabili episcopo atque doctissimo Nicetae” Niceta of Remesiana and Episcopal Leadership in Fourth- Century Illyricum

135

Julio Cesar Magalhães de Oliveira Controllers of Crowds? Popular Mobilization and Episcopal Leadership in Late Roman North Africa

151

Martijn Icks Keeping up Appearances Evaluations of Imperial (In)Visibility in Late Antiquity

163

Meaghan McEvoy An Imperial Jellyfish? The Emperor Arcadius and Imperial Leadership in the Late Fourth Century AD

181

Acknowledgements This volume presents the results of the conference ‘Medial (re)presentations – various messages: leadership, ideology and crowds in the Roman Empire of the 4th century AD’, that was hosted by the Georg-August-Universität Göttingen in February 2015 This conference concentrated on leadership, ideology and crowds in the fourth century AD (i e the period from the emperors Constantine to Theodosius (306–395) As a dynamic period within Roman history, the fourth century saw various transformations in the imperial administrative structures, the position of the emperor(s), and the emerging dominance of Christianity During the conference, we investigated the fourth century at large, with a specific focus on the functioning of leadership and ideology, and on the ways in which leading figures in society – in particular emperors and bishops – interacted with their ‘crowds’, whether they be the inhabitants of the city of Rome, the subjects of the empire at large or the members of the various Christian communities The emergence of bishops as religious leaders on the worldly stage of power made them a force to reckon with for the emperors of the fourth century Consequently, we were interested in the ways in which emperors and bishops interacted while having similar aims: securing their own position of power We are grateful to the Radboud University Nijmegen and the Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, and in particular the Graduate School of Humanities Göttingen (GSGG) for their support for our conference We especially thank the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) for its financial contribution to our conference without which we would not have been able to organize our international gathering Sadly, in September of 2018, our dear colleague Marianne Sághy, passed away after a period of illness As a token of appreciation for her friendship and kindness, as well as her many and valuable contributions to the field of Late Antiquity, we dedicate our volume to her

Introduction Leadership, Ideology and Crowds in the Roman Empire of the 4th Century AD Jan Willem Drijvers (Groningen) / Erika Manders (Nijmegen) / Daniëlle Slootjes (Nijmegen) Since the time of Augustus the emperor stood at the apex of the political and social hierarchy In theory he had power of unprecedented scope, he symbolized Rome’s might, and in important respects he was even thought to embody the empire by his contemporaries After the third century, marked by crisis and anxiety, the empire recovered by reorganizing the administrative and military system and by creating a sustainable imperial rule which was able to deal with external and internal menaces as well as with societal and cultural change such as the growing impact of Christianity The New Empire1 was a fresh beginning yet anchored in existing traditions In this new Roman Empire emperors had to establish societal support in order to create sustainable imperial leadership and to re-articulate imperial ideology, especially in the light of the growing dominance of Christianity as the religion of the empire The late Roman Empire was an autocratic state and the emperor was a monarch in the true sense of the word However, no emperor rules alone Although a late Roman emperor had in principle unmatched power and coercive force (“Macht” according to Weberian terminology), an emperor could only transform his power into successful rule (“Herrschaft”) by the legitimacy of his rule in the sociological sense of this notion The power and legitimacy of any ruler and leader, including that of the emperor of the late Roman Empire, is constructed and negotiated in discourse with those over whom he governs, and the military and administrative apparatus on which he is dependent Societal consensus of an emperor’s rule was based upon the fundamental belief that

1

The term is derived from Barnes 1982 who chose it in homage to Edward Gibbon The latter spoke of “a new empire” founded by Diocletian (ed Bury, 383)

10

Jan Willem Drijvers / Erika Manders / Daniëlle Slootjes

his reign depended on public opinion and upon an emperor’s ongoing ability to gain and sustain the commitment and loyalty of his subjects The way in which a sovereign encounters his subjects and organizes consensus is critical for the success or failure of his rule Societal consensus was not readily reached in the vast Roman Empire with its diverse populations and its great economic, social and cultural differences, and was therefore a constant process of communication and negotiation 2 An emperor had to engage with several widely diverging groups (e g the military, the administrative elite, the economic elite, local notables, the Church, regional groups) to win their support in order to enhance and uphold his rule Roman emperors and leaders in general were actively involved to bond themselves with their subjects and various interest groups, a process in which the one emperor succeeded better than the other Leaders are not born: they are made or make themselves However, enduring and stable rule was not only created from the top down but also from the bottom up The various groups the emperor interacted with exerted influence in their turn on constructing and framing his rule Roman emperors were expected to have certain traits and qualities However, even possessing the required characteristics was no guarantee of good leadership 3 Leaders need to be actively involved in molding the communal identity of “who we are” and must be able to relate to their subjects Although late Roman emperors were in theory omnipotent, their reigns were not uncontested and their position was not inviolable In particular, their control of the military was vulnerable The emperors, often military men who led many campaigns during their reigns, invested heavily in a good relationship with both rank-and-file and officers Not only was the army vital to their military success and therefore their prestige and acceptance as ruler, in most cases they also owed their imperial position to “election” by the army 4 The loyalty of common soldiers could be won and retained by both material benefits and symbolic rituals High-ranking and ambitious officers often formed the most serious threat to an emperor’s position For that reason emperors surrounded themselves with loyal, trustworthy generals, and in order to avert the ever-present danger of usurpation by prominent and popular generals emperors had a variety of strategies at their disposal, including material rewards, enhancement of status by granting the consulship or promotion to senatorial status, relocation from one command to another, dismissal, exile and even elimination 5 There were usurpations in the fourth century, as the cases of Magnentius, Procopius and Magnus Maximus show, 2 3 4

5

See Ando 2000, esp part 2 On consensus and “Kaiserakzeptanz” see also Flaig 1992 Wallace-Hadrill 1981; Fears 1981 In the acclamation ceremony the army acted as a sort of people’s assembly (Pabst 1997, 9 ff ) The influence of the army is nicely illustrated by the account by Amm Marc (26 2 2–10) of Valentinian’s inauguration as Augustus When the new emperor was ready to address his troops, the soldiers unanimously demanded that the new emperor appointed a co-Augustus Valentinian could only consent to this bottom-up request See now Lee 2015

Introduction

11

but there were no attempts to overthrow imperial rule as an institution 6 The emperor was clearly part of the indisputable order of things The latter, however, did not imply that the fourth-century emperor and the subjects stood in close contact with one another Especially from the end of the century onward, when the emperors stopped campaigning, imperial accessibility was far from self-evident anymore Honorius and Arcadius left the military campaigns to their generals and remained themselves within the comfort of their palace This fundamentally changed the dynamics of late-antique imperial rule: from rulers who spent long periods of their reigns moving about the empire at the head of their armies and only settling temporarily at imperial residences distributed all over the empire (Trier, Ravenna, Milan, Serdica, Constantinople, Antioch and other sites), emperors now became static figures who hardly left the security of their palaces in Rome and Ravenna in the west and Constantinople in the east The emperor was not anymore as easily accessible for his subjects as had been the case in the early empire (or at least that was the impression given) The ideal of the princeps civilis as constructed by Augustus, although still presented in official imperial propaganda, was a far cry from the late Roman world where the emperor was dominus noster living in a sacrum palatium With Constantine imperial autocracy entered a radical new phase with the rapid Christianization of the Roman world in combination with the emperor’s association with and support of Christianity The transformation of the late Roman world into a Christian empire created the complicated issue of redefining the relationship between secular power, spiritual authority, moral legitimacy and societal consensus While in the polytheistic early empire the Roman emperor was considered as part of the divine, in Late Antiquity his godly status was gradually redefined to correspond with Christian cosmology Empire and monarchy became associated and connected with Christian monotheism (“one God, one emperor, one empire”) Eusebius was the first to present the emperor, Constantine in this case, as God’s representative on earth and a copy of God’s perfection 7 In spite of the criticism of other church leaders, such as John Chrysostom,8 the new Christian political ideology sacralised Roman monarchy and made the emperor a sacred creature who ruled on earth in the name of God Constantine was called the koinos episkopos by Eusebius,9 thereby inter alia characterizing the emperor’s close association with the Church and their leaders, the bishops Before the fourth century, bishops, as leaders of Christian communities, had remained largely invisible 10 Their main tasks had always concerned the pastoral care of their own 6 7 8 9 10

On usurpations in Late Antiquity see Szidat 2010 Drake 2015 Drake 2015, 296–299 Euseb Vit Const 1 44 On the bishop in late antiquity see e g Brown 1992, passim; Rebillard and Sotinel 1998; Liebeschuetz 2001, 137–168 (Ch 4 “The Rise of the Bishop”); Rapp 2005; Lizzi Testa 2009; Brown 2012, passim; Gwynn 2012a

12

Jan Willem Drijvers / Erika Manders / Daniëlle Slootjes

groups, involving primarily teaching and preaching, spiritual guidance, the ministry of prayer, care of the liturgical duties, and the maintenance of the (orthodox) faith Administration of justice by means of the episcopal court, the responsibility for the social welfare of his flock, charity, and the care of travelers and strangers were other important episcopal responsibilities In short, bishops were responsible for all matters concerning their community, clergy, and church In combination with their spiritual and religious authority bishops in late antiquity were able to create, as “lovers of the poor,” a substantial power base in their cities Consequently, bishops developed into local patrons and leaders in secular business, especially when traditional local elites became less inclined to carry the heavy financial burden that local magistracies or membership in local councils entailed Privileges granted by Constantine and his successors to bishops, the presence of bishops at the court, and the increasing wealth of the Church added significantly to the development of the episcopal influence in urban affairs and increasingly made them the equals of the traditional local elite – the social class from which many of them came – in the cities of the late Roman Empire 11 A bishop’s status and influence were substantially enhanced by the fact that he was not rich (or not supposed to be), that he could operate outside the traditional civic power structure, and that he had a large support group, i e his own Christian community, in particular the lower and middling classes, and that unlike secular officials he exercised his authority for life Most importantly, he had moral authority and the sanctity of his office added considerably to his power and influence The leadership of a bishop in late antique cities could be a stable factor amidst the complexities of urban life A bishop’s duties and civic patronage as an urban leader could be manifold and varied: dealing with food shortages, acting as a judge, interceding on behalf of the urban community with the imperial authorities at the local and provincial levels and even at the imperial court itself Some bishops gained (or appropriated) an empire-wide authority and mediated on behalf of the Christian faith in imperial affairs The increasing authority of Christian bishops in urban society, as well as the empire as a whole in some cases, gave a new dimension to the dynamics of power relationships in the fourth century and beyond For secular leaders the influence of ecclesiastical authorities became a force to reckon with but also offered opportunities, such as exerting influence through church leaders

11

On the relationship between Constantine and church leaders, see Drake 2000

Introduction

13

Aim and method This book focuses on the functioning of leadership in the period of the Tetrarchs to Theodosius and fits with recent diachronic analyses of leadership in the fourth century Yet, whereas either emperors or bishops are central to the majority of these studies, our volume starts from the idea that the imperal and ecclesiastical administrations became interdependent in this period and thus presents an integrated approach of imperial and religious leadership 12 As the spread of ideology plays a key role in creating societal consensus and thus in wielding power successfully, the volume analyses both types of leadership from an ideological angle 13 It examines the communicative strategies employed by emperors and bishops through analyzing the ideological messages that were disseminated by a variety of media: coins, architectural monuments, literary and legal texts The central question of this volume is how, in a period in which an important shift took place in the power balance between church and state, emperors and bishops made use of ideology to bind people to them and thus to interact with their ‘crowds’, whether they be the inhabitants of the city of Rome or Constantinople, the subjects of the empire at large or the members of the various religious communities This volume not only fills gaps when it comes to addressing different types of leadership and the central role of ideology, it furthermore combines longitudinal analyses focussing on the fourth century as a whole and case studies dealing with a specific emperor or bishop, thereby linking up the macro and micro level In addition, the approach of ‘systematic medium analysis’ forms the methodological framework for our examination of the different media Recent research has demonstrated the necessity of analyzing the different ancient media such as coinage, monuments and literature into their own context and medial discourse before combining them In other words, specific local and medial traditions should be taken into account while analyzing the sources By analyzing the coins, monuments and texts within their own context and medial discourse instead of ‘cherry-picking’ examples, the contributors to this volume,

12

13

As for imperial leadership in the fourth century, see for instance Burgersdijk and Ross 2018; Omissi 2018; Wienand 2015; McEvoy 2013; Leppin 1996 On religious leadership in the fourth century and beyond see for example Dunn 2015; Fear, Fernández Ubiña and Marcos 2013; Rapp 2005; Rebillard and Sotinel 1998 On specific fourth-century emperors, see e g Barnes 1982; Lenski 2002; Leppin 2003; Barceló 2004; Maraval 2013; Teitler 2017 On specific fourth-century bishops, see for instance McLynn 1994; Gwynn 2012b For integrated approaches of imperial and religious leadership in the reign of one particular fourth-century emperor, see Barnes 1981 and 1993; Drake 2000 On ideology and imperial power, see Flaig 1992; Ando 2000; Kolb 2001; Pfeilschifter 2013 Following Thompson, we define ideology as ‘the ways in which the meaning constructed and conveyed by symbolic forms serves, in particular circumstances, to establish and sustain structured social relations from which some individuals and groups benefit more than others, and which some individuals and groups have an interest in preserving while others may seek to contest ’ See Thompson 1990, 294 and Manders 2012, 27

14

Jan Willem Drijvers / Erika Manders / Daniëlle Slootjes

who are specialists on different types of sources, demonstrate how these sources allow for ideological differentiation and diverse messages to different types of audiences Another methodological notion that is central to our book is the combination of top-down and bottom-up approaches Traditional research on literary sources has mostly examined the perspective of the upper layers of Roman society (emperors, elites and army) as these are usually at the centre of the texts In recent years, research on other types of sources, for instance coins and panegyrics, has shown some interest in a larger group of the population, as the concept of ‘audience’ received more attention While not denying the value of top-down models, several contributions such as those of Magalhães and Sághy deliberately include the perspective of Roman society’s lower strata and therefore combine top-down and bottom-up approaches Leadership, Roman or other, cannot function without the acceptance of all levels of society, thus including the people The contributions of the volume are presented partly in a general chronological order, and partly thematically This choice is guided by the interconnectednes of the contributions which made a thematic presentation in separate sections less obvious Some general points are to be made before briefly introducing the individual contributions Some authors deal with long term and general issues of the fourth century linked to imperial and religious leadership and ideology, while others zoom in on more specific subjects such as individual leaders and particular media Furthermore, the contributions present insights into issues of imperial and religious leadership both at local and central level and demonstrate that these levels were inextricably linked even though we often tend to treat them as separate levels of interaction and communication Similarly, all contributions offer glimpses of both senders and receivers of messages, again both at central and local level In the first contribution of the volume, Verena Jaeschke focuses on the expressions of imperial ideology through the building of the tetrarchic imperial residences She demonstrates that the architecture of these residences offered the emperors’ possibilities to visually communicate their imperial power and the new tetrarchic concept of rule By systematically comparing the architectural layout of principal imperial residences throughout the empire, Jaeschke is able to distinguish a set of characteristics that define these residences and that sent out a message of imperial equality among the tetrarchs The article by Adrastos Omissi combines elements of local initiative and expressions of loyalty and imperial reception, as he examines the creators of the fourth-century panegyrics While most scholars so far have mainly discussed the imperial perspective and the emperor as the receiving party of the panegyrics, Omissi is interested in the identity of the orators and their motivation to compose their speeches For the orators, panegyrics provided an excellent opportunity to speak on behalf of their communities to the emperor In this way they could not only flatter the emperor and his imperial leadership and seek imperial attention for local issues, but could also take it

Introduction

15

as a moment to present themselves as highly skilled individuals, demonstrating their abilities for a possible career in the imperial administration Erika Manders offers an in-depth medium analysis, as she merges both the imperial and local perspective in her examination of an exceptional series of coins minted under Maximinus Daia by the three cities Antioch, Alexandria and Nicomedia By iconographically placing these coins within a larger numismatic context, both chronologically and geographically, Manders steps away from the traditional interpretation of these coins as reactions to the rise of Christianity Instead, she links these coins to both Maximinus’ legitimization of power as well as local civic autonomy Legal sources allow for precious insights both into the world of those who issued legislation, in particular the emperor, as well as of those who were at the receiving end of the laws Elisabeth Hermann-Otto and John Curran investigate the terminology and wording used in the legal sources to communicate with the inhabitants of the Roman world, be they the general group of subjects or targeted at specific groups In her close reading of the Codex Theodosianus, Hermann-Otto analyses the social legislation of the emperor Constantine the Great She demonstrates that by the employment of rhetorical strategies and the deliberate inclusion of moralizing elements in the laws, the emperor attempted not only to direct his subjects’ behavior, but also to create a strong(er) legal basis for the functioning of his empire, which was further developed by his successors She shows that Constantine’s legislation was not merely an expression of imperial rhetoric and propaganda, but that it was directly connected to the realities of life in the empire Curran connects both modern and ancient perspectives on one particular religious group within the Roman Empire, i e the Jewish community He calls for a re-examination of the use of terminology, law-making and discussions surrounding the Jewish communities in Late Antiquity Curran’s reassessment demonstrates how emperors and their lawyers were influenced by ideological notions about Jews, although these were most often ambivalent and could differ from emperor to emperor Different types of leadership, especially that of emperors and church leaders, underwent considerable changes in the fourth century An understanding of these changes can be gained by in-depth analyses of the ancient sources but also by application of modern theoretical notions and models Especially in the field of sociology an extensive body of theoretical models has been developed for understanding modern leadership Both Gerda de Kleijn and Marianne Sághy took up the challenge to try and incorporate modern theoretical notions into their contributions De Kleijn attempts to shed light on emperorship in the mid-fourth century with a particular focus on Constantius II, by testing the applicability of modern theoretical concepts such as models of transformational and transactional leadership By way of her case study on Constantius II, De Kleijn confronts modern theoretical notions of personal and positional power as well as the so-called warrior model of autocracy with classical criteria of good leadership as these have emerged from the ancient sources Hereby, she demonstrates the additional value of the application of modern sociological theory onto ancient

16

Jan Willem Drijvers / Erika Manders / Daniëlle Slootjes

leadership Sághy zooms in on the bishop as a rising type of leadership in the fourth century Her contribution presents a central ecclesiastical perspective, as she traces the ways in which in Rome the famous fourth-century bishop Damasus made the martyrs available and accessible to pious crowds Sághy sees the application of modern notions of crowd behaviour onto Rome’s populus sanctus as a valuable additional instrument for understanding the ecclesiastical leadership of Damasus Carmen Cvetković continues our search for understanding religious leadership in her presentation of a case study of the fourth-century bishop Niceta of Remesiana, who traveled to Nola where he spoke on behalf of the Illyrian pro-Nicene churches Cvetković shows how Paulinus of Nola, our most important ancient source for Niceta, builds an image of Niceta as a man with important spiritual qualities Niceta could be considered a church politician who would be appealing to his local church community as well as influential within the transregional network of churches in the fourth century Julio Cesar Magalhães de Oliveira takes his readers to Late Roman North Africa, where he offers a local and regional perspective of religious power By way of several case studies in the mid-fourth and late fourth century and focusing on outbreaks of violence and reasons for popular engagement, he analyzes how episcopal leaders could mobilize or demobilize their religious crowds Magalhães de Oliveira shows how the application of modern theoretical concepts and notions such as ‘collective action’ and ‘dynamics of contention’ can be a fruitful tool for understanding the ancient source material Martijn Icks, in examining literary sources, illustrates how images of ‘hiding’ or ‘visible’ emperors were a major concern for late antique orators and authors Visibility, a key element of accessibility, remained an important marker of ‘good’ rulership for late antique emperors Whereas Icks concentrates on the general images of (in)accessible emperors, Meaghan McEvoy zooms in on the emperor Arcadius and his (in)visibility in the city of Constantinople Although in modern literature this emperor is often portrayed as hiding from his subjects and mostly ‘palace-bound’, McEvoy, by way of a reassessment of the literary sources, comes to the conclusion that Arcadius appeared on many more public occasions in Constantinople, both in secular and religious contexts, than so far has been acknowledged This emperor should therefore not be seen as ‘palace-bound’, but more as ‘Constantinople-bound’

Introduction

17

Bibliography Ando, C 2000 Imperial Ideology and Provincial Loyalty in the Roman Empire Berkeley: University of California Press Barceló, P 2004 Constantius II und seine Zeit Die Anfänge des Staatskirchentums Stuttgart: Klett Cota Barnes, T D 1982 The New Empire of Diocletian and Constantine Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press – 1981 Constantine and Eusebius Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press – 1993 Athanasius and Constantius Theology and Politics in the Constantinian Empire Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press 1993 Brown, P 1992 Power and Persuasion in Late Antiquity Towards a Christian Empire Madison: University of Winconsin Press – 2012 Through the Eye of a Needle Wealth, the Fall of Rome and the Making of Christianity in the West, 350–550 AD Princeton: Princeton University Press Burgersdijk, D , and A Ross, eds 2018 Imagining Emperors in the Later Roman Empire Leiden and Boston: Brill Drake, H A 2000 Constantine and the Bishops The Politics of Intolerance Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press – 2015 “Speaking of Power: Christian Redefinition of the Imperial Role in the Fourth Century” Pages 291–308 in Contested Monarchy: Integrating the Roman Empire in the Fourth Century AD Edited by J Wienand Oxford: Oxford University Press Dunn, G D 2015 The Bishop of Rome in Late Antiquity Burlington: Ashgate Fear, A , Fernández Urbiña, J and M Marcos, eds 2013 The Role of the Bishop in Late Antiquity: Conflict and Compromise London and New York: Bloomsbury Academic Fears, J R 1981 “The Cult of Virtues and Roman Imperial Ideology” ANRW 17 2: 827–948 Flaig, E 1992 Den Kaiser herausfordern Die Usurpation im Römischen Reich Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag Gwynn, D M 2012a “Episcopal Leadership” Pages 876–915 in The Oxford Handbook of Late Antiquity Edited by S F Johnson Oxford: Oxford University Press – 2012b Athanasius of Alexandria Bishop, Theologian, Ascetic, Father Oxford: Oxford University Press Kolb, F 2001 Herrscherideologie in der Spätantike Berlin: Akademie Verlag Lee, D 2015 “Emperors and Generals in the Fourth Century” Pages 100–118 in Contested Monarchy: Integrating the Roman Empire in the Fourth Century AD Edited by J Wienand Oxford: Oxford University Press Lenski, N 2002 Failure of Empire Valens and the Roman State in the Fourth Century Berkeley: University of California Press Leppin, H 1996 Von Constantin dem Großen zu Theodosius II Das christliche Kaisertum bei den Kirchenhistorikern Socrates, Sozomenus und Theodoret Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht – 2003 Theodosius der Grosse Darmstadt: Primus Verlag Liebeschuetz, J H W G 2001 The Decline and Fall of the Roman City Oxford: Oxford University Press (ch 4 “The Rise of the Bishop”, pages 137–168) Lizzi Testa, R 2009 “The Late Antique Bishop: Image and Reality” Pages 525–538 in A Companion to Late Antiquity Edited by P Rousseau Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Manders, E 2012 Coining Images of Power Patterns in the Representation of Roman Emperors on Imperial Coinage, A D 193–284 Leiden and Boston: Brill

18

Jan Willem Drijvers / Erika Manders / Daniëlle Slootjes

Maraval, P 2013 Les Fils de Constantin Constantin II (337–340), Constance II (337–361) et Constant (337–350) Paris: CNRS Éditions McEvoy, M A 2013 Child Emperor Rule in the Late Roman West, AD 367–455 Oxford: Oxford University Press McLynn, N 1994 Ambrose of Milan Church and Court in a Christian Capital Berkeley: University of California Press Omissi, A 2018 Emperors and Usurpers in the Later Roman Empire Civil War, Panegyric, and the Construction of Legitimacy Oxford: Oxford University Press Pabst, A 1997 Comitia Imperii Ideelle Grundlagen des römischen Kaisertums Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Pfeilschifter, R 2013 Der Kaiser und Konstantinopel Kommunikation und Konfliktaustrag in einer spätantiken Metropole Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter Rapp, C 2005 Holy Bishops in Late Antiquity The Nature of Christian Leadership in an Age of Transition Berkeley: University of California Press Rebillard, E and C Sotinel, eds 1998 L’évêque dans la cité du IVe au Ve siècle Image et autorité Rome: École Française de Rome Szidat, J 2010 Usurpator tanti nominis Kaiser und Usurpator in der Spätantike (337–476 n Chr ) Stuttgartt: Franz Steiner Verlag Teitler, H C 2017 The Last Pagan Emperor Julian the Apostate and the War against Christianity New York: Oxford University Press Thompson, J 1990 Ideology and Modern Culture Critical Social Theory in the Era of Mass Communication Stanford: Stanford University Press Wallace-Hadrill, A “The Emperor and His Virtues” Historia 30: 298–323 Wienand, J , ed 2015 Contested Monarchy Integrating the Roman Empire in the Fourth Century AD Oxford: Oxford University Press

Architecture and Power Defining Tetrarchic Imperial Residences Verena Jaeschke (Frankfurt [Oder]) Indeed she [Rome] had sent the leaders of her Senate, freely imparting to the city of Milan, most blessed during those days, a semblance of her own majesty, that the seat of imperial power could then appear to be the place to which each Emperor had come 1 (Pan Lat XI/III 12 1–2)

Introduction This contribution attempts to define characteristics of cities that served as principal residences of Tetrarchic emperors in contrast to other types of imperial residences during the Tetrarchy such as locations for imperial retirement or suburban villas 2 Furthermore, it will be discussed if there was a pattern of buildings constructed in the context of the architectural embellishment of the principal residences It is proposed that the specific urban layout of the principal residences with palaces, circuses and infrastructural buildings such as imperial baths and warehouses formed the architectural framework to establish and visualize the Tetrarchic concept of sovereignty The palaces with audience halls, elaborate facades and intricate entrances reflected and accentuated the increasingly transcendent role of the emperor in Late Antiquity The spatial connection of the palace area with the circus underlined the role of the latter as a place for ritualized interaction between the sovereign and his people At the same time the visibility of the palace from the spectator ranks of the circus symbolized the presence of the emperor, even when he was not present in person

1 2

Lumina siquidem senatus sui misit beatissimae illi per eos dies Mediolanensium civitati similitudinem maiestatis suae libenter impartiens, ut ibi tunc esse sedes imperii videretur quo uterque venerat imperator Pan Lat XI/III 12 1–2, translated by Nixon 1994, 96 f In this paper, the period in question is defined as the time between the accession of Diocletian in 284 AD and the victory of Constantine over Licinius in 324 AD, which marked the return to the sole reign of one emperor

20

Verena Jaeschke

The Tetrarchy: division and decentralization of power Diocletian’s accession to power in 284 AD followed the so-called “crisis of the third century” from 235 to 284 AD, an episode in Roman history which can be characterized as a period of destabilization The Roman Empire was shaken by multiple challenges such as economic crisis and continuing conflicts on the frontiers at the Rhine and the Danube as well as with the Persians in the East With Diocletian a period of stabilization and reform of the empire commenced 3 Administrative and economic reforms were performed, the frontiers of the empire were stabilized and the period of internal political confrontations – at least for now – was ended Decisive for the success of these measures was the most sweeping reform of Diocletian: the introduction of the Tetrarchy 4 The political system of the Tetrarchy was supported ideologically by several components, which were communicated accordingly in literature, coinage, sculpture and architecture First, there are the virtues of concordia (harmony) and similitudo (similarity) of the emperors, which are illustrated in the optical alignment of the emperors in the iconographic representation 5 Furthermore, an increasing sacralization of the emperors can be witnessed, which is reflected both in the ideological reference to the divine dynasties of Jupiter and Hercules, as well as in the increasingly transcended staging of the ruler in court ceremonies The imperial palace was now perceived as sacred space and audiences took place after strict ceremonial protocol Although some elements of ritual homage linked to these audiences were already practiced in the imperial period, such as silence in the presence of the emperor, from Diocletian onward they developed into binding court ceremonial 6 In addition to these newly shaped audiences, which were only accessible to a selected group of individuals, the Tetrarchic rule was made visible to the masses by imperial processions through the city and circus games, as was common in earlier periods 7 The implementation of this new concept of sovereignty was based on the decentralization of power and representation The city of Rome ceased to be the political center of the Imperium Romanum and the exertion of power shifted to the respective residences of the Tetrarchic rulers This originated mainly from practical considerations such as the geostrategic position of the residences close to military or infrastructural focal points The emperors spent a good part of their reign on the road, travelling through the provinces or leading military campaigns and some of them did not visit

3 4 5 6 7

For an overview of the historic developments compare Corcoran 2006, 35–58 For an overview see for instance Brandt 1988, 19–27 A prominent example for this is the porphyry group of four tetrarchs, today at St Mark’s Basilica in Venice Boschung and Eck 2006, 10; Kolb 2001, 146 ff Kolb 2001, 22 f ; Unruh 2003, 34 Kolb 2001, 45 f

Architecture and Power

21

Rome once But, in contrast to emperors on campaign in times of the Principate, there was now a deliberate permanence to the absence from Rome, which for example becomes apparent in the fact that imperial jubilees and birthdays were mostly celebrated far away from the eternal city 8 This resulted in an increasing status and architectural embellishment of the principal residences of the Tetrarchic emperors such as Mediolanum (Milan), Nicomedia (Izmit), Augusta Treverorum (Trier) or Thessalonica (Thessalonike) In this context, it has frequently been discussed if a specific concept of urban planning can be witnessed in the architectural furnishing of the principal residences with palatial complexes, circuses and partially mausoleums and how this is related to the Tetrarchic ideology 9 The main challenges for this idea were twofold First, when dealing with imperial residences in Tetrarchic times, one has to consider that the emperors often changed their residences and not every domicile on their itinerary qualified as principal residence Hence, it has to be defined what characterizes a principal residence and which residences qualify as such Second, the archaeological evidence sometimes is quite sparse Additional sources such as the written tradition, inscriptions and coins can provide further insight, but attention has to be paid to uncertainties regarding the date of origin, benefactor and specific function of the buildings in question This paper attempts to define some functional and architectural characteristics of Tetrarchic principal residences and their imperial buildings in contrast to old-age residences and short-term habitats such as suburban villas Furthermore, by taking into account the findings of recent archeological research the thesis of a systematic endowment of Tetrarchic capitals with the trio of palace, circus and mausoleum shall be reevaluated What defines a principal residence? The principal residences of Tetrarchic emperors differed both in terms of function and architectural layout from other imperial residences such as retirement residences and suburban villas Suburban or rural villas mainly served as short-term habitat of an emperor on his travels Tetrarchic retirement residences such as Diocletian’s palace in Split were designed for the resigned emperors (seniores augusti) Principal residences on the other hand were not solely imperial estates housing the emperor They were cities whose public space in general served as a stage of imperial self-representation,

8

9

For example in the year 289 AD Maximian celebrated the birthday of Rome not in the urbs aeterna but in his residence Augusta Treverorum (Pan Lat X/II) as well as his birthday in 291 AD (Pan Lat XI/III) An exception was the celebration of the vicennalia of Maximian and Diocletian in 303 AD in Rome (Bauer 2012, 3 ff ) Duval 1997, 127–153; Ćurčić 1993, 67–89; Brenk 1996, 67–114; Von Hesberg 2006, 133–167; WulfRheidt 2007b, 59–79

22

Verena Jaeschke

just like Rome in earlier times These cities did not only possess a palace and other imperial buildings, but showed some distinctive attributes especially considering functional aspects: 1 Presence of the emperor: The emperors in question resided here for several years or repeatedly over a long term They were the seat of an active member of the council of rulers (augustus or caesar), not a senior augustus 2 Urban centers: They were established cities which served as economic centers in their region and were equipped with political and administrative functions – for example as provincial capitals or seats of a praetorian prefect 3 Strategic location: They were cities which because of their geostrategic position were close to regions of importance for the defensive strategy or were infrastructural focal points of the Imperium Romanum 10 4 Imperial mint: They usually were the seat of an imperial mint, at least while the emperor took up residence 11 5 Architectural embellishment: The elevated status of the principal residences became manifest in the exceptional architectural embellishment with buildings for imperial representation The key element clearly distinguishing the principal residences and their palaces from retirement residences and villas were the circuses They were usually topographically linked to the palace These criteria apply to long-term residences, such as Nicomedia, Augusta Treverorum, Mediolanum and Thessalonica, as well as to cities which served as principal residence for a shorter period of time, such as Antiochia (Antakya), Sirmium (Sremska Mitrovica), Aquileia and Serdica (Sofia) 12 Presumably it was not always foreseeable, which 10

11

12

Augusta Treverorum, Sirmium and Serdica were located close to frontiers where the emperors had to lead campaigns but still in secure distance Nicomedia and Thessalonica on the other hand were located at major crossroads and important port cities connecting different parts of the empire (Kuhoff 2001, 731) Between 284 and 301 the number of imperial mints more than doubled In addition to the operating mints in Rome, Lugdunum (Lyon), Ticinum (Pavia), Siscia, Antiochia and Tripolis other imperial mints were (re-) established While the mint in Tripolis was closed, coins were issued in Londinium (London), Augusta Treverorum (Trier), Aquileia, Carthago, Serdica (Sofia), Thessalonica, Heraclea (Eregli), Nicomedia (Izmit), Cyzicus and Alexandria (Weiser 2006, 209) York (Eboracum) is not considered in this context, since Constantius Chlorus only briefly resided here while on campaign in Britain in 296 AD and 305/6 AD and no major building measures comparable to other residences can be observed Most probably Constantius stayed at the praetorium of the provincial governor (Bidwell 2006, 36–40) Arles (Arelate) is not discussed either, because it is not clear if it was ever the principal residence of a Tetrachic emperor Maybe Constantine resided here when he was in Northern Italy between 306 and 316 AD But although Barnes lists Arles as a probable residence under Constantine, only two stays are attested, one at the Council of Arles in August 314 AD and one in August 316 AD (Barnes 1982, 68) Furthermore, there seems to have been no according architectural embellishment except for the so-called baths of Constantine and it was not a provincial capital or seat of a praetorian prefect in Tetrarchic times (Witschel 2006, 234 f ; Heijmans 2006, 209–220)

23

Architecture and Power

Table: The principal residences of Tetrarchic emperors between 284 and 324 AD 13 Residence Nicomedia

Emperor residing Diocletian

Principal residence 285–296 (w. Sirmium)

Capital of Imperial Palace Circus province mint x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

/

x (?)

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x (?)

/

x

x

x

x

x

/

x

x

x

x

x (?)

x

302–305 Maximinus Daia 311–312

Antioch

Licinius

317–324

Constantine

324–330

Galerius?

293–296

Diocletian

299–302

Maximinus Daia 305–306 309–311 312–313 Sirmium

Diocletian

285–296 (w. Nicomedia)

Licinius

308–316

Constantine

317–324 (w. Serdica)

Thessalonica Galerius

299–303 winter 308/9–311

Serdica Augusta Treverorum

Constantine?

317–324

Licinius

324–325 (abdicated)

Galerius

303–winter 308/9

Constantine

317–324 (w. Sirmium)

Maximian

286–?293

Constantius Chlorus

293–306

Constantine

306–316

Mediolanum Maximian

?293–296 (w. Aquileia) 299–305

Aquileia

Severus

305–307

Maximian

?293–296 (w. Mediol.) 299–305

13

The data given on the period of time in which the cities served as principal residence of an emperor is based on Barnes (1982, 49–82) and Millar (1992, 40–54)

24

Verena Jaeschke

city would be a long-term or temporary principal residence, since this depended on the volatile political circumstances This suggests that even for short-term principal residences a monumental expansion might have been planned, but was not completed due to changes in the imperial itinerary 14 The retirement residences and the villa complexes on the other hand served different purposes and hence differ in their architectural layout as well The known retirement residences are characterized by their rural location near the birthplace of the respective emperor and are not located in an urban center with administrative function They were also the designated burial sites of the resigned emperors 15 The architectural design varies, but their enclosed structure with strong walls and watchtowers reminds of fortification architecture The closed off estates included residential buildings as well as representative facilities (aula, triclinium, thermae) for the resigned emperor Furthermore, they featured temples for the tutelary gods of the Tetrarchy as well as mausolea for the emperors and sometimes their family members 16 Although they were still representative estates resembling small cities, regarding their function the retirement residences differed significantly from the cities serving as residences of the active emperors They were designed as an adequate but remote residence for the senior augustus, who still was a member of the council of rulers, but was not supposed to actively take part in the political affairs of the empire This is reflected in the size and types of buildings For example the audience halls in Split and Felix Romuliana were about a quarter of the size of the audience halls from Trier and Thessalonike 17 Moreover, Tetrarchic retirement residences did not have a circus This suggests that the resigned emperors were not supposed to or did not intend to host public games in their residences and thus did not make it a priority to symbolically interact with their subjects during circus games In fact, as designated burial sites the retirement residences seem to have centered not on the needs of daily politics, but on the cult of the Tetrarchic tutelary gods and the commemoration of the emperor 18 Hence, the temples for Jupiter and Hercules did not only honor the Tetrarchic system Since the Tetrarchic emperors claimed to directly descend from these gods, the temples also reflected the sacralization of the emperor himself This was reinforced by the mausoleums, especial14

15

16 17 18

Galerius for example changed his principal residence from Thessalonica to Serdica, but returned to Thessalonica after the conference of Carnuntum in 308 AD Hence, construction works on an imperial palace at Serdica might have begun at that time but most likely were left unfinished until Constantine took up residence in the city in 317 AD (Kuhoff 2001, 731) This primarily refers to the estates of Diocletian in Spalato and of Galerius in Felix Romuliana The lesser known old-age residence in Šarkamen had not been completed at that time, but bore clear reminiscences of Felix Romuliana, which was only 40 km away Most likely the complex was initiated by Maximinus Daia (Popović 2007, 80–95) In Spalato the mausoleum of Diocletian was located inside the city walls, while in Felix Romuliana and Sarkamen the mausolea were situated outside the walls (Mayer 2002, 68–91) Zabehlicky 2011, 96, fig 8 Kuhoff 2001, 782; Von Hesberg 2006, 138

Architecture and Power

25

ly in the case of Spalato where the mausoleum of Diocletian and the temple faced each other In the old-age residences individuality and dynastic thought could be expressed again, although within the Tetrarchic system The emperors were buried with their family members at their place of origin and close to the temples of the gods which they claimed to descend from The type of the rural or suburban villa must also be clearly distinguished from principal residences and their palaces They did not serve as long-term residences of the emperor and his comitatus, but were designed as places of retreat or short-term habitat for the emperor on his travels Accordingly, they were ample estates situated in the open landscape They featured residential and representative facilities common for the architectural type of the villa: housing space, audience halls, banquet halls and baths as well as extensive gardens Because of their “open” layout outside of towns they cannot be treated synonymously with inner-city palace complexes in the principal residences which appeared like a secluded quarter within the city 19 Nevertheless, even suburban villas or other short-term habitats are sometimes called palatium in the sources, since in Late Antiquity this term described the domicile of the emperor, whether this meant an imperial palace in a principal residence, a villa without connection to a city or the praetorium of a provincial governor, where the emperor held audiences while briefly residing in the city 20 In terms of architectural characteristics it is difficult to distinguish the villa of a high-ranking official from the villa of an emperor if there are no identifying inscriptions or the like, since there were not necessarily architectural differences except maybe for the size of the estate 21 An exception is the villa of Maxentius on the Via Appia in Rome By means of its layout and location outside of the city it complied with the type of the villa suburbana But because of the combination of the classical villa with a mausoleum and a circus, it united architectural and functional aspects of the villa with those of an urban imperial residence and a retirement residence respectively 22

19 20

21 22

An example of this type is the recently discovered villa in Cordoba, which probably served briefly as the residence of Maximian and was later the seat of high administrative officials (Kuhoff 2001, 734 ff ) Millar 1992, 41 Originally the term palatium meant the residence of the emperor on the Palatine in Rome, but during the late second and third century it became a description for the residence of the emperor as such For a brief history of the term from the times of Augustus to Late Antiquity compare Winterling 1999, 209–217; for some further remarks on the development in the third century see Schöpe 2014, 218 ff For example the villa at Piazza Armerina was long interpreted as summer residence of Maximian It is now thought to have belonged to a wealthy citizen For a recount of the discussion compare Kuhoff 2001, 736 f Wulf-Rheidt 2007b, 79

26

Verena Jaeschke

The architectural embellishment of the principal residences Taking into account the findings of recent archaeological research, some remarks are possible on the question if there was a pattern to the architectural embellishment of the principal residences of Tetrarchic emperors The existence of a palace complex and circus seems to be a crucial criterion to identify a Tetrarchic principal residence architecturally Considering the archeological and textual evidence, palaces as domicile for the emperor and his family and entourage existed in all Tetrarchic capitals 23 Nevertheless, it is debatable how imperial palaces are to be defined in functional and architectural terms As mentioned above, especially considering the literary sources the term palatium is problematic Even if one can assume an imperial residence within the city, it is often not clear what the term palatium actually describes It might mean a grand imperial palace complex as well as a villa of rather limited size 24 Here it must be analyzed from case to case, how the written tradition can be synchronized with the archaeological record in the respective cities But the archeological record poses a challenge as well, since architectural elements typical for villas, such as dining halls, baths and spacious courtyards, were adapted for the palatial architecture Hence, generally speaking an imperial palace is first and foremost defined by its function: The decisive factor was the presence of the emperor and the exercise of governmental activity 25 Particularly in principal residences though, this meant that the palace was not just a residential complex for the emperor, but an official residence of the imperial administration Like the archetype on the Palatine in Rome, it had to adhere to public representative demands as well as comply with the requirements of a private residence of the rulers 26 A palace complex in a principal residence therefore had to be situated within the city and con-

23

24

25 26

The knowledge of the actual appearance of these palaces differs For example, there is no archaeological record of the palace of Diocletian in Nicomedia, although it is mentioned in multiple sources (Lactant , De mort pers 14 2, 14 4; Amm Marc 22 9 4; Lib Or 61 10, 61 17) Of the palace in Antioch, also described by Libanios, at least its location on the Orontes Island close to the circus and some details of its appearance are known (Lib Or 11 203–208) The palace in Augusta Treverorum on the other hand is quite well investigated The large audience hall was part of a vast palace complex with service and residential buildings to the west and north of the basilica, a residential area to the south and a number of representative buildings and courtyards in the east connecting the palace with the adjoining circus (Kiessel 2014, 85–197; Fontaine 2003, 130–173) For Serdica it has recently been proposed that the Rotunda of St George originally was a bath belonging to an adjoining palace complex constructed in the early 4th century AD (Kirin 2000, 269 ff ) This might be the case in Sirmium The palace is not securely located, but it was most probably situated close to the circus If the archeological record here is rightly interpreted as palace, it was not a secluded complex but more a loose structure of different residential and representative buildings (Popović 2011, 177–185) Wulf-Rheidt 2007a, 1 f For a most recent account of the state of research regarding the development of the Palatine in Rome from Augustus until the 4th century AD compare (Wulf-Rheidt 2007a, 1–18)

Architecture and Power

27

sisted of a variety of residential and representative buildings which were comparable in size and expenditure to the imperial palace in Rome 27 Despite the typological difficulties in the investigation of Tetrarchic palaces, some components can be observed in several cases First, the localization within the city was usually at the periphery and not in the center of the city as one might expect This was the case in Mediolanum, Augusta Treverorum, Antiochia, Thessalonica and Serdica It is also noticeable that in some residences whole neighborhoods were torn down in order to create space for the imperial building measures The primary reason will have been a practical one, since a palace complex took up a lot of space and often existing structures were reused and enlarged accordingly 28 But the location at the periphery also points towards a strategic localization within the topographical context of the city, maybe to enhance the sublime image of the emperor and his power through the more secluded position of the palace Secondly, there is a new feature to the Tetrarchic palaces which differentiates them from the palace in Rome: the large audience halls with their apsidal layout Here the emperor held his audiences and court hearings and thence they were the spatial frame for the new court ritual emerging since Diocletian 29 Aulae are known not only from the imperial palaces in the principal residences, but were also a common feature of the retirement residences and suburban villas Nevertheless, the known audience halls from Tetrarchic capitals in Trier (1 430 m2) and Thessalonica (1 238 m2) range in a different dimension As mentioned above, they were significantly larger than the audience halls in Split (356 m2) and Felix Romuliana (204 m2) This applies as well to the audience halls from the suburban villas in Cercadilla (692 m2) and in the Villa of Maxentius at the Via Appia (627 m2) 30 The longitudinal orientation of the structure towards the apse enhanced the focus on the emperor or his representative who was enthroned in or right before the apse 31 Notably, the audience halls were often flanked by porticoed courtyards and equipped with an entrance hall Most likely, those structures were part of the ceremonial proceedings and helped regulate access and organize crowds hierarchically These surrounding structures and the more distinct apsidal structure clearly distinguished the Tetrarchic audience halls from the audience halls of the Domus Flavia on the Palatine But the most striking difference must have been the large windows in the longitudinal sides and in the apse, which supposedly left the whole building light-flooded 32 Furthermore, the question arises if there were certain architectural patterns in the arrangement of buildings within the palace area In recent scholarship not only the

27 28 29 30 31 32

Mayer 2001, 39 ff Wulf-Rheidt 2007b, 60 f Von Hesberg 2006, 150 ff Zabehlicky 2011, 96, fig 8; Kuhoff 2001, 740 On the specific features of Tetrarchic audience halls compare i a Von Hesberg 2006, 150–164 Von Hesberg 2006, 153 ff

28

Verena Jaeschke

audience halls have been discussed in this context, but also the intricate entrance situations as well as the possibility of belvedere-like connecting structures between the palace and the adjoining circus These may be assumed for Thessalonike, Sirmium and Milan 33 This would mean that these palaces had a representational façade towards the circus like the palace on the Palatine hill Also similar to the palatium in Rome, the Tetrarchic palace complexes were endowed with a multitude of courtyards and porticoes connecting the different parts of the palace, suggesting a functional partition into representative and more residential areas 34 The most distinctive recurring feature of the palace complexes in principal residences was that they were often adjacent to the circus, which means that there was a topographical connection between these buildings In Tetrarchic times, all principal residences except for Serdica were equipped with a circus Sometimes existing structures were enlarged and embellished, as in Trier and Antioch, but mostly the circus was newly built, as in Nicomedia, Thessalonica, Sirmium and Milan 35 A direct combination of palace and circus can only be proven for Thessalonica, but in Antioch, Sirmium, Milan and Aquileia it is most probable that the circus and the area of the palace adjoined each other 36 In Trier the circus was located not far from the palace The archetype for this concept, again, was the imperial palace on the Palatine in Rome The fact, that in Tetrarchic times monumental circuses were only constructed in cities where an emperor took up residence points to the importance of the circus and its spatial connection to the palace for imperial representation 37 The visibility of the palace from the spectator ranks of the circus represented the presence of the emperor even in his absence Furthermore, the circus played an important role in the ritualized communication between the ruler and his people During the circus games the spectators had the possibility to articulate approval or displeasure with the emperor without having to fear punishment Since this was a means of releasing tensions between the people and the imperial rule it had a catalyzing effect and thus a stabilizing character for imperial rule in the Roman Empire 38

33 34

35 36 37 38

Wulf-Rheidt 2007b, 62 f Kirin recently suggested that a large peristyle court served as connecting element between the representative and the residential parts of the palace complex in Serdica (Kirin 2000, 332) In Trier, too, the residential part seems to have been located in the south of the palace area, which was connected to the representative area in the north by a number of courtyards and connecting buildings (Fontaine 2003, 152) Humphrey 1986, 579 ff ; Heucke 1994, 319–399 Apparently in Serdica an amphitheater was built under Diocletian, but until today neither the archeological record nor the literary sources provide any evidence that there was a circus in Serdica (Boyadjiev 2002, 125–180; Kirova 2012, 99–260) Witschel 2006, 228; Wulf-Rheidt 2007b, 61 Recently on the palace in Thessalonica: Hadijitryphonos 2011, 203–217 For Sirmium compare Popović 2011, 177–185; for Milan and Aquileia Haug 2003, 72 ff and 92 ff ; for Antioch compare Kuhoff 2001, 719 f Humphrey 1986, 579 f Heucke 1994, 312 f

Architecture and Power

29

Consequently, the imperial palace in Rome with its spatial connection to the Circus Maximus and the elaborate façades both towards the circus as well as towards the square at the palace entrance from the city appears to have been the prototype for the Tetrarchic palaces The large audience halls on the other hand were a specifically Tetrarchic element Also, the decentralization of this palace concept once reserved to Rome was a novelty as such Notably, not only palaces and circuses were built in the principal residences A common feature which has been rarely discussed in scholarship is that in several Tetrarchic residences imperial baths were (re)constructed The monumental thermae in Milan and Trier were built around 300 AD In Antioch a massive bath named after Diocletian was built once he took up residence in the city Furthermore, existing Severan baths seem to have been restored and enlarged in Nicomedia by Diocletian, in Aquileia by Constantine and in Sirmium by Licinius This stands out since baths of the imperial type, as was the case with circuses, in Tetrarchic times were only built in cities that served as imperial residences 39 Also, between the Severans and the Tetrarchy almost no imperial thermae, which traditionally were an architectural demonstration of the liberalitas of the emperor, had been built 40 This was probably due to the political and economic insecurity during the crisis of the third century Hence, the resumption of the building of imperial baths specifically in the residences of the Tetrarchic emperors suggests that they should be evaluated within the context of Tetrarchic imperial self-representation In general, the enhancement of the urban infrastructure seems to have been a crucial aspect of Tetrarchic building measures in the residences, for example by building colonnades and warehouses 41 In many residences an expansion or at least restoration of the city walls can be witnessed 42 In Thessalonica the remains of the arch of Galerius still give an impression of the imperial representation on state monuments 43 The thesis that a mausoleum was a crucial feature of the principal residences on the other hand has to be reevaluated A mausoleum was only built in Thessalonica, although never used as such 44 Medieval literary sources also indicate a mausoleum for Constantius Chlorus in Trier, built for him by his son Constantine Since there are no confirming late antique sources this stays however highly hypothetical 45

39 40 41 42 43 44 45

For a compilation of sources and literature compare Witschel 2006, 227 Nielsen 1990, 59 For example horrea were built in Trier, Milan, Aquileia and Sirmium (Witschel 2006, 229 f ) Aurelius Victor tells us about new city walls in Milan and Nicomedia (Aur Vict Caes 39 45) In Serdica and Aquileia the city walls were extended as well (Kirova 2012, 206; Haug 2003, 92 f ) Kuhoff 2001, 598–627; Mayer 2002, 47–66 Galerius initiated the building works on the Rotunda which was intended as his mausoleum Later he seems to have changed his mind and after his death in 311 AD he was buried in his mausoleum in Felix Romuliana (Mayer 2002, 69) Schwinden 2007, 63–77

30

Verena Jaeschke

Hence, it seems that there was a specific layout of Tetarchic principal residences, but it did not consist of the trio palace, circus and mausoleum Because only the Rotunda in Thessalonica can, with relative certainty, be regarded as a mausoleum In fact, the architectural embellishment of the residences consisted of a combination of multiple building measures In the majority of the Tetrarchic principal residences the combination of palace and circus known from Rome was adapted This duality was a privilege of the principal residences and is not to be found in any other residences of the emperors In general, in Tetrarchic times new circus buildings were only initiated in residential capitals 46 The same applies to imperial baths, which were not necessary, but a recurring feature In addition, the frequent expansion of the city walls and the installation of buildings to improve the urban infrastructure seem to have been a common feature Architecture, leadership and ideology in the tetrarchic principal residences Assuming a systematic endowment of the residences with representative buildings, the question arises how the Tetrarchic concept of sovereignty was reflected in the public space of the principal residences Most important in this context is the construction of palace complexes with a preferably adjoining circus as a copy of the Roman palace on the Palatine This was meant to visualize the imperial presence in each residence and illustrated the deliberate departure from Rome as the center of government activity At the same time the spatial connection of circus and palace – often reinforced by a monumental façade – envisioned the power and presence of the ruler even during his absence The ritualized communication between emperor and crowd during circus games provided a possibility to negotiate mutual expectations and served as a stabilizing means of government The design of the adjoining palaces reflected the transcended image of the ruler in Late Antiquity With the audience halls the Tetrachic emperors created a unique architectural space which served as the frame for the new imperial ideology and self-representation of the emperor 47 Through the longitudinal orientation towards the apse as the seat of the emperor, the whole building was focused on his presence A striking aspect is the large number of windows, which distinguish the late antique audience halls clearly from the Domus Flavia on the Palatine By representative and ornate facades as well as complex access situations, the importance of the audience with the emperor was emphasized This was reinforced by the generous use of precious materials, for example marble floors and glass mosaics around the window arches

46 47

Humphrey 1986, 581 Von Hesberg 2006, 164

Architecture and Power

31

In addition, in most cities the imperial baths where a monumental sign of the liberalitas of the emperors and the new period of stability and economic growth 48 This image of security, prosperity and strength was enhanced by infrastructural buildings such as new warehouses and the restoration and enlargement of city walls Altogether, the Tetrarchic principal residences and their urban layout were the stage for the imperial self-representation of the Tetrarchy Their architectural embellishment symbolized the decentralization of the empire and the diminution of Rome’s political power while at the same time showing its continuing symbolic value The large imperial buildings such as palaces, circuses and imperial baths illustrated the merits of the new political system – first and foremost the newfound political and economic stability The layout of the palaces was geared to the prototype in Rome but also reflected the need for new architectural features related to the new concept of sovereignty Especially the large, light flooded Tetrarchic audience halls with their apses and adjoining courtyards show that the architecture focused on the staging of the emperor and the increasingly hierarchical organization of crowd circulation during his audiences Bibliography Barnes, T D 1982 The new empire of Diocletian and Constantine Cambridge: Harvard University Press Bauer, F A 2012 “Stadt ohne Kaiser Rom im Zeitalter der Dyarchie und Tetrarchie (285–306 n Chr ) ” Pages 3–75 in: Rom und Mailand in der Spätantike Repräsentation städtischer Räume in Literatur, Architektur, und Kunst Edited by T Fuhrer Berlin: De Gruyter Bidwell, P 2006 “Constantius and Constantine at York ” Pages 31–40 in Constantine The Great York’s Roman Emperor Edited by E Hartley et al York: York Museum Trust Boschung, D , and W Eck, eds 2006 Die Tetrarchie Ein neues Regierungssystem und seine mediale Repräsentation Wiesbaden: Reichert Boyadjiev, S 2002 “Serdica ” Pages 125–180 in Roman and Early Byzantine Cities in Bulgaria Studies in memory of Prof Teofil Ivanov Edited by R Ivanov Sofia: Ivray Brandt, H 1988 Geschichte der römischen Kaiserzeit Von Diokletian und Konstantin bis zum Ende der konstantinischen Dynastie (284–363) Berlin: Akademie Verlag Brenk, B 1996 “Innovation im Residenzbau der Spätantike ” Pages 67–114 in Innovation in der Spätantike Edited by B Brenk Wiesbaden: Reichert Corcoran, S 2006 “Before Constantine ” Pages 35–58 in The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Constantine Edited by N Lenski New York: Cambridge University Press Ćurčić, S 1993 “Late-Antique palaces: The meaning of urban context ” Ars Orientalis 23:67–89 Duval, N 1997 “Les résidences impériales: leur rapport avec les problèmes de légitimité, les partages de l’empire et la chronologie des combinaisons dynastiques ” Pages 127–153 in Usurpationen in der Spätantike Akten des Kolloquiums “Staatsstreich und Staatlichkeit”, 6 –10 März 1996, Solothurn/Bern Edited by F Paschoud et al Stuttgart: Franz Steiner

48

Von Hesberg 2006, 149 f ; Witschel 2006, 227 f

32

Verena Jaeschke

Fontaine, T 2003 “Ein letzter Abglanz vergangener kaiserlicher Pracht Zu ausgewählten archäologischen Befunden aus dem Areal der römischen Kaiserresidenz in Trier ” Pages 130– 173 in PALATIA Kaiserpaläste in Konstantinopel, Ravenna und Trier Edited by M König Tier: Rheinische Landesmuseum Trier Hadijitryphonos, E 2011 “The Palace of Galerius in Thessalonike: its place in the modern city and an account of the state of research ” Pages 203–217 in Bruckneudorf und Gamzigrad Spätantike Paläste und Großvillen im Donau-Balkan-Raum Akten des Internationalen Kolloquiums in Bruckneudorf vom 15 bis 18 Oktober 2008 Edited by G Bülow et al Bonn: Habelt Haug, A 2012 “Die Stadt als Repräsentationsraum Rom und Mailand im 4 Jh n Chr ” Pages 111–136 in Rom und Mailand in der Spätantike Repräsentation städtischer Räume in Literatur, Architektur, und Kunst Edited by T Fuhrer Berlin: De Gruyter – 2003 Die Stadt als Lebensraum Eine kulturhistorische Analyse zum spätantiken Stadtleben in Norditalien Heidelberg: Leidorf Heijmans, M 2006 “Constantina urbs Arles durant le IVe siècle: une autre residence impériale?” Pages 209–220 in Konstantin der Große Imperator Caesar Flavius Constantinus Kolloquiumsband Edited by A Demandt et al Trier: Rheinisches Landesmuseum Trier Heucke, C 1994 Circus und Hippodrom als politischer Raum Hildesheim: Olms-Weidmann Hesberg, H , von 2006 “Residenzstädte und ihre höfische Infrastruktur – traditionelle und neue Raumkonzepte ” Pages 133–167 in Die Tetrarchie Ein neues Regierungssystem und seine mediale Präsentation Edited by D Boschung et al Wiesbaden: Reichert Humphrey, J H 1986 Roman Circuses Arenas for Chariot Racing London: B T Batsford Ltd Kiessel, M 2012/2013 “Das spätantike Palastareal nordöstlich und östlich der ‚‘Basilika’ in Trier ” Trierer Zeitschrift 75/76:85–197 Kirin, A 2000 The Rotunda of St George and Late Antique Serdica: From Imperial Palace to Episcopal Center PhD diss Princeton University Kirova, N 2012 “Serdica/Serdika ” Pages 199–260 in Roman Cities in Bulgaria Edited by R Ivanov Sofia: Prof Mairn Drinov Academic Publishing House Kolb, F 2001 Herrscherideologie in der Spätantike Berlin: Akademie Verlag Kuhoff, W 2001 Diokletian und die Epoche der Tetrarchie Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Mayer, E 2002 Rom ist dort, wo der Kaiser ist: Untersuchungen zu den Staatsdenkmälern des dezentralisierten Reiches von Diocletian bis zu Theodosius II Mainz: Verlag des RömischGermanischen Zentralmuseum in Kommission bei Habelt Millar, F 1992 The Emperor in the Roman World (31 BC – AD 337) London: Duckworth Nielsen, I 1990 Thermae et Balnea The Architetcture and Cultural History of Roman Public Baths Aarhus: Aarhus University Press Popović, I 2011 “A residential complex in the south-eastern part of Late Antique Sirmium: written sources and archeological evidence ” Pages 177–185 in Bruckneudorf und Gamzigrad Spätantike Paläste und Großvillen im Donau-Balkan-Raum Akten des Internationalen Kolloquiums in Bruckneudorf vom 15 bis 18 Oktober 2008 Edited by G Bülow et al Bonn: Habelt – 2007 “Šarkamen – Eine Residenz- und Begräbnisstätte aus der Zeit des Maximinus Daia ” Pages 80–95 in Roms Erbe auf dem Balkan Spätantike Kaiservillen und Stadtanlagen in Serbien Edited by U Brandl et al Mainz: Philipp von Zabern Schöpe, B 2014 Der römische Kaiserhof in severischer Zeit (193–235 n Chr ) Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Schwinden, L 2007 “Vor 1700 Jahren – Konstantins Erhebung zum Kaiser und die Vergöttlichung seines Vaters Constantius ” Funde und Ausgrabungen im Bezirk Trier 39:63–77

Architecture and Power

33

Unruh, F 2003 “Unsichtbare Mauern der Kaiserpaläste Hofzeremonien in Rom und Byzanz ” Pages 33–47 in PALATIA Kaiserpaläste in Konstantinopel, Ravenna und Trier Edited by M König Tier: Rheinische Landesmuseum Trier Weiser, W 2006 “Die Tetrarchie – ein neues Regierungssystem und seine mediale Präsentation auf Münzen und Medaillons ” Pages 205–227 in Die Tetrarchie Ein neues Regierungssystem und seine mediale Präsentation Edited by D Boschung et al Wiesbaden: Reichert Winterling, A 1999 Aula Caesaris Studien zur Institutionalisierung des römischen Kaiserhofes in der Zeit von Augustus bis Commodus (31 v Chr – 192 n Chr ) München: R Oldenbourg Verlag Witschel, C 2004/2005 “Trier und das spätantike Städtewesen im Westen des römischen Reiches ” Trierer Zeitschrift 67/68:223–272 Wulf-Rheidt, U 2007a “Die Entwicklung der Residenz der römischen Kaiser auf dem Palatin vom aristokratischen Wohnhaus zum Palast ” Pages 1–18 in Bruckneudorf und Gamzigrad Spätantike Paläste und Großvillen im Donau-Balkan-Raum Akten des Internationalen Kolloquiums in Bruckneudorf vom 15 bis 18 Oktober 2008 Edited by G Bülow et al Bonn: Habelt – 2007b “Residieren in Rom oder in der Provinz? Der Kaiserpalast Felix Romuliana im Spiegel der tetrarchischen Residenzbaukunst ” Pages 59–79 in Roms Erbe auf dem Balkan Spätantike Kaiservillen und Stadtanlagen in Serbien Edited by U Brandl et al Mainz: Philipp von Zabern Zabehlicky, H 2011 “Die Villa von Bruckneudorf – Palast oder Großvilla?” Pages 89–100 in Bruckneudorf und Gamzigrad Spätantike Paläste und Großvillen im Donau-Balkan-Raum Akten des Internationalen Kolloquiums in Bruckneudorf vom 15 bis 18 Oktober 2008 Edited by G Bülow et al Bonn: Habelt

Rhetoric and Power How Imperial Panegyric Allowed Civilian Elites to Access Power in the Fourth Century Adrastos Omissi (Glasgow) Since Sabine MacCormack wrote her seminal Art and Ceremony in Late Antiquity in 1981, interest in panegyric as a historical source has blossomed Once discounted as “expressing stylized and calculated flattery, repetitiously asserting loyalty, and (one regretfully concludes) delighting their audiences,” panegyrics are now recognised as an invaluable window onto imperial politics and the last thirty years have seen a series of important studies that explore the ways in which panegyric communicated imperial ideology to a wide audience 1 Less, however, has been done to consider panegyric from the point of view of the orator 2 This article is an attempt to address this imbalance and examine panegyrics solely from the perspective of those who created them Who were they? Why did they compose their speeches? And how did they use panegyric to interact with imperial power? Through this analysis we will see that, although panegyric existed to serve the needs of the imperial person, it nonetheless offered enormous opportunities and advantages to both individuals and communities, serving as a medium of upward communication and a way of accessing imperial patronage In a world of leadership, ideology, and crowds, panegyric was a chance to stand out and to be noticed, and in this article we will see how and why so many orators reached for this opportunity with both hands

1 2

Quote from Matthews 1990, 228 For modern studies that employ panegyric as a source, see especially: MacCormack 1975 and 1981; Nixon 1983 and 1993; Mause 1994; Rees 2002 and 2012; Humphries 2008; Flower 2013, 33–44 Notable exceptions are Brown 1992 and Heath 2004

36

Adrastos Omissi

The orators and their speeches The fourth century, broadly defined, provides fruitful ground for such a study Thanks largely to accidents of survival (though also to the multiplication of emperors and the increased itinerancy of the imperial court, which greatly increased the opportunity for the emperor to formally interact with his subjects), the period 289–404 provides a corpus of imperial panegyrics, the size and variety of which is unrivalled at any other point in imperial history Fifty-one speeches survive in total, a rate of nearly one every two years Though only a small fraction of the thousands that must have been delivered in the period, this is an impressive volume The majority of the speeches in the surviving corpus are the products of some of the most significant writers of the age: Libanius, Themistius, Julian, Symmachus, Ausonius, and Claudian 3 But to complement these luminaries there also exists the Gallic corpus of the Panegyrici Latini, a style guide made up of eleven late antique speeches composed by authors of whom we know little that the speeches themselves do not tell us and headed by a silver Latin exemplum, written by Pliny 4 These speeches are the work of a minimum of five authors and are more probably the work of ten or even eleven individuals 5 The range of this surviving material allows us to draw conclusions about the individuals who delivered panegyrics in the later Roman Empire What these men all shared in common was an education founded on the fundamentals of grammar and rhetoric and grounded in an intimate familiarity with the greats of the Empire’s two languages, authors such as Vergil and Cicero, Homer and Demosthenes The composition of a panegyric required an ability to deploy a florid and archaising language, to manipulate topoi, and to deploy relevant exempla from the cannon of Graeco-Roman literature 6 It is little wonder, therefore, that, of the surviving corpus of orators, virtually all had at some point been teachers of rhetoric, grammar, or philosophy Ausonius, Libanius, 3

4 5 6

Thirteen of Libanius’ Orationes, written between the period 344–349 and 388 to four emperors (Constantius II, Constans, Julian, and Theodosius), may be considered imperial panegyrics (though note that many were never actually delivered: cf Malosse 2014) Themistius has left us eighteen imperial Orationes, delivered between 350 and 384 to five emperors (Constantius II, Jovian, Valentinian, Valens, and Theodosius) We know he also delivered an oration to Julian that does not survive (it is mentioned in a letter from Libanius to the philosopher: Lib Ep 818 3; Vanderspoel (1995, 128–34) suggests that this text is actually preserved, through Arabic, as the document called the Risâlat) Julian composed two Orationes to Constantius II, dating from 356 and 358 respectively (Bowersock 1978, 37 and 43; Tougher 2007) Three fragmentary imperial Orationes of Symmachus’ survive, dating from winter 367/8 (Or I and III) and 1st Jan 370 (Or II) and addressing Valentinian and Gratian, to which may also be added a number of speeches that we know were delivered but which do not survive (Sogno 2006, 2) Ausonius’ gratiarum actio for his consulship in 379 was delivered to Gratian Finally Claudian delivered three speeches in honour of Honorius’ third, fourth, and sixth consulships, in 396, 398, and 404 respectively On the collection, see Galletier 1949–1955; MacCormack 1975; Nixon and Rodgers 1994; Rees 2012 Nixon and Rodgers 1994, 3–10 On the education of orators, see Brown 1992, 41–7; Russell 1998

Rhetoric and Power

37

and Themistius had all had teaching careers 7 Of the Panegyrici Latini authors, four of the eleven explicitly mention in their speeches that they were, or had been, professional teachers, and the close association of the collection to the schools of Gaul would suggest that they all were 8 Augustine, who addressed Valentinian II on at least one occasion (lamentably, the speech does not survive), seems to have been qualified to speak by virtue of his position as a professor of rhetoric at Milan 9 Of the remaining authors, though they had not held official teaching positions, nonetheless what we know of their lives speaks to the quality of their education Julian had received the very best schooling in Constantinople, Nicomedia, and Athens, and had intended to devote his life to the study of philosophy;10 Symmachus, in keeping with the status of his family and its traditional, senatorial ambitions, received a superb education;11 and though we know nothing directly of Claudian’s upbringing, his astounding facility with Latin, which, as a native of Egypt, was certainly not his mother tongue, is testament to the quality of his education 12 All these men were civilians, with no direct experience of the continual warfare that characterised the late Empire The only example that we possess of panegyrics composed by a soldier are those of Julian, who was a soldier only by default, having been requisitioned from his schooling to imperial power by his cousin Constantius 13 The bifurcation of the civilian and military hierarchies in the fourth century meant that the military was increasingly staffed with men of limited education, men who might receive panegyrics but would not give them 14 Emperors, too, often rose to their position by virtue of their military and not their educational qualifications But the value of panegyric to them and to their regime was evidently always appreciated Emperors received panegyrics to mark their important victories and anniversaries They received them when they visited their cities or when they were visited by delegations from such They received them when they assumed the consulship or when they awarded consulships to others 15 Emperors even sat to listen to panegyrics when they were delivered

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

For their teaching careers: Libanius: Norman 1992, Wintjes 2005, and Cribiore 2007 and 2013; Ausonius: Sivan 1993, esp 76–9; Themistius: Vanderspoel 1995, 42–49, and Heather and Moncur 2001, 1–3 The four are Pan Lat VIII (1 2), IX (1 1, 2 2–5, 6 2), VI (23 2), and V (1 2) The author of Pan Lat IV is known to have been a rhetor from extra-textual references (Aus Prof 14; Jerome, Chon s a 324); cf Nixon 1983 Aug Conf VI 6 Bowersock 1978, 21–32; Athanassiadi-Fowden 1981, 13–51; Tougher 2007, 12–21 Matthews 1990, 86; Heather 2005, 16 ff Cameron 1970, 1–29 Athanassiadi-Fowden 1981, 44 ff ; Tougher 2007, 26 ff On the division of civil and military, see Liebeschuetz 1990, esp 7–85, and Lee 2007, esp 153– 63 Mennen 2011 provides valuable historical context for the developments of the later third and fourth centuries Nixon 1983, 89

38

Adrastos Omissi

in languages of which they had little grasp 16 Panegyrics were a way for the emperor to communicate to the cultural elite upon which he depended for the smooth operation of his government in terms that paid due reverence to the cultural heritage that united them and of which they saw themselves as guardians 17 Beyond their education and their civilian background, however, the orators provide a varied picture Some, like Libanius and Augustine (before Christianity drew him to another life), were career academics, who composed panegyric to the emperor in the course of their duties Others were habitués of the court, who delivered speeches to the emperor by virtue of their close connections to him; such were the gratiarum actiones of Mamertinus and Ausonius, delivered for consulships awarded in 362 and 379 respectively, or the officially commissioned works of a tame orator like Claudian 18 Some, like Symmachus and Julian, were men who by birth were already well placed to take hold of positions of importance, but who nevertheless used panegyric to consolidate their positions and to help secure the favour of the emperors that they served Yet still others were men of relatively humble status, teachers and men of local distinction, who used panegyric to display their culture and learning to emperors and thereby to secure their patronage, rising higher than they could possibly have hoped otherwise What makes panegyric so intriguing is that, within the confines of the genre, orators were capable of huge inventiveness It is true, style guides existed that offered, in intricate detail, guidance as to how to compose an imperial panegyric Such guides, like the Basilikos Logos of Menander Rhetor, offered their readers step-by-step instruction on how to structure their speeches, giving pointers on overall shape and on the construction of individual phrases, garnished with such unsentimental advice as “if it is possible to invent, and to do this convincingly, do not hesitate ”19 Yet the existence of such style guides ought to alert us only to the popularity of the genre, not to its creative bankruptcy 20 Whilst orators might use these guides when composing their own speeches, they were not constrained to do so 21 Panegyrics varied greatly in length, content, and form, and even the compositions of an individual orator might vary greatly from one an-

16 17 18 19 20

21

Russell 1998, 44 Kaster 1988, esp 15–31 Pan Lat III; Aus Grat Act ; Claud de III con Hon , de IV con Hon , de VI con Hon Men Rhet Bas Log (tr Russell and Wilson 1981, 83) For a more general introduction to handbooks of rhetoric, see the introduction to Russell and Wilson 1981; also Russell 1998 So popular, indeed, was panegyric, that we possess numerous examples of speeches ostensibly delivered to emperors but which were in fact delivered in absentia (though often before a crowd of local notables) and were then forwarded on to the court, the demand for imperial attention far outstripping its supply: cf Pan Lat IV; Them Or II and IV; Jul Or I and II; Lib Or XV and LIX If a prefect in Egypt could receive 1 804 petitions in just three days, the volume of panegyrics flowing into the court from the provinces should easily be imagined in comparable terms (Connolly 2010, 24) Examples of panegyrics that do adhere closely to the structure advised by Menander are Pan Lat X; Lib Or LIX; Jul Or I

Rhetoric and Power

39

other 22 As the rest of this article will show, the topoi of panegyric were deployed with considerable creativity by their authors Orators used their speech – the moment they stood before an ordinarily unreachable emperor and in command of his attention – to advance individual agendas that are woven through the speeches like golden thread Speaking for the community Agendas there were many The orations that we have preserved to us were, almost without exception, occasioned by the rhythms of the imperial calendar and their content was likewise dictated by the needs of the emperor and reflected his own propaganda 23 Yet despite all this, the speeches were personal creations Orators spoke in the first person and addressed emperors in the second Orators often gave details of their own lives and they recalled to the emperors the cities that had sent them Many orators, indeed, came before the emperor not solely as an individual, but as the representative of a wider community This might be a city that the emperor was visiting, as when Libanius spoke before Julian at Antioch in July 362 24 More commonly, however, orators would travel to the emperor bearing official salutations on behalf of the community that sent them In both 310 and 311, orators from Autun in central Gaul came to Trier to address Constantine on behalf of their communities The first speaker (Pan Lat VI) came to give thanks for the anniversary of Trier’s founding and to congratulate the emperor for having defeated his late father-in-law, Maximian, the second (Pan Lat V) to celebrate Constantine’s quinquennalia and deliver a gratiarum actio on behalf of Autun for tax concessions that the emperor had granted 25 In 357, Themistius undertook the significant journey from Constantinople to Rome in order personally to give thanks to Constantius on behalf of the entire Constantinopolitan senate for the emperor’s twenty year reign and his recent victories over Magnentius, Vetranio, and Silvanus 26 Indeed, after having risen to a position of considerable power in the Constantinople’s senate, Themistius frequently represented the city in official delegations to the emperor 27 Symmachus came likewise to Trier, when still a relatively young man, to offer thanksgiving for the quinquennalia of Valentinian in the winter of 367/8 28 Such delegations often bore official gifts; both Themistius and Symmachus came bringing large

22 23 24 25 26 27 28

For examples of distinct panegyric, see Jul Or II and commentary in Curta 1995; Them Or VII and commentary in Vanderspoel 1995, 161–7; Lenski 2002, 68–115; Omissi 2018, 228–47 See n 1 Also Omissi 2018, passim Lib Or XIII Pan Lat VI 1 1; V 1 1–2 For both, see relevant sections in Nixon and Rodgers 1994 Vanderspoel 1995, 100–104; Heather and Moncur 2001, 114–25 Them Or XVII 214b Vanderspoel 1995; Heather and Moncur 2001 Sogno 2006, 2–12

40

Adrastos Omissi

gifts of “crown gold,” aurum coronarium, on behalf of their respective senates 29 Their orations thus served to further advertise and individualise the tribute paid by their communities, expressing their loyalty An oration was not simply a pretty bow to wrap around the present of tribute, however Panegyric offered a formal setting in which to present petitions for local causes; accompanied by tribute and by the fulsome praise of the speech itself, delivered publicly before the emperor and his court, such requests had a considerable chance of meeting with success Eunapius records that, following Julian’s proclamation as Augustus, embassies came from cities all over the Empire bearing crown gold and that Julian granted the requests with which they accompanied these gifts 30 The orator from Autun who spoke at Trier in 310, mentioned above, had included in his address to the emperor a plea that Constantine visit his city: “This would be answer to my prayerful offering if you, led by your piety, were to see my fatherland, for it will at once be restored if you come to see it ”31 When Constantine did, indeed, come to Autun during the following year, this orator would doubtless have boasted that it was his words that had moved the emperor so to do, a boast made all the fuller by the fact that Constantine, during the visit, granted tax concessions to Autun and the remission of 7 000 capita for the future 32 It would be a source of considerable profit for an individual within their community to be able to claim responsibility for attracting such impressive and tangible manifestations of imperial favour Some of the most important and poignant of the panegyrics, however, were delivered by the representatives of communities coming not to give thanks but rather to beg forgiveness for their wrongdoing towards the emperor In such situations, communities would often pick their embassies carefully, looking for individuals who would be acceptable to the emperor 33 In the spring of 363, Libanius wrote an oration which he sent to Julian, then on his way toward Persia, to beg the emperor to forgive the behaviour of the Antiochenes, which had prompted Julian’s confusing Misopogon and his irate promise that he would move the imperial residence to Tarsus when he returned from campaign: “What punishment more do you require of men consumed with grief? (…) Crown your victories with mercy, and do not reduce us alone to tears in this triumph in which all the world shares ”34 As with the requests mentioned above, such moments created the opportunity for the emperor to display his mercy, to be moved by eloquence, and to reverse a decision made in anger without losing face 35 Panegyric was also a way in which orators might not only communicate pleas on behalf of the groups that sent them, but present to the emperor new ways of thinking 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

Klauser 1974; Ando 2000, 175–90 Eun , fr 24 Pan Lat VI 21 7–22 7 (quote at 22 7) Nixon and Rodgers 1994, 256 Sogno 2006, 3–5 Lib Or XV 75 (tr Norman 1969); Bowersock 1978, 103–105; Elm, 2012, 332 Brown 1992, 44–7

Rhetoric and Power

41

about and engaging with these communities In the winter of 366/7, Themistius addressed Valens as the representative of a Constantinopolitan senate that had supported the usurper Procopius (r Sept 365 – May 366) against Valens in a civil war 36 Themistius was at pains to paint a picture of Constantinople enclosed by a siege from within, so that no news of the outside world could reach those trapped in the city by the tyrant 37 Likewise, in the summer of 389, the orator Pacatus spoke before Theodosius in Rome as part of the celebrations engendered by his defeat of Magnus Maximus (r 383–388) and his conquest of the West 38 Pacatus came with full consciousness that he had lived in the territory of the man who had, whilst alive, been Theodosius’ enemy and he was at pains to show the emperor that the Gauls had been unwilling participants in the government of Maximus: “(…) wretched men we were; we were forbidden to show our wretchedness but rather were compelled to feign joy and, when at home and in private we had confided our secret anguish to our wives and children only, we then proceeded in public with our faces showing nothing of our fortune ”39 Delivered before the emperor, his court, and the Roman senate, the panegyric contained within it an important rereading of the past Pacatus offered, woven within his praise of Theodosius, a way of imagining Gaul that saved face for both parties As we shall discuss below, this presentation was clearly pleasing to Theodosius, for Pacatus himself was richly rewarded Nor should we discount the power of such pageantry; it was the part of the role expected of an emperor to be moved by such charismatic appeals to his virtue In 387, after tax rioting in Antioch which saw public buildings burned and statues of the emperor dragged through the streets, Bishop Flavian, who led the deputation sent to Theodosius to beg forgiveness for the city, was able to excite the emperor’s pity by employing the men who sang at the emperor’s table to sing laments for the Antiochenes 40 Display and formal speechmaking was part of the business of accessing imperial government 41 Speaking for themselves If orators (often) spoke on behalf of communities, however, they stood physically before the court and the emperor as individuals Despite the formidable prospect that emperor and court must have presented, this was a rare and coveted opportunity, and men competed with one another for the opportunity to speak Powerful friends would

36 37 38 39 40 41

Vanderspoel 1995, 161–7; Lenski 2002, 68–115; Matthews 1990, 191–203; Omissi 2018, 228–47 Them Or VII 90d–92a Nixon 1987; Matthews 1990, 173–82 and 223–38; Lunn-Rockliffe 2010; Omissi 2018, 263–89 Pan Lat II 25 2 Sozomen, VII 23 3; Liebeschuetz 1972, 104–5, 225 Connolly 2010, 22–39; Brown 1992, 48–70

42

Adrastos Omissi

be employed to secure important commissions 42 Augustine’s increasing dissatisfaction with worldly honours may have led him to speak with great bitterness of the occasion on which he delivered a panegyric to Valentinian II, but nevertheless he had fought tooth and nail to gain the professorship at Milan that had qualified him for it 43 A display of oratory before the emperor was a well-recognised method for advancement The great Symmachus seems to have launched his career with the delivery of a pair of panegyrics, his (now fragmentary) Or I and III in the winter of 367/8 Prior to this point, Symmachus had held only the trifling ranks of quaestor and praetor (standard rungs on the senatorial career ladder) and served as corrector of Lucania and Brutii 44 But after traveling to the Rhine on behalf of the Roman senate to deliver words and gold to Valentinian and his young son, Gratian, Symmachus was raised high; he was awarded the rank of comes and he stayed with the court throughout 369, long enough to deliver a thanksgiving speech for Valentinian’s third consulship on 1st January 370 (his Or II) When we find him next, it is in November 373 as proconsul of Africa, one of the highest ranking positions in the Empire’s civil hierarchy 45 Later, of course, he reached the giddy height of prefect of Rome 46 Symmachus’ rise is striking, but not necessarily surprising His was an established and powerful Roman family which, in combination with his own energy and erudition, would probably have led to advancement by whatever route he chose 47 But others, not born so high, could also enjoy the fruits of oratory Themistius, son of a notable but nevertheless politically irrelevant philosopher, entered onto the political stage with his first oration, delivered at Ancyra, perhaps in 350, and it is from here that a teaching career seems to have begun to yield to a political one 48 He was made a senator of Constantinople in 355 and delivered further orations to Constantius, in 355 and 357, from which time his position of prominence appears to have been assured 49 He was proconsul of Constantinople in 358–359 (the last man to hold this office before the urban prefecture of the city was created, an office he also held for some months in the period 383–385) and appears as a leading man in the senate throughout the period 355–384, in which he delivered a further fourteen imperial panegyrics (that survive) 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49

Cameron 1970, 36 Aug Conf VI 6 Cf Matthews 1990, 13 Cod theod XII 1 73; Matthews 1990, 12–5; Sogno 2006, 5–8, 21–2 Barrow, 1973; Sogno 2006, 31–57 On Symmachus’ family, see Cameron 1999 The date of Themistius’ speech is contentious, with the dates offered ranging from 347–351 For various options see Seeck 1906, 293–4; Portmann 1992; Barnes 1993, 313, n 21; Heather and Moncur 2001, 67–71 Skinner 2015 also suggests the more radical date of 342 Nov/Dec 355: Or II; 1 Jan 357: Or IV; May 357: Or III (cf Vanderspoel 1995, 250) Themistius’ rise occasioned considerable criticism and the charge of sophistry – the mere pretence of philosophical devotion in order to secure worldly gain – which it took him many years to shake off (Heather and Moncur 2001, 43–7, 101–7)

Rhetoric and Power

43

and served on ten official embassies from the senate to a reigning emperor 50 The poet Claudian likewise made a career for himself upon the imperial stage through the careful deployment of his rhetorical skills His debut in the Latin West was a panegyric to the consuls of 395, the brothers Olybrius and Probinus, scions of the house of the Anicii His next panegyric would be to an imperial consul, Honorius, and through it he allied himself to Stilicho and ensured his future at the court 51 Such examples are striking but they are also unusual The works of men like Symmachus, Themistius, and Claudian survive precisely because they were so famous and so do not necessarily provide an accurate guide to the career opportunities that panegyric afforded Yet, thanks to the Panegyrici Latini collection, a group of speeches collected not because of the fame of their authors, but because of the quality of their prose, it is clear that provincial authors could also use panegyric to attract imperial favour or enter imperial employ 52 The anonymous author of Pan Lat VIII, who spoke in the spring of 297 in praise of Constantius I after the defeat of the British Empire under Carausius, gives us a fascinating insight into his career A former professor of rhetoric, he had come to the court of Maximian through the introduction of Constantius (in the days before the latter had been made an emperor) It was after he delivered a panegyric to Maximian, however, that his star truly began to rise He was given an office (he does not tell us which one) and joined Constantius on campaign in the late 280s or early 290s He was still serving with Constantius in 293, when the latter was made Caesar 53 The author traditionally believed to be the compiler of the collection, Pacatus, author of Pan Lat II, delivered his monumental oration to Theodosius during the latter’s triumphal visit to Rome after the fall of Magnus Maximus, that is sometime during the period 13th June – 1st September 389 54 Pacatus is unknown to us before the delivery of his speech and seems to have had no contact with any imperial court prior to this time In February 390, however, we find him, like Symmachus, promoted to proconsul of Africa 55 Three and a half years later he had climbed still higher, serving as comes rei privatae 56 The au50

51 52 53 54 55 56

Or XVII 214b Note that Themistius’ proconsulship has been denied (Heather and Moncur 2001, 45) Only under Julian, who took exception to Themistius’ talent for spin, was this ascendancy ever challenged (Vanderspoel 1995, 118–34; Heather and Moncur 2001, 138–42) As Vanderspoel points out, however, even under Julian Themistius still occupied a position of importance, as his delivery of a panegyric indicates Cameron 1970, 30 ff On the growing desirability of imperial appointments over local, see Brown 1992, 21–3 (though note Brown’s emphasis on the continued dependence of imperial officials on the cooperation of local elites for the smooth operation of local government); Sarris 2011, 25–32 Pan Lat VIII 1 1–3 1 Galletier 1949–55, I, 71–2; Nixon and Rodgers 1994, 104–5 Date: Nixon and Rodgers 1994, 443–4 For the evidence for Pacatus’ role in composing the collection, see Pichon 1906, 285–91; Galletier 1949–55, I, xv–xvi; Nixon and Rodgers 1994, 6–7; Rees 2002, 20–2 Cod theod IX 2 4 Cod theod IX 42 13; cf Matthews (1990, 86) who also mentions one Latinus Alcimus, another orator who had won fame through a panegyric

44

Adrastos Omissi

thor of Pan Lat XI likewise mentions an “honour” awarded as a reward for speaking, which may well have been an office 57 Emperors were ready and willing to reward the men who stood up to praise them Nor were orators always content to wait passively for such honours Throughout the panegyrical corpus, we find examples of rhetors who felt able to speak directly to the emperor and to make clear requests of him Libanius was no stranger to using oratory as a way to present requests to an emperor To his plea that Julian return to Antioch, in Or XV (above), may also be added his Or XIV, a speech to the same emperor, written in order to reconcile him to their mutual friend, Aristophanes, and his Or XIX, addressed to Theodosius to beg for mercy for Antioch after the riot of the statues 58 Themistius ended his panegyric in honour of Jovian’s consulship (Or V), delivered 1st January 364, with a request that Jovian’s infant son, Varronianus ( Jovian’s colleague in the consulship) be sent to Themistius to be tutored when he came of age: “Pray send to me meantime the light bearer, the consul in arms, who has already imbibed his father’s qualities at the breast, to be so courageous, so imperturbable like one about to address the multitude ”59 The author of Pan Lat X likewise expressed his hopes to Maximian that the emperor would send him his young son, Maxentius, for tutelage 60 The anonymous author of Pan Lat VI, delivered before Constantine in 310, declared that he had worked for the imperial administration before and sought imperial patronage for his children and further employment for himself as an orator at the court 61 Pan Lat IX, strictly speaking a panegyric to an (unknown) local governor rather than an emperor, was an extended plea that its author, Eumenius, be allowed to contribute his (enormous) salary to rebuilding the school of rhetoric at Autun, and that the governor write to the emperor to secure this 62 The oration was thus a chance for an unknown man to be seen, for a waning career to be revived, or simply for a powerful orator to reaffirm his loyalty to his emperor and patron Orators were, of course, not always people outside the court circle looking to be admitted Eumenius, whom we have just mentioned, had been magister sacrae

57 58

59 60 61 62

Pan Lat XI 1 1–2, with Nixon and Rodgers 1994, 81, n 3 Or XV, we know, was not actually delivered, as it had not reached Julian by the time of his death (Norman 1969, I, xxxii) For the oration on behalf of Aristophanes, see Sandwell 2005, 102–3; Flower 2013, 34–5 Or XIX is clearly a rhetorical exercise, rather than an actual plea to Theodosius (Malosse 2014, 85) Sadly, we do not have evidence for what was said by the official delegation sent to the emperor and led by Bishop Flavian Them Or V 71b (tr Heather and Moncur 2001) Pan Lat X 14 1; the request is indirect but clear Pan Lat VI 23 1–3 Pan Lat IX, passim (esp 3 4, 11 1–3, 16 3–5, 20 1–2) The governor is likely the governor of Lugdunensis I (cf Nixon and Rodgers 1994, 147–8) There is dispute over whether Eumenius’ salary was paid by the people of Autun, the Aedui, or by the imperial government; Woolfe (1998, 1–3) assumes the former, Nixon and Rodgers (1994, 149) the latter Either way, Eumenius’ speech amounts to a request to direct large amounts of public money (whether local or central) toward a pet project, albeit in a laudable manner

Rhetoric and Power

45

memoriae at some point before speaking 63 Mamertinus, who addressed Julian in 362 to give thanks for the consulship the emperor had granted him, had served as comes sacrarum largitionum and then praetorian prefect of Illyricum in the preceding year 64 Likewise, Themistius and Symmachus may have been relative unknowns when they first spoke but they hardly remained so, and the patronage of the court ensured future occasions to speak Orators who could do so took evident delight in expressing their personal familiarity with the emperor 65 When a particularly delicate situation presented itself, it is clear that communities looked carefully for the correct person to represent them, choosing individuals who would find favour with the emperor 66 But in other instances, opportunity was given to new men, unfamiliar with the speaker’s platform On the basis of the surviving evidence, it is impossible to estimate in what proportion the emperor was addressed by men known to him or by strangers, though evidently it was a mix of both 67 For orators known to the emperor, however, panegyric was an excellent method by which to express their personal loyalty to their ruler In moments of political tension, this was of particular importance We have already seen that orators might seek forgiveness on behalf of their communities for wrongs committed against the emperor Individuals, too, might seek to use panegyric to heal a rift between themselves and their ruler In 356, Julian composed in Gaul a lengthy panegyric to Constantius that he forwarded to the court in the East 68 Some commentators have argued that Julian’s first panegyric was extorted from him almost as if by force 69 Yet this is to view Julian’s early career through the prism of his later writings and his open hostility to his deceased cousin If, however, we imagine him as Caesar in Gaul, isolated, distrusted, and struggling to gain for himself some real power, it is clear that there would have been great expediency in his reaching out to Constantius with a voluntary display of loyalty Symmachus, we know, addressed a panegyric to the emperor Theodosius in not dissimilar circumstances Symmachus had, in late 387 or early 388, delivered a panegyric to the emperor Magnus Maximus When Theodosius marched west in the spring of

63 64

65 66 67

68 69

Pan Lat IX 11 2 Comes sacrarum largitionum: Pan Lat III 1 4, 22 2 (cf Amm Marc XXI 8 1); praetorian prefect: Pan Lat III 1 5, 15 5, 22 2 (Amm Marc XXI 12 25) He continued to serve as praetorian prefect until 365 (cf PLRE “Claudius Mamertinus 2”) Mamertinus is probably the only author in the Pan Lat collection who was in imperial service at the time he delivered his speech, but five other authors seem to have held an imperial appointment at some time in their careers (Nixon and Rodgers 1994, 29) Pan Lat XI 1, III 25–9; Symm Or II 3; Them Or II 25d–26a, XXXIV 14 Sogno 2006, 3–5 Of the eleven late speeches in the Pan Lat collection, five writers reference that they had delivered panegyrics before or had some familiarity with the emperor: XI, VIII, VI, III, IX (though, in this last example, whilst Eumenius clearly knew the emperor, having served as magister memoriae, he claims he has not delivered a panegyric before: 1 1, 3 1) Jul Or I Athanassiadi-Fowden 1981, 61

46

Adrastos Omissi

388 and defeated Maximus, conquering the West for himself, Symmachus found himself thrust out into the political cold, where his widely known status as a persona non grata opened him to political and legal attacks In desperation, the orator composed a speech to Theodosius, his defensio panegyrici (sadly now lost), in which he explained his behaviour and attempted to distance himself from the usurper to whom his speech had implicitly allied him 70 Panegyric was, therefore, not simply empty verbiage, but entailed a political statement on the part of the orator, a statement for which he could be held to account It united an orator to an emperor Conclusion Imperial panegyric existed to flatter the emperor and to give ceremonial expression to his position as the supreme ruler of the Roman autocracy Delivered to emperors in their hundreds and thousands, panegyrics gave urban communities a chance to speak to their (often distant) ruler Orators used them as a way to offer thanks, to ask for favours, or to beg forgiveness The orators that delivered them also provided a fertile recruiting ground for the imperial administration and for a well-educated man with ambitions beyond the local level they provided a golden ticket, a chance to stand before the ruler of the entire world, to say the right things, and to be rewarded for doing so Panegyric was, therefore, a point of contact between ruler and ruled, a ritual to which both contributed and, importantly, from which both could draw considerable benefit Bibliography Ando, C 2000 Imperial Ideology and Provincial Loyalty in the Roman Empire Berkeley: University of California Press Athanassiadi-Fowden, P 1981 Julian and Hellenism: An Intellectual Biography Oxford: Clarendon Barnes, T D 1993 Athanasius and Constantius: theology and politics in the Constantinian Empire Cambridge: Harvard University Press Barrow, R H 1973 Prefect and Emperor: the Relationes of Symmachus, A D 384 Oxford: Clarendon Bowersock, G W 1978 Julian the Apostate London: Duckworth Brown, P 1992 Power and Persuasion in Late Antiquity: Towards a Christian Empire Madison: University of Wisconsin Press 70

Matthews 1990, 228–31; Sogno 2006, 68–78 Libanius, in the years after the usurpation of Procopius, (d May 366), was also dogged by accusations that he had composed a panegyric to the erstwhile emperor: Lib Or I 163–5 His correspondence from 363–365 is disordered and then ends almost entirely for the period 365–388, before resuming for 388–393, which has traditionally been taken as evidence that, in fear of being put on trial during this difficult time, he destroyed this portion of his letter collection (Norman 1992, 28–35) This hypothesis has been questioned (Cabouret 2009)

Rhetoric and Power

47

Cabouret, B 2009 “La correspondence fait-elle peur au pouvior?” Pages 259–279 in Correspondances: Documents pour l’histoire de l’antiquité tardive: actes du colloque international, Université Charles-de-Gaulle-Lille 3, 20–22 novembre 2003 Edited by R Delmaire, J Desmulliez and P -L Gatier Lyon: Maison de l’Orient et de la Méditerranée-Jean Pouilloux Cameron, A 1970 Claudian: Poetry and Propaganda at the Court of Honorius Oxford: Clarendon – 1999 “The Antiquity of the Symmachi ” Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte 48 4:477–505 Connolly, S 2010 Lives Behind the Laws: The World of the Codex Hermogenianus Bloomington: Indiana University Press Cribiore, R 2007 The School of Rhetoric in Late Antique Antioch Princeton: Princeton University Press – 2013 Libanius the Sophist: Rhetoric, Reality, and Religion in the Fourth Century Cornell Studies in Classical Philology Ithaca: Cornell University Press Curta, F 1995 “Atticism, Homer, Neoplatonism, and Fürstenspiegel: Julian’s Second Panegyric on Constantius ” Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 36 2:177–211 Elm, S 2012 Sons of Hellenism, Fathers of the Church: Emperor Julian, Gregory of Nazianzus, and the Vision of Rome Berkeley: University of California Press Flower, R 2013 Emperors and Bishops in Late Roman Invective Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Galletier, E 1949–1955 Panégyriques Latins: texte établi et traduit par Édouard Galletier 3 vols Paris: Belles lettres Heath, M 2004 Menander: A Rhetor in Context Oxford Oxford University Press Heather, P J 2005 The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians London: Macmillian –, and D Moncur 2001 Politics, Philosophy, and Empire in the Fourth Century: Select Orations of Themistius Translated Texts for Historians 36 Liverpool: Liverpool University Press Humphries, M 2008 “From Usurper to Emperor: the politics of legitimation in the age of Constantine ” Journal of Late Antiquity 1 1:82–100 Kaster, R A 1988 Guardians of the Language: The Grammarian and Society in Late Antiquity Berkeley: University of California Press Klauser, T 1974 “Aurum Coronarium ” Pages 292–309 in Gesammelte Arbeiten zur Liturgiegeschichte, Kirchengeschichte und christlichen Archäologie Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum Edited by T Klauser Ergänzungsband 3 Münster: Aschendorff Lee, A D 2007 War in Late Antiquity: A Social History Oxford: Blackwell Lenski, N 2002 Failure of Empire: Valens and the Roman State in the Fourth Century A D Berkeley: University of California Press Liebeschuetz, J H W G 1972 Antioch: City and Imperial Administration in the Later Roman Empire Oxford: Clarendon – 1990 Barbarians and Bishops: Army, Church, and State in the Age of Arcadius and Crysostom Oxford: Clarendon Press Lunn-Rockliffe, S 2010 “Commemorating the Usurper Magnus Maximus: Ekphrasis, Poetry, and History in Pacatus’ Panegyric of Theodosius ” Journal of Late Antiquity 3 2:316–336 MacCormack, S 1975 “Latin Prose Panegyrics ” Pages 143–205 in Empire and Aftermath: Silver Latin II Edited by T A Dorey London: Routledge – 1981 Art and Ceremony in Late Antiquity Berkeley: University of California Press Malosse, P -L 2014 “Libanius’ Orations ” Pages 81–106 in Libanius: A Critical Introduction Edited by L van Hoof Translated from French by L van Hoof Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

48

Adrastos Omissi

Matthews, J 1990 Western Aristocracies and Imperial Court, AD 364–425 Revised Edition Oxford: Clarendon Press Mause, M 1994 Die Darstellung des Kaisers in der lateinischen Panegyrik Palingenesia: Monographien und Texte zur klassischen Alterumswissenschaft 50 Stuttgart: Steiner Mennen, I 2011 Power and Status in the Roman Empire, AD 193–284 Impact of Empire 12 Leiden: Brill Nixon, C E V 1983 “Latin Panegyrics of the Tetrarchic and Constantinian Period ” Pages 88–99 in History and Historians in Late Antiquity Edited by B Croke and E M Emmett New York: Pergamon Press – 1987 Pacatus: Panegyric to the Emperor Theodosius Translated Texts for Historians: Latin Series II Liverpool: Liverpool University Press – 1993 “Constantinus Oriens Imperator: Propaganda and Panegyric: On Reading Panegyric 7 (307) ” Historia 42:229–46 –, and B S Rodgers 1994 In Praise of Later Roman Emperors: the Panegyrici Latini Berkeley: University of California Press Norman, A F 1969 Libanius: Select Orations Cambridge: Harvard University Press – 1992 Libanius: Autobiography and Selected Letters Cambridge: Harvard University Press Omissi, A 2018 Emperors and Usurpers in the Later Roman Empire: Civil War, Panegyric, and the Construction of Legitimacy Oxford Studies in Byzantium Oxford: Oxford University Press Pichon, R 1906 Études sur l’histoire de la littérature latine dans les Gaules: les derniers écrivains profanes: les panégyristes, Ausone, le Querolus, Rutilius Namatianus Paris: Leroux Portmann, W 1992 “Zum Datum der ersten Rede des Themistius ” Klio 74:411–21 Rees, R 2002 Layers of Loyalty in Latin Panegyric, AD 289–307 Oxford: Oxford University Press – 2012 Latin Panegyric Oxford Readings in Classical Studies Oxford: Oxford University Press Russell, D A 1998 “The Panegyrists and their Teachers ” Pages 17–50 in The Propaganda of Power: The Role of Panegyric in Late Antiquity Edited by M Whitby Leiden: Brill –, and N G Wilson, eds 1981 Menander Rhetor Oxford: Clarendon Sandwell, I 2005 “Outlawing ‘Magic’ or Outlawing ‘Religion’? Libanius and the Theodosian Code as Evidence of Legislation against ‘Pagan’ Practices ” Pages 87–124 in The Spread of Christianity in the First Four Centuries: Essay in Explanation Edited by W V Harris Columbia Studies in the Classical Tradition Leiden: Brill Sarris, P 2011 Empires of Faith: The Fall of Rome to the Rise of Islam, 500–700 Oxford: Oxford University Press Seeck, O 1906 Die Briefe des Libanius Leipzig: J C Hinrichs Sivan, H 1993 Ausonius of Bordeaux: Genesis of a Gallic Aristocracy London: Routledge Skinner, A 2015 “Violence at Constantinople in A D 341–2 and Themistius, Oration 1 ” Journal of Roman Studies 105: 234–249 Sogno, C 2006 Q Aurelius Symmachus: A Political Biography Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press Tougher, S 2007 Julian the Apostate Debates and Documents in Ancient History Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Vanderspoel, J 1995 Themistius and the Imperial Court: Orator, Civic Duty, and Paideia from Constantius to Theodosius Ann Arbour: University of Michigan Press Wintjes, J 2005 Das Leben des Libanius Rahden: Leidorf Woolfe, G 1998 Becoming Roman: The Origins of Provincial Civilisation in Gaul Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Coins against Christianity? Maximinus’ “Persecution Issues” in Context Erika Manders (Nijmegen) Introduction During the last phase of the reign of the emperor Maximinus Daia (305–313), a remarkable series of bronze and billon coins were minted in Nicomedia, Antioch and Alexandria These coins, bearing images of (local) deities, are considered the last example of civic coins that were issued within the Empire In modern scholarship, they are now generally placed within the context of Maximinus’ persecutions of Christians between 311 and 312; the coins, also called “persecution issues,” are connected with anti-Christian measures undertaken by specific cities in Maximinus’ part of the Empire, such as for instance Antioch and Nicomedia 1 In this article, I will argue that a clear link between the minting of these types and the persecutions under this particular fourth-century emperor is however difficult to establish When taking into account the broader numismatic context of these particular coins, and thus analyzing them within their own medial discourse, it becomes clear that the messages communicated through these types fit within earlier and contemporary ideological patterns, visible on both central and local coinage This makes it implausible that they were anti-Christian propaganda and emphasizes the importance of “systematic medium analysis” when investigating and explaining the meaning of specific coin types 2

1 2

See notably Van Heesch 1993, 65–75 In an earlier article Van Heesch (1975, 98–108) associates the issues with persecutions by Maximinus between May 310 and July 311 On results yielded by means of systematic medium analysis, see O Hekster, E Manders and D Slootjes 2014, 25–37; O Hekster et al 2014, 7–27; E Manders and D Slootjes 2015, 989–1005; O Hekster 2015

50

Erika Manders

The historical context In 311, the Roman emperors Galerius, Constantine and Licinius published the famous Edict of Toleration 3 With this proclamation, posted in Nicomedia, Christians within the Empire were effectively granted freedom of religion as long as they would not disturb public order Soon after the termination of the Great Persecution, initiated in 303, the emperor Galerius died He was succeeded by his nephew Maximinus Daia, who had already become Caesar in 305 and started to use the title Augustus in 310 Following the death of his uncle, Maximinus not only ruled Egypt and Syria, but also seized control over Asia Minor His reign over the dioceses Asiana, Pontica and Oriens, however, did not last very long as he committed suicide after being devastatingly defeated by his imperial rival Licinius in 313 4 Nevertheless, he clearly left his imprint on the Empire’s religious history Both late antique Christian texts and epigraphical evidence inform us about Maximinus’ anti-Christian measures carried out between the end of 311, some months after the issuance of the Edict of Toleration, and the end of 312 5 Although the specific reasons for this are unclear, Maximinus’ name was absent from the list of emperors who had promulgated the edict 6 Yet, whereas Maximinus did not grant the Christians freedom of religion in his part of the Empire, he seems to have relaxed their persecution in the first instance 7 A letter written to provincial governors by the praetorian prefect Sabinus, communicating his instructions to be lenient, testifies to this 8 However, Maximinus’ policy towards the Christians changed in the last months of 311 According to Eusebius, he took action to prevent Christians from meeting in cemeteries 9 In addition, the emperor was approached by embassies from various cities, such as Antioch, Nicomedia, Tyre, Arycande and Colbasa, asking him for permission to expel the Christians from their grounds, which he granted 10 Finally, Eusebius mentions that

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Lactant De mort pers 33 11–35 and Euseb Hist Eccl 8 17 3–10 Rees 2004, 11 For the ongoing debate on the creation of the dioceses, see for instance Zuckerman (2002, 617–637) and Slootjes (2014, 177–195) CIL III 12132; Mitchell 1988, 108–109 According to Eusebius (Mart Pal IV 8), Maximinus already acted against the Christians during his reign as Caesar For a detailed overview of the whole of Maximinus’ anti-Christian measures, see Mitchell 1988, 113–115 Mitchell 1988, 113 with n 21 Van Heesch 1993, 73; Mitchell 1988, 113 Euseb Hist Eccl 9 1 3–6 In the letter it is stated that it was not allowed to molest Christians and that the Christians were free to profess their religion The tone of the letter was, however, negative with respect to the Christians See Mitchell 1988, 113 Euseb Hist Eccl 9 2 1; Mitchell 1988, 114 For the epigraphical evidence, see Mitchell 1988, 108 ff Eusebius and Lactantius argue that the cities’ petitions were instigated by the emperor himself (Hist Eccl 9 2, De mort pers 36 3) See also Van Heesch (1993, 74) and Mitchell (1988, 114)

51

Coins against Christianity?

Maximinus put the most notable preachers to death and that he conducted a military campaign against the Christian Armenians 11 Towards the end of 312, as Constantine rose to power and Constantine and Licinius became allies, Maximinus seem to have changed direction with respect to the Christians once more Constantine’s and Licinius’ pro-Christian attitude, which eventually led to freedom of religion within the Empire, presumably caused Maximinus’ promulgation of an edict in May 313 by which privileges and properties were restored to the Christians 12 Only shortly after issuing this edict, in the summer of 313, Maximinus died at Tarsus The numismatic context The following table presents an overview of the specific types that belong to the socalled “persecution issues” that were minted under Maximinus’ reign:13 Obverse legend

Obverse image

DEAE SANC CERERI

Veiled and GEN CIVIT diademed bust NICOM of Ceres

Fortuna with Nicomedia 4 rudder and cornucopiae, standing l., OPA in exergue

GENIO ANTIOCHENI

Antioch seated APOLLONI facing on rock, (sic) below Orontes SANCTO swimming

Apollo standing l., patera in r. hand, lyre in left, SMA/ AMS in ex., A to I in right field / E in right field

Antioch

96

GENIO CIVITATIS

Towered and draped bust of Antioch, r.

Apollo standing l., patera in r. hand, lyre in left

Antioch

414

11 12 13

14

Reverse legend

APOLLONI (sic) SANCTO

Reverse image

Mint

Specimens

Van Heesch 1993, 74 Euseb , Hist Eccl 9 9a 1–9 and 9 10 7–11 Van Heesch 1993, 74 This table is based on the overview of this series of coin types presented by Van Heesch 1993 However, Van Heesch attributes a coin type, minted in Antioch, presenting Jupiter Conservator on the obverse and Victory on the reverse, also to this series Marcellesi rightly argues that, apart from the absence of the emperor’s name and portrait, this type has nothing in common with the other Antiochene coin types of this series that present the city’s Tyche and Apollo, see Marcellesi 2008, 189 Consequently, the Jupiter/Victory type is not recorded in the table presented here Furthermore, the emphasis in this table lies on text and images on obverses and reverses Therefore, specimens bearing similar legends and images but differing in weight and/or diameter are taken together Two of these specimens are anagraphic

52

Erika Manders

Obverse legend

Obverse image

Reverse legend

Reverse image

Mint

Specimens

DEO SANCTO SARAPIDI

Head of Serapis with modius, r.

DEO SANCTO NILO

Nilus reclining l., leaning on crocodile or hippopotamus, holding reed in right hand and cornucopiae in left, ALE in ex.

Alexandria

1715

DEO SARAPIDI

Head of Serapis with modius, r.

SANCTO NILO

Nilus reclining l., leaning on crocodile or hippopotamus, holding reed in right hand and cornucopiae in left, ALE in ex.

Alexandria

716

DEO SARAPIDI

Head of Serapis with modius, r.

GENIO ALEXAND

Alexandria reclining l., rudder in right hand, (SM/ MS in ex.)

Alexandria

3

As the above table shows, these particular coins, minted in the three most important cities of the Eastern part of the Empire, clearly have a connection with each other The city-goddesses are depicted on the coins of Antioch and Alexandria and the coins of all three cities bear images of other gods important for the city: Ceres on the coins of Nicomedia, Apollo on the coins of Antioch, and both Sarapis and Nilus on the coins of Alexandria In addition, the names of the cities are mentioned in the coins’ legends and either sanctus or genius or both are inscribed on the types listed in the table 17 Based on an analysis of mint marks, die-axis and the number of officinae as well as a comparison with coins stemming from a hoard found in East Turkey, Van Heesch argues that this series of coins can be dated to 312 18 He reinforces his claim by suggesting that, because of the coherence of such a series of coins issued in three different cities, the coins were not issued by an exclusively civic authority and that a higher official in control of the territory to which Antioch, Nicomedia and Alexandria belonged might have played an important role in the minting of these coins Given that, following the 15 16 17 18

Excavations in Alexandria, carried out by the Centre d’études alexandrines at the beginning of the 1990s, yielded another five specimens of this type (Marcellesi 2008, 185) which are all included here During the same excavations one more specimen of this type, which is recorded here too, was found (Marcellesi 2008, 186) Marcellesi 2008, 189; Van Heesch 1993, 67–68 Van Heesch also mentions that the weight of the larger module coins (15 mm) is similar in the three cities Van Heesch 1993, 68–73

Coins against Christianity?

53

death of Galerius in the spring of 311, Maximinus Daia also came to possess Pontica (Nicomedia) as well as the dioceses Oriens (Antioch and Alexandria) and Asiana, over which he already ruled, the date of 312 for this series of coins appears highly credible 19 Van Heesch even puts the coins in a more precise context, namely that of the actions undertaken by specific cities, such as Nicomedia and predominantly Antioch, against the Christians in 311–312 20 These cities, for which religious activities connected to their famous sanctuaries (such as the temple of Apollo at Daphne, just outside Antioch) were an important source of income, asked Maximinus for permission to ban the Christians from their grounds 21 Maximinus, who was financially dependent on these cities, answered positively to this request According to Van Heesch, these coins, bearing images of the “ancient immortal gods,” reflected the cities’ actions and were intended as anti-Christian propaganda 22 This presumed persecution context of these coins seems to be problematic in some respects First, coins bearing images of traditional Roman gods cannot be considered exceptional or even anti-Christian at this point in Roman history It was only in 312 that Constantine, as the first Roman emperor ever to do so, openly associated himself with the god of the Christians Before this moment, references to the Christian god did not appear on Roman coinage In addition, references to the Christian god did not replace allusions to the Roman gods immediately after 312 On the contrary, only very few coin types that were minted by Constantine display the Christogram 23 Only gradually Jupiter, Hercules, Mars and Sol disappeared from Constantine’s coins and it was not before Constantine’s victory over Licinius in 324 that they vanished completely 24

19

20

21 22 23 24

Van Heesch 1993, 72 In the most recent contribution to the debate on the dating of this coin series, Marcellesi states that the coins of Alexandria were minted between 294–317 and the coins of Antioch between 310 and 320 She does not consider the Nicomedian coins, since the only attested mint mark on these coins, OPA, has no parallel within the history of the workshop For an overview of all contributions to this debate, see Marcellesi 2008, 187–188 According to Van Heesch, the fact that there were several issues of these particular coins at Antioch and that they were struck in large quantities presumably reflects the actions of the Antiochenes against the Christians under the leadership of their curator Theotecnus (Van Heesch 1993, 75; Euseb Hist Eccl 9 2–3) On Maximinus’ persecutions of Christians in the context of these cities’ economic dependence on their religious activities, see Castritius 1969 Van Heesch 1993, 75 See for example RIC VII, Ticinum, no 36; RIC VII, Constantinople, nos 19 and 26 With the sole exception of one coin type featuring Sol From 324–325 onward (and in many cases some years before 320) direct references to the Olympian gods disappeared from Constantine’s coins Military themes, such as references to victory and military prowess, came to replace them See also Barnes, Constantine, 18 Leeb argues that Constantine initially turned away from the Tetrarchic gods and selected Sol as the state deity, see Leeb 1992, 9 However, until 324 especially Jupiter played a prominent role on Constantine’s imperial coins (mainly on those issued in the east) On (the disappearance of specific) divine symbolism on the coins of Constantine, see for instance Bruun 1958, 15–37; M -R Alföldi 1964, 10–16; Leeb 1992, 9–52; Ehling 2011, 32; Wienand 2011, 53–61

Percentages of coin types referring to specific deities

54

Erika Manders

50 % 45 % 40 % None

35 %

Christian god

30 %

Sol

25 %

Mars

20 %

Hercules

15 %

Jupiter

10 % 5% 0%

306–312

313–324

325–337

Phases within Constantine’s reign

Fig. 1 Deities on Constantine’s coin types 25

Second, a link with Maximinus’ persecutions of Christians is difficult to establish since the messages propagated on the series of coins described above fit perfectly within contemporary and earlier representational patterns on imperial coins Figure 1 shows the most popular themes on Maximinus’ coins that were issued between 305 and 313 and are listed in the Roman Imperial Coinage (RIC) It shows clearly that deities ( Jupiter, Hercules, Sol and Mars), the genius of the Roman people and the genius of the emperor(s) figure on almost two-thirds (or 65 %) of the coin types minted by Maximinus 26 The themes chosen for the obverses and reverses of the Nicomedian, Antiochene and Alexandrian coins, deities and the genius of the cities, thus fit into the pattern of messages spread by the coins of Maximinus as a whole, emphasizing genius 25 26

This graph has also been published in Manders 2014, 6 Genius populi Romani: 19 %; Genius Caesaris / Augusti / Imperatoris / Augustorum et Caesarum: 19 %; Virtus exercitus / militum: 10 %; Virtus Augustorum et Caesarum: 6 %; Deities: 27 %; Princeps iuventutis: 3 %; Other: 16 % There is, however, a marked difference between the coin types issued during Maximinus’ reign as Caesar and the types minted under his rule as Augustus Maximinus Caesar: Genius populi Romani: 27 %; Genius Caesaris / Augusti / Imperatoris / Augustorum et Caesarum: 16 %; Virtus exercitus / militum: 12 %; Virtus Augustorum et Caesarum: 12 %; Deities: 12 %; Princeps iuventutis: 4 %; Other: 17 % Maximinus Augustus: Genius populi Romani: 12 %; Genius Caesaris / Augusti / Imperatoris / Augustorum et Caesarum: 24 %; Virtus exercitus / militum: 9 %; Virtus Augustorum et Caesarum: 0 %; Deities: 44 %; Princeps iuventutis: 1 %; Other: 10 % As I argued in an earlier article, the ideological differences between the co-rule and sole rule of an emperor might hint at a large personal influence of the emperor on the choice of coin types, see Manders 2011, 230–247

Coins against Christianity?

55

Reverse types Maximinus, 305–313 (N = 399)

Genius populi Romani Virtus exercitus/militum Virtus Augustorum et Caesarum Princeps iuventutis

Genius Caesaris/Augusti/Imperatoris/ Augustorum et Caesarum Deities (Sol, Jupiter, Hercules, Mars) Other

Fig. 2 Dominant themes on Maximinus’ coin types

and gods In addition, on the basis of an investigation of the coins of Diocletian (instigator of the Tetrarchy) and Galerius (Maximinus’ predecessor) that are recorded in the RIC, it is even possible to argue that these particular themes also seem to fit into the general picture of Tetrarchic coinage 27 Analysis of Diocletian’s coin types reveals that over a quarter (28 %) of his coin types bear references to genius populi Romani while 24 % depict a deity ( Jupiter, Hercules, Sol and Mars) In addition, more than a third (37 %) of the coin types of Galerius refer to the genius of the Roman people and 9 % to deities ( Jupiter, Hercules, Sol and Mars) 28

27

28

See also Marcellesi who mentions that the iconography of the three series “ne diffère pas fondamentalement de celle qui marque le reste du monnayage impérial à l’époque tétrarchique, où sont couramment représentés Jupiter ou la ville de Rome personnifiée” (Marcellesi 2008, 191) The latter, however, seems to be not completely accurate Notably, Van Heesch (1993, 69), while rejecting a later date (325–330) for the series, states the following too: “(…) the typological messages of the coinages of our series and of the Tetrarchic period differ completely from those of the period after 325, when the dominant type is the camp gate (providentiae augg) instead of the genius of the cities (e g genio civitatis), the emperor (genio augusti), the army (genio exercitus) or the people (genio populi Romani) of the earlier period ” Of the coin types that were minted during Galerius’ reign as Caesar, 7 % depict deities This percentage increases to 14 % for the coin types minted during his reign as Augustus

56

Erika Manders

Reverse types Diocletian, 284–305 (N = 855)

Genius populi Romani

Virtus exercitus/militum

Virtus Augustorum et Caesarum

Deities (Sol, Jupiter, Hercules, Mars)

Other

Fig. 3 Dominant themes on Diocletian’s coin types

Reverse types Galerius, 293–311 (N = 687)

Genius populi Romani Virtus exercitus/militum

Genius Caesaris/Augusti/Imperatoris/ Augustorum et Caesarum

Virtus Augustorum et Caesarum/Iovi Caesaris

Deities (Sol, Jupiter, Hercules, Mars)

Princeps iuventutis

Other

Fig. 4 Dominant themes on Galerius’ coin types

Coins against Christianity?

57

Thus, following Van Heesch’ claim that a higher official (i e Maximinus) reigning over all three cities played a large role in the minting of these coins, the themes on the series of coins discussed here are compatible with those present on other coins minted during Maximinus’ reign and, to a certain extent, with messages communicated through Tetrarchic coinage as a whole Therefore, again, the coins’ typology makes it difficult to place the series within the particular context of the Christian persecutions under Maximinus in 311–312 Finally, not only from the central but also from the local perspective the series of coins discussed in this article falls within established frameworks As the last known example of civic coinage minted within the Empire, it clearly has a link with local traditions and customs The cities’ most important deities figure on their coins: the city-goddesses on the coins of Antioch and Alexandria, Ceres on the coins of Nicomedia, Apollo on those of Antioch and Sarapis as well as Nilus on the coins of Alexandria Moreover, this emphasis especially on Apollo and Sarapis on the one hand, and on the city-goddesses on the other, is an important characteristic of pseudo-autonomous coinage (Roman provincial coinage lacking a portrait of the emperor or of one of his family members on the obverse), a category to which this series belongs 29 Civic autonomy and legitimization of power As demonstrated, the Nicomedian, Antiochene and Alexandrian coin types fit into the general image communicated by contemporary (and earlier Tetrarchic) central coins and they link up with traditions inherent to civic coins, which were, apart from our series, no longer minted after the reign of Diocletian 30 Only by means of comparing these coins’ messages with the messages spread by other (in this context chronologically and/or geographically relevant) coins does it become clear that the coin types minted in the three particular eastern cities cannot be seen as ideologically exceptional The Roman users of these coins were thus confronted with messages with which they were already familiar and they would probably not have seen them as reactions to the rise of Christianity When seen iconographically, there seems to be no reason to consider this series as anti-Christian propaganda and to put it in the context of Maximinus’ persecution of Christians during the last years of his reign

29

30

Heuchert distinguishes three groups of pseudo-autonomous coins: 1 Gods and goddesses, the most common Zeus, Apollo, Dionysus, Heracles, Athena, Artemis, Serapis; 2 Personifications of the Roman Senate and Thea Roma; 3 Personifications of the city, either the city-goddess or founding heroes and personifications of civic institutions See Heuchert 2005, 47 On possible reasons for the end of local coinage, see RPC I, 18–19; Ripollès 2005, 93 and Burnett 2005, 177–178

58

Erika Manders

What is exceptional, however, is the fact that, suddenly after the generally accepted end of civic coinage, three cities simultaneously started to mint their own coins again in 312 If it cannot be ascribed to the persecution of the Christians, there obviously must have been another motive for the issuance of this series In June 311, when Maximinus arrived in Nicomedia after the death of Galerius, he issued a census law by which he abolished the personal tax for the urban population, levied by Galerius, in his part of the Empire 31 This correspondingly implied a higher degree of fiscal independence for these particular cities The series of coin types, issued in the three most important cities of the Eastern part of the Empire, can therefore be placed within this context of (temporary) stronger civic autonomy 32 After all, the minting of its own coins, bearing local references such as images of the most important civic deities, can be seen as a city’s privilege, as a continuous symbol of its (apparent) autonomy, regardless of under whose authority it stood On the other hand, the coins also seem to reflect Maximinus’ attempt to legitimize his power after he gained control over Galerius’ territories As stated above, central influence over the coin series can be considered highly plausible, and the series’ issuance would not only have had a positive effect on the image of the cities, but also on the representation of the emperor Through granting the cities a certain amount of freedom and propagating this by means of the coins minted in Nicomedia, Antioch and Alexandria, the emperor might have wanted to bind more closely the cities within his territories to his rule Moreover, as the imagery present on these coins did not deviate from the messages communicated by his other coins, it could only strengthen Maximinus’ ideological program as a whole This series of coins therefore suggests a significant merger of both local and central interests Bibliography Alföldi, M -R 1964 “Die Sol-Comes Münze vom Jahre 325: Neues zur Bekehrung Constantins ” Pages 10–16 in Mullus: Festschrift für Theodor Klauser Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum Edited by T Klauser, A Stuiber and A Hermann Münster: Aschendorff Bruun, P 1958 “The disappearance of Sol from the coins of Constantine ” Arctos 2:15–37 Burnett, A 2005 “The Roman West and the Roman East ” Pages 171–180 in Coinage and Identity in the Roman Provinces Edited by C Howgego, V Heuchert, and A Burnett Oxford: Oxford University Press Castritius, H 1969 Studien zu Maximinus Daia Kallmünz: Michael Lassleben Christensen, T 2012 C Galerius Valerius Maximinus: studies in the politics and religion of the Roman Empire, AD 305–313 Copenhagen: Copenhagen University

31 32

On the promulgation of this law and the debate concerning it in modern literature, see Christensen 2012, 189–200 See also Singor 2014

Coins against Christianity?

59

Ehling, K 2011 “Das Christogramm als magisches Siegeszeichen Zum konstantinischen Silbermedaillon des Jahres 315 ” Pages 27–32 in Konstantin der Grosse: zwischen Sol und Christus Edited by K Ehling and G Weber Darmstadt: Philipp von Zabern Heesch, J , van 1975 “Une frappe semi-autonome sous Maximin Daza ” RBN 121:98–108 – 1993 “The last civic coinages and the religious policy of Maximinus Daza (AD 312) ” NC 153:65– 75 Hekster, O 2015 Emperors and Ancestors Roman Rulers and the Constraints of Tradition Oxford: Oxford University Press –, E Manders and D Slootjes 2014 “Making history with coins: Nero from a numismatic perspective ” JIH 45 1:25–37 –, et al 2014 “Nero’s ancestry and the construction of imperial ideology in the Early Empire A methodological case study” JAHA 1 4:7–27 Heuchert, V 2005 “The chronological development of Roman provincial coin iconography” Pages 29–56 in Coinage and Identity in the Roman Provinces Edited by C Howgego, V Heuchert, and A Burnett Oxford: Oxford University Press Leeb, R 1992 Konstantin und Christus Die Verchristlichung der imperialen Repräsentation unter Konstantin dem Großen als Spiegel seiner Kirchenpolitik und seines Selbstverständnisses als christlicher Kaiser New York: De Gruyter Manders, E 2011 “Boodschappen van de keizer? Monetaire propaganda in de Romeinse keizertijd ” Lampas 44 3:230–247 – 2014 “De keizer en het goddelijke De ‘Constantijnse wende’ numismatisch onderzocht ” Jaarboek voor Munt- en Penningkunde 101:1–26 –, and D Slootjes 2015 “Linking inscriptions to provincial coins: a reappraisal of Nero’s visit to Greece ” Latomus 74:989–1005 Marcellesi, M -C 2008 “La série romaine tardive d’Alexandrie aux types de Sarapis et du Nil ” Pages 185–195 in Aegyptiaca serta in Soheir Bakhoum memoriam Mélanges de numismatique, d’iconographie et d’histoire Edited by D Gerin, A Geissen and M Amandry Milan: Ennerre Mitchell, S 1988 “Maximinus and the Christians in A D 312: a new Latin inscription ” JRS 78:105–124 Rees, R 2004 Diocletian and the Tetrarchy Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Ripollès, P P 2005 “Coinage and identity in the Roman provinces: Spain ” Pages 79–93 in Coinage and Identity in the Roman Provinces Edited by C Howgego, V Heuchert, and A Burnett Oxford: Oxford University Press Singor, H 2014 Constantijn en de christelijke revolutie in het Romeinse rijk Amsterdam: Ambo|Anthos Slootjes, D 2014 “Late antique administrative structures: on the meaning of dioceses and their borders in the fourth century” Pages 177–195 in Aspects of Ancient Institutions and Geography Studies in Honor of Richard J A Talbert Edited by L Brice and D Slootjes Leiden: Brill Wienand, J 2011 “Ein Abschied in Gold Konstantin und Sol Invictus ” Pages 53–61 in Konstantin der Grosse: zwischen Sol und Christus Edited by K Ehling and G Weber Darmstadt: Philipp von Zabern Zuckerman, K 2002 “Sur la Liste de Vérone et la province de Grande Arménie, la division de l’Empire et la date de création des diocèses ” Pages 617–637 in Mélanges Gilbert Dagron Edited by V Déroche and G Dagron Travaux et Mémoires 14 Paris: E de Boccard

Moral und Rhetorik im Codex Theodosianus Konstantins Strategien zur Beeinflussung der römischen Bevölkerung* Elisabeth Herrmann-Otto (Trier) Vorbemerkung In diesem Beitrag soll es nicht um die gängigen konstantinischen Themen gehen, wie Konstantins usurpatorische Erhebung zum Augustus, seine vermeintliche Konversion zum Christentum, des Kaisers Visionen und Träume Auch die sogenannte konstantinische Wende ist nicht Gegenstand der Betrachtung 1 Ich möchte mich mit einer Seite des Kaisers beschäftigen, die weniger bekannt ist, die schwieriger fassbar ist und in der es weniger um den Kaiser selbst als um das spätantike Römische Reich im 4 Jh n Chr geht und vor allem um seine Bevölkerung Die zentrale Frage dieses Beitrages ist, wie der spätantike Kaiser, der als geschickter Propagandist seiner Politik bekannt ist,2 in der Lage ist, Einfluss auf das Verhalten der Bürger zu nehmen, nicht nur in seiner Residenzstadt, sondern reichsweit Es wird untersucht, wie und mit welchen Mitteln Konstantin die Menschen erreichen kann, um sie in ihrem Verhalten zu korrigieren, da es nur so möglich sein wird, im Inneren des Römischen Reiches überfällige Reformen durchzuführen 3 Ob es sich dabei um eine Art Sittenreform handelt, wird im Laufe der Untersuchung ebenfalls thematisiert werden

* 1 2 3

Den beiden Veranstalterinnen des Kongresses, Daniëlle Slootjes und Erika Manders, danke ich sehr für die Möglichkeit des Vortrages und der Publikation meines Beitrages Forschungsüberblick in: Wallraff 2013, 7–34; speziell zu den aufgeführten Thesen in jüngeren Veröffentlichungen: Girardet 2010, 26–62; Rosen 2013, 247–252, 259–273 Ronning 2007, 125–149; Ehling 2011, 27–32 Brandt 2006, 31–37

62

Elisabeth Herrmann-Otto

Einführung in die Thematik Das 4 Jahrhundert ist eine Zeit der Umbrüche, nicht nur auf dem Gebiet der Religionen, der Verwaltung und der Machtpolitik, sondern auch im sozialen Bereich Diese Veränderungen vollziehen sich langsam, kaum merklich, aber dennoch sind sie bestimmend für die folgenden Jahrhunderte 4 Einige dieser Veränderungen haben die Kaiser selbst durch ihre Reformen bewirkt, wie etwa die Herausbildung eines Beamtenadels zu Lasten des bisherigen Geburtsadels,5 oder die Bildung einer beweglichen Elitetruppe, die sogenannten Comitatenses, die eine Umstrukturierung des römischen Militärwesens einleiten 6 Andere Veränderungen dagegen, vor allem in der Sozialstruktur des Reiches unterhalb der obersten Führungselite, vollziehen sich auf Grund ökonomischer und religiöser Wandlungen, die nur teilweise von Oben gesteuert sind 7 Aber auch auf sie müssen die Kaiser reagieren, wollen sie erfolgreich sein und Akzeptanz bei der Bevölkerung finden Es gibt viele Wege, das Volk zu erreichen, auch in der Spätantike Praktisch jeder Bewohner des Römischen Reiches wird von der offiziellen kaiserlichen Propaganda erreicht, die sich auf den Münzen befindet, dem Zahlungsmittel schlechthin in der antiken Welt In jeder Stadt, vor jedem Amtslokal, auf öffentlichen Plätzen, vor Bädern, Theatern und Markthallen finden sich Statuen der herrschenden Kaiser, wodurch eine ständige Präsenz, aber auch Schutz der Bevölkerung simuliert werden Kaiserliche Macht und Prestige spiegeln sich in großen Bauwerken, Tempeln und fortschreitend in Kirchenbauten wider, in denen die Kaiser ihre Sorge um das Reich und die Gunst der Götter beziehungsweise des Gottes zum Ausdruck bringen Diese „medialen Repräsentationen“ sind visuell erfassbar, und können die Bevölkerung im positiven und im negativen Sinne beeinflussen, sei es durch Akklamationen, Unterstützung der Kaiser und ihrer Beamten oder durch Protestaktionen wie beispielsweise Brandlegungen an öffentlichen Gebäuden und das Umstürzen kaiserlicher Statuen 8 Einfluss können die Kaiser aber auch auf audiovisuellem Wege auf die Bevölkerung ausüben durch Triumphzüge, Einzüge (adventus) in eine Stadt nach längerer Abwesenheit, Prozessionen und Anwesenheit bei den Spielen Durch Musik und Reden, aber auch euergetische Maßnahmen wie unter anderem Geldspenden, Bankette und

4 5 6 7 8

Überblicksliteratur: Bollmann 2006, 51–92; Demandt 2007, 325–329; Alföldy 2011, 245–284 Näf 1995, 12–27; Rebenich 2007, 179–182; Kelly 2006, 183–204 Elton 2006, 325–346; Engemann 2006, 155–161 S hierzu den Sammelband: Krause und Witschel 2006, u a mit den Beiträgen von Laniado 319– 334; Krause 413–440; Whitby 441–462; Liebeschütz 463–484 Zu Münzen und Bauwerken s die entsprechenden Beiträge in diesem Band Zur Baupolitik: Behrwald 2009, 46–58, 160–170; Eck 2006, 323–348 Zu Aufständen der Bevölkerung gegen die Kaiser s u a Tinnefeld 1977, 151–203

Moral und Rhetorik im Codex Theodosianus

63

Spiele werden die Massen in allen ihren Sinnen angesprochen und ihnen das Bild großzügiger, erfolg- und siegreicher Herrscher vermittelt 9 Diese extrovertierten Formen der Beeinflussung müssen von sogenannten introvertierten, sprich schriftlichen Methoden flankiert werden, vor allem dann, wenn weitreichende Reformen im Sozialsystem einer Gesellschaft anstehen, wie etwa der rechtlichen Gleichstellung von Verheirateten und Unverheirateten,10 der gleichzeitigen Stärkung von Familie und Ehe,11 der Anerkennung des neuen Standes der Kolonen,12 der fördernden Unterstützung der kirchlichen Sozialfürsorge mitsamt den damit zusammenhängenden Institutionen13 und der Zulassung auch der Ärmsten der Armen zur Appellation gegen die Korruption der Beamten 14 Edikte, Reskripte, Konstitutionen seltener Briefe und Reden sind dazu geeignet, komplizierte Inhalte und Neuerungen zu transportieren 15 Dabei stellt sich allerdings die Frage, wie diese schriftlichen Zeugnisse über die Beamtenschaft hinaus die nicht politisch oder administrativ tätige Bevölkerung erreichen können Zur Beantwortung dieser Frage soll im Mittelpunkt meines Beitrages die Gesetzgebung Kaiser Konstantins stehen, die sich mit den sozialen Verhältnissen der Bevölkerung befasst Wie kann der Kaiser das Volk über die Gesetze erreichen, wie kann er Einfluss auf die Menge gewinnen durch Verlautbarungen, die eher als spröde, normativ, reaktiv und als realitätsfern gelten? Alles das sind Forschungsmeinungen, alte und neue, die es zu hinterfragen gilt, was in den letzten fünfzehn Jahren auch vereinzelt, vor allem unter dem Aspekt der Religion und der Administration, geschehen ist 16 Mir geht es um das Leben der Menschen, sowohl in der Ober- wie der Mittel- und der Unterschicht, in ihren Familien, mit ihren Frauen, Kindern und Sklaven, um ihre Bedrohungen durch korrupte Beamte Ich möchte eine juristische Exegese einzelner Gesetzestexte nur insofern vorlegen, als ich ihren innovativen Charakter auf dem Hintergrund der bisherigen Gesetzgebung darlegen möchte Von hier aus lässt sich der ideologisch-mentalitätsgeschichtliche Aspekt besser verfolgen, nämlich: Wie kann der Kaiser durch gesetzliche Verlautbarungen nachhaltigen Einfluss auf die Verhaltensweise der Reichsbevölkerung nehmen? Es geht dabei stets um eine doppelte Aufgabe, zum einen auf der Grundlage der juristischen Analyse die Bedeutung der Gesetze für

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Überblicksliteratur zu Zeremoniell, adventus, triumphus etc u a Behrwald 2009, 78–86; Von Hesberg 2006, 133–168; MacCormack 1990 Zum spätantiken Euergetismus s Brown 2002, 16 ff Cod Theod 8 6 1 ( J 320); Evans Grubbs 1995, 118–123 Evans Grubbs 1995, 156–183 Überblick: Arjava 1996, 28–75 Cod Theod 5 17 1 ( J 332); Lit zu den Kolonen: Grey 2011, 495–506 Klein 2008, 43–80; Herrmann-Otto 2017, s v Armut Brandt 2006, 36; Dillon 2012, 214–250 Liebs 1999, 69–73, 82–91; Schmidt-Hofner 2008, 21–36 Schmidt-Hofner 2008, 71–116, 289–336; Dillon 2012, 1–11

64

Elisabeth Herrmann-Otto

die Bevölkerung und die Administration zu klären, zum anderen ihre rhetorische Einkleidung darzulegen und deren Intention kritisch zu hinterfragen 17 Das uns erhaltene Gesetzgebungswerk Kaiser Konstantins ist gewaltig und neben dem des Justinian das umfangreichste in der Spätantike Je nach Berücksichtigung auch literarisch überlieferter Zeugnisse außerhalb der großen Rechtssammlungen des Codex Theodosianus und des Codex Iustinianus, beläuft es sich auf etwa 410 Rechtstexte, in denen Angelegenheiten wirtschaftlicher, verwaltungsrechtlicher, religiöser, strafrechtlicher und gesellschaftlicher Art geregelt werden 18 Ich beschränke mich auf einen Ausschnitt aus dem sozialrechtlichen Bereich, und zwar auf die Verlautbarungen, in denen sich der Kaiser unmittelbar an die Bevölkerung „ad populum“ der Städte Rom oder Konstantinopel wendet, beziehungsweise an die Provinzialen insgesamt oder einer bestimmten Region, zum Beispiel Italiens oder Afrikas, oder aber auch an die Prätorianer- und Stadtpräfekten, die entsprechende Regelungen der Bevölkerung bekannt geben sollen, das heißt für ihre Umsetzung zu sorgen haben Nicht selten sind auch Bischöfe seine Adressaten, die ähnlich wie die Beamten, Bestimmungen zum Wohle ihrer christlichen Gemeinden durchführen sollen Im Gegensatz zu den an einzelne Menschen auf deren Anfrage hin gerichteten Reskripten, die in überwältigender Anzahl von Diokletian und seinen mit ihm regierenden Tetrarchen vorliegen, sind uns von Konstantin überwiegend leges generales überliefert, kaiserliche Konstitutionen, die durch ihren allgemeingültigen Charakter in höchstem Maße für die Herrscherpropaganda geeignet erscheinen 19 Darüber hinaus ist Konstantin ein Meister der Rhetorik, der in Prologen und Epilogen, aber auch durch eine geschickte Wortwahl innerhalb der Rechtstexte sein Gegenüber direkt anspricht Dazu wählt er moralische Argumentationen, die er rhetorisch geschickt aufbereitet, sodass die eigentliche spröde und schwer zugängliche Rechtsbestimmung hinter den allgemein verständlichen moralischen Wertungen zurücktritt Wie weit Konstantin selbst für diesen eher literarischen Stil seiner Gesetzestexte verantwortlich ist oder seine Kanzlei, die – wie Detlev Liebs behauptet – fortschreitend mit Literaten statt mit Rechtsgelehrten besetzt worden sei, bleibe dahingestellt Wir kennen leider das Verwaltungspersonal der Kanzlei nicht persönlich, namentlich Außerdem ist in jüngster Zeit von John Noel Dillon nachgewiesen worden, dass auch schon vor Konstantin und vor Diokletian die Rhetorik, wenn auch noch in bescheidenem Maße, Einzug in die Gesetzestexte gehalten habe Dennoch muss man mit Liebs daran festhalten, dass wir bei Konstantin einen Quantensprung in der Rhetorisierung 17

18 19

Zur doppelten Aufgabe s Dillon 2012, 6: „The legislation of Constantine must be analyzed both for its legal and administrative significance and for its rhetorical formulation as an expression of the imperial will …“ Im Einzelnen zur Ehegesetzgebung s : Evans Grubbs 1995; Evans Grubbs 1993a, 125–154; Evans Grubbs 2007, 43–94; zum Sklavenrecht Herrmann-Otto 1994; Herrmann-Otto 2004, 167–186; Herrmann-Otto 2006, 83–95 Liebs 2006, 98; Elliott 1996, 97 Dillon 2012, 12–59; Harries 2010, 74–79

Moral und Rhetorik im Codex Theodosianus

65

der juristischen Texte erleben Das hängt allerdings auch mit ihrer Form zusammen, der constitutio, der lex generalis, dem Kaisergesetz, das ganz anders argumentieren kann als das auf einen einzelnen Fall hin ausgerichtete Reskript, in dem es um eine vom Kaiser oder seinem juristischen Stab erbetene Rechtsauskunft geht, die knapp und juristisch exakt formuliert sein muss 20 Auch Konstantin geht es um Klarheit und Verbindlichkeit, aber in einem anderen Sinne Den Juristendisput, der so kennzeichnend für das Römische Recht in der Republik und der Prinzipatszeit ist, schaltet er aus Die Leitlinien, die er zu geben bestrebt ist, sind oft nicht so eindeutig, da der Kaiser sich nicht selten selbst widerspricht So verurteilt er zwar einerseits das Denunziantenwesen, das er unter schärfste Strafen stellt (s u ), andererseits aber befördert er es geradezu, wenn es um Anzeigen korrupter Beamter durch die Bevölkerung geht,21 oder um die Denunziation vermeintlich ehebrecherischen oder unstandesgemäßen Sexualverhaltens von Frauen, die im Falle von Sklaven als Denunzianten (indices) mit der Freilassung belohnt wird (s u ) Im Vergleich mit früheren Rechtstexten schleicht sich sogar der Eindruck ein, dass Konstantin den Rechtsgehalt verwässert und seine damit verbundenen eigentlichen Intentionen hinter moralischen Wertungen, donnernden Zornesausbrüchen, barschen und rigiden Strafandrohungen, die Furcht erzeugen und abschreckend wirken sollen, versteckt Auf diesem Hintergrund stellt sich die doppelte Frage: Geht es dem Kaiser um eine Sittenreform der Bevölkerung, eventuell sogar im Zusammenhang mit christlichen ethischen Forderungen? Diese Thesen sind in der Forschung bis heute heiß diskutiert, die weit davon entfernt ist, zu einer Lösung der Problematik gelangt zu sein 22 Außerdem hängt hiermit auch die andere übergreifende Frage zusammen: Sind die spätantiken Kaiser in ihrer Gesetzgebung nicht nur reaktiv tätig oder können sie aktiv und gestaltend Politik, auch Gesellschaftspolitik betreiben?23 Für Konstantin gilt Letzteres in ganz hohem Maße, auch wenn er ein Meister der Rhetorik und der Selbstdarstellung ist, die sich viel ausgiebiger in seinen bei Eusebius überlieferten Zeugnissen widerspiegelt als ausgerechnet in den Rechtstexten Hier geht es ihm immer ganz konkret um den Umbau der Gesellschaft, indem er neues Recht schafft und altes modifiziert Die Form allerdings ist die rhetorische Einkleidung, mit der er das Volk ansprechen will Bleibt man bei dieser äußeren Hülle stehen, ergibt sich sehr schnell eine Theoretisierung der Gesetzgebung, die nur noch als Propaganda und Selbstdarstellung der Kaiser abgetan wird Es bedarf jedoch einer doppelten Vorgehensweise Die rhetorische Form dient zur Einwirkung auf die Bevölkerung, sie ist sozusagen eine Strategie Hinterfragt man aber diese Einkleidung, dann werden die

20 21 22 23

Liebs 2006, 101; Liebs 2007, 191–192; Wieling 1995, 619–632; Dillon 2012, 60–89 Cod Theod 1 16 6 7 ( J 331); Liebs 2007, 193–194 Christlicher Einfluss: Vogt 1945, 118–148; Ehrhardt 1974, 388–456, ebenso Elliott 1996, 97–114; Chiusi 2007, 55–64 Schwankend: Firpo 1991, 112–116 Schmidt-Hofner 2008, 15–18, 344–350

66

Elisabeth Herrmann-Otto

eigentliche Intention des Gesetzgebers und seine Innovationen deutlich Das ist nur möglich, wenn man induktiv sich mit den einzelnen Texten beschäftigt, und nicht deduktiv ihnen eine Theorie überstülpt Diese Grundfragen zwischen Historikern und Juristen, die ich hier nur andeuten kann, sind mitnichten geklärt Meine kleine Spezialuntersuchung in diesem Sammelband ist nicht der rechte Ort für diese Grundsatzdiskussion Dazu bedarf es eines eigenen Kongresses, auf dem beide Seiten ihren Standpunkt darlegen können 24 Die Auswahl der folgenden Fallbeispiele ist unter mehreren Aspekten erfolgt: Im Mittelpunkt der Untersuchung stehen die leges generales, das heißt kaiserliche Verlautbarungen, die in den Provinzen oder anderen öffentlichen Orten, also reichsweit verkündet werden und allgemeine Gültigkeit besitzen 25 Leicht erkennbar sind diese Konstitutionen durch die Adressaten, an welche sie sich wenden: ad populum,26 an das Volk einer Stadt oder des Reiches, ad provinciales,27 an die Einwohner einer Provinz, die manchmal noch spezifiziert werden in Italiker,28 Bewohner der Africa Proconsularis,29 und anderer Provinzen,30 oder an alle Provinzialen 31 Aber auch die Praetorianerpräfekten, die höchste Verwaltungsebene nach den Kaisern, wie auch die Vikare der Diözesen oder die magistri militum, die Beamten der höchsten Ränge im Reich, gelten als Adressaten, die die allgemeinen Verlautbarungen an das Volk publizieren sollen 32 Je nach Inhalt der lex generalis übernehmen selbst auch Bischöfe diese Funktion 33 Die Auswahl der Texte beschränkt sich auf gesellschaftliche Bereiche von Ehe und Familie sowie verschiedene Bevölkerungsschichten Es soll hier aber nicht die Ehe-, Sklavenund Dekurionengesetzgebung Konstantins an sich auf ihren jeweiligen Erfolg oder Misserfolg thematisiert werden Das ist bereits an anderer Stelle geschehen und nicht Ziel dieses Beitrages 34 Viel mehr soll an einzelnen Fallbeispielen, entsprechend dem 24

25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

Trotz der starken Betonung des propagandistischen Charakters der Gesetzgebung und der Selbstdarstellung der Kaiser als große „Fürsorger“ (curatores) des Reiches räumt Schmidt-Hofner sowohl in seinem oben aufgeführten Buch von 2008 (s Anm 16) wie auch in seinem Aufsatz von 2016 auch andere Hintergründe ein, die für die spezielle Gesetzgebung ausschlaggebend gewesen sein können Propaganda einerseits, Beeinflussungs- und Verschleierungsstrategien andererseits schließen sich nicht gegenseitig aus, sondern können als multikausale Erklärungen durchaus nebeneinander bestehen Cod Theod 1 1 6 pr ( J 435): omnes edictales generalesque constitutiones vel in certis provinciis seu locis valere aut proponi iussae Vgl Dillon 2012, 15–27 Cod Theod 1 2 2 ( J 315); 2 16 1 ( J 326); 3 2 1 ( J 320?); 3 17 2 ( J 326); 8 16 1 ( J 320); 9 9 1 ( J 326); 9 24 1 ( J 320); 10 1 1 ( J 315); 10 10 1 2 ( J 313; 319?); 11 7 3 ( J 320); 13 3 3 ( J 333); 13 10 1 ( J 313); 16 2 4 ( J 321) Cod Theod 1 16 6 ( J 331); 4 5 1 ( J 331); 4 12 3 ( J 331?); 5 17 1 ( J 332); 10 1 3 ( J 319) Cod Theod 5 10 1 ( J 329) Cod Theod 8 4 2 ( J 315); 11 7 4 ( J 327) ad Bithynos: Cod Theod 10 7 1 ( J 317); 10 20 1 ( J 317); 12 1 5 ( J 317) ad universos provinciales: Cod Theod 2 26 3 ( J 331); 2 30 1 ( J 315); 3 30 4 ( J 331); 9 1 4 ( J 325); 15 14 2 ( J 325) Zu Beamten als Verbreiter der Gesetze mit dem Anspruch von generalitas, s Dillon 2012, 24–27 Brown 2002, 187–195 S o Anm 17

Moral und Rhetorik im Codex Theodosianus

67

Charakter des Römischen Rechts als Fallrecht, punktuell und exemplarisch die Macht der Rhetorik und ihre verschleiernde Wirkung des eigentlichen innovativen Inhaltes der Gesetze aufgezeigt werden Wie lange anhaltend diese auf die Beeinflussung des Volkes gerichtete „Offensive Strategie“ war, und warum sie teilweise zeitlich begrenzt war, wird abschließend kurz skizziert werden Fallbeispiele Konstantin an Bischof Hosius: Wer mit frommem Sinne im Schoße der Kirche seinen Sklaven die verdiente Freiheit verliehen hat, soll dies mit derselben Wirkung getan haben, mit welcher früher das römische Bürgerrecht durch gewisse, nunmehr abgeschaffte Feierlichkeiten erteilt zu werden pflegte Aber dies ist nur denjenigen nachgelassen, welche die Freilassung in Gegenwart der Geistlichen vorgenommen haben (…)35 (Cod Theod IV 7 1; Cod Iustin I 13 2 [ J 321])

Konstantin betont in dieser Konstitution an den Bischof Hosius von Corduba, seinen Hofbischof, dass diejenigen Christen, die aus frommer Gesinnung ihre Sklaven freilassen wollen, dieses nun rechtsgültig in der Kirche vor den Klerikern und im Angesicht der Gemeinde als Zeugen tun können Wichtig in unserem Zusammenhang ist, dass der Sklave die Freilassung verdient – er hat seinem weltlichen christlichen Herrn gehorsam gedient – und dass der Herr selbst dies aus frommer Gesinnung tut In späteren Jahrhunderten wird Freilassung von christlichen Laien zum eigenen Seelenheil vorgenommen 36 Es geht also um moralische, hier christliche Grundsätze, die Konstantin vor der Verleihung des vollen römischen Bürgerrechtes in der manumissio in ecclesia, der Freilassung in der Kirche, die er juristisch aufwertet, in den Vordergrund stellt Der eigentliche Grund dieser „Privilegierung“ liegt aber darin, dass das staatlich anerkannte kirchliche Verfahren eine Entlastung für die personell unterbesetzten Behörden bringt 37 Kaiser Konstantin an seine Provinzialen: Wenn jemand wegen übergroßer Armut und Not einen Neugeborenen, Sohn oder Tochter, wegen des Lebensunterhalts verkauft, so soll nur in diesem einen Fall der Kauf wirksam sein und der Käufer das Recht haben, ihn als seinen Sklaven zu behalten § 1 Der aber, der ihn verkauft hat, sowie der, der verkauft wurde, sowie jeder andere soll

35

36 37

Deut Übers d Autorin: Imperator Constantinus Hosio Episcopo Qui religiosa mente in ecclesiae gremio servulis suis meritam concesserint libertatem, eandem eodem iure donasse videantur, quo civitas Romana sollemnitatibus decursis dari consuevit; sed hoc dumtaxat his, qui sub aspectu antistitum dederint, placuit relaxari Seelenheil: Grieser 1997, 140–148; Weiler 2003, 203–205; Herrmann-Otto 2010, 56–75 Herrmann-Otto 2008, 353–366

68

Elisabeth Herrmann-Otto

ihn zurück in die Freiheit führen können, wenn er ihm den Preis anbietet, den er wert ist oder einen Sklaven gleichen Wertes gibt 38 (Cod Iustin IV 43 2; Cod Theod V 10 1 [ J 329])

In dieser Konstitution stellt Konstantin rhetorisch geschickt eine ausweglose und schreckliche Situation, in der sich verarmte Eltern eines gerade geborenen Kindes befinden, an den Beginn seiner Bestimmung Aus krasser Existenznot heraus, die Eltern wissen nicht wie sie sich selbst, noch wie sie ihr Neugeborenes ernähren sollen, ist ihnen erlaubt, das Kind zu verkaufen Es muss aber noch blutüberströmt, i e gerade geboren sein, und vom Vater noch nicht als sein eigenes Kind anerkannt sein, was nach der ersten Waschung erfolgt Nur dann ist es den Eltern erlaubt, das Kind zu verkaufen 39 Noch Diokletian hatte einige Jahre zuvor eingeschärft, dass ein römischer Familienvater seine Kinder, auch seine Neugeborenen, nicht verkaufen darf 40 Diese einschneidende Neuerung Konstantins bedeutet nichts anderes als die Aufhebung der Unveräußerlichkeit der freien Geburt durch den pater familias Ganz realitätsbezogen und den Nerv seiner Zeit mit der überhandnehmenden Armutsproblematik genau treffend, versteckt der Kaiser die neue Rechtslage hinter einer rhetorischen Fassade, um Mitleid und Verständnis mit den Armen werbend Die tiefgreifende Rechtsänderung wird damit verschleiert; ihr wahrer Grund bleibt ebenfalls verborgen, was in der folgenden Konstitution nur ein wenig erhellt wird Kaiser Konstantin an den Prätorianerpräfekt Ablabius: Wer ein Kind, Knabe oder Mädchen, das aus dem Haus des Vaters oder Eigentümers willentlich und wissentlich weggegeben wurde, aufnimmt und mit seinen Mitteln aufzieht, der kann es in dem Status behalten, in dem er den bei sich Aufgenommenen halten wollte, d h als Sohn bzw Tochter oder Sklaven bzw Sklavin, wie es ihm beliebt Und er ist von aller Beunruhigung durch Rückforderungen derer gänzlich freizuhalten, welche soeben geborene Sklaven oder freie Kinder wissentlich und willentlich aus dem Haus fortgeschafft haben 41 (Cod Theod V 9 1 [ J 331]) 38

39 40

41

Wieling 1999, 127, Nr 221, deut Übers ebd : Imperator Constantinus Augustus provincialibus suis: Si quis propter nimiam paupertatem egestatemque victus causa filium filiamve sanguinolentos vendiderit, venditione in hoc tantummodo casu valente emptor obtinendi eius servitii habeat facultatem § 1 Liceat autem ipsi qui vendidit vel qui alienatus est aut cuilibet alii ad ingenuitatem propriam eum repetere, modo si aut pretium offerat quod potest valere, aut mancipium pro huiusmodi praestet Vgl Cod Theod : Imperator Constantinus Augustus Italis suis (…) (Wieling 1999, 110, Nr 198) Darstellung des Notszenario s Vuolanto 2003, 170–179; Rechts-Interpretation u a Vuolanto 2003, 179–188; Lorenzi 2003, 27 f ; Herrmann-Otto 2006, 86–88 Cod Iustin IV 43 1 ( J 294): Impp Diocletianus et Maximianus Augusti et Caesares Aureliae Papinianae: liberos a parentibus neque venditionis neque donationis titulo neque pignoris iure aut quolibet alio modo, nec sub praetextu ignorantiae accipientis in alium transferri posse manifesti iuris est (Wieling 1999, 127, Nr 220) Wieling 1999, 109, Nr 196, deut Übers ebd : Imperator Constantinus Augustus ad Ablabium praefectum praetorio: Quicumque puerum vel puellam proiectam de domo, patris vel domini voluntate

Moral und Rhetorik im Codex Theodosianus

69

Trotz der Erlaubnis des Verkaufs der Neugeborenen stellt der Kaiser fest, dass weiterhin freie und unfrei geborene Kinder von ihren Eltern beziehungsweise Eigentümern ausgesetzt werden Der Kaiser ist empört, was er durch die Vorsätzlichkeit und den Akt der Aussetzung (voluntas und scientia), sowie das Wegwerfen (proiecere) betont Hinter der moralischen Empörung verbirgt sich wiederum die Schaffung einer neuen Rechtslage Im Gegensatz zum Verkauf war die Aussetzung der Kinder in allen antiken Völkern erlaubt Nach römischem Recht allerdings war freie Geburt unveräußerlich Deswegen konnten Eltern, deren ausgesetztes Kind von einem Finder großgezogen worden war, dieses – manchmal sogar unentgeltlich – zurückfordern Dem schiebt Konstantin einen Riegel vor und schafft neues Recht Er diffamiert die Aussetzenden, ob Eltern oder Herr ist unerheblich, und erkennt ihnen, durch den Akt der Aussetzung verwirkt, alle Rechte auf das Kind (patria oder dominica potestas) ab Der Finder und Ernährer aber kann das Kind als Sklavenkind, wenn er es als solches aufgezogen hat, behalten, auch wenn das Kind frei geboren ist Auch hier versteckt Konstantin die Ungeheuerlichkeit einer neuen Rechtslage, nämlich den gesetzlich zugelassenen Verlust der freien Geburt, hinter moralischen Argumenten, indem er die Aussetzenden diffamiert und bestraft und den bisherigen juristischen Grundsatz der Unveräußerlichkeit der freien Geburt im Falle Aussetzung und Menschenhandel aufkündigt 42 Kaiser Konstantin an das Volk: Wenn eine freie Frau in heimlichem Einverständnis mit ihrem Sklaven entdeckt wird, so soll sie mit einer Kapitalstrafe belegt werden, und der Sklave den Feuertod erleiden Es soll auch jedem die Freiheit zustehen, dieses öffentliche Verbrechen anzuzeigen, ein Amt die Möglichkeit zur Meldung, selbst einem Sklaven die Erlaubnis gegeben sein, Anzeige zu machen, einem solchen auch, wenn das Verbrechen erwiesen worden ist, soll die Freiheit erteilt werden, während bei einer falschen Beschuldigung die Bestrafung droht (…) 2) Auch die Kinder, die aus solcher Verbindung geboren, sollen, aller Zeichen des Ranges bar, lediglich den Stand der Freien erhalten, und weder in eigener Person noch durch Mittelspersonen unter irgendeinem Titel der Willensbestimmung aus dem Vermögen der Frau irgendetwas erhalten 43 (Cod Theod IX 9 1; Cod Iustin IX 11 1 [ J 319])

42 43

scientiaque, collegerit ac suis alimentis ad robur provexerit, eundem retineat sub eodem statu, quem apud se collectum voluerit agitare, hoc est sive filium sive servum eum esse maluerit: omni repetitionis inquietudine penitus summovenda eorum, qui servos aut liberos scientes propria voluntate domo recens natos abiecerint Evans Grubbs 2009, 119–131; Tate 2009, 123–141; Corbier 2001, 52–73; Herrmann-Otto 2012, 181– 186 Willvonseder 2010, 108–110, Nr 166; 159–160, Nr 251, deut Übers ebd : Imp Constantinus A ad populum: Si qua cum servo suo occulte rem habere detegitur, capitali sententiae subiugetur, tradendo ignibus verberone sitque omnibus facultas crimen publicum arguendi sit officio copia nuntiandi, sit etiam servo licentia deferendi, cui probato crimine libertas dabitur, quum falsae accusationi poena immineat (…) § 2 Filii etiam, quos ex hac coniunctione habuerit, exuti omnibus dignitatis insignibus

70

Elisabeth Herrmann-Otto

Auch hier wird hinter Moralisierung und einer rhetorischen Fassade neues Recht versteckt: Verbindungen von freien Frauen mit ihren eigenen Sklaven waren bisher kein öffentliches Verbrechen (crimen publicum), sie waren überhaupt kein öffentlicher Straftatbestand, sondern gehörten bestenfalls vor das Hausgericht, das iudicium domesticum Der Kaiser greift hier in die privaten Rechte des pater familias ein Auf Grund mangelnden Eherechts des Unfreien liegt keine Ehe vor, wahrscheinlich auch kein Ehebruch, da die Frau verwitwet zu sein scheint Warum belegt Konstantin die freie Frau mit Verbannung und Tod, den Sklaven mit dem Feuertod und die freigeborenen Kinder mit Degradation und Enterbung? Und warum wird ein seine Herrin denunzierender Sklave mit der Freiheit belohnt, obwohl der Kaiser sich in einem anderen Erlass gegen das Übel der Denunziation gewendet hatte, die er mit Herausreißen der Zunge bestrafen will?44 Diese Fragen sollen im Kontext der folgenden Gesetze gebündelt beantwortet werden Sehen wir uns deswegen noch weitere Beispiele an, bevor wir entscheiden können, ob es sich im obigen Fall um eine Sittenreform, christlicher oder nichtchristlicher Provenienz handelt, eine bloße Selbstdarstellung des Kaisers oder ob andere Gründe hinter der rhetorischen Einkleidung versteckt werden Kaiser Konstantin an das Volk: Wenn jemand, der mit den Eltern eines Mädchens keinen Konsens zu einer Eheschließung erwirkt hat, dieses raubt, sei es nun, dass es unwillig ist, oder wenn er es weggeführt hat, willig, und er hofft unter dem Schutz seiner Zustimmung erfolgreich zu sein, dann ist auf die Aussage eines solchen Wesens, das wegen seiner Oberflächlichkeit, Untreue und Unbeständigkeit von gerichtlichen Vertretungen, Zeugenaussagen und allen öffentlichen Angelegenheiten seit alters her ferngehalten wird, nichts zu geben § 1 Und weil oft die Wachsamkeit der Eltern durch Geschichten und schlechte Einreden von Ammen getrübt wird, sollen zuerst diese Ammen, deren Dienstleistung sich als so verderblich herausgestellt hat, und deren Gerede die Tat ermöglicht hat, mit folgender Strafe bedroht werden: Mund und Hals, aus denen so verderbliche Ermutigungen gekommen sind, sollen mit flüssigem Blei geschlossen werden. § 2 Wenn das Mädchen unwillig und mit Gewalt entführt worden ist, (…) soll es eine leichtere Bestrafung treffen: es soll vom Erbe seiner Eltern ausgeschlossen werden § 3 Wenn der Dieb zweifelsohne für schuldig befunden wird, soll sein Wunsch nach einer Appellatio nicht berücksichtigt werden. § 4 Sofern ein Sklave eine vertuschte Entführung ans Licht bringen will,

44

in nuda maneant libertate, neque per se neque per interpositam personam quolibet titulo voluntatis accepturi aliquid ex facultatibus mulieris Cod Theod 10 10 2 ( J 312) Jeder Beamte, der weiter solche Anzeigen annimmt, soll mit dem Tode bestraft werden (Cod Theod 10 10 1 [ J 313]) Lit zu diesen widersprüchlichen Erlassen: Liebs 1985, 100–101; Navarra 1990, 431–437; Evans Grubbs 1995, 273–277; Herrmann-Otto 2006, 89–90; Dillon 2012, 238–9

Moral und Rhetorik im Codex Theodosianus

71

soll er mit der Latinität belohnt werden, (…) Wenn die Eltern, für die die Rache des Vergehens ein Anliegen war, zur Verschleierung der Tat doch Nachsicht üben und ihren Schmerz unterdrücken, sollen sie mit Deportation bestraft werden (…) § 5 wenn sich unter diesen Gehilfen ein Unfreier befindet, befehlen wir, dass er ohne Unterschied des Geschlechts den Feuertod stirbt 45 (Cod Theod IX 24 1 [ J 320 oder 326])

Mit Recht schreibt Detlev Liebs in diesem Zusammenhang von der Brutalisierung der Strafgesetzgebung durch Konstantin 46 Hierfür ließen sich noch viele andere Gesetze anführen Aber bleiben wir bei diesem unglaublich harten Gesetz zum Jungfrauenraub 47 Warum werden nicht allein der Dieb, sondern auch das betroffene Mädchen, das als völlig unzurechnungsfähig dargestellt wird, sowie seine gesamte Umgebung, einschließlich der Amme, die fast schon klischeehaft wie aus einem Theaterstück entnommen, in ihrem intriganten Wirken geschildert wird, ebenso bestraft? Warum werden alle, einschließlich der Eltern, mit unverhältnismäßig harten Strafen, wie Deportation, Enteignung, Verstümmelung und Todesstrafe belegt, während ein denunzierender Haussklave mit Freilassung und latinischem Bürgerrecht belohnt wird? Die Schwächung der patria potestas, die sich im Verhalten der beiden jungen Leute widerspiegelt, ist längstens ein Faktum und auch rechtlich anerkannt Der langsame Niedergang der „väterlichen Gewalt“ hat bereits in der frühen Prinzipatszeit eingesetzt Will Konstantin dieses Recht wieder herstellen? Befürchtet er, dass auch unwürdige Ehemänner sich auf diesem heimtückischen Wege in reiche Häuser einschleichen könnten? Oder geht es ihm schlichtweg um eine Sittenreform und eine Eindämmung des Brautraubs?48

45

46 47 48

Deut Übers der Autorin: Imp Constantinus A ad populum: Si quis nihil cum parentibus puellae ante depectus invitam eam rapuerit vel volentem abduxerit patrocinium ex eius responsione sperans, quam propter vitium levitatis et sexus mobilitatem atque consili a postulationibus et testimoniis omnibusque rebus iudicariis antiqui penitus arcuerunt, nihil ei secundum ius vetus prosit puellae responsio, sed ipsa puella potius societate criminis obligetur § 1 Et quoniam parentum saepe custodiae nutricum fabulis et pravis suasionibus deluduntur, his primum, quarum detestabile ministerium fuisse arguitur redempti discursus, poena immineat, ut eis meatus oris et faucium, qui nefaria hortamenta protulerit, liquentis plumbi ingestione claudatur (…) § 2 (…) eadem (virgo) qua raptor severitate plectatur (…) poenam leviorem imponimus, solamque eis parentum negari successionem praecipimus § 3 raptor autem indubitate convictus si appellare voluerit, minime audiatur (…) § 4 si quis vero servus raptus facinus dissimulatione praeteritum aut pactione transmissum detulerit in publicum, Latinitate donetur (…) parentibus, quorum maxime vindicta intererat, si patientiam praebuerint ac dolorem conpresserint, deportatione plectendis § 5 (…) si quis inter haec ministeria servilis condicionis fuerit deprehensus, citra sexus discretionem eum concremari iubemus Liebs 1985, 95–97; Evans Grubbs 1995, 183–188, 351; Liebs 2006, 103 Dillon 2012, 67, Anm 34; zur ethischen und intellektuellen Diffamierung der Frauen und Mädchen durch den Gesetzgeber s Arjava 1996, 232–3 Patria potestas: Evans Grubbs 2005, 99–106; Arjava 1996, 48–52 Brautraub: Evans Grubbs 1995, 183–193 Vgl konstantinische Gesetze zur Eindämmung der patria potestas s Humfress 2006, 216– 217

72

Elisabeth Herrmann-Otto

Schauen wir uns noch zwei weitere Konstitutionen an, die sich an die gehobenen Gesellschaftsschichten wenden, bevor wir die oben aufgeworfenen Fragen insgesamt zu beantworten versuchen Kaiser Konstantin an Patroclus: Mag es auch unwürdig erscheinen, so wird es doch durch die Gesetze nicht verboten, dass Personen ohne Ehrenstellung sich zu den schmutzigen Ehen mit Sklavinnen erniedrigen Aber es kann keine rechtlich gültige Ehe geben mit Personen aus dem Sklavenstand Und aus einer solchen Verbindung werden Sklaven geboren Daher verbieten wir, daß Dekurionen, getrieben von der Leidenschaft in den Schoß der mächtigsten Häuser fliehen Wenn sich nämlich ein decurio heimlich, ohne Wissen der Verwalter und Prokuratoren mit einer fremden Sklavin verbunden hat, so befehlen wir, dass die Frau in ein Bergwerk geworfen, der decurio selbst auf eine Insel verbannt wird, wobei sein bewegliches Vermögen und seine städtischen Sklaven konfisziert werden, die ländlichen Güter und Sklaven hingegen der Stadt zu übereignen sind, deren Stadtrat er war 49 (Cod Theod XII 1 6; Cod Iustin V 5 3 [ J 319])

Die Rhetorisierung braucht hier nicht weiter erklärt zu werden, wohl aber der rechtliche Tatbestand Da mit Sklavinnen keine Ehe möglich ist, ist weder Standespersonen noch solchen ohne Stand eine Verbindung mit Sklavinnen verboten, da die Kinder aus solchen Contubernien immer unfreie und illegitime sind Konstantin befürchtet nun aber, dass sich diese Dekurionen, die gar nicht verheiratet sind, ihren Verpflichtungen als Stadträte entziehen könnten, indem sie sich in den Schutz reicher Großgrundbesitzer begeben und untergetaucht ein sklavenähnliches Dasein führen Außerdem befürchtet er, dass sie die kurialen Besitztümer der Stadt entfremden Modern könnte man sagen: Konstantin bestraft Steuerflüchtlinge Außerdem entziehen sie sich der Verpflichtung, für legitimen Nachwuchs zu sorgen, der später ihre kurialen Pflichten übernehmen kann 50 Aus diesem Grunde gelten ihm die Sklavinnen als sogenannte „Verführerinnen dieser Männer“, wie er sie in der folgenden Konstitution wortgewaltig diffamiert:

49

50

Willvonseder 2010, 111–112, Nr 169; 124–125, Nr 181, deut Übers ebd : Imperator Constantinus Augustus Patroclo: Nulla praeditos dignitate ad sordida descendere conubia servularum etsi videtur indignum, minime tamen legibus prohibetur; sed neque conubium cum personis potest esse servilibus et ex huiusmodi contubernio servi nascuntur Praecipimus itaque, ne decuriones in gremia potentissimarum domorum libidine (servarum) ducente confugiant Si enim decurio clam actoribus atque procuratoribus nescientibus alienae fuerit servae coniunctus, et mulierem in metallum trudi per sententiam iudicis iubemus et ipsum decurionem in insulam deportari, bonis eius mobilibus et urbanis mancipiis confiscandis, praediis vero et rusticis mancipiis civitati, cuius curialis fuerat, mancipandis Herrmann-Otto 2006, 90; Lenski 2006, 337, 352

Moral und Rhetorik im Codex Theodosianus

73

Kaiser Konstantin an Gregorius: Senatoren oder perfectissimi, bzw Männer, die in den Städten das Duumvirat oder das Fünfjahresamt bekleiden, oder die das Ehrenamt eines Flamen oder eines Priesteramtes in der Provinz bekleiden, laden auf sich, so ist entschieden, den Makel der Ehrlosigkeit und werden für das römische Recht Fremde, wenn sie wollen, dass ihre Kinder, die sie von einer Sklavin, der Tochter einer Sklavin, von einer Freigelassenen, der Tochter einer Freigelassenen, sei sie zur Römerin oder Latinerin geworden, von einer Schauspielerin, der Tochter einer Schauspielerin, von einer Wirtin, der Tochter eines Wirtes, von einer niedrigen oder verworfenen Person, von der Tochter eines Kupplers oder eines Gladiators, oder einer Frau, die einen öffentlichen Handelsbetrieb geleitet hat, bekommen haben, als ihre legitimen Kinder haben wollen, und dies entweder aus eigener Entscheidung oder durch den Vorzug eines Reskriptes von uns Und das gilt mit der Maßgabe, dass alles, was der Vater solchen Kindern schenkt, (…) ihnen weggenommen wird und der legitimen Nachkommenschaft gegeben wird, oder dem Bruder, der Schwester, dem Vater oder der Mutter Aber auch alles, was einer solchen Ehefrau gegeben wurde, (…) auch das wird weggenommen und den genannten Personen gegeben Diese Frauen selbst aber, durch deren Gift die Sinne der Verdorbenen infiziert wurden, sollen der Befragung unter der Folter unterworfen werden, wenn etwas gesucht wird, oder behauptet wird, dass es ihnen anvertraut wurde (…) wird unser Fiskus alles an sich nehmen, was die unsaubere Freigebigkeit solchen Ehefrauen oder Kindern verschafft hat 51 (Cod Theod IV 6 3; Cod Iustin V 27 1 [ J 336])

In diesem Falle handelt es sich um die oberste Schicht im Reich: Senatoren, Perfectissimi, Duumviri und Priester, die sich mit Sklavinnen und anderen infamen Frauen verbunden hatten, und bei Konstantin um die Legitimierung ihres Nachwuchses nachgesucht haben, was der Kaiser im Gegensatz zu seinen Vorgängern jedoch ablehnt Und damit nicht genug, die Antragsteller werden degradiert und das römische Bürgerrecht wird ihnen entzogen, sodass sie dadurch des Adoptions-, Testier- und Vererbungsrechtes verlustig gehen Frauen und Kinder werden enterbt 52 51

52

Willvonseder 2010, 99–101, Nr 155; 127–128, Nr 185, dt Übers ebd : Constantinus A ad Gregorium: Senatores seu perfectissimos, vel quos in civitatibus duumviralitas vel quinquennalitas vel flamonii vel sacerdotii provinciae ornamenta condecorant, placet maculam subire infamiae et peregrinos a Romanis legibus fieri, si ex ancilla vel ancillae filia vel liberta vel libertae filia, sive Romana facta seu Latina, vel scaenica vel scaenicae filia, vel ex tabernaria vel ex tabernari filia vel humili vel abiecta vel lenonis vel harenarii filia vel quae mercimoniis publicis praefuit, susceptos filios in numero legitimorum habere voluerint aut proprio iudicio aut nostri praerogativa rescripti, ita ut quidquid talibus liberis pater donaverit (…) totum retractum legitimae suboli reddatur aut fratri aut sorori aut patri aut matri Sed et uxori tali quodcumque datum (…) etiam hoc retractum reddi praecipimus: ipsas etiam, quarum venenis inficiuntur animi perditorum si quod quaeritur vel commendatum dicitur, (…) tormentis subici iubemus (…) quidquid talibus filiis vel uxoribus liberalitas impura contulerit, fiscus noster invadat (…) Herrmann-Otto 2006, 90

74

Elisabeth Herrmann-Otto

Gerade an der Dekurionengesetzgebung wird deutlich, dass es Konstantin nicht um eine Sittenreform geht, dass es ihm auch nicht um eine systematische Rechtsreform zu tun ist, sondern dass fiskalische und ökonomische Bedürfnisse und ordnungspolitische Zwänge sich hinter den rhetorischen Floskeln und den moralischen Argumentationen verbergen Kommen die Oberschichten auf Reichs-, Provinzial- und städtischer Ebene ihren ständischen Pflichten nicht mehr nach, wozu auch der Abschluss standesgemäßer Ehen und die Zeugung des entsprechenden Nachwuchses gehören, dann werden Wirtschaft und Verwaltung des Reiches grundlegend geschädigt 53 Wenn Frauen von Stand Mesalliancen abschließen, dann wird ihr Vermögen ihrem freien, aber nicht standesgemäßen Nachwuchs zugutekommen und damit ihrem Stand und dem Staat verloren gehen 54 Einen ähnlichen Hintergrund könnte auch das harsche Gesetz zur Verhinderung des Brautraubes haben 55 Aber mit solchen standesrechtlichen und volkswirtschaftlichen Argumentationsreihen überzeugt man nicht die Bevölkerung Moralische Diffamierungen, Androhung schwerster Strafen, rhetorische Übertreibungen, das sind die Strategien, mit denen man die Massen ansprechen und beeinflussen kann, indem man Ängste schürt und Erwartungen anheizt Ganz ähnlich sieht es auf dem Feld von Kindesverkauf und -aussetzung aus Auch hier geht es nicht um Hebung der Moral, speziell der Unterschichten Es geht auch nicht darum, christliche Ethik umzusetzen 56 Konstantin strebt einen kanalisierten Kinderhandel an, von dem alle profitieren: die verarmten Eltern, die für den Verkauf der Kinder Geld bekommen und außerdem die Option erhalten, ihre Kinder später zurückkaufen zu können, wenn es ihnen selbst wirtschaftlich besser geht Positiv wirkt sich das Gesetz ebenfalls auf die Sklavenhändler aus, die nun sicher die ihnen verkauften Kinder als Sklavenkinder aufziehen können Auch die Kinder selbst profitieren davon: Sie verlieren zwar ihre Freiheit, meistens lebenslänglich, aber ein jämmerlicher Tod als Ausgesetzte bleibt ihnen erspart Allerdings wurden weder Armut noch Arbeitskräftemangel durch den kanalisierten Kinderhandel behoben Das Prinzip der Unveräußerlichkeit der freien Geburt war viel zu tief im römischen Rechtsempfinden verankert, als dass es durch private Kaufverträge hätte abgeschafft werden können So wurde das konstantinische Gesetz wieder auf53 54

55 56

Verschiedene Bewertungen: Sittenreform: McGinn 1999, 57–73; Gehässige Zurücksetzung bestimmter Personengruppen: Wieling 1990, 455–471; Ordnungspolitische Aspekte zur weiteren Hierarchisierung der Gesellschaft: Harper 2011, 449–455; Humfress 2006, 205–208 Zu „gemischten“ Verbindungen insgesamt, auch zum SC Claudianum s Evans Grubbs 1995, 261–316; speziell zur Verbindung zwischen Herrin und eigenem Sklaven s Evans Grubbs (1993b, 142–147), die ebenfalls die starke Rhetorisierung und die Wahrung der Standesgrenzen in dem konstantinischen Gesetz hervorhebt Evans Grubbs 2007, 57; Evans Grubbs (1995, 185–193) lokalisiert den Brautraub in den östlichen Reichsteil, in ländliche Gegenden, überwiegend in mittlere Gesellschaftsschichten Sie betont stärker moralische Aspekte Zum nichtchristlichen Charakter des konstantinischen Gesetzes s Arjava 1996, 212–214; Harper 2010, 610–638 Dagegen moralische Wertungen: Navarra 1990, 432–437; Willvonseder 2010, 160

Moral und Rhetorik im Codex Theodosianus

75

gehoben, und durch zeitlich befristete Verpfändung der Arbeitskraft der Kinder sowie durch Aussetzung der Neugeborenen ersetzt Entweder verdingten die Eltern sofort die Arbeitskraft des Kindes, indem sie es Händlern zur Weitervermittlung mitgaben,57 oder sie setzten es weiterhin aus Der Finder eines solchen Ausgesetzten hatte fortan die Möglichkeit entweder 20 Dienstjahre von dem expositus zu fordern und ihn dann frei zu entlassen, oder seinen Sklavenstatus offiziell von der Provinzialbehörde, dem tabularium, sofort bescheinigen zu lassen 58 Die abschreckende Wirkung moralischer Diffamierungen und die Androhung schwerster Strafen haben sich nur als begrenzt praktizierbar erwiesen Dennoch entwickelten sich aus den konstantinischen Neuerungen weitere Transformationen, die durch ihre Vielgestaltigkeit der sozialen Wirklichkeit und deren Problemen gerechter wurden Der erste Anstoß dazu war aber von dem Kaiser ausgegangen 59 Auch die so christlich daherkommende Privilegierung der Freilassung in der Kirche hatte eher einen demographischen und verwaltungstechnischen Hintergrund und ist keineswegs als eine Art Schwächung oder gar Aufhebung der Sklaverei aus christlichen Gründen aufzufassen Die formlosere Praktizierung der manumissio in ecclesia sollte vollgültige Freilassungen mit römischem Bürgerrecht erleichtern, um die Zahl römischer Bürger, ihres freigeborenen Nachwuchses und damit die Anzahl der Steuerzahler zu erhöhen Des Kaisers demographische Zielsetzung, die er christlich verbrämte (mit frommem Sinn = religiosa mente), verfing allerdings nicht bei den kirchlichen Institutionen, die sich fortschreitend zu den größten Sklavenbesitzern neben den Kaisern in der Spätantike entwickelten Die Praktizierung der „Freilassung in der Kirche“ blieb gering und lokal begrenzt 60 Daraus darf man jedoch nicht die Schlussfolgerung ziehen, dass Konstantin mit seiner Gesetzgebung und den neuen Strategien der Rhetorisierung und Moralisierung erfolglos gewesen wäre Er hat auf vielen Gebieten wichtige Anstöße gegeben, die die späteren Kaiser teils aufgreifen, teils durch Abmilderung der Strafen umwandeln und weiterentwickeln konnten 61 Dennoch haben auch sie es mit dem Problem einer enormen Umschichtung und hohen Mobilisierung der spätantiken Gesellschaft zu tun, die sich durch einschränkende Gesetze, die die Statusschranken festschreiben oder Berufe zwangsweise in Korporationen organisieren wollen, nicht aufhalten lassen Partielle Erfolge lassen sich durchaus in tetrarchischer und konstantinischer Zeit durch die ent57 58 59 60 61

Paul Sent 5 1 1: Qui contemplatione extremae necessitatis aut alimentorum gratia filios suos vendiderint, statui ingenuitatis eorum non praeiudicant: homo enim liber nullo pretio aestimatur (…) Operae tamen eorum locari possunt (Wieling 1999, 85–86, Nr 146) Sententiae Syriacae 98, Wieling 1999, 159, Nr 293; hierzu Memmer 1991, 24–25, 83–93 Corbier 2001, 52–73 Herrmann-Otto 2012, 192–195 mit weiterführender Literatur Grieser 1997, 144–154; Herrmann-Otto 2008, 353–356 Z B Abmilderungen des Gesetzes zum Brautraub: Cod Theod 9 24 2 ( J 349): Kapitalstrafe nur für den Dieb; Cod Iustin 9 13 1 ( J 533): Abschaffung jeglicher Strafen für die Braut und die Eltern

76

Elisabeth Herrmann-Otto

sprechenden Reformen nachweisen, sodass das 4 Jahrhundert, wenn auch regional unterschiedlich, insgesamt als eine durchaus wirtschaftlich saturierte Zeit zu gelten hat Erst die folgenden Jahrhunderte, unter anderem bedingt durch die andauernden militärischen, kirchen- und machtpolitischen sowie gesellschaftlichen Konflikte im Inneren des Reiches und an seinen Grenzen haben dann zu Verschlechterungen und zum Niedergang geführt 62 Zusammenfassung und Ausblick Rhetorisierung und Moralisierung der Gesetzestexte als Strategien der Einflussnahme auf die Bevölkerung sind aus der spätantiken Gesetzgebung seit Konstantin nicht mehr wegzudenken Wie tief und nachhaltig ihr Einfluss konkret war, lässt sich – an den wenigen Fallbeispielen, die hier vorgeführt wurden – schlecht ermessen Dazu hätte es einer umfassenden Analyse der gesamten konstantinischen Gesetzgebung bedurft, was aber den Rahmen dieses Beitrages sprengen würde Konstantin war ein Herrscher, der gestalterisch aktiv durch seine Gesetzgebung auf die spätrömische Gesellschaft Einfluss nehmen wollte, was bereits in der Antike unterschiedlich kommentiert wurde: Während der Neffe und spätere Kaiser Julian Apostata seinen Onkel als „Erneuerer und Verwirrer der alten Gesetze“ bezeichnet,63 und der Historiker Eutrop von „vielen guten und gerechten, aber auch von noch mehr überflüssigen und einigen grausamen Gesetzen“ schreibt,64 sieht der Rechtsgelehrte Sozomenos ein Jahrhundert später in Konstantin das Bemühen wirksam: „in der Gesetzgebung (…) die Gottheit zu ehren “65 Wer auch immer von diesen Autoren Recht hat – eventuell auch keiner von ihnen – so steht doch fest, dass Konstantin in der Gesetzgebung an bestehende Tendenzen der Rhetorisierung angeknüpft hat und die Strategien der Einflussnahme auf die Bevölkerung durch moralisierende Elemente ausgebaut hat Diese Methode wurde von den nachfolgenden Kaisern bis Justinian weiter perfektioniert Das bedeutet aber nicht, dass die Gesetze rein ornamental, von der gesellschaftlichen Wirklichkeit entfernte Normen darstellten Es sind immer zwei Seiten zu sehen, um dem komplexen Charakter des Rechts und der Gesetzgebung gerecht zu werden Generelle Verlautbarungen haben die Kaiser immer wieder zur Selbstdarstellung genutzt Andererseits finden sich unter den leges generales auch Bestimmungen, die konkrete Neuerungen enthielten, die der Kaiser durchsetzen wollte Um dies zu

62 63 64 65

Woolf 2015, 315–326 Amm 21 108: memoriam Constantini ut novatoris turbatorisque priscarum legum et moris antiquitus recepti Eutrop brev 10 8: multas leges rogavit, quasdam ex bono et aequo, plerasque superfluas, nonnullas severas Sozom, h e I 8 13–14

Moral und Rhetorik im Codex Theodosianus

77

erreichen, bedurfte es eines hohen Maßes an Rhetorisierung und Moralisierung, um Einfluss auf die Bevölkerung zu gewinnen Nicht immer war Konstantin erfolgreich, und wurden seine Neuerungen durch altes Recht wieder ersetzt Bibliographie Alföldy, G 2011 Römische Sozialgeschichte 4 völlig überarbeitete und aktualisierte Auflage Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag Arjava, A 1996 Women and Law in Late Antiquity Oxford: Clarendon Press Behrwald, R 2009 Die Stadt als Museum? Die Wahrnehmung der Monumente Roms in der Spätantike Berlin: Akademie Verlag Bollmann, R 2006 Lob des Imperiums Der Untergang Roms und die Zukunft des Westens Berlin: Wolf Jobst Siedler jr Brandt, H 2006 „Konstantins Reformen “ Seiten 31–37 in Konstantin der Große, Geschichte – Archäologie – Rezeption Internationales Kolloquium 10 –15 10 2005 an der Universität Trier Herausgegeben von A Demandt und J Engemann Trier: Rheinisches Landesmuseum Brown, P 2002 Macht und Rhetorik in der Spätantike Der Weg zu einem „christlichen Imperium“ München: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag Chiusi, T J 2007 „Der Einfluss des Christentums auf die Gesetzgebung Konstantins “ Seiten 55– 64 in Kaiser Konstantin der Große Historische Leistung und Rezeption in Europa Herausgegeben von K M Girardet Bonn: Habelt Verlag Corbier, M 2001 „Child Exposure and Abandonment “ Seiten 52–73 in Childhood, Class and Kin in the Roman World Herausgegeben von S Dixon London: Routledge Demandt, A 2007 Die Spätantike Römische Geschichte von Diocletian bis Justinian 284–565 n Chr 2 vollständig bearbeitete und erweiterte Auflage München: Verlag C H Beck Dillon, J N 2012 The Justice of Constantine Law, Communication, and Control Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press Eck, W 2006 „Worte und Bilder Das Herrschaftskonzept Diocletians im Spiegel öffentlicher Monumente “ Seiten 323–348 in Die Tetrarchie Ein Regierungssystem und seine mediale Präsentation Herausgegeben von D Boschung und W Eck Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag Ehling, K 2011 „Das Christogramm als magisches Siegeszeichen – Zum konstantinischen Silbermedaillon des Jahres 315 “ Seiten 27–32 in Konstantin der Große zwischen Sol und Christus Herausgegeben von K Ehling und G Weber Mainz: Verlag Philipp von Zabern Ehrhardt, A 1974 „Constantin der Große Religionspolitik und Gesetzgebung “ Seiten 388– 456 in Konstantin der Große Herausgegeben von H Kraft Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Elliott, T G 1996 The Christianity of Constantine the Great Scranton: University of Scranton Press Elton, H 2006 „Warfare and the Military “ Seiten 325–346 in The Cambridge Companion to The Age of Constantine Herausgegeben von N Lenski Cambridge: University Press Engemann, J 2006 „Konstantins Sicherung der Grenzen des römischen Reiches “ Seiten 155–161 in Imperator Caesar Flavius Constantinus Konstantin der Große, Ausstellungskatalog Herausgegeben von A Demandt und J Engemann Mainz: Verlag Philipp von Zabern Evans Grubbs, J 1993a „Constantine and Imperial Legislation on the Family “ Seiten 125–154 in The Theodosian Code Studies in the Imperial Law of Late Antiquity Herausgegeben von J Harries und I Wood London: Bristol Classical Press (= 2010 2 Auflage)

78

Elisabeth Herrmann-Otto

– 1993b „‚Marriage more shameful than Adultery‘: Slave-Mistress Relationships, ‚Mixed Marriages‘ and Late Roman Law “ Phoenix 47:125–154 – 1995 Law and Family in Late Antiquity The Emperor Constantine’s Marriage Legislation Oxford: Clarendon Press – 2005 „Parent-Child Conflict in the Roman Family: The Evidence of the Code of Justinian “ Seiten 93–128 in The Roman Family in the Empire Rome, Italy and Beyond Herausgegeben von M George Oxford: Oxford University Press – 2007 „Marrying and its Documents in Later Roman Law “ Seiten 43–94 in To have and to hold: Marrying and its documentation in Western Christendom 400–1600 Herausgegeben von P L Reynolds und S Witte Cambridge: Cambridge University Press – 2009 „Church, State and Children: Christian and Imperial Attitudes Toward Infant Exposure in Late Antiquity “ Seiten 119–131 in The Power of Religion in Late Antiquity Herausgegeben von A Cain und N Lenski Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Firpo, G 1991 „Il problema servile tra Costantino e Giustiniano Pensiero cristiano e legislazione imperiale “ Seiten 95–119 in L’Impero romano-cristiano Problemi politici, religiosi, culturali Herausgegeben von C Alza Roma: Coletti Girardet, K M 2010 Der Kaiser und sein Gott Das Christentum im Denken und in der Religionspolitik Konstantins des Großen Berlin: De Gruyter Grey, C 2011 „Slavery in the Late Roman World “ Seiten 482–509 in The Cambridge World History of Slavery I: The Ancient Mediterranean World Herausgegeben von K Bradley und P Cartledge Cambridge: University Press Grieser, H 1997 Sklaverei im spätantiken und frühmittelalterlichen Gallien (5 –7 Jh ) Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag Harper, K 2010 „The SC Claudianum in the Codex Theodosianus: Social History and Legal Texts “ ClQ 60:610–638 – 2011 Slavery in the Late Roman World AD 275–425 Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Harries, J 2010 „Constantine the Lawgiver “ Seiten 73–92 in From the Tetrarchs to the Theodosians Later Roman History and Culture 284–450 CE Herausgegeben von S McGill, C Sogno und E Watts Yale Classical Studies 34 Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Herrmann-Otto, E 1994 Ex ancilla natus Untersuchungen zu den hausgeborenen Sklaven und Sklavinnen im Westen des römischen Kaiserreiches Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag – 2004 „Sklavenkinder in Recht, Ökonomie und Gesellschaft des Römischen Reiches “ RIDA 51:167–186 – 2006 „Sklaven und Frauen unter Konstantin “ Seiten 83–95 in Konstantin der Große, Geschichte – Archäologie – Rezeption Internationales Kolloquium 10 –15 10 2005 an der Universität Trier Herausgegeben von A Demandt und J Engemann Trier: Rheinisches Landesmuseum – 2008 „Konstantin, die Sklaven und die Kirche “ Seiten 353–366 in Antike Lebenswelten Konstanz – Wandel – Wirkungsmacht Festschrift für Ingomar Weiler zum 70 Geburtstag Herausgegeben von P Mauritsch et al Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag – 2010 „Manumissio (Freilassung) “ Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum 24:56–75 Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann – 2012 „Kindsein im Römischen Reich “ Seiten 171–201 in Kindersklaven – Sklavenkinder Schicksale zwischen Zuneigung und Ausbeutung in der Antike und im interkulturellen Vergleich Herausgegeben von H Heinen Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag – 2017 „Armut “ Spalten 208–222 (In Druck) in Handwörterbuch zur Antiken Sklaverei Herausgegeben von H Heinen und W Schmitz et al Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag

Moral und Rhetorik im Codex Theodosianus

79

Hesberg, H von 2006 „Residenzstädte und ihre höfische Infrastruktur – traditionelle und neue Raumkonzepte “ Seiten 133–168 in Die Tetrarchie Ein Regierungssystem und seine mediale Präsentation Herausgegeben von D Boschung und W Eck Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag Humfress, C 2006 „Civil Law and Social Life “ Seiten 205–225 in The Cambridge Companion to The Age of Constantine Herausgegeben von N Lenski Cambridge: University Press Kelly, C 2006 „Bureaucracy and Government “ Seiten 183–204 in The Cambridge Companion to The Age of Constantine Herausgegeben von N Lenski Cambridge: University Press Klein, R 2008 „Pagane liberalitas oder christliche caritas? Konstantins Sorge für die Bevölkerung des Reiches “ Seiten 43–80 in Zum Verhältnis von Staat und Kirche in der Spätantike Herausgegeben von R Klein Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck Krause, J -U , und C Witschel, eds 2006 Die Stadt in der Spätantike – Niedergang oder Wandel? Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag Lenski, N 2006 „Servi Publici in Late Antiquity “ Seiten 335–357 in Die Stadt in der Spätantike – Niedergang oder Wandel? Herausgegeben von J -U Krause und C Witschel Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag Liebs, D 1985 „Unverhohlene Brutalität in den Gesetzen der ersten christlichen Kaiser “ Seiten 89–116 in Römisches Recht in der europäischen Tradition Symposion aus Anlass des 75 Geburtstages von Franz Wieacker Herausgegeben von O Behrens, M Diesselhorst und W E Voss Ebelsbach: Verlag Rolf Gremer – 1999 Römisches Recht Ein Studienbuch Überarbeitete 5 Auflage Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht – 2006 „Konstantin als Gesetzgeber “ Seiten 97–107 in Konstantin der Große, Geschichte – Archäologie – Rezeption Internationales Kolloquium 10 –15 10 2005 an der Universität Trier Herausgegeben von A Demandt und J Engemann Trier: Rheinisches Landesmuseum – 2007 „Recht und Gesetzgebung “ Seiten 190–196 in Imperator Caesar Flavius Constantinus Konstantin der Große, Ausstellungskatalog Herausgegeben von A Demandt und J Engemann Mainz: Verlag Philipp von Zabern Lorenzi, C 2003 Si quis a sanguine infantem … conparaverit Sul commercio di figli nel tardo impero Perugia: Università delgi Studi di Perugia MacCormack, S G 1990 Art and Ceremony in Late Antiquity London: University of California Press McGinn, T A J 1999 „The Social Policy of the Emperor Constantine in Codex Theodosianus 4,6,3 “ RHD 67:57–73 Memmer, M 1991 „Ad servitutem aut ad lupanar … Ein Beitrag zur Rechtsstellung von Findelkindern nach Römischem Recht – Unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von §§ 77, 98 Sententiae Syriacae “ ZRG RA 108:21–93 Näf, B 1995 Senatorisches Standesbewusstsein in spätrömischer Zeit Freiburg Schweiz: Universitätsverlag Rebenich, S 2007 „Der Senat “ Seiten 179–182 in Imperator Caesar Flavius Constantinus Konstantin der Große, Ausstellungskatalog Herausgegeben von A Demandt und J Engemann Mainz: Verlag Philipp von Zabern Rosen, K 2013 Konstantin der Große Kaiser zwischen Machtpolitik und Religion Stuttgart: KlettCotta Navarra, M L 1990 „A proposito delle unioni tra libere e schiavi nella legislazione Costantiniana “ Atti dell’Academia Romanistica Costantiniana 8:427–437 Ronning, C 2007 „Pontifex Maximus, charismatischer Herrscher, ‚allen gemeinsamer Bischof ‘ oder ‚dreizehnter Apostel‘? Das römische Herrschaftsverständnis und der christliche Kaiser “

80

Elisabeth Herrmann-Otto

Seiten 125–149 in Konstantin der Große Kaiser einer Epochenwende Herausgegeben von F Schuller und H Wolff Lindenberg: Kunstverlag Josef Fink Schmidt-Hofner, S 2008 Reagieren und Gestalten Der Regierungsstil des spätrömischen Kaisers am Beispiel der Gesetzgebung Valentinians I München: Verlag C H Beck –, 2016, Alltag als Argument: Gesetzgebung und Propaganda im Codex Theodosianus In: Akten der Tagung „Leben Tür an Tür – Religiöse Identitäten und reale Lebenswelten in der Spätantike“, Trier 2013, Seiten 1–26, Herausgegeben v R Haensch und Ph von Rummel Tate, J C 2009 „Christianity and the Legal Status of Abandoned Children in the Later Roman Empire “ The Journal of Law and Religion 24:123–141 Tinnefeld, F 1977 Die frühbyzantinische Gesellschaft Struktur – Gegensätze – Spannungen München: Wilhelm Fink Verlag Vogt, J 1945 „Zur Frage des christlichen Einflusses auf die Gesetzgebung Konstantins “ Seiten 118–148 in Festschrift für Leopold Wenger II Herausgegeben von L Wenger und M San Nicolo München: C H Beck Vuolanto, V 2003 „Selling a Freeborn Child Rhetoric and Social Realities in the Late Roman World “ AncSoc 33:169–207 Wallraff, M 2013 Sonnenkönig der Spätantike Die Religionspolitik Konstantins des Großen Freiburg: Herder Weiler, I 2003 Die Beendigung des Sklavenstatus im Altertum Ein Beitrag zur vergleichenden Sozialgeschichte Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag Wieling, H 1990 „Die Gesetzgebung Constantins zur Erwerbsfähigkeit der Konkubinenkinder “ Atti dell’Academia Romanistica Costantiniana 8:455–471 – 1995 „Die Gesetze der Herculier “ Seiten 619–632 in Collatio Iuris Romani Festschrift Hans Ankum Herausgegeben von R Feenstra et al Amsterdam: J C Gieben – 1999 Die Begründung des Sklavenstatus nach ius gentium und ius civile Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag Willvonseder, R 2010 Stellung des Sklaven im Privatrecht 1: Eheähnliche Verbindungen und verwandtschaftliche Beziehungen Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag Woolf, G 2015 Rom Die Biographie eines Weltreichs Übersetzt von A Wittenburg Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta (= engl Original: 2012 Rome An Empire’s Story Oxford: University Press)

“His blood be upon us” Protecting the Jews in Late Antiquity John Curran (Belfast) Introduction Two incontrovertible truths, one ancient and one modern, frame the contemporary study of Jewish history The first is that the appearance of belief in Jesus christos brought for many a new dimension to their comprehension of the beliefs of those who had established a distinctive cult of worship centred upon their god’s temple in Jerusalem The second is that the Holocaust has laid upon many historians the obligation to explain how deeply the roots of the hatred upon which it was founded ran In the context of ideology, leadership and crowds in the fourth-century Roman Empire, this contribution explores some themes lying between these two truths Specifically, it seeks to test some influential ideas that have given shape to much modern discussion of the Jews in the late Roman Empire The utility and legitimacy of some of the language frequently deployed is examined The vitality of “Judaism” as an exegetical or literal phenomenon is explored The significance of legal texts as evidence on the process of law concerning the Jews is established And finally the status of the Patriarch of the Jews as a touch-stone for understanding Jewish-Christian relations is revisited Language It is important at the outset to recognize the inventio of some of the most important modern (and some ancient) terms that commonly feature in the discourse on the subject of the Jews in the Roman world 1 The term “Semitic” was used for the first time in 1781 by Ludwig Schlözer in his article Von den Chaldaern 2 Eichorn took up the term

1 2

See Cohen 1986 and Gruen 1998, 41–72 Schlözer 1781, 161

82

John Curran

himself and used it in his own book Einleitung in das Alte Testament (Leipzig, 1787) As Louis Feldman has pointed out, the word began life as a linguistic term to describe a family of related languages, not a people When applied to the latter, he considered it “clearly a misnomer ”3 The term “anti-semitism” dates to 1880 and was first used by Wilhelm Marr in his Der Weg zum Siege des Germanenthums über das Judentum 4 The term “race” in English dates to the period 1500–1520 It occurs first in a poem written in 1508 by William Dunbar with the title The Dance of the Seven Deadly Sins 5 The term “Racialism” appeared in print for the first time in 1907; “racism” followed later, some time after the publication of the OED in 1910 The term “tolerantia” in the sense of the toleration of religious dissent dates to John Locke’s Epistola de tolerantia published in 1689 6 The phrase “religio licita,” frequently deployed by scholars as a formula that encapsulated the status of the religio/superstitio of the Jews, has in fact no basis in Roman law; it was used by Tertullian to serve his apologetic purposes in his Apologeticum 7 To paraphrase Seth Schwartz, the “peculiar ways” of the Jews were licita only in the sense that for some reason no one was particularly concerned to make them illicita 8 What is the historian left with? The answer is “Judaeoi”/“judaei”/“Jews”; an ethnos or genos; a natio or genus Compared to iudaios, the word “Judaism” (Gr iudaismos, Lat Judaismus) is a much rarer term It appears for the first time in the second century B C in The Second Book of Maccabees, and there only as a contrast to hellenismos meaning “the ways of the Greeks” against whom the Maccabees were fighting 9 Paul of Tarsus uses the word “iudaismos” precisely twice to refer to a way of life that he was leaving – the only use of the term in the whole New Testament 10 Josephus never used the word The term’s Latin transliteration appears for the first time in Tertullian’s Adversus Marcionem 11 Prior to the third century, “Judaism” was not therefore a term in common discourse Ancient commentators were interested in the Jews; what they did and said, or, perhaps more often, what they were reported to have said and done Even after the more widespread adoption of the term “iudaismos” by Christians in the second century,

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Feldman 1993, 84 Marr 1880 Isaac 2004, 25, n 59 It was used in French in its modern sense in 1684 Stroumsa 1996, 3 Tert Apol 21 1: [On Christianity as derived from] (…) insignissimae religionis [of the Jews], certe licitae (…) Schwartz 2001, 189 See too Garnsey 1984, 9 for “toleration by default ” Fredriksen 2003, 40: “ancient empires did not ‘practice religious tolerance’; they presupposed religious difference ” 2 Macc 8 1 See Boyarin 2003, 68 for remarks on the similar apposition of hellenismos to medismos Gal 1 13 and 14 Tert Adv Marc 5 6 10: [Where Tertullian suggests that Paul’s career is seen to be pre-figured in Isaiah 3 3] (…) Paul (…) who was destined to be taken away from Judaea, which means Judaism (Iudaismus), for the building up of Christendom (Christianismus) Et numquid ipse tunc Paulus destinabatur, de ludaea, id est de Iudaismo, auferri habens in aedificationem Christianismi, (…)

“His blood be upon us”

83

the abstraction did not inspire comprehensive theological refutation; like their pagan co-citizens, Christians hostile to the Jews continued to attack what Jews did rather than their entire system of belief 12 It is vitally important to grasp that this is the perspective that informed the philosophical and ethical discourse of the educated whether well or ill-disposed towards the Jews as well as the law-making activity of the ancient state There may well be a case for using more modern concepts but the use of the old can still serve historical enquiry well The problem of the vitality of the iudaioi What iudaioi did then, or said, or reportedly believed was extensively the subject of what has become known as adversus iudaeos literature Methodologically speaking, in the context of this contribution, this literature offers the historian the opportunity to assess the nature of the threat posed by Christian ideas to the Jews of the late empire Early in the twentieth century Von Harnack interpreted the adversus iudaeos literature as a powerful polemic against only sample Judaeans and concluded that the Jews and their customs had been comprehensively superseded by the beliefs of the followers of Jesus 13 The Jews who appeared in dialogues like that between Justin Martyr and Trypho or Jason and Papiscus were stereotypes designed to illustrate the superiority of Christian beliefs 14 Thus superseded, according to Von Harnack, the Jews had retreated into their own beliefs and customs and there become insular and ritualistic “late Judaism,” ripe for persecution Marcel Simon’s post-war Verus Israel interpreted the adversus iudaeos tradition as reflecting debates between real people and real ideas, an argument that permitted the reconstruction of a Jewish culture of an altogether more dynamic and confident type The dialogues showed the competition between two confident, legitimate and missionizing ways of life 15 The literature, like the archaeology of the Roman Empire, showed Jews confidently rooted in the communities of the Roman Empire But for Miriam Taylor (1995), Simon’s confident Judaeans might be understood, in part, to have sought confrontation and as such to have been responsible for some of the hostility that came their way 16 She demanded a return to an understanding of the 12 13 14 15 16

A very illuminating discussion in Mason (2009, 150–58) although I stress the persistence of iudaioi where his focus is the development of the use of iudaismos See Lieu 1994, 102 The more substantial intellectual engagement was between Christianity and the Greek philosophical tradition The latter work is now lost It was seemingly set in Alexandria Jason was purportedly a Jewish convert and Papiscus a Jew Papiscus ends up converting to Christianity See Bovon and Duffy 2012 Simon 1986, 271–305 For another proponent of missionary Judaism, see Feldman 1996, 293 and Paget 1996 Taylor 1995, 1–5

84

John Curran

adversus iudaeos tradition as a rhetorical phenomenon but one that revealed a deep and unremitting hostility on the part of Christians towards Judaeans Christian hostility was an exegetical phenomenon As Christians competed with each other to annex and interpret the texts of Judaean culture a violent repudiation of their originators was required to complete the process Anti-Judaism was therefore “intrinsic to Christian teaching ”17 David Jacobs has recently attempted to break the impasse with appeals to postcolonial criticism, defined as “a set of reading practices that seeks to uncover the cultural processes and appropriation that are intimately interwoven with the politics of empire ”18 The available evidence shows constructs, rather than the “real world”, but the most important of these constructs is the mapping out of the other and the imperialist discourse itself is a dynamic phenomenon, unstable and shifting In the first century of the Christian empire, the mappers of the Other par excellence were the bishops They are widely credited with being the leaders of a surge of violence against the Jews and their institutions 19 But there is a dimension of the outlook of these bishops that has been obscured by the traditional terms of the debate on adversus iudaeos literature The problem specifically is that many scholars have detected a clear demarcation between the beliefs of the Jews and Christianity in the period Jacobs’ model permits a much more complex treatment of the late antique world of ideas in that the apparently dominant culture is not to be understood as an immutable phenomenon Nor is it necessarily to be understood as always confident within itself With this flexibility comes an increased understanding of a particularly important stimulus for aggression against the Jews in late antiquity: anxiety Long a concern of some of the followers of Jesus, believers could be found associating uninhibitedly with iudaioi At the Council of Elvira in 303, with the world on the verge of a Christian emperor, canons were being issued which prohibited not only marriage between Catholic/Christian women and Jews but the employment of Jews to bless crops 20 A number of other councils, including Nicaea, took time to address the serious problem of the persistence of the use of the Jewish calendar for the calculation of the date of Easter; the only letter Constantine wrote on the subject of the coun-

17 18 19 20

Taylor 1995, 196 Cf Ruether 1974, 159: “For Christianity, anti-Judaism was not merely a defence against attack but an intrinsic need in Christian self-affirmation Anti-Judaism is part of Christian exegesis ” See Jacobs 2003, 107–8 Some famous set-pieces: See McLynn 1994, 291–315 for Ambrose; on Magona in 418, see Hunt 1982 See Drake (2011, 216–17) for bishops as mediators of the divine in a world governed by Christian emperors Canons 16 (covering marriage with Jews or heretics) and 49 Canon 50 condemned accepting Jewish hospitality and 78 all sexual relations with a Jewish or pagan woman

“His blood be upon us”

85

cil mentioned virtually nothing else 21 The very first canon of the Council of Antioch (341) denounced the eating of the Passover meal with Jews; canons issued at the council of Laodicea (360) ruled against sharing feasts and gifts with Jews (and heretics) and insisted on Christians working on the Jewish Sabbath 22 The Didascalia et constitutiones apostolorum includes canons of the fourth-century Christian community in Syria suggesting that Christian clergy, including bishops (!), may have been officiating at Jewish festivals 23 Too often, as we have seen, scholarship labels such activity as “judaizing” Christianity, emphasising the phenomenon as a struggle of theological ideas, and in particular, suggesting that “judaizing” Christians were either people reluctant or unable to leave a way of life or were Christian “god-fearers,” looking at aspects of Jewish belief and worship that they thought attractive Perhaps the most notorious fourth-century example of the ancient adversus iudaeos literature is provided by the eight homilies preached by (Saint) John Chrysostom in Antioch in 386 and 387 24 The homilies make uncomfortable reading for modern Christians; the tone of some of the statements made is so violently poisonous: “(…) another prophet called the Jews ‘an untamed calf [ Jeremiah 31 18] ’ Although such beasts are unfit for work, they are fit for killing And this is what happened to the Jews: while they were making themselves unfit for work, they grew fit for slaughter ”25 Some modern commentators rightly see this powerful language as above all an exercise in rhetoric What is interesting is that this rhetoric was not of course directed at the Jews; it was directed at people who thought of themselves as followers of Jesus Christ but who were sitting in Chrysostom’s congregation The sermons were carefully timed It is clear that they were delivered in and around Jewish festivals and the days of preparation required by them 26 They were also preached in proximity to the August festival of the Maccabees – Jewish martyrs par excellence to whom a shrine had been dedicated in Antioch 27 Chrysostom was clearly trying to impede Christians who were attending Jewish ceremonies: “I shall bring my homily to an end here with the words of Moses: ‘I call heaven and earth to witness against you ’ If any of you, whether you are here present or not, shall go to the spectacle of the Trumpets, or rush off to the synagogue, or go up to the shrine of Matrona, or take part in fasting, or share in the Sabbath, or observe any other Jewish ritual great or small, I call heaven and earth as my witnesses that I am

21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Euseb Vit Const 3 17 1–20 1 At 18 3: “For it is surely quite grotesque for them to be able to boast that we would be incapable of maintaining these observances without their instruction ” Canons 37, 38 and 29 8 47 62; 65; 70; Funk 1905–6, 582 and 584 See now Wilken 1983, especially 34–65 The homilies, interestingly, are termed “discourses” by the CUA Press See Harkins 1979 John Chryst Hom 1 2 5–6 (trans Harkins 1979) See e g John Chryst Hom 1 5; Harkins (1979, l–lx) for the order and dating of the homilies PG 50:617–28, homilies 1–3 “on the Maccabees ” See Braun 1998, 145

86

John Curran

guiltless of the blood of all of you ”28 And in denouncing the Jewish Patriarchs, Chrysostom declared significantly: “These Patriarchs you mention are not priests but they impersonate priests,” suggesting that at least some could not see a significant distinction between senior Jewish leaders and the Christian clergy 29 It is understandable, with hindsight, to see the polemic only as a theological phenomenon and to see the Christian community constructing a comprehensive repudiation of Jewish ways But there is a correlation between the hostility of episcopal language and a deep anxiety about the actual behavior of people who considered themselves followers of Jesus Jews may or may not have been energetically proselytizing but Christians in alarming numbers were observing Jewish ways It was imperative to gather these people into the churches of the bishops for worship – and it was not subtly done To claim a devoted congregation was above all the seal upon a bishop’s authority in the world Some of the most famous adversus iudaios literature of the period, in other words, tells us little about theological argument, even less about iudaioi and “Christians” but a great deal about the anxieties of Christian bishops as they sought to boundary their own congregations 30 As such, there was a literal, physical setting of boundaries; this was a battle for bodies: “Those of you who have not yet taken this goodly catch have time enough in these five days to trap and overcome your prey So let us spread out the nets of instruction; like a pack of hunting dogs let us circle about and surround our quarry; let us drive them together from every side and bring them into subjection to the laws of the Church ”31 The Law With regard to iudaioi, the reign of Constantine has been regarded in this, as in so many other respects, as an historic turning point One persistent narrative suggests that with a Christian emperor now in place and with an historic hostility towards iudaioi already evident among the followers of Jesus of Nazareth, it was only a matter of time before the machinery of law-making began to exhibit hostility towards the Jews 32 The great

28 29 30

31 32

John Chryst Hom 1 8 1 (PG 48:855) John Chryst Hom 6 5 (PG 48:911): (…) hiereis eisin alla hiereis hupokrinontai (…) See Reed (2003, 36) on “the parting of the ways” debate: “That we even ask this question at all, however, is an oblique admission of failure It gives the measure of the degree to which the concerns of ancient Christian orthodox writers, specifically as manifest in the contra iudaeos tradition, continue to determine the line of approach taken by modern historians ” John Chryst Hom 2 1 4 (Migne, PG 48:857) See, e g Millar (2006, 438) on the conversion of Constantine: “For it was from that moment that religious conviction came to structure the activities of the state in a quite new way; above all the Christian emperors came, step by step [italics mine], to define the rights of their subjects differently, in terms of their attachment to different religious groups ”

“His blood be upon us”

87

historian of Rome’s legislation on the Jews, Amnon Linder, observed that from the time of Constantine onwards “all of the adjectives applied to the Jewish entity” were hostile 33 Constantine was the first to describe the Jewish “sect” (secta) as feralis and nefaria 34 Constans’ shrill “every superstition must be entirely uprooted” set the Christian empire against anything other than belief in Christ 35 In 383 Gratian linked Jews together with pagans for the first time 36 And by 409, the law-makers could describe Jews as being “enemies of the supreme majesty and of Roman law”37 The problem is that a survey of the laws demonstrates that statements of sweeping hostility cannot be said to have been accompanied by a legal onslaught on iudaioi in the first century of the Christian empire Alongside apparent expressions of hostility, statements in some laws referred to the historic legal standing of the Jews In a law of 321 allowing Cologne to make Jews serve as decurions, for example, the emperor declared “in order that something of the former rule be left to them as solace, we extend to two or three persons from each group the perpetual privilege of not being disturbed by any nominations ”38 In 330 Constantine identified Jewish leaders as “those who dedicated themselves with complete devotion (…) and while living in the above-mentioned sect preside over that law ”39 Valentinian identified the synagogue as “a place of religio ”40 In 393, Theodosius in response to reports of attacks upon synagogues stated: “it is sufficiently established that the sect of the Jews is prohibited by no law ”41 And as late as 423, Honorius and Theodosius II could reiterate the right of Jews to worship in safety: “We want the Jews to know, however, that we take with pleasure the occasion of the repetition of the law, and in answer to their pitiful supplications we have but legislated that those who usually commit wrong unadvisedly under cover of the venerable Christianity, shall abstain from injuring and persecuting them (…) ”42 Linder identified what he considered a “contradiction” in the apparent outlook of the law-makers and proposed as a solution that statements like these were expressions of “ironic undertones” or “cynicism ”43 “[I]t is reasonable to suppose that on several 33 34 35 36 37 38

39 40 41 42 43

Linder 1987, 59 Cod theod 16 8 1 (Linder 1987, no 8) See Linder (2006, 149–50) for a longer list of hostile terms Cod theod 16 10 3 (of AD 342) Cf Cod theod 16 1 13 (A D 380): “We want all the peoples governed by the serenity of our clemency to practice the religion that Saint peter the Apostle gave to then Romans ” Cod theod 16 7 3 (Linder 1987, no 16) Cod theod 16 8 19 (1 April 409; Linder 1987, no 39): [perversitas iudaica] alienam Romano imperio Cod theod 16 8 3 The traditional exemption at Dig 50 2 3 3, cf 27 1 15 6 And cf Constantine’s exemption for Christian clergy: Cod theod 16 2 2,7 (319 and 330) and 16 2 3,6 (320 and 326) Cohen (1976, 8) thought Constantine was bringing the position of Jews into line with the concessions extended to Christian clergy Cod theod 16 8 2 (Linder 1987, no 9) Cod theod 7 8 2 (Linder 1987, no 14) Cod theod 16 8 9 (393) Cod theod 18 8 26 (Linder 1987, no 48) Linder 1987, 66

88

John Curran

occasions the legislator hesitated between these two opposing conceptions, between persecution of the Jews and their protection ”44 But two features of the laws of these Christian emperors are particularly striking As Linder observed, the most sustainedly hostile language in the fourth century legislation was reserved for laws on Jewish proselytism 45 This hostility long pre-dated Constantine and that is because taking up Jewish ways was the classic transgressing of boundaries between the iudaioi and Roman religio 46 The consequence of Christianity’s historic struggle to comprehend itself in relation to the beliefs and practices of those who called themselves iudaioi gave particular importance to the difficult task of establishing the boundaries between people 47 As we have seen, where citizens could not or would not observe boundaries a particular anxiety could manifest itself among those who claimed to lead the church It is in this context that we notice a second feature of the legislation From the time of Gratian in 383, iudaioi were increasingly mentioned alongside pagani as people who were the subject of contemptuous language or decisions, or both 48 In 390 they were associated for the first time with Samaritans 49 In a law of 408 they were denounced along with Donatists and heretics, a tripartite denunciation that was to be common in laws issued between 408 and 545 50 Linder, who was interested in the language of anti-Jewish legislation thought it “problematic” that the same language should be used of these other groups 51 But there was nothing to stop Christian emperors addressing laws to Jews specifically; why did they link them to these other groups? In fact, the association of the iudaioi with these other groups shows the participation of the law in religiously inspired boundary-drawing Given the difficulty of ruling on the demarcation between Christians and iudaioi, it was easier to project the latter into a legal territory that was beyond the acceptable But what of the apparently conciliatory statements? Linder drew a distinction between the rhetorical component of law-making and persecutory laws 52 As Jill Harries has recently reiterated, one of the purposes of late Roman law-making was as an agent

44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51

52

Linder 1987, 65 Linder 2006, 163–4 See Gager 1983, 59–61; Schäfer 1997, 106–18; Fredriksen 2003 Linder 2006, 146–8 Cod theod 16 7 3 (Linder 1987, no 16) Cod Iustin 1 15 21 (Linder 1987, no 60) By 531 a legal distinction between them is evident: Cod Iustin 1 5 21 Cod theod 16 5 44 (Linder 1987, no 37) issued by Honorius For the persistence of the association, see Linder 2006, 150 Linder 1987, 60: “The language employed in the sixth-century texts was substantially identical but their usefulness is somewhat problematical in this specific context because it is almost impossible to isolate language employed with regard to the Jews from that directed towards pagans and heretics in laws that deal with all three groups in common ” Linder 2006, 151–2

“His blood be upon us”

89

of moral persuasion 53 It was the means by which emperors revealed their governing, legislating and moral personalities 54 This impulse is what lies behind the hostile statements cited earlier But why should it not also underlie the conciliatory? The two outlooks cannot easily be reconciled and Linder arguably does not succeed in doing so But there may be no need to make the attempt Taking the evidence as it is, we are witnessing tensions within the law-making community – and it was a community – itself 55 The surviving laws show that there were individuals in the law-making process who wanted to uphold the privileges of the Jews The laws reveal this struggle Constantine’s exemption in 330 from personal and civic liturgies for hierei, archisynagogi and patres synagogarum of the iudaioi was repealed in 383 but fully reinstated in the East in 397 Legislators in the West upheld the repeal in 398, along the way expressing doubts whether a law really had been issued in the East 56 As late as 537 Johannes of Cappadocia, Praetorian Prefect of the East, and significantly not a Christian, could be rebuked for upholding exemptions from curial service on religious grounds: “We were (…) amazed, how – if indeed – could your sharp mind and quick comprehension bear such words of these men, how it did not immediately tear them to pieces when they uttered these words [the application] ”57 The law finally intervened in legal disputes between Christians and iudaioi only in 415; bans on iudaioi occupying certain positions in the imperial administration are evident only from the fifth century onwards; “outright discriminatory legislation against the Jews” in their legal affairs with Christians began only in the sixth 58 There is thus a hazard in considering the laws concerning iudaioi during the fourth century simply as an episode in “Christianisation ” The term gives the impression of a process and in the context of a certain outlook on Jewish-Christian relations, of the inevitable march of one faith to the detriment of the other Linder was aware of the difficulty with the evidence, however, but retained the concept of process, toning it down as one of evolution and not revolution 59 But the conceptualization fails to pay sufficient attention to the very real tensions that are evident in the legislation itself Far from being “innate conservatism,” “inertia,” or the dead-weight of legal tradition, there

53 54 55 56 57 58 59

Harries 2011 Harries 2011 Cf Millar (1977, 203) on Fronto’s Ad M Antoninum de eloquentia 2 7 Harries 1999, 37–8 Cod theod 16 8 2: “[they] shall enjoy perpetual exemption from the decurionate” (Linder 1987, no 9) Repeal 12 1 99 (Linder 1987, no 15); Arcadius: 16 8 13 (Linder 1987, no 27); Honorius in the West: 12 1 158 (Linder 1987, no 29): “(…) that law, if it does exist (…) ” Novellae 45 (Linder 1987, no 64) Legal disputes: Cod theod 16 8 22 (AD 415; Linder 1987, no 41); first formal expulsion of iudaioi from the administration: 16 8 24 (AD 418; Linder 1987, no 45); “outright discrimination”: Cod Iustin 1 5 21 (AD 531; Linder 1987, no 60) Linder 2006, 144

90

John Curran

were those in the imperial court who sought to uphold Rome’s historic location of the iudaioi within the empire 60 The Jewish Patriarch A final influential narrative concerning the standing of the Jews in the late empire focuses on the mysterious figure of the Jewish Patriarch, long understood as a key figure for understanding the place of the Jews in the late Roman empire The origins and functions of the position are very obscure but Patriarchs are in evidence at least from the third century until the excessus of Gamaliel VI sometime between 415 and 429 61 The apparent succession of Patriarchs has prompted institutional histories that have given the impression that the Jewish Patriarch was a person of some constitutional standing and that as a consequence his fall must have marked the passing of an important protector of Jewish interests; Applebaum’s recent study refers to the Patriarch as the “chief lobbyist” of the Jews; his passing permitted the Christian church to deal with “the leaderless and presumably uninfluential Jews” while for Linder the Patriarch’s demise constituted a “decapitation” of the leadership of the Jews 62 The pre-eminence of the Patriarch (nasi) in the period prior to Constantine, however, is by no means proven Some at least of the early Patriarchs nesi’im were demonstrably powerful, took an interest in matters of Jewish law and could be found determining the Jewish calendar, declaring and annulling fast-days and excommunicating the recalcitrant 63 But despite being based in Palestine, they have left no sustained impression on talmudic literature which was certainly redacted there The appellation “rabbi” was frequently applied to them, suggesting that they took their place alongside other rabbis 64 When Origen was famously asked by the governor Africanus about the legitimacy of death sentence passed by the Jews of Babylon on Susanna (Dan 13), he commented: (…) it is no uncommon thing, when great nations become subject, that the king should allow the captives to use their own laws and courts of justice Now, for instance, that the Romans rule, and the Jews pay the half-shekel to them, how great power by the concession of Caesar (synchorountos Kaisaros) the ethnarch has; so that we, who have had experience

60 61 62 63 64

Linder 2006, 144–5 for the “dead-weight” perspective Among the most important contemporary studies: Applebaum 2013; Jacobs 1995; Goodblatt 1994; Heszer 1997; Levine 1996; Levine 1979 The Jews’ “chief lobbyist” in Applebaum 2013, 122; “leaderless” Jews at 186 “De-capitation”: Linder 2006, 158 The evidence conveniently collected in Goodman 1983, 113 Compare Goodblatt (2006, 417) on Judah-ha-Nasi’s commonly used appellation “rabbi” as indicating modesty, with Goodman (1983, 112) on the title as to be understood as denoting only one of a number of rabbis of importance

“His blood be upon us”

91

of it, know that he differs in little from a true king! Private trials are held according to the law, and some are condemned to death And though there is not full licence for this, still it is not done without the knowledge of the ruler, as we learned and were convinced of when we spent much time in the country of that people 65 (Ep ad Afric 14)

The “concession” here is to be understood in the context of the later acknowledgement that arrangements made by the Patriarch did not have full legal validity Together, they show that Rome observed a powerful figure at work but did not intervene to restrict certain powers he demonstrated To return to Tertullian, this curious people could be allowed to do things without being explicitly permitted to do so 66 A much-discussed inscription from Stobi in Macadonia of the late 2nd or early 3rd century date refers to a private house converted into a synagogue 67 Those violating the site were to pay a fine to patriarches, who can hardly have been distant Jewish figures and are surely to be understood as prominent figures in the local community Another, from Catania and dating to 383, was placed on a Jewish tomb and commanded the reader “by the honores of the patriarchae (…) and the Law” not to molest it The juxtaposition of Patriarch and Law is most plausibly the Patriarchs of ancient Jewish literature, not the status of distant Jewish figures in Palestine 68 The so-called apostole, the payment demanded by the Patriarch from at least the late fourth century, when viewed through the institutional prism has seemed to some to be a manifestation of Rome’s concession of tax-gathering powers to the Jewish leader But in fact it would seem to be significantly less than a universal levy on all Jews Again, as Schwartz has pointed out, the laws of the emperors did not enforce the payment of the apostole to the Patriarch; they merely allowed him to keep what he raised 69 Julian had proposed the abolition of the apostole as harmful to those paying it and Honorius in outlawing the paying of the apostole in 399 added the statement: “Let the populace of the Jews know therefore that we have removed this depredatory tax ”70 The Jewish Patriarch was there called a “despoiler” (depopulator) of the Jews 71

65 66 67 68 69 70 71

Origen, Ep ad Afric 14 (PG 11:81, 84) Schwartz 2001, 27: [The third-century Patriarchs] “were merely tolerated, not recognised, by the Roman state, and whatever power they had, they had painstakingly accumulated through their own efforts ” See too Lapin 2006, 209 IJO 1, no Macedonia 1 See Goodman 1983, 116 Noy, JIWE vol 1, no 145 “Law” the likeliest translation of licem, see Millar 2006, 432–3 Schwartz 2001, 127 Julian Ep 51; Honorius: Cod theod 16 8 14 (April 399; Linder 1987, no 30) The law was overturned by Cod theod 16 8 17 ( July 404; Linder 1987, no 34): secundum veterum principum statuta privilegia (…) Iudaeis mittendi copiam (…) Cod theod 16 8 4 The payments were restored in Cod theod 16 8 17 (404) reflecting, presumably, the success of Gamaliel (VI) at negotiating the politics of the court Jerome attacked the patriarchs as acquisitive (In Isa 3 1–2; 3 14, 13–14) Cf John Chrys Ad Iud 6 5: “do not speak to me of these patriarchs; shopkeepers, businessmen – full of every iniquity (…) ”

92

John Curran

As Peter Brown understood years ago, the Patriarch of the Jews is better seen as a grand patronal figure than a species of client king 72 Towards the end of the fourth century Patriarchs could be found with titles such as spectabilis (normally applied to senators) and later illustris with the awarding of praefectura honoraria 73 The titles showed how successfully embedded the Patriarchs were in the life and politics in circles around the emperor Unsurprisingly, what struck some Jewish observers was the enthusiasm with which they adopted the modes of upper-class Greeks From their adoption of what looks very much like the salutatio of a man of substance to their enthusiasm for Greek language and literature, the Patriarchs were men gravitating towards the emperors as courtiers, not diplomats 74 Libanius reported in a letter to the experienced governor (and old school friend) Priscianus that the Jews of Antioch, having expelled an unpopular community leader, were apprehensive that the same man was going to be imposed upon them by “the supreme leader who has authority over their own leaders” – presumably the Patriarch 75 What is interesting is that the Jewish community had repudiated him in the first place and also that a figure who may be the Patriarch needed the approval of the governor to achieve his aim 76 The Jews for their part seem to have had little hesitation in asking Libanius to use his influence against the Patriarch One notable feature of fourth-century laws on the Jews, is the frequency with which office-holding leaders of the Jews are mentioned Constantine’s “feral sect” law (threatening Jews who assaulted Christian converts) was addressed to “the Jews, and their elders and their patriarchs” – the latter a significant plural 77 Linder thought it referred to “the Patriarch and his household in Tiberias,” but the use of the term in this sense is too haphazard to constitute proof 78 Instead, the plural is better understood as an indicator that the Patriarch was only one of a number of authoritative figures in the Jewish community Cod theod 16 8 13 of 397 mentioned those “subject to the rule of (dicioni subiecti sunt) the Illustrious Patriarchs, that is the Archisynagogi, the Patriarchs, the 72 73 74 75 76 77

78

Brown 1992, 47–8 Cf the Patriarch and the Exilarch of Babylon as vassal princes in Cohen 1990, 181 Spectabilis in Linder 1987, no 32; cf (clarissimus et) illustris in nos 20, 24, 27 Praefectura honoraria in no 41 (A D 415, the demotion of Gamaliel VI) See Linder 1987, 70 Cohen (1990, 184) thought the various titles were evident as early as the third century Lib Ep 1098 See Heszer 2001, 106; Wilken 1983, 58–60 Salutatio: yShab 12:3, 13c cf yHor 3:5, 48c: “Those of [the houses of] R Hoshaiah and Bar Pazzi would greet the patriarch every day And those of [the house] of R Hoshaiah would go in first and come out first ” See Heszer 1997, 419–20 Lib Ep 131 Palladius in his Life of Chrysostom said that the (corrupt) Patriarch of the Jews could change the archisynagogus of Antioch every year in pursuit of cash (PG 47:51) Cod theod 16 8 1 (A D 329) See Linder 1987, no 8 and 124–5 Cod theod 16 8 2 (A D 330) = Linder (1987, no 9) upholding exemption of “those who dedicated themselves with complete devotion to the synagogues of the Jews, to the patriarchs or to the presbyters (…) ” Cod theod 16 8 4 (331) addressed “priests, archisynagogoi and patres of synagogues ” Linder 1987, 130 See De Lange 1976, 24

“His blood be upon us”

93

presbyters and the others who are occupied in the right of that religion (religio) ”79 Mommsen and following him Seeck emended the text to read patribusque – instead of patriarchis – “fathers” of synagogues, and Linder thought the text “undoubtedly corrupt ”80 He suggested the text was based on Constantine’s earlier law of 330 which had mentioned only one kind of Patriarch But Constantine’s law of a year earlier 329, as we saw, strikingly addressed “patriarchs, presbyters” and “synagogues of the Jews ”81 The clerification of these office-holders, that is to say the law-makers’ attempt to equivalize Christian clerics with Jewish office-holders, combined with a more measured assessment of the powers of the Patriarchs, reveals the network of leaders who liaised routinely with the representatives of the state 82 The passing (excessus) of the Patriarch sometime after 415 was not the termination of formal Jewish representation at the court of emperors; it was the spectacular fall of a colorful and assertive Jewish patron at court And when he was gone, the law continued to communicate, as it had always done, for example in a law of 429 with “the primates of the Jews, who are appointed in the sanhedrins of the two Palestines or who live in the other provinces ”83 Conclusions As Guy Stroumsa has pointed out, historians of anti-semitism always find what they are looking for; and they always find it in the area of their own expertise 84 The more cautious hedge their bets, giving us terms like “proto-racism” or “ethnoracism” or “Judaeophobia ”85 In thinking about the Jews in late antiquity we are not, however, bound by the modern language of the discourse And the ancient terms open up a much more complex picture of the Jews in the first century of Christian imperial rule What the ancient language reveals is a powerful episcopal assault upon the practices of the Jews But in some of the most frequently cited cases, where one finds hatred one also uncovers anxiety It was prompted by the fact that significant numbers of people who thought of themselves as followers of Jesus of Nazareth were sitting down with iudaioi to express it The most important purpose of some of the most virulent adversus

79 80 81 82

83 84 85

Linder 1987, no 27 Linder 1987, 203 Cod theod 16 8 1 See De Lange (1976, 24) for “patriarch” as term applicable to local community leaders For “clerification” see Constantine’s Cod theod 16 8 2 and 4; Linder 1987, no 7 Cf Cod theod 16 8 13 = Linder (1987, no 27) where Honorius in 404 linked the authority of “archisynagogues, Patriarchs and presbyters” with “the first clerics of the venerable Christian law ” See my remarks on Chrysostom’s treatment of the Patriarch above See Curran 2010 Stroumsa 1996, 1 “Ethnoracism” that of Frederickson 2002, 9

94

John Curran

iudaeos literature was to force them to stop and to establish a precinct that would hold the legitimate Christians Analysis of the timing, delivery and audience of Chrysostom’s own notorious contribution to the adversus iudaeos literature shows that a literal battle for people was taking place, a battle aimed at compelling those who acknowledged Jesus to fill the churches of the bishops With regard to the law, the observation that the early Christian empire was disinclined to persecute the Jews does little justice to the complexity and contradictory character of some of the legislation Emperors were at their most confident where their lawyers were similarly confident: with the condemnation of proselytism – an historic pre-occupation of Roman law outside of this area, however, there are grounds for considering the aims and sentiments of law-making on the Jews as somewhat confusing and inconsistent Powerful expressions of hostility expressed by one emperor can be balanced by conciliatory statements elsewhere in the record Given the complexity of both the late Roman imperial court and the law-making process, the protectors of the Jews in the fourth century may well have been the faceless lawyers of the imperial court They came to understand the peculiar Christian version of legal rhetoric but they persistently (and often with the prudent consent of emperors) upheld the old Roman tradition of legal beneficia for the Jews We began with the word iudaioi In antiquity there were people, Christian and polytheists, who hated iudaioi; they accused them of being the enemies of religio, whether Roman or Christian Iudaioi could be attacked because, however strange or irrational to moderns, a reason could be found in a range of accusations But seemingly in the sixteenth century the ancient term iudaismos re-entered the languages of common people Its earliest recorded usage in English was in 1513 by the draper and poet Robert Fabyan 86 Within a century the word could be found first in French and Judentum appeared shortly after in German The word brought with it a possibility that was unknown to antiquity A person might now become a hater of Judaism in the vernacular To hate Judaism was more than to hate Jews; it was to become a hater of a state of being; and a hater of a state of being could in turn come to harbor the ambition to eradicate every thing that was Jewish But to be a hater of Judaism was to embrace the most un-classical of notions: ideology

86

Fabyan 1513, xxiii: “He anon renouncyd his iudaisme or Moysen Law, And was cristenyd, and lyved after as a Cristen Man ”

“His blood be upon us”

95

Bibliography Appelbaum, A 2013 The Dynasty of the Jewish Patrairchs Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck Becker, A H , and A Y Reed, eds 2003 The Ways That Never parted Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck (= 2007 Paperback Edition Minneapolis: Fortress Press) Bovon, F , and J M Duffy 2012 “A New Fragment from Ariston of Pella’s Dialogue of Jason and Papiscus ” HThR 105 4:457–65 Boyarin, D 2003 “Semantic Differences; or, ‘Judaism/Christianity’” Pages 65–86 in The Ways That Never parted Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Age Edited by A H Becker and A Y Reed Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck Braun, T 1998 “The Jews in the Late Roman Empire ” SCI 17:75–93 Cohen, J 1976 “Roman Imperial Policy Toward the Jews from Constantine Until the End of the Palestinian Patriarchate (ca 429) ” Byzantine Studies 3:1–29 Cohen, S A 1990 The Three Crowns: Structures of Communal Politics in Early Rabbinic Jewry Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Cohen, S J 1986 “‘Anti-Semitism’ in Antiquity: The Problem of Definition ” Pages 43–7 in History and Hate: The Dimensions of Anti-Semitism Edited by D Berger Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society Curran, J R 2010 “The Jewish Patriarch – a state within a state?” Pages 13–28 in Unclassical Traditions Volume II: Alternatives to the Past in Late Antiquity Edited by C Kelly, R Flower and M Williams Cambridge: Cambridge Philological Society Drake, H A 2011 “Intolerance, religious violence, and political legitimacy” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 79 1:193–235 Fabyan, R 1513 New Cronycles of England and France: Vol 2 London: Pynson Feldman, L H 1993 Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World Princeton: University Press Fredriksen, P and O Irshai, 2006 “Christian anti-Judaism: Polemics and Policies ” Pages 977– 1034 in The Cambridge History of Judaism volume 4: The Late Roman-Rabbinic Period Edited by S T Katz Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Fredriksen, P 2003 “What ‘Parting of the Ways’? Jews, Gentiles, and the Ancient Mediterranean City” Pages 35–63 in The Ways That Never parted Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Age Edited by A H Becker and A Y Reed Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck Fredrickson, G M 2002 Racism: A Short History Princeton: Princeton University Press Funk, F , ed 1905 Didascalia et Constitutiones Apostolorum Vol 1 Paderborn: F Schoeningh Gager, J 1983 The Origins of Anti-Semitism: Attitudes Toward Judaism in Pagan and Christian Antiquity New York: Oxford University Press Garnsey, P 1984 “Religious Toleration in Classical Antiquity” Pages 1–27 in Persecution and Toleration Edited by W J Sheils Oxford: Blackwell Goodblatt, D 2006 “The political and social history of the Jewish community in the land of Israel, c 235–638 ” Pages 404–30 in The Cambridge History of Judaism volume 4: The Late RomanRabbinic Period Edited by S Katz Cambridge: Cambridge University Press – 1994 The Monarchic Principle: Studies in Jewish Self-Government Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum 38 Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck Goodman, M D 1983 State and Society in Roman Galilee Totowa: Rowman and Allanheld Gruen, E 1998 Heritage and Hellenism The Reinvention of Jewish Tradition Berkeley: University of California Press

96

John Curran

Harkins, P W 1979 Discourses Against Judaizing Christians (St John Chrysostom) Washington, D C : Catholic University of America Press Harries, J 2011 “Superfluous verbiage?: Rhetoric and Law in the Age of Constantine and Julian ” JECS 19 3:345–74 – 1999 Law and Empire in Late Antiquity Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Heszer, C 1997 The Social Structure of the Rabbinic Movement in Roman Palestine Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum 66 Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck Hunt, E D 1982 “St Stephen in Minorca: An Episode in Jewish-Christian Relations in the Early Fifth Century A D ” JThSt 33:106–23 Isaac, B 2004 The Invention of Racism in Classical Antiquity Princeton: Princeton University Press Jacobs, A S 2003 “The Lion and the Lamb: Reconsidering Jewish – Christian Relations in Antiquity” Pages 95–118 in The Ways That Never parted Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Age Edited by A H Becker and A Y Reed Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck Jacobs, M 1995 Die Institution des jüdischen Patriarchen: Eine quellen- und traditionskritische Studie zur Geschichte des Juden in der Spätantike Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck Lange, N , de 1976 Origen and the Jews Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Lapin, H 2006 “The Origins and Development of the Rabbinic Movement in the Land of Israel ” Pages 206–229 in The Cambridge History of Judaism vol 4: The Late Roman-Rabbinic Period Edited by S T Katz Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Levine, L I 1996 “The Status of the Patriarch in the Third and Fourth Centuries: Sources and Methodology” JJS 47:1–32 Levine, L L 1979 “The Jewish Patriarch (Nasi) in Third Century Palestine ” Pages 649–88 Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt II Edited by H Temporini and W Haase vol 19 2 Berlin: de Gruyter Lieu, J 1994 “‘The Parting of the Ways’: Theological Construct or Historical Reality?” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 56:101–19 Linder, A 2006 “The Legal Status of the Jews ” Pages 128–73 in The Cambridge History of Judaism volume 4: The Late Roman-Rabbinic Period Edited by S Katz Cambridge: Cambridge University Press – 1987 The Jews in Roman Imperial Legislation Detroit: Wayne State University Press Marr, W 1880 Der Weg zum Siege des Germanenthums über das Judentum Berlin: Hentze Mason, S 2009 “Jews, Judaeans, Judaizing, Judaism: Problems of Categorisation in Ancient History” Pages 141–84 in Josephus, Judaea, and Christian Origins Methods and Categories Edited by S Mason Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers McLynn, N 1994 Ambrose of Milan: church and court in a Christian capital Berkeley: University of California Press Millar, F G B 2006 “The Jews of the Graeco-Roman Diaspora between Paganism and Christianity, A D 312–438 ” Pages 432–56 in Rome, the Greek World, and the East, Volume 3: The Greek World, the Jews and the East Edited by F Millar, H Cotton and G M Rogers (= originally published in 1992) – 1977 The Emperor in the Roman World Ithaca: Cornell University Press Paget, J C 1996 “Jewish Proselytism at the Time of Christian Origins: Chimera or Reality?” JSNT 62:65–103 Pucci ben Zeev, M 1998 Jewish Rights in the Roman World Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck Reed, A Y 2003 “‘Jewish Christianity’ after the ‘Parting of the Ways’” Pages 189–231 in The Ways That Never parted Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Age Edited by A H

“His blood be upon us”

97

Becker and A Y Reed Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck (= 2007 Paperback Edition Minneapolis: Fortress Press) Ruether, R R 1974 Faith and Fratricide: The Theological Roots of Anti-Semitism New York: Seabury Press (= 1997 Eugene: Wipf & Stock) Schäfer, P 1997 Judeophobia: Attitudes Towards the Jews in the Ancient World Cambridge: Harvard University Press Schlözer, L 1781 “Von den Chaldaern ” Pages 117–176 in Repertorium für Biblische und Morgenländische Litteratur Edited by G Eichorn vol 8 Leipzig: bei Weidmanns Erben und Reich Schwartz, S 2001 Imperialism and Jewish Society 200 B C E – 640 C E Princeton: Princeton University Press Simon, M 1986 Verus Israel: A Study of the relations between Christians and Jews in the Roman Empire (135–425) Oxford: Oxford University Press Stroumsa, G 1996 “From anti-Judaism to Anti-Semitism in Early Christianity?” Pages 1–26 in Contra Iudaeos: Ancient and Medieval Polemics between Christians and Jews Edited in O Limor and G Stroumsa Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck Taylor, M S 1995 Anti-Judaism and early Christian Identity A Critique of the Scholarly Consensus Leiden: Brill Wilken, R L 1983 John Chrysostom and the Jews: rhetoric and reality in the fourth century Berkeley: University of California Press

Imperial Leadership: Constantius II Gerda de Kleijn (Nijmegen) There are several avenues for the investigation of an emperor’s leadership beyond the plain descriptions of his deeds One might start from the surviving source material in order to find criteria with which the ancients themselves judged their leaders, and apply those criteria to a specific emperor Such an inductive method is valuable and has resulted in many highly interesting insights 1 Nevertheless it may be worthwhile to explore whether other procedures can offer additional criteria This is a matter of methodology already explored in several branches of ancient history Research into the Roman economy has led the way Ever since Moses Finley’s publication of The Ancient Economy in 1973, there has been a vehement scholarly discussion among other issues about his view that Greeks and Romans “lacked an abstract concept of ‘economy’”, and had no “economic system which was an enormous conglomeration of interdependent markets” Especially on the latter claim, the economist Peter Temin came to quite different conclusions 2 Methodological discussions were not restricted to research relating to the Roman economy Here I recall the sociologist Rodney Stark, who put the issue of the quantitative growth of Christianity in the first three centuries AD in another perspective, explicitly making use of his expertise as a sociologist 3 And more recently Daniëlle Slootjes, who in a review essay considered Mann’s sociological theory of power and the polarized reactions it raised She noticed that the level of abstraction the use of models often involves fosters the controversy Slootjes stands up for “leaving behind, and reconciling, the tired conflict between traditional and more modern methodologies ”4

1 2 3 4

See for instance McEvoy 2013 and Noreña 2001 Finley 1985, 21–22; For discussions on various aspects of the Roman economy in the last decades, all indebted to Finley, see: Scheidel and Von Reden 2002, Manning and Morris 2005, Scheidel, Morris and Saller 2007, Temin 2013 Stark 1996 Slootjes 2011, 238–239; 249

100

Gerda de Kleijn

Advancing in this way when exploring leadership in antiquity, it may be worthwhile to use models and criteria derived from modern leadership research Such an alternative procedure may arouse the suspicion that it introduces anachronisms which obscure the reliability of the historical picture Even so, findings from leadership studies might also constitute an addition to the classical methods of inquiry 5 In this contribution, it is my aim to investigate how outcomes of modern leadership studies, applied to historical issues, might extend our understanding of ancient imperial leadership I hope to show that these may complement traditional judgement as well as offer more depth to our current studies For reasons of manageability, some choices had to be made as to the number of emperors and the available evidence The focus here will be on the rule of only one emperor, Constantius II (AD 337–361), who received ample treatment in contemporary sources but has been underexposed in modern historical writing as he reigned between two emperors who have attracted much scholarly attention To make a start, the ways in which he was presented by pagan historians who were his contemporaries or lived somewhat later will be investigated in this contribution As a consequence of this decision, attention to panegyrists such as Themistius or Christian authors such as Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria at intervals, have to be discussed in future research 6 The last decades of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty-first showed an enormous expansion of leadership studies For the greater part, leadership in business holds prominent place now, followed by leadership in other organizations such as schools, universities, churches and in politics Over time, the subject matter of leadership studies evolved The outcome of those studies may have influenced historiography and vice versa In any case, leadership studies used the examples of great historical persons to substantiate their claims It is necessary, therefore, to explore methodology first before applying notions or models to the late antique authors selected Leadership studies Historical inquiry into leadership mainly covered the performance of leaders who had won their spurs as generals and rulers Their leadership was and is often phrased in terms of personal qualities The accompanying trait approach, an approach that stressed that leaders were individuals, born with traits such as ambition, courage, decisiveness, or intuition was in vogue in the early twentieth century In the 1940s, the assumption that leaders were born rather than made, gave way to the idea that leadership could be taught, and that aspiring leaders could mimic behaviour of successful

5 6

See for instance De Kleijn 2009; De Kleijn 2013 For Constantius as a Christian emperor handling pagans: Leppin 1999

Imperial Leadership: Constantius II

101

examples Later on, however, it became clear that a leader’s performance is dependent on the situation in which he has to operate A leader, successful in one situation, might fail in another Winston Churchill, a great leader in war time conditions, less so in post war Britain, is a striking example of this notion In a nutshell, leadership studies widened their scope from stressing a leader’s personal traits to a leader’s personal behavior and added situational leadership A next step was made by James McGregor Burns in his book Leadership published in 1978, in which he made an effort towards a general theory on leadership His work was followed by many others Burns stated that power and leadership are closely connected, and that leadership is a form of power wielding 7 He formulated that, at its base, power is a relationship and that leadership is a relationship 8 Though it is evident that there are no leaders without followers, until the seventies the latter had been largely ignored in leadership studies Burns developed the notions of transactional and transforming leadership His basic assumption was that, “in a context of competition or conflict, persons with certain motives and values, various political, economic and other resources, want to realize goals These goals may be held independently or mutually by both leaders and followers ”9 A leader’s vision is essential in mobilizing his followers When goals of leaders and followers are connected but separate, and their relation a matter of mutual profit based on reciprocity, and thus a matter transaction, leadership is called transactional When, however, leaders unite separate interests of themselves and followers in pursuit of “higher” goals, this leadership is identified as transforming This type of leadership is called transforming or – by others than Burns – transformational leadership, and implies moral and charismatic notions When it came to charisma, Burns acknowledged to be indebted to the concept of charisma, put forward by the social scientist Max Weber,10 that had become well known and applicable outside its original context To sum up, it may be said that leadership studies saw a development from the traits approach, via behavioural leadership and situational leadership to transactional and transformational leadership In leadership literature of the last decades, transformational leadership has been raised to the standard Things have even reached a stage that one leadership researcher, Dennis Tourish, was getting tired of the dominance of transformational leadership as he published his book entitled The dark side of transformational leadership,11 in which he called attention to the risks a company or society runs by following a charismatic leader whose aims are morally reprehensible His caveat against a favourable appreciation of transformational leadership as such should

7 8 9 10 11

Burns 1978, 18–19 Burns 1978, 11 Burns 1978, 425 Weber 1922 Tourish 2013

102

Gerda de Kleijn

remind us of the complexity of the matter Though transformational leadership often has a positive connotation, its results may be judged as objectionable or as harmful for the organization at large Methodology Over the course of the twentieth century, historiography and leadership studies mutually influenced each other Leadership studies benefitted from the Humanities, and from History in particular 12 This is acknowledged explicitly in a 2008 special issue of The Leadership Quarterly This issue shows that leadership research is dominated by the methodology of the Social Sciences, which in its turn relies heavily on methodology from the Natural Sciences 13 Joanna Ciulla, editor of that special issue, was of the opinion that the Social Sciences provide descriptions and explanations, but that the Humanities are needed to help understand those explanations in the context of history and in the way in which artists, writers, theologians, and philosophers depict elements of the human condition In her view, hermeneutics and interpretation are of vital importance for leadership studies In addition, history was and still is a container full of great men whose successes and the way in which they achieved them serve as examples for leaders in organizational contexts, especially when it comes to the training of aspiring leaders or improving leadership performance Yet, there is also the opposite route In my view, the basic idea of leadership being a relationship has affected historical studies on messages and audiences Paul Zanker’s Augustus und die Macht der Bilder (1987) was an early example, but there were also Egon Flaig’s acceptance theory,14 and studies of coinage and imperial representation,15 to name a few We are faced with the question whether we, as historians of (late) antiquity, can benefit more than we have done so far from the insights from the field of leadership studies What opportunities do they offer us? In the overabundance of journals and books on leadership studies it is hard to find one’s way Bass’ Handbook of Leadership Studies is a valuable starting point 16 In addi12 13

14

15 16

Cotterel, Lowe and Shaw 2006; Strauss 2012 Ciulla 2008, 393–395 Ciulla stresses that the Natural Sciences apply scientific standards of objectivity and generate verifiable “facts” based on data The aim of the Social Sciences is linked to that, but objectivity and the generation of verifiable “facts” are harder to get Social Sciences and leadership studies make extensive use of questionnaires to generate data Flaig 1992 Flaig stated that an emperor in the Principate always ran the risk of his position being challenged by another aristocrat As it turned out, the roman plebs, the military and the senate had to accept the emperor or his rival Communication with these groups was of utmost importance for both of them He considered the relations of the emperor with each of these groups in separate chapters of his book See for instance Noreña 2011 and Manders 2012 Bass 2008

Imperial Leadership: Constantius II

103

tion there are some journals dealing with general issues, for example: Leadership in Action (from 1981), The Leadership Quarterly (from 1990), Journal of Leadership Studies (from 2007) Again, most contributions relate to highly detailed issues from businesses, educational institutions, etc Its research is dominated by hypotheses, investigated by questionnaires resulting in data that are processed statistically, so by quantitative methods As we all know this is an impassable road for us in trying to understand the ancient world Even so, in my view, leadership studies may offer a toolbox of models, ideas and analogies that might help us to dig deeper When carefully selected and tested if it is applicable to the chosen time period, a model or idea might add to our understanding of phenomena in antiquity In what follows the basic assumption is Burns’ statement that leadership is a relationship Notice will be taken first of classical criteria to judge an emperor, then of personal and positional power in the context of transformational and transactional leadership Thereafter attention will be paid to a specific model of an autocratic leadership style Finally, a number of aspects of Constantius II’ leadership as phrased by contemporary and later authors will be evaluated on the basis of notions discussed above Classical criteria That authors write their work in the context of their own situation in life, tailored to the wishes of their patrons if any, and with their own motives and purposes in mind is a truism that is also applicable for late Roman historians Though the criteria they expected an emperor to meet may have been different per author, there were also universal requirements 17 What mattered for all Roman emperors is that they had to show Roman (military) superiority over outsiders 18 In the middle of the fourth century this meant that an emperor was expected to be victorious over the Sassanians in the East, as well as over the peoples described as barbarians in the North Additional criteria to judge an emperor in this period of time were borrowed from especially Dio Chrysostom’s Orationes on kingship (about AD 100), and Menander Rhetor’s Basilikos Logos (about AD 300) These authors have set the scene for discussions about criteria to judge an emperor in view of notions on the ideal monarch 19 Four virtues were fundamental, not only for panegyrists, but also for historians: courage, justice, temperance, and wisdom 20 Although they do not fully overlap, these qualities bear resemblance to

17 18 19 20

Lenski 2001, 3 Heather and Moncur 2001, 108, n 184 Heather and Moncur 2001, 74–75; McEvoy 2013, 23–47 McEvoy 2013, 28

104

Gerda de Kleijn

those earlier mentioned by Augustus in his Res Gestae, i e virtus, clementia, justitia and pietas 21 Personal and positional power When looking into leadership at the highest level in society, it is worth the effort to distinguish between personal and positional power 22 The former is based “on expertise, referent power, esteem, persuasiveness and charisma,” the latter on “legitimacy, the power to reward and coerce, and access to and control of information ”23 Leaders with personal power know how to maintain strong bonds with their followers who may feel deep affection for their leader Transformational leaders predominantly show great personal power, while positional power is usually seen as characteristic of transactional leaders Assuming that positional and personal power are extremes and that leaders often use both, it remains to be seen where a specific late Roman emperor such as Constantius II stood on the scale between them The warrior model of autocracy Roman emperors used an autocratic leadership style 24 According to a basic description of the term autocracy this means that they took full and sole responsibility for decisions and controlled the performance of their followers 25 Such a description is consistent with the view of Ammianus Marcellinus, who put words of identical import in Constantius II’ mouth when the latter addressed his troops in AD 354: “(…) and being the guardian of others’ safety, he realises that the interests of the people look to him wholly for protection and that therefore he ought eagerly to seize upon all remedies which the condition of affairs allows, as though offered to him by the favour of Heaven ”26 An interesting modern subcategory of autocratic leadership, that might be applicable to many Roman emperors, is described as the warrior model 27 This model is related to conflict and triumph over opposition and is characterized by:

21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Res Gestae Divi Augusti 34 2 Bass (2008, 266–268) with further references Bass (2008, 266 and 267) referring to Yukl and Falbe 1991 Heather and Moncur 2001, 35 Bass 2008, 440 Amm Marc 14 10 12 3–4 Bass (2008, 440–441) discusses the literature on autocratic-authoritarian leadership from ca 1950 up to 2000 Most types of autocratic leaders have a bearing on leadership in business Bass mentions e g Howard and Wellins (1994) who listed five types in work settings: the controller, the commander, the ruler, the judge, and the guard; Nice 1998

Imperial Leadership: Constantius II

– – – – –

105

The aim to control the flow of information The idea that results count, no matter how they were achieved Knowing one’s friend and foe Careful selection of battles worth fighting A belief that the world is a dangerous place in which few people can be trusted

Both these phrasings of autocracy, the general and the more specific, do not necessarily include negative connotations How an emperor’s leadership is evaluated in the end depends among other things on his relationships with other people and on his position on the scales of these factors as judged by his contemporary and later critics On the one hand, we find powerful autocratic leaders able to develop and maintain reliable and devoted relations with their followers and to exercise authority in establishing and maintaining order On the other, the dark side there is autocratic leadership associated with “abusiveness, creating fear and distrust, using arbitrary and unconditional punishment, ignoring subordinates’ information and inputs to decisions, and relying exclusively on one’s own judgment ”28 So, to sum up, three sets of options to investigate a fourth century emperor’s leadership will be used: classical criteria and two notions derived from leadership studies, i e personal and positional power in the context of transformational and transactional leadership, and the warrior model of autocratic leadership Constantius II Contrary to his successful father Constantine and his much-discussed successor Julian, Constantius II went down in history as inconspicuous 29 Be that as it may, there must have been people and groups with whom the emperor maintained relations: senate and individual senators, city councils, governors, bureaucrats, military leaders and armies, people in Rome and the provinces, people at court, bishops and groups in the church, family members and wives The possibility to discuss them all is outside the scope of this contribution 30 Occasionally in historiography an emperor’s relationship with individuals is placed in the forefront In such cases, it is assumed first that an emperor could make good use of someone close to him, to share power in order to rule the empire, and second-

28 29 30

Bass 2008, 440 Wirth 1979, 294–295 For Constantius’ measures regarding the empire’s administrative organisation see Vogler 1979; for his church politics Barnes 1993; more recently, several aspects of Constantius’ reign are discussed in Wienand (2015a) with extensive bibliography

106

Gerda de Kleijn

ly that the emperor ran the risk to be put aside 31 The third century had seen many usurpations: leadership and power were fragmented rather than shared or distributed Diocletian’s tetrarchy plan meant to achieve controlled sharing of leadership with power, although in practice it failed soon after the early decades of the fourth century Constantine returned to earlier methods by appointing family members as Caesars,32 thus distributing power under his aegis When his three sons became Augusti after his death in 337, they shared leadership and power for some time, as brothers and rivals After the deaths of his brothers in 340 and 350 respectively, Constantius II initially tried to be sole ruler By appointing Gallus Caesar in 351 and Julian in 355 he returned to his father’s way of distributing power to family members Eventually he came off worst when Julian was acclaimed Augustus and waged war against him Narratives of Constantius II’s life and actions have been put on record by various authors The historian Ammianus Marcellinus has pride of place 33 As protector domesticus (officer of the bodyguard) he was involved in a number of military actions in Constantius II’s reign As he greatly admired Constantius’ successor Julian, he presented a critical image of Constantius II Nevertheless, his books 14–21 offer an inside view on the ins and outs of the imperial administration otherwise hard to get Short biographies of Constantius II are found in the historical overviews written by Eutropius, Aurelius Victor, and the unknown author of the Epitome de Caesaribus in the second half of the fourth century, and in Zosimus’ Ἱστορία Νέα, probably written well over a century later 34 Ammianus Marcellinus Stories about Constantius II’s reign in Ammianus’ narrative, as passed down to us, are found from the beginning in book 14 up to and including a post-mortem in chapter 16 of book 21 Although he has put emphasis on the performance of Constantius II’s successor Julian, observations and comments on Constantius’ behaviour are found throughout his entire narrative An in-depth review of Ammianus’ judgement of Constantius II’s leadership is, however, outside the scope of this contribution The discussion here about Constantius’ leadership as seen by Ammianus is mainly restricted to the overview in 21 16, which is explicitly meant as an assessment of this emperor’s virtues and faults How did Constantius II meet the classical criteria courage, justitia, temperance and wisdom according to Ammianus’ post-mortem? And did he do what an emperor had 31 32 33 34

De Kleijn 2009; De Kleijn 2013 Constantine’s plan to appoint Bassianus, husband of his half-sister Anastasia, as Caesar in 314 was stopped by Licinius He appointed his son Crispus as Caesar in 317, his sons Constantine II, Constantius II and Constans in 317, 324 and 333 respectively, and his nephew Dalmatius in 335 PLRE I, Ammianus 15 Though an eyewitness in the reign of Constantius II, Ammianus wrote his books in the last decades of the fourth century Zos 1982, xii

Imperial Leadership: Constantius II

107

to do, i e extend the empire? Ammianus is quite negative and clear in his judgement of the latter The emperor did not extend the empire On the contrary, the empire was weakened and the emperor himself was utterly humiliated in foreign wars Nevertheless, the emperor himself boasted on his successes in bloody civil wars (21 16 15) It is evident that Ammianus loathes this attitude and that he is of the opinion that Constantius showed that he completely lacked wisdom If he would have had sense, he would have renounced power (21 16 12) Ammianus did not waste words on any courage of Constantius What he brings to the fore on the emperor’s justitia is explicitly negative and matches his judgment on the emperor’s lack of wisdom In addition to Constantius’ noninterference when provincials asked for justice (21 16 17), Ammianus censures the emperor’s obsessive way of handling even the slightest suspicions of high treason, usurpation, or undermining his authority The emperor’s inquiries into these cases were supposedly unfair, the judges he appointed for the ensuing juridical processes acted harshly, and punishments were extremely cruel In his brutality he surpassed Caligula, Domitian and Commodus He employed torture to force confessions out of the accused, and to prolong suffering after death sentences were pronounced In this respect, according to Ammianus, he was even worse than Gallienus That he blew up rumors to serious threats showed that he was incapable of telling essentials from side issues and that he had no sense of moderation (21 16 8–11) The only classical imperial quality Ammianus appreciated in Constantius II was his temperance in eating, drinking, and in his sexual behaviour (21 16 5–6) What does Ammianus tell us about Constantius II’s relationships with the people and with his closest staff in the same part of his narrative? Ammianus expresses his appreciation of the emperor’s perseverance in the upkeep of imperial authority In his view, Constantius II did not care about the favour of the people (21 16 1), and showed extreme self-control when seen by the people (21 16 7) 35 He kept a close watch on the observance of hierarchy in the state (21 16 2) Furthermore, he was restrictive in giving away any power to high civil or military officials (21 16 1), and in his appointment policy he was exceedingly meticulous: high civil and military positions were only given to men with proven experience,36 and he did his best to preserve his troops (21 16 3) On the other hand, Ammianus passed a negative judgement on Constantius’ noninterference when provincials complained about tax collectors or accumulation of taxes That he arbitrarily recalled privileges made things even worse (21 16 17) In terms of relationships, it is evident that, in Ammianus’ view, the emperor went his own way, only to be influenced by the courtiers who just played up to him and his wives (21 16 16) There

35 36

A striking example is the emperor’s motionless pose when visiting Rome in 357 (Amm Marc 16 10 5; 16 10 9–12) Bird (1993, 161, n 32) sees a similarity with Eutr 10 15 Following that idea would suggest that Ammianus suggests that Constantius appointments should be seen as rewards after many years of service

108

Gerda de Kleijn

seems to have been neither any reciprocity between the emperor and the people, nor between the emperor and his higher civil and military officials In this way Ammianus implies that the emperor did not try to convince groups or persons to reach for higher goals, i e that he showed hardly any transformational power Instead he relied on and made the most of his positional power and, when it came to transactional leadership, acted as he pleased There is one remark/comment in his summary, however, that hints at an exception It may be that in conservando milite nimium cautus (21 16 3) Ammianus refers to Constantius’ speeches to his troops Both in 14 10 11–16 and in 21 13 9–16 Constantius explains his decision to the military, and receives the response he hoped for What do we find with the warrior model of autocracy? In his summary, Ammianus only implicitly raises the matter of aiming at control over the flow of information He describes Constantius II as very suspicious This must have meant that the emperor was not confident that he got all the information he aimed for (21 16 9) It is abundantly clear that, in Ammianus’ opinion, only results counted for Constantius, no matter how they were achieved That is why he stresses that Constantius destroyed his family root and branch (21 16 8), and employed extreme torture in high treason or maiestas cases (21 16 9–10) Nonetheless, Ammianus made a positive remark on the prudent way in which Constantius II committed his troops to battle (21 16 3), but adds that the emperor boasted of his successes in civil instead of foreign wars (21 16 15) If that means that the emperor tried to select the battles he thought worth fighting, Ammianus is not convinced that he made the right selection That Ammianus thought that the emperor considered the world a dangerous place in which few people can be trusted is evident when he discusses the emperor’s suspicion, and when he mentions the meticulous way in which the emperor investigated the careers of officials to-be The emperor’s general suspicion also shows that he did not know friend and foe The only people Constantius really seems to have trusted are his wives (21 16 16) To conclude: application of the three possible sets to investigate the emperor’s leadership, as derived from Ammianus Marcellinus post-mortem, leads to different emphases in the author’s evaluation Using the classical criteria implies that the emperor’s traits are judged, as well as the outcome of his military actions at large With the exception of Constantius’ temperance in eating, drinking and sexual behaviour, all are judged negatively Looking at the emperor’s relationships results in a more varied picture His motionless behaviour towards the people stressed the distance between ruler and ruled, and helped to maintain the difference between them and to enhance the authority of the imperial office 37 That Constantius was primarily a transactional leader, and made use

37

Matthews 1989, 231 ff For a discussion about the image of a fourth century emperor, starting from a medallion of Constantius II (RIC VIII, Constantius II (Antioch), no 78), see Wienand 2015b

Imperial Leadership: Constantius II

109

of his positional power, is not judged negatively in itself What did incur Ammianus’ disapproval was the emperor’s arbitrariness and his reliance on the wrong people Application of the features belonging to the warrior model of autocracy shows that Ammianus was of the opinion that Constantius saw the world as a dangerous place, in which most people had to be mistrusted He probably aimed for control over the flow of information, but felt unsure about it Ammianus made clear that Constantius hardly knew any friends, just foes Though Constantius carefully selected battles, Ammianus was of the opinion that they were not worth fighting as they were fought in civil war To stay in power only results counted Constantius did fit in some aspects of the model, but failed to be a successful autocratic warrior as he had no friends to rely on, and chose the wrong battles Short fourth-century overviews Three very short overviews of Constantius’ emperorship were written by Eutropius, Aurelius Victor, and the unknown author of the Epitome de Caesaribus 38 Aurelius Victor wrote his history probably between 358 and 360 when he was numerarius of the scrinium fisci of the PPO in Illyricum, and Constantius was still alive 39 Eutropius’ work is dated somewhat later in the 4th century; it was probably written during the reign of the emperor Valens 40 He had been magister epistolarum before 361 41 So both men were contemporaries of Constantius II, and were active in the imperial service The Epitome de Caesaribus probably dates to the last years of the fourth century 42 This is not the place to go into debates on which author used, or was influenced by, earlier authors 43 It is most likely that the authors made their own choice from literature, hearsay, and their own experience in the perspective of what they wanted to tell What can be established is that their judgments of the emperor show many similarities Constantius’ military performance is mentioned by all three Both Eutropius and the Epitome judge that the emperor was more successful in civil than in foreign wars 44 Aurelius Victor, on the other hand, stresses that he had to fight both civil and foreign wars, without expressing his opinion on its results 45 As for the emperor’s qualities, his clementia is warmly commended by Aurelius Victor 46 They all praise his temper38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46

Eutr 10 9–15; Aur Vict Caes 41 22–42 25; Epit de Caes 41 18–42 21 Bird 1984, 10 PLRE I, Victor 13 Bird 1993, xiii PLRE I, Eutropius 2 Barnes 1976, 266 For debates on these issues see Burgess (2005) with references Eutr 10 15; Epit de Caes 42 18 Aur Vict Caes 42 20 Aur Vict Caes 42 1–2

110

Gerda de Kleijn

ance 47 In the same breath they enter into his relationships with other people All three severely criticize his lack of control over the people around him: his friends, companions and wives (Eutropius),48 his provincial governors, generals and officials (Aurelius Victor),49 and his eunuchs, courtiers and wives (Epitome) 50 In the latter, especially his second wife Eusebia gets the blame They implied that he failed in his relationships, though they pointed to different groups of people So, in their stories, Constantius was a fine emperor, who was surrounded by the wrong advisers and greedy officials Eutropius makes a positive exception for the fact that the emperor enriched his friends and rewarded those who had performed tough jobs for him This may be read as a matter of explicit transactional leadership What is to be seen of the criteria of the autocratic warrior model? None of these three authors enters into control of information or into a belief that the world is a dangerous place in which few people can be trusted They rather say that he trusted the wrong people The idea that results count, no matter how they were achieved is taken for granted They do not reproach the emperor for the murders of 337, and whitewash the murder of Dalmatius that year: Eutropius wrote that it was rather condoned by Constantius than ordered, Aurelius Victor only mentioned that it was not clear who ordered the murder, and the Epitome blames the violence of the troops 51 The murders of Gallus and Silvanus in 354 and 355 respectively, are only mentioned in passing by Eutropius and the Epitome 52 Aurelius Victor attributed the murder of Gallus to Constantius,53 and ascribed the murder of Silvanus to the legions he himself trusted 54 That Constantius managed to disarm the usurper Vetranio is met with approval of all three authors 55 As it subsequently took three years to finally defeat the other usurper Magnentius at the battle Mursa, at the cost of many Roman military lives, Constantius is not praised for selection of battles worth fighting Eutropius is of the opinion that the troops had better fought against a foreign force, and the Epitome considers the loss of lives as disastrous for the whole empire 56 Aurelius Victor refrains from judgement by saying that there were so many civil and foreign wars that Constantius had to be engaged in warfare 57 Taken together, the picture they painted was that Constantius

47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57

Eutr 10 15; Aur Vict Caes 42 23; Epit de Caes 42 18 Eutr 10 15 Aur Vict Caes 42 24 Epit de Caes 42 19 Eutr 10 9; Aur Vict Caes 41 22; Epit de Caes 41 18 Eutropius 10 13; Aur Vict Caes 42 12; Epit de Caes 42 9–10 Aur Vict Caes 42 12 Aur Vict Caes 42 16 Eutr 10 10–11; Aur Vict Caes 42 1; Epit de Caes 41 25 Eutr 10 12; Epit de Caes 42 4 Aur Vict Caes 42 20

Imperial Leadership: Constantius II

111

himself had not been able to select battles worth fighting Other people forced him into battle with disastrous effect on the empire’s military strength In sum: none of these three stories of Constantius’ reign provide enough opportunities to fully employ the chosen analytical sets The emperor’s clemency is the only virtue mentioned Extending the empire is not brought up That Constantius was more successful in civil than in foreign wars is explained away by Aurelius Victor’s remark that he had to fight many civil and foreign wars Maybe Victor was just on guard as Constantius was still alive when he was writing As regards relationships, it is clear that the authors are of the opinion that Constantius’ grip on the people around him was insufficient, even though he rewarded some of them Using some features of the warrior model of autocracy shows that again the emperor is reproached for the loss of lives in civil wars which resulted in a weaker empire Zosimus 2.39–3.11 At the beginning of the sixth century, Zosimus wrote his Ἱστορία Νέα, in which he put the blame for the decline of the Roman Empire to the rise of Christianity 58 For his account of Constantius’ reign (2 39–3 11), he may have used Ammianus, the overviews mentioned above and sources we no longer possess Zosimus’ story of which significant parts are devoted to the dealings of Constantius’ adversaries focusses on two issues The first examines the usurpation of Magnentius up to and including the victory gained by Constantius (2 39–2 55) The second deals with the rivalry between Julian and Constantius which ended when Constantius died, before their final confrontation (3 1–3 11) Zosimus has little to say about Constantius’ courage, justice or temperance, except that he was jealous of Julian’s courage in war, his self-control with regard to wealth, and other virtues (3 5 3) His decision to first win over the usurper Vetranio by persuasion and a speech to the military, so as to attack the other usurper Magnentius thereafter, is described in terms of a trick, or as a delusion of Vetranio rather than as wisdom or clemency of Constantius (2 44 1–2 45 1) The interaction of Constantius with his close associates does not show great wisdom either Zosimus demonstrates this point in his account of the way in which Constantius treated Flavius Philippus, his PPO Orientis 59 Constantius had sent Philippus as an envoy to Magnentius, who still held him in custody when Constantius had won the day near Siscia Two of the emperor’s closest associates, Latinus and Thalassius,60 refrained from being present at a banquet to which Constantius had invited his mili58 59 60

Zos , 1982, xii PLRE I, Philippus 7 PLRE I, Latinus; PLRE I, Thalassius 1

112

Gerda de Kleijn

tary staff The reason for their decision to be absent is that they thought of Philippus, who was still detained (2 48 5) This vote with their feet as told by Zosimus should be interpreted as disapproval of the emperor’s conduct On the other hand, Zosimus mentions one instance of Constantius knowing how to address soldiers in a speech In 350, in difficult circumstances, he successfully made a strong appeal to Vetranio’s men In this way he won them over to his side before waging war on Magnentius (2 44 2–4) What does Zosimus tell us about the matter of the warrior model of autocratic leadership? He gives little attention to aiming at control over the flow of information The only mention bearing on this issue is that Constantius sent Flavius Philippus to Magnentius, under the pretext of negotiation, to get information about the usurper’s plans (2 46 2) In Zosimus’ view, Constantius was the only emperor responsible for the murders of his relatives in AD 337 Together with the murders of Optatus and his PPO Ablabius,61 they can be ranged under the heading of the idea that results count, no matter how they were achieved (2 40) Mention of carefully selected battles worth fighting is made in the context of the usurpations of Magnentius and Vetranio Constantius decided to get rid of Vetranio without military effort, so as to avoid war with two usurpers at the same time (2 44 1– 4) When Magnentius’ position was critical after violent combat near the river Savus, he allowed the usurper to retreat, because he thought that another place was more conveniently situated for battle (2 48 3) Later on, he preferred a treaty with Magnentius to a battle in civil war Yet, when necessary, such a battle was not avoided (2 51 1) This shows that although Constantius tried to select battles worth fighting, he was not in control Zosimus’ opinion that Constantius saw the world as a dangerous place, is put aptly in 3 1 1, where he mentions that Constantius had to face incursions of the Franks, the Alamanni, the Saxons in the provinces on the Rhine, the Quadi and Sarmatians in Pannonia and upper Moesia, and the Persians in the East In a world that is such a dangerous place, it is of utmost importance to know friend and foe Zosimus describes Constantius as an emperor who failed in this respect Though Constantius did not consider himself to be able to cope with the serious threats at the borders, he was so suspicious that he thought he had no friends at all The only person whom Constantius really seems to have trusted was his wife Eusebia 62 He followed her advice to appoint Julian as Caesar (3 1 2–3) As he, however, did not trust his Caesar, he had him accompanied by two persons, who had to govern Gaul instead of Julian Later on, Eusebia convinced her husband that Julian could better govern himself, using the same line of reasoning as before, i e that he had little political experience, and would ascribe successes to the emperor, or would die if he were unsuccessful (3 2 2)

61 62

PLRE I, Ablabius 4 PLRE I, Eusebia

Imperial Leadership: Constantius II

113

Whereas Zosimus explicitly enters into Constantius’ feelings of suspicion towards the people around him, he also names a small number of people Constantius might have trusted: Philippus, his PPO Orientis, sent to Magnentius, who stayed loyal even when in the power of Magnentius (2 46 2), Latinus and Thalassius, who refrained from feasting while Philippus was still in the power of Magnentius (2 48 5), Marcellus and Salustius, who accompanied Julian to Gaul (3 2 2), and Taurus and Florentinus, consuls of the year 361 who were on Constantius’ side, and fled from Rome when Julian crossed the Alps (3 10 4) to confront him In sum: In contrast with his positive judgement on Julian’s domineering over the Germans and Gauls, Zosimus is almost silent about the issue of Constantius extending the empire He has nothing positive to say about the emperor’s virtues Zosimus pictures Constantius as an emperor who felt himself as being without any friends to work with, who instead relied on his wives and grovelling courtiers Maybe some transformational leadership is shown when the emperor addressed the soldiers of Vetranio, and transactional leadership when he organized a party for his staff after Siscia On the other hand, the emperor showed little commitment to his closest associates The items of the warrior model of autocracy make clear that Zosimus was of the opinion that Constantius thought the world was a dangerous place in which few people could be trusted, but that Constantius was not knowing friend and foe That Constantius may have been very careful in his selection of battles worth fighting does meet as little approval as his idea that results count, no matter how they were achieved Conclusion The issue at stake in this contribution is how notions derived from modern leadership studies may add to our understanding of leaders in (late) antiquity Constantius II, as judged by some pagan authors, served as an example Three analytical sets were used, one based on classical criteria and traditionally used, the other two came from modern leadership studies The selection of issues discussed by the chosen authors and their judgements were not exactly the same, but showed many similarities When classical criteria were used, discussion centred first on the results of the emperor’s wars The authors agreed that Constantius did not extend the territory of the state, on the contrary, he weakened the empire by the loss of Roman lives in his successful civil wars Further, stress was laid on the emperor’s virtues Ammianus made some positive remarks about the emperor upholding the status of emperorship and hierarchy within the empire, and his temperance with regard to food, drink, and sex Victor, Eutropius and the author of the Epitome likewise praised his temperance Aurelius Victor commented favourably on the emperor’s clemency when he discussed the way in which Constantius put Vetranio out of action These few positive remarks pale into significance when compared to the negative side Even Constantius’ alleged

114

Gerda de Kleijn

temperance was challenged, by Zosimus who wrote that the emperor was jealous of Julian’s temperance, and by Victor who pointed to Constantius’ lack of self-control in his anger and cruelty None of the authors has anything favourable to say about either courage or wisdom Constantius had better stepped down from office As regards Constantius’ relationships with other people, the authors gave some clues Most remarkable is that they ascribed mainly positional power to Constantius He depended on his position as emperor This is shown by the poor interaction with his civil and military officials and by the flatterers at court Even in this domain he fell short of what an emperor had to do as he did not keep them under control There are some hints to transactional leadership in Eutropius, Ammianus and Zosimus From these, Eutropius was the most explicit: the emperor rewarded people who had done their very best for him Ammianus and Zosimus, however, were more critical They stressed the emperor’s arbitrariness in giving rewards and taking them back A rare moment of transformational leadership may be discerned in the speech to Vetranio’s soldiers and the response they gave him The application of the items of the warrior model of autocratic leadership has shown that the authors were unanimous in their evaluation of Constantius They said little about a likely wish to control the flow of information, except Zosimus who told that Philippus was ordered to gain information The idea that the authors thought that for Constantius results counted, however they were achieved, is quite evident They had no difficulties with the idea that results counted, but some of them showed their disapproval of how these results were achieved Others glossed over the raw edges Some saw that Constantius tried to carefully select battles, but abhorred that he did so in the scope of civil instead of foreign wars The authors displayed to be convinced that Constantius believed that the world is a dangerous place in which few people could be trusted It is even worse, in their eyes; Constantius did not know friend and foe He trusted the wrong people I hope to have shown that it is possible to complement the traditional judgment of Constantius II’ leadership as sketched by late antique pagan historians, by means of notions derived from modern leadership studies Factors underlying the emperor’s behaviour have become clearer The picture has not been fundamentally changed, but has gained more depth in the sense that modern leadership models offer an additional tool for perspectives on the emperor’s leadership that so far have not been fully explored Future research, applying the used notions on different sources as for instance panegyrics and Christian authors may serve to show and refine other sides of Constantius II’ leadership

Imperial Leadership: Constantius II

115

Bibliography Barnes, T D 1976 “The Epitome de Caesaribus and Its Sources ” Classical Philology 71 3:258–268 – 1993 Athanasius and Constantius: Theology and politics in the Constantinian Empire Cambridge: Harvard University Press Bass, B M 2008 The Bass Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, & Managerial Applications Revised 4th Edition New York: Free Press Bird, H W 1984 Sextus Aurelius Victor: a historiographical study Liverpool: Francis Cairns – 1993 The Breviarum ab urbe condita of Eutropius Translated with an Introduction and Commentary Liverpool: Liverpool University Press Burgess, R W 2005 “A common source for Jerome, Eutropius, Festus, Ammianus, and the Epitome de Caesaribus between 358 and 378, along with further thoughts on the date and nature of the Kaisergeschichte ” Classical Philology 100 2:166–192 Burns, J M 1978 Leadership New York: Harper & Row Ciulla, J B 2002 “Trust and the future of leadership ” Pages 334–351 in The Blackwell Guide to Business Ethics Edited by N E Bowie Oxford: Blackwell Cotterel, A , R Lowe and I Shaw 2006 Leadership Lessons from the Ancient World: How Learning from the Past Can Win You the Future Chichester: John Wiley Finley, M I 1985 The Ancient Economy 2nd ed London etc : Penguin Books Flaig, E 1997 “Für eine Konzeptionalisiering der Usurpation im spätrömischen Reich” Pages 15–34 in Usurpationen in der Spätantike Edited by F Paschoud and J Szidat Historia Einzelschriften 111 Stuttgart: F Steiner Heather, P , and D Moncur 2001 Politics, philosophy, and empire in the fourth century: Select orations of Themistius Translated with an Introduction Liverpool: Liverpool University Press Howard, A , and R S Wellins 1994 High-Involvement Leadership Changing Roles for Changing Times A Study of Evolving Leadership Practices Pittsburgh Pa: Development Dimensions International Kleijn, G , de 2009 “C Licinius Mucianus, Leader in time of crisis ” Historia 58 3:311–324 – 2013 “C Licinius Mucianus, Vespasian’s co-ruler in Rome ” Mnemosyne 66 3:433–459 Lenski, N 2001 Failure of empire: Valens and the Roman state in the fourth century A D Berkeley: University of California Press Leppin, H 1999 ‘Constantius II und das Heidentum’ Athenaeum 87 2: 457–480 McEvoy, M A 2013 Child emperor rule in the Late Roman West, AD 367–455 Oxford: Oxford University Press Manders, E 2012 Coining images of power: Patterns in the Representation of Roman Emperors on Imperial Coinage, A D 193–284 Leiden: Brill Manning, J G and I Morris (eds ) The Ancient Economy: Evidence and Models Stanford CA: Stanford University Press Matthews, J F 1989 The Roman Empire of Ammianus Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press Nice, D C 1998 “The warrior model of leadership: Classical perspectives and contemporary relevance ” Leadership Quarterly 9 3:321–332 Noreña, C F 2001 “The communication of the emperor’s virtues ” JRS 91:146–168 – 2011 Imperial ideals in the Roman West: Representation, circulation, power Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Scheidel, W and S von Reden (eds ) 2002 The Ancient Economy New York: Routledge Scheidel, W , I Morris, and R Saller (eds ) 2007 The Cambridge Economic History of the GrecoRoman World Cambridge etc : Cambridge University Press

116

Gerda de Kleijn

Slootjes, D 2011 ‘Local Elites and Power in the Roman World: Modern Theories and Models ’ Journal of Interdisciplinary History 42 2: 235–249 Stark, R 1996 The Rise of Christianity: A Sociologist Reconsiders History Princeton: Princeton University Press Strauss, B 2012 Masters of Command: Alexander, Hannibal, Caesar, and the Genius of Leadership New York: Simon & Schuster Temin, P 2013 The Roman Market Economy Princeton: Princeton University Press Tourish, D 2013 The Dark Side of Transformational Leadership: A Critical Perspective Hove: Routledge Vogler, C 1979 Constance II et l’administration impériale Strasbourg: Association pour l’Étude de la Civilisation Romaine Weber, M 1922 Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft Tübingen: Mohr Wienand, J , ed 2015a Contested monarchy: integrating the Roman empire in the fourth century AD Oxford: Oxford University Press – 2015b “The Empire’s Golden Shade ” Pages 423–451 in Contested Monachy: Integrating the Roman Empire in the Fourth Century AD Edited by J Wienand Oxford: Oxford University Press Wirth, G 1979 “Themistios und Constantius ” Byzantinische Forschungen 6:294–317 Yukl, G A , and C M Falbe “The importance of different power sources in downward and lateral relations ” Journal of applied Psychology 76 3:416–423

Damasus and the Charioteers Crowds, Leadership and Media in Late Antique Rome Marianne Sághy (Budapest) Then Damasus and the perjurers collected the gladiators, charioteers and grave-diggers and all the clergy, with axes, swords and clubs, and besieged the basilica (…) they crashed down doors and laid fires and searched for an entrance in order to break in Some of Damasus’ followers tore up the roof of the basilica and killed the faithful people with the tiles Then all the forces of Damasus poured into the basilica and slew one hundred and sixty of the people, both men and women, and wounded a very large number, many of whom died But no one died of the party of Damasus 1 (Collectio Avellana 1895, 12)

No bishop of Rome has been more tenaciously and least favourably associated with the manipulation of Roman (Catholic?) crowds than Damasus, whose seizing of power in A D 366 is here recounted in graphic terms by an unknown author from the opposing Christian faction 2 Like his contemporaries, modern scholars are thrilled both by Damasus’ street smart expertise in mobilizing the “specialists” – gladiators, charioteers, gravediggers – of classical urban riots and by the bishop’s efficiency in controlling mob violence when consolidating his authority in Rome Crowds made and unmade leaders in Late Antiquity, yet strikingly, no study exists on crowd dynamics, crowd empowerment, ingroup dynamics, crowd psychology, intergroup contacts or

1

2

Quae Gesta sunt inter Liberium et Felicem episcopos, ch 5 (hereafter: Gesta) in Collectio Avellana (hereafter CA) 1895, 12: Tunc Damasus cum perfidis invitat arenarios quadrigarios et fossores omnemque clerum cum securibus gladiis et fustibus et obsedit basilicam hora diei secunda septimo Kalendarum Novembrium die Gratiano et Dagalaifo conss et grave proelium concitavit Nam effractis foribus igneque subposito aditum Unde inrumperet, exquirebat; nonnulli quoque de familiaribus eius tectum basilicae destruentes tegulis fidelem populum perimebant Tunc universi Damasiani irruentes in basilicam centum sexaginta de plebe tam viros quam mulieres occiderunt; vulneraverunt etiam quam plurimos, ex quibus multi defuncti sunt De parte vero Damasi nullus est mortuus Blair-Dixon (2007, 59–76) argues for a fifth or sixth-century composition of the Gesta, corroborated by Brandt 2012 Reutter (2009) offers a solid introduction into the sources

118

Marianne Sághy

crowd politics in fourth-century Rome 3 Scholarship on Damasus has neatly compartmentalized the urban mob actions triggered by his election into one drawer, and his revival of martyr cults into another, as if no connection existed between the two sets of events 4 Confronting evidence from epigraphic poetry with theology, historiography, archaeology and sociology, this paper argues that these two best known aspects of Damasus’ pontificate are clearly connected Both are part of group processes occurring from within and from outside the group,5 as if “the properties of any of the parts were determined by the intrinsic structural laws of the whole ”6 Damasus’ patronage of the Roman martyrs is closely bound not only to episcopal leadership, but also to group dynamics and group control The Damasian commemoration of the martyrs of Rome meant not only to unite warring Christian factions, but also to obliviate the remembrance of those who perished in the bloodbath triggered by the double election of 366 Damasus’ tribute to the martyrs was (among others) a “crisis management” that sought to erase the memory of heated inter-Christian violence during the Arian conflict by evoking the memory of earlier schisms and persecutions 7 In the terminology of modern sociology, Damasus’ discovering the martyrs was a construction of “superordinate identities” including the common ingroup identity, the ingroup projection model, the mutual intergroup differentiation model, and the ingroup identity model 8 These concepts are particularly useful for understanding the inner social dynamics of the Nicene Catholic minority in Rome, their separation from schismatic and heretical sects within the Vrbs and their heavenward projection of their own religious identity in the figures of the martyrs they venerated Identifying with the martyrs was the aim of Late Antique Christians, but this remained largely an individual drive, rather than a mass movement The massively “crowdlike” commemoration of crowds of martyrs, as introduced by Damasus, seems to have been very much a response to crowd pressure from other, buzzing religious factions – Arians, Novatians, Meletians active in Rome Martyr commemoration, however, not only demarcated, but also merged conflicting or rival groups in a common Christian celebration Crowds, therefore, emerge both as faceless, yet ever-present political pressure groups and as “superordinate identities”

3 4 5 6 7 8

As opposed to North Africa, well analysed in recent studies by Evers 2010 and Magalhães de Oliveira 2012 McMullen 1990, 250–276; McLynn 1992, 15–44; Pietri, Duval and Pietri 1992, 373–395; Wirbelauer 1994, 407–410 Epigrammata damasiana 1942; English translation by Watson (The Epigrams of St Damasus 1958) Brown 2000, 24 Wertheimer 1922, 47 No study deals with the Arian crisis and its aftermath in Rome that triggered the double election of Damasus and Ursinus in 366 For a later period, see Allen and Neil 2013 Drury and Stott 2011, 1–15; Drury and Reicher 2009, 707–725; Reicher 2001, 182–208; Tsoukalas 2007, 39–81 Hornsey and Hogg 2000, 242 I thank Daniëlle Slootjes for her help with sociological literature

Damasus and the Charioteers

119

in the Damasian documents, from partisan pamphlets to historical works and to epigraphic commemorations This is best seen in the accounts recounting Damasus’ and Ursinus’ struggle for the Roman bishopric Unsurprisingly, the fight for the See of Peter was reported to, and closely watched by, the emperors As the main concern of the imperial administration and of the urban prefecture was the maintenance of public order in the Vrbs, the emperors supported Damasus, possibly an imperial appointee and the majority leader, who was seen capable of pacifying the Christian community and maintaining urban cohesion The first part of this paper describes the epic fight for the Roman bishopric between two splits of the Nicene Catholic group from the perspective of city rules and imperial urban administration The very themes of struggle, persecution, exile, riot, conspiracy and threat are echoed in Damasus’ epigrams about the martyrs, the issue I deal with in the second part of this contribution, where I discuss the Damasian rediscovery and mediatization of the martyrs of Rome I stress Damasus’ preference of “crowds of martyrs” that I interpret as an answer to the challenge of a violent past and the long-running opposition of Ursinus’ faction “Crowds,” often strangely obscure, without precise social identity and even without names, are constituted as support groups of the Roman bishop in fourth-century Rome: it is the “mob” that backs Damasus’ election, and it is masses of anonymous martyrs that are celebrated by Damasus The reference to nameless, indistinct, marginal and riotous masses both in the streets and in the catacombs of Rome contributed to the imperial acknowledgement of the Roman bishop as controller of urban crowds and bolstered the rise of episcopal leadership in Late Antique Rome Universi irruentes: Suburban Riots Two sets of sources report on the double election of Damasus and Ursinus and on its aftermath: a pro-Ursinian plaidoyer from 368 entitled Quae Gesta sunt inter Liberium et Felicem episcopos on the one hand and eight imperial rescripts between 367–372 condemning the factionalism of Ursinus extant in the Collectio Avellana No pro-Damasian version of the events survives 9 Some twenty years later, Ammianus Marcellinus evoked the events in his Res gestae,10 as did Jerome in his Chronicle In the fifth century, Greek Church historians standardly refer to the double election in Rome 11

9 10 11

In 366, Jerome was in Rome Twenty years later, in his Chronicon 386, he relates the brutality of the Damasan party: quo damasianae partis populo confluente crudelissime interfectiones diversi sexus perpetratae See Pietri 1976, 408–12 Damasus’ poor PR is well brought out by Hall 2012, 1 Amm Marc Res gestae XXVII 3 12–13 English translation by J C Rolfe 1935–1940 Socrates IV 29; Sozomen VI 23; Theodoret II 17

120

Marianne Sághy

After Liberius’ death in September 366, two deacons were elected bishop in Rome: Ursinus in the basilica Julii, and Damasus in San Lorenzo in Lucinis The first clash took place a week after the event, lasted for three days and left many dead according to the anonymous Ursinian supporter: “Damasus, who had always schemed for the bishopric, heard of it; he stirred up all the charioteers and the ignorant multitude with money until, armed with clubs, they burst into the basilica of Julius, slaughtered many of the faithful and held an orgy for three days ”12 On October 26, Ursinus and his party gathered in the basilica Liberii on the Esquiline Hill, where one hundred and sixty persons were slain by Damasus’ partisans, as we have seen at the beginning of this contribution: “(…) all the forces of Damasus poured into the basilica and slew one hundred and sixty of the people, both men and women, and wounded a very large number, many of whom died ” Strikingly, the Ursinian Gesta failed to identify any of the “very large number,” hundred and sixty (or hundred and thirty seven) victims who died for the cause of Ursinus, and remained silent about their eventual commemoration in the Ursinian Church It mentioned them as casualities of the schism and as victims of violence inflicted by Damasus and his “people,” but was far to cast them as “martyrs ” The mass of unidentified and unremembered Ursinian victims in an Ursinian text is all the more astonishing because the “murder in the basilica” was not forgotten in Rome Even non-Christians, such as the historian Ammianus Marcellinus, recalled it: Damasus and Ursinus, burning with a superhuman desire of seizing the bishopric, engaged in bitter strife because of their opposing interests; and the supporters of both parties went even so far as conflicts ending in bloodshed and death (…) And in the struggle Damasus was victorious through the efforts of the party which favoured him It is a well-known fact that in the basilica of Sicininus, where the assembly of the Christian sect is held, in a single day a hundred and thirty-seven corpses of the slain were found, and that it was only with difficulty that the long-continued frenzy of the people was afterwards quieted 13 (Res gestae XXVII 3 12–13)

If the Gesta was uninterested in specifying the social identity of the casualties of the murder in the basilica, or in expliciting their annual commemoration, it was rather keen on listing Damasus’ crimes The bishop organized yet another raid against the Ursinians in mid-November in the cemetery of St Agnes on the Via Nomentana: “Then bishop Ursinus (…) held services without clergy in the cemeteries of the martyrs

12 13

Gesta 5: Quod ubi Damasus, qui semper episcopatum ambierat, comperit, omnes quadrigarios et imperitam multitudinem pretio concitat et armatus fustibus ad basilicam Iuli perrumpit et magna fidelium caede per triduum debacchatus est Res gestae XXVII 3 12–13 (Mazzoleni 1986, 235)

Damasus and the Charioteers

121

When, therefore, many of the faithful had met at St Agnes, Damasus with his creatures fell upon them and cut down many in their savage onslaught ”14 From late September to mid-November 366, the Church of Rome teemed with mob violence and mass murder Neither the basilicas, nor the catacombs and the streets were safe places 15 How did the urban prefect respond to the unchained urban uproar? Viventius praefectus urbi sported a diplomatic departure after the election of the two bishops: “Since Viventius was able neither to end nor to diminish this strife, he was compelled to yield to its great violence, and retired to the suburbs ”16 The Ursinians suspected secret politicking behind Viventius’ disappearance, suggesting that Damasus had bought the prefect 17 The prefect might have been simply afraid that the armed Christian mob and the charioteers besieging the basilica Iulii in Trastevere would attack his house located near the church 18 Viventius supported Damasus and exiled the Ursinians immediately after the first clash in the basilica Iulii Challenging the prefect’s decree, Ursinus’ party convened in the basilica Liberii, where many of them were to die in the ensuing massacre While the traditional leaders of the city seem incompetent or helpless to quell Christian rioting, Damasus emerges as the “strong man” who settles the conflict with his own resources, as argued by Pietri: “(…) il avait déjà rétabli l’ordre par ses propres moyens ”19 The Church, however, largely depended on imperial authority: the bishop had to work together in tandem with the emperor Valentinian I offered amnesty to the Ursinians on the condition that they would never again disturb the peace, and restored the basilica Liberii to Damasus The events prompted the emperor to create a new office, that of the defensor ecclesiae, appointing a layperson to represent the Church at secular law courts The desperate plea of the Gesta demonstrates that the uncooperative Ursinus was dropped by the emperors Ursinus was cast as a chronic troublemaker and incurable agitator: Ambrose accused him to appeal to the “mob”: Ursinus, although long since banished by your clemency’s edict, is trying in secrecy, by means of those men whom he sacrilegiously and illegally ordained, to win over all the evil-minded Some bishops, who unfortunately are still in the churches, have been incited

14

15 16 17 18 19

Res gestae 1 11–12: Tunc Ursinus episcopus vir sanctus et sine crimine consulens plebi tradidit se manibus iniquorum et sexto decimo Kal Decembr iussione imperatoris ad exilium sponte properavit Sed populus timens Deum multisque persecutionibus fatigatus non imperatorem, non iudices nec ipsum auctorem scelerum et homicidam Damasum timuit sed per coemeteria martyrum stationes sine clericis celebrabat Unde cum ad sanctam Agnem multi fidelium convenissent, armatus cum satellitibus suis Damasus irruit et plurimos vastationis suae strage deiecit The localization of the basilicas is unclear, see Pietri 1976, 408–418; 412, note 2 XXVII 3 11 (Viventius, PLRE I, 972) Pietri (1976, 431) denies contact between ecclesiastical factions and secular power A slave’s choker found in the area Callisti attests that Viventius’ domus was nearby (CIL XV 7193): Tene me ne fugia et revoca me ad domnu meu Viventium in ara Callisti Pietri 1976, 37–38

122

Marianne Sághy

by his example, to form a conspiracy of wicked insolence and argue lawlessly that they should not accept the judgment of the Roman bishop, even as men argue who know that by their deserts they should be condemned or as those who have been condemned appeal to a mob of the common populace and threaten their judges with terror of death (…) 20 (Ambr Ep extra coll 7 4)

The double election of 366 and the countdown between the two factions is represented in the sources as a city-wide riot affecting a large part of the population and hard to quell Not only the pro-Ursinian tract, but the “neutral” Ammianus too blew up the extent and impact of the Christian riot and of episcopal crowd management 21 Neil McLynn argues that this is a false perspective: the strife between Damasus and Ursinus was not a riot, but a brutal elimination of one party by the other: (…) we must not assume that this outrage [the clash between Damasus and Ursinus] made as dramatic an impression upon the people of Rome as it has upon historians and moralists The killings took place in a short space of time and were concealed from view within the walls of the church (…) they need not, therefore, have grated upon the consciousness of the ordinary Christians of Rome (McLynn 1992, 17)

The killings, however, did not fall into oblivion Neither did Damasus’ “urban militia” of grave-diggers, gladiators and charioteers If Damasus’ bonding with the fossores, a clerical group responsible for the upkeep of the cemeteries was professional, his association with the gladiators and charioteers was quite unusual 22 What did these flashy figures of ancient Rome have to do with the bishop, the (modest) administrator of the Christian Church? How was a Christian prelate able to mobilize gladiators and charioteers to support his case? The Gesta seems to imply that Damasus had funds to bribe sportsmen, “blue collar” clerics and high imperial officials, without specifying the origins of this money – personal fortune, the Roman Church’s strong-box, or donations? The stress on Damasus’ crowd mobilization and wide social reach down to popular entertainers and workmen, however, explains the bishop’s success Damasus had access to a large spectrum of different social classes and to different sources of 20

21 22

Ambr Ep extra coll 7 4 (CSEL 82 3): Sed quoniam licet iamdudum vestrae clementiae iudicio relegatus Ursinus per eos quos illicite sacrilegus ordinavit vilissimum quemque occulte licet sollicitare conatur eoque exemplo nonnulli episcopi qui male ecclesiis incubant usu temeritatis suae et profani conspiratione contemptus, ne acquiescant Romani sacerdotis iudicio, lacessuntur, ita ut etiam qui se intellegunt pro meritorum suorum ratione damnandos vel damnatos esse viderunt, redempta vulgi multitudine iudices suos terrore mortis exagitent (…) McMullen 1990, 250–276 The grave-diggers (fossores or copiatae) were accorded clerical status by Constantius in 356: CT XIII 1 1: clericos qui copiatae appellantur (Chastagnol 1962, 294): (…) à Rome, [the copiatae] dépendaient du pape (…) Les peintures des catacombes nous montrent plusieurs fois des fossores munis de leur lampe et de leur pioche ou ascia: l’un d’eux même, qu’on donne en général comme contemporain de Damase, porte un habit de clerc garni de croix See also Guyon 1974, 540–596

Damasus and the Charioteers

123

power As opposed to the Damasian faction, the Ursinians emerged in the Gesta as well as at the Roman synod of 378 as a strictly clerical gathering whose members belonged to the higher orders of ecclesiastical hierarchy In other words, their support systems seem to have been much less well spread Damasus enjoyed powerful political support in Rome: both Christian and pagan officials were on his side In 367, the pagan leader Vettius Agorius Praetextatus helped him to expell the Ursinians Praetextatus was on good terms with Damasus whom he used to tease: “Make me bishop of Rome and I’ll be straight away Christian ”23 Turba piorum: Catacomb Crowds The making of the cult of the saints was part of Damasus’ struggle for the Roman bishopric against the Ursinian faction Damasus did not invent the martyrs, but through various textual, visual and architectural media, he made them the pillars of his Church As the Roman streets ran riot with schismatics and heretics, Damasus associated himself and his faction with a quieter, but just as numerous, community: that of the martyrs There is a vivid contrast between the bloodbath and mass killings recorded in Ammianus and the majestic calm of Damasus catacomb poetry evoking something of Winckelmann’s “edle Einfalt und stille Größe” of the Classics This might precisely have been Damasus’ purpose In the Great Persecution, the Roman community suffered perhaps the greatest losses among the Churches 24 “The Church of Christ” was gradually becoming an ecclesia martyrum 25 Damasus, who personally witnessed the Constantinian turn, saw the rise of glittering basilicas above the holy tombs of the martyrs But Rome’s murky underworld was full of hitherto unexploited and unexpected possibilities The indistinguishable mass of dead bodies expressed not only the grim equality of all Christians in death, but also the profound unity of the members of the church The martyrs formed a wall of unshakeable unity They flanked Christ in a solemn and harmonious procession in Paradise There was no discord among them Damasus recruited from the dead a group of loyal supporters and patrons Who constituted this “community of the elect”? During the pontificate of Damasus, a debate about the holiness of the community raged at Rome where Christians split into various groups each claiming the privilege of righteousness for themselves As opposed to the Ursinian splinter group who identified their own party as the Christian plebs sancta, Damasus chose to expand the notion to embrace the entire Christian 23 24 25

Facite me Romanae ecclesiae episcopum, et ero protinus Christianus (quoted by Jerome, Contra Johannem Hieros 8) Praetextatus, PLRE I, 722–724 Delehaye 1933, 260 Bastiaensen 1995, 333–350

124

Marianne Sághy

community of Rome: the populus Christianus26 is holy because it is sanctified by its dead members, the martyrs who, having offered the greatest sacrifice to God, became the “friends of God ”27 Damasus’ poetic program in the catacombs illustrates the way episcopal authority was grafted onto martyr charisma 28 The discourse on the martyrs in Rome was part of a larger polemic about the church, an acute debate in the aftermath of the Arian crisis when opposing Christian factions cast themselves as “the church of the saints ” Damasus’ martyr inscriptions were polemical and propagandistic works directed against rival pieties 29 It is as the caretaker of crowds of martyrs (cultor martyrum) that the Catholic bishop of Rome was able to emerge as an authority in a city of heterogeneous and fractured Christian communities The first bishop of Rome to launch an ambitious programme to revive and reform martyr cults in Rome, Damasus localised and reconstructed the holy tombs of the martyrs in the suburban catacombs, constructed underground basilicas and decorated the subterranean shrines with mosaics, reliefs, and inscriptions 30 Damasus’ guiding principle in inaugurating the catacombs as centres of worship was communal: instead of constructing a single “super-memorial,” he roamed dozens of underground cemeteries, endowing each of them with holy shrines Integration, rather than exclusivity was the leading idea in the creation of these “halls of fame ” Directing attention to the “crowds of saints” buried in the suburbia, the bishop emphasized the equal holiness among the followers of Christ Damasus put the sign of his church in several dozens of catacombs His purpose was less to compete with imperial and private sponsors, but also to maximalize the effect of the collective sanctity of the martyrs 31 Damasus’ signature is best seen in the Vergilian-style epitaphs (carmina or epigrammata) that he composed for the martyrs, decorating the large marble plaques above the tombs 32 Fifty-nine of such metrical epigrams survived: two dedicated to martyr apostles, six to martyr bishops, 23 to various (often unknown martyrs or groups of martyrs) and six to non-martyrs (Damasus’ father, mother, sister and his own epitaph; a deacon; a young lady) The epigrams reveal that the promotion of martyr bishops was important for Damasus, without being his chief concern He did honour his episcopal 26

27 28 29 30 31 32

Populus is a term more frequently used by Damasus than plebs Populus expresses civic consciousness: this is clearly involved in Damasus’ Romanization of the martyrs Populus in Augustine and Jerome means “a group whose specific characteristic [is] one of unity deriving from law or some sort of political responsibility” (Adams 1971, 70) Jn 15,13; Praefatio missae sanctorum: ‘Qui in sanctorum concilio celebraris et eorum coronando merita tua dona coronas’ (God crowns the merits of His witnesses, the saints, whose virtue is a God-given grace) Reutter 2009; Mazzoleni 1986 Sághy 2012, 31–45; Sághy 2010, 17–35 Diefenbach 2007 and 2012 Guyon 1987; Denzey 2007 Epigrammata damasiana (Ferrua 1942); Damasus of Rome: The Epigraphic Poetry (Trout, 2015)

Damasus and the Charioteers

125

forebears, yet only six epigrams are dedicated to the bishops of Rome Most of the elogia are dedicated to non-episcopal, still mostly clerical martyrs Damasus’ bishop list is shorter, his martyr list is longer than the Roman church’s official calendar of saints, the so-called Catalogus Liberiana Damasus provided Rome with thirteen new martyrs (Anastasia, Simplicius, Faustinus, Viatrix and Rufus, Felix and Adauctus, Nereus and Achilleus, Ireneus and Abundius, and Chrysanthius and Daria) and three large groups of anonymous saints The bishop casts himself as a supplicant, as a client to the martyrs, avidly seeking their intercession Damasus spurs the heavenly “lobbying” of the martyrs on his behalf The bishop as client is accentuated in an epigram from 367 that commemorates the end of the schism Damasus gives thanks to a group of unknown, unremembered martyrs who, despite their obscurity, successfully intervened at Christ for “the return of his clergy,” and thus re-established the unity of the Church of Rome: You who are reading this, venerate the tomb of the saints length of time has not been able to preserve their names or number Damasus, the bishop, you must understand, has decorated the tomb because of the clergy’s return, triumphing with Christ at hand To the holy martyrs the bishop has discharged his vows (Epigram 42)33

Damasus’ three epigrams connected with the Ursinian schism celebrate the miracle-working power of the martyrs, their practical help in re-establishing the unity of the Church and their heavenly intervention to save Damasus’ life, but they also make clear that the bishop is in control over his clergy The reconstruction of martyr monuments served to create a unified front of heavenly patrons for the city Damasus’ revamping of the Crypt of the Popes in San Callisto testifies to his efforts towards concord and unity This cemetery was the first communal funerary space sponsored by the Church of Rome: bishop Zephyrinus (198–217) had charged the deacon Callixtus to purchase burial grounds for Christian believers and bishops alike in this graveyard 34 In 258, a bishop and his clergy had been martyred here: Sixtus II was slaughtered together with his seven deacons The tradition of communal burial and papal enhancement of the site influenced Damasus’ choice when he reconstructed the Crypt of the Popes as a small underground church, decorating the walls with marbles, two skylights, an altar, and two spiral columns on high basis sup33

34

Epigram 42: Sanctorum quicumque legis venerare sepulcrum Nomina nec numerum potuit retinere vetustas Ornavit Damasus tumulum, cognoscite, rector, pro reditu cleri Christo prestante triumphans Martyribus sanctis reddit sua vota sacerdos English translation by Dennis E Trout, 2015, 162 Picard 1998 But see now Rebillard 2003

126

Marianne Sághy

porting an architrave from which hung lamps, crosses and ornamental wreaths 35 On the lower part of the wall, Damasus placed an epigram commemorating the martyrs and confessors buried in the crypt: Here collected lies, if you ask, a throng of the pious Revered tombs hold the bodies of the saints; the palace of heaven has taken up their lofty spirits for itself Here the comrades of Xystus, who carry trophies from the enemy; here a company of nobles who guard the altars of Christ Here is buried a bishop who lived in long peace; here are the holy confessors whom Greece sent; here young men and boys, old men and chaste grandsons, for whom it was more pleasing to keep virginal modesty Here, I confess, I Damasus wished to set my limbs, but I feared to disturb the holy ashes of the pious (Epigram 16)36

Instead of naming the bishops of Rome and evoking individually their martyrdom, Damasus monumentalizes the group of leaders as a single body The nameless individuals melt into a pious crowd (turba piorum), united by office, purpose and commitment The epigram conveys the idea of unity: the bishops of Rome (numerus procerum) form a single tradition It is left to the visitors to the crypt to reconstruct mentally the list of the bishops buried here: the throng of prelates that keeps the altars of Christ are Pontianus (230–235); Antherus (235–236); Fabian (236–250); Lucius I (253–254); Stephen (254–257); Dionysius (259–268); Felix (269–274) Eutychian (275–283), and Sixtus II (257–258) The companions of Sixtus are the four deacons, Gennarius, Magnus, Vincent and Stephen Two other deacons, Felicissimus and Agapitus, as well as Sixtus’ archdeacon, Lawrence, are commemorated elsewhere The bishop who lived through the long peace probably refers to Fabian (or Dionysius or Eutychian) The holy confessors from Greece are a group of martyrs buried elsewhere in the catacomb: Martia, Neon, Hippolytus, Adria, 35 36

Reekmans 1995, 32–70; Reekmans 1986, 261–281 Epigram 16: Hic congesta iacet quaeris is turba piorum, corpora sanctorum retinent veneranda sepulcra, sublimes animas rapuit sibi regia caeli Hic comites Xysti, portant qui ex hoste tropaea, hic numerus procerum, servat qui altaria Christi, hic positus, longa vixit qui in pace sacerdos; hic confessores sancti, quos Graecia misit; hic iuvenes puerique, senes castique nepotes, quis mage virgineum placuit retinere pudorem Hic, faetor, Damasus volui mea condere membra, sed cineres timui sanctos vexare piorum English translation by Trout, 2015, 114

Damasus and the Charioteers

127

Paulina, Martha, Valeria, Eusebius, Marcellus Heir to this army of saints, who defended heroically their faith and their flock, Damasus inscribes himself in the list of bishops, but refuses to enter their tomb: out of respect for the inviolability of the grave, he refrains from disturbing the peace of the holy ashes This epigram makes the communio sanctorum a reality as the community of believers remembers her heavenly patrons Not even the epigram commemorating Sixtus II in the same crypt dispells the communal spirit of the place Damasus stresses that Sixtus sacrificed himself for his congregation: At the time when persecution’s sword cut at our mother’s holy innards, here in this place the bishop was teaching the heavenly commands Suddenly men arrive to seize him whom by chance they find sitting there To the soldiers who had been sent the people then offered their necks As soon as the older man understood who wanted to take (from him) the victory palm, he offered himself and his own life first of all, unwilling that savagery be able to harm anyone Christ, who assigns the reward of (eternal) life, displays the merit of the shepherd; he himself watches over the full number of his flock (Epigram 17)37

The commemoration of unknown groups of martyrs who fell during the persecutions graphically evoked the fights that broke out after the double election of 366: At that time when persecution’s sword cut at our mother’s holy innards, sixty-two, seized through the savagery of the tyrant, straightaway then offered their necks to the commanders sent against them Having confessed Christ, with the prince of the world vanquished, they sought out an aetherial home and the realms of the righteous (Epigram 43)38

37

38

Epigram 17: Tempore quo gladius secuit pia viscera matris, hic positus rector caelestia iussua docebat Adveniunt subito, rapiunt qui forte sedentem: militibus missis populi tunc colla dedere Mox ubi cognovit senior, quis tollere vellet palmam, seque suumque caput prior optulit ipse, inpatiens feritas posset ne laedere quemquam Ostendit Christus, reddit qui praemia vitae, pastoris meritum, numerum gregis ipse tuetur English translation by Trout, 2015, 116 Epigram 43: Tempore quo glaudis secuit pia viscera matris, sexaginta duo capti feritate tyranni extempo ducibus missis tunc colla dedere; confessi Christum, superato principe mundi, aetheriam petiere domum regnaque piorum English translation by Trout, 2015, 164

128

Marianne Sághy

Since it is the saving work of Christ that unites Christians, unity is the essential doctrine that defines orthodoxy: “Make my joy complete by being of the same mind, maintaining the same love, united in spirit, intent on one purpose ” (Phil 2:2) Orthodoxy is unity: it is in this context that the problem of traitors (lapsi) and schism becomes so important Guilty members in the Church threaten to split the community, but excommunication is no solution either The bishop therefore must be clement and merciful with those who failed Without condemning or excommunicating them, he must compel them to confess their sins and ask pardon Riots threaten the unity of the Church By pointing out the ever-present tendency to dissent, strife and schism within the Christian community, Damasus is referencing his own struggle against the Ursinians The epigrams make us better understand his position against the schismatics: division is sin, unity is virtue Maintaining the unity of the community is the greatest purpose for which every bishop should work: this is why “peaceful communion” (foedera pacis) will be the Leitmotiv of the Damasian carmina Christian unity is a holy communion with the martyrs in Christ The Church is an institution that is constituted by the living and dead members Damasus’ epigrams testify to the communio sanctorum and the triumph of Christ What is new is the intercessory role and the earthly authority of the bishop: it is the bishop who guarantees not only the authenticity of the martyrs, but also the faith of the Church: Credite per Damasum, possit quid gloria Christi 39 Invited to sanctity, the bishop distinguishes between false and true beliefs just as he sorts out false and true martyrs The bishop is invited to participate in the history of the martyrs and in the life of Christ Multa Corpora Sanctorum: Pilgrims’ Throngs Damasus’ inscriptions did not only evoke past turbulences and mob actions, but also attracted crowds They functioned as “crowd magnets,” exciting and encouraging a large number of pilgrims to visit the holy tombs Keeper of martyr memory, Damasus was also a creator of holy places in the catacombs 40 The bishop multa corpora sanctorum requisivit et invenit quorum etiam versibus declaravit, stresses the Liber pontificalis 41 Damasus’ ambitious campaign re-conceptualized and re-contextualized martyr cults: instead of family commemoration, he made the holy tombs available for mass veneration in suburban underground cemeteries Making the martyrs of Rome available for pious crowds, the bishop increased the number of the martyrs and made them seem more “crowdlike”: he privileged large numbers of martyrs and, remarkably, groups of anonymous martyrs in the catacombs, thus construing the superordinate identity of the Nicene Catholic Church The architectural enlargement of the martyr shrines from cubicula to 39 40 41

Ep 8 Trout 2005, 165–187 LP 37 English translation by Davis 1989

Damasus and the Charioteers

129

basilica transformed the formerly private holy graves into the new “national” landmarks of Rome, accessible to large crowds by reconstructing the underground circulation 42 Guiding the pilgrims’ throngs through sixty catacombs in Rome involved significant organizing work, and – yet again – control over the pilgrims’ choices The Damasian tituli were monumental marble “billboards” advertising a particular saint (or a group of saints) with huge and exquisite letters created by the artistocratic calligrapher, Furius Dionysius Filocalus That the plaques served as signs in the labyrinthine avenues of the cemeteries is also confirmed by their size 43 Unsurprisingly, the majority of the Damasian incriptions are in and around Constantinian foundations, basilicas and mausolea: in St Peters’ on the Vatican; in Saint Agnes’ on the Via Nomentana; in the coemeterium on the Via Labicana; in Saint Lawrence’s on the Via Tiburtina 44 Damasus did not simply want to put the label of the Church onto the imperial monuments in order to “appropriate” the imperial initiative, but rather to put his own party label onto the holy graves in the catacombs to where he transferred his battle against his opponents and where he built up a conscious ideological campaign against Christian splinter groups with the help of the cult of the martyrs Damasus’ enterprise in the catacombs should be seen in the context of Roman ecclesiastical factionalism and his poems read as an answer to his enemies Paul-Albert Février suggested that the model of the “peacemaker bishop” as presented by Damasus aimed to defeat the effects of a bad press: (…) l’évêque qui avait pris le pouvoir à l’aide des partisans qui n’avaient pas eu peur d’aller jusqu’à des ’bagarres avec morts et blessés’ (…) et qui avait du affronter les représentants de l’empereur, a réussi, non sans mal, à renverser la situation Sur ces efforts et ces tensions, a leur façon, les inscriptions, martyrologiques ou autres, des nécropoles romaines apportent un témoignage et comme la réponse de Damase aux libelles qui circulaient (Février 1992, 506)

More than a response to his detractors, the Damasian cult of the saints was an ideological and cultural program broadcast to the entire Christian community Damasus’ poetic corpus concentrates emphatically on clerical martyrs (bishops, deacons, presbyters), stresses the bishop’s role in establishing peace and unity in the church, and polemizes with splinter groups (Ursinians, Luciferians, Novatians) The epigrams appropriated the classical tradition for the martyr shrines in the catacombs 45 Damasus’ choice of a poetic tradition suggests an élite audience, yet the epigrams seem to have been most popular with pilgrims who copied them and preserved

42 43 44 45

Trout 2003, 517–36 Reprinted in Trout 2005 For the dimensions of the plaques, see Guyon 1995, 163–168 Guyon 1987, 413: “Damase a probablement cherché très consciemment à placer aussi sa signature sur le terrain même des créations impériales, pour y laisser, a côté de la marque de la famille constantinienne, celle même de l’Église ” Liddel and Low 2013

130

Marianne Sághy

them in collections (syllogae) 46 Damasus’ verse put Christian imagery and classical poetry on the same footing, on the same cultural level, while expanding the reach of this culture to a large crowd of not necessarily cultivated Christian Romans and Christian pilgrims Lucy Grig ascribes the popularity of metrical inscriptions to changes in burial practices in Rome, where the great burial complexes founded in the fourth century provided ideal locations for the erection of extensive inscriptions 47 Damasus’ incriptions, notably, remained underground, in the ancient graveyards, but were more elegantly carved than the traditional types of elite epigraphic commemoration in secular public spaces, thus suggesting a shift in priorities The availability of privileged tomb sites, close to imperial mausolea, provided ideal locations for the display of culture and status Natalie Hall sensitively argues that the epigrams are effective because “the social, gendered, and economic status of the holy dead identified by Damasus (companions of Sixtus, great men, priest, confessors, children and the elderly) mirrors the diversity of individuals visiting the tombs ”48 The Virgilian, rather than biblical language reveals the conception that the bishop held about his Church and the vision that he wanted to impress upon the minds of the Roman crowds The martyrs, regardless from where they came, became Roman citizens by the fact that they died in Rome Their rediscovery by Damasus served a triple crowd management project: controlling the riotous urban mob, controlling the martyr memories, and finally controlling the pilgrim throngs The Roman Christian communio sanctorum was cast by Damasus as an “elect crowd” (populus sanctus) sanctified by its martyrs This was a Church of an élite, yet open to a very large spectrum of people coming from very different walks of life: foreigners, wandering evangelists, bishops, gladiators, teenage girls, grave-diggers, and charioteers Bibliography Primary Sources Ambrose Sancti Ambrosi opera 1982 Translated by M Zelzer CSEL 82 3 Vienna: HoelderPichler-Tempsky Ammianus Marcellinus Res gestae 1935–1940 Translated by J C Rolfe Cambridge: Loeb Classical Library Collectio Avellana Epistulae imperatorum pontificum aliorum: inde ab a CCCLXVII usque ad a DLIII datae: Avellana quae dicitur collectio 1895 (reprinted in 1979) Edited by Otto Günther New York: Johnson Reprint

46 47 48

Walser 1987 Grig 2017 Hall 2012, 6

Damasus and the Charioteers

131

Damasus of Rome: The Epigraphic Poetry Introduction, Texts, Translations, and Commentary Edited by Dennis Trout Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015 Die Einsiedler Inschriftensammlung und der Pilgerführer durch Rom (Codex Einsidlensis 326) 1987 Edited by G Walser Stuttgart: Steiner Epigrammata damasiana 1942 Edited by A Ferrua Roma: Pontificio Istituto di Archeologia Sacra Inscriptions and their Uses in Greek and Latin Literature Oxford studies in ancient documents 2013 Edited by P Liddel and P Low Oxford: Oxford University Press Jerome Contra Johannem Hierosolymitanum Last accessed 24 May 2015 http://www thelatinlibrary com/jerome/contraioannem html Socrates Historia ecclesiastica = Socrate de Constantinople Histoire ecclésiastique, livres I–VII 2004–2007 Texte grec de G C Hansen (GCS) Traduction par P Périchon et P Maraval Paris: Éditions du Cerf Sozomen Historia ecclesiastica Last accessed 24 May 2015 http://www ccel org/ccel/schaff/ npnf202 titlepage html?highlight=sozomenus#highlight The Book of Pontiffs (Liber Pontificalis) 1989 Translated by R Davis Liverpool: University of Liverpool Press The Epigrams of St Damasus: a Translation and Commentary 1958 Translated by W L Watson Austin: University of Texas Press Theodoret, Historia ecclesiastica = Théodoret de Cyr, Histoire ecclésiastique, tome 1 (Livre I– II) 2006 Introduction d’A Martin, traduction de Pierre Canivet revue et annotée par J Bouffartigue, A Martin, L Pietri et F Thélamon Paris: Éditions du Cerf

Secondary Sources Adams, J D 1971 The Populus of Augustine and Jerome A Study in the Patristic Sense of Community New Haven: Yale University Press Allen, P , and P Neil, eds 2013 Crisis Management in Late Antiquity (410–590 CE) A Survey of the Evidence from Episcopal Letters Leiden: Brill Bastiaensen, A A R 1995 “Ecclesia martyrum: Quelques observations sur le témoignage des anciens textes liturgiques ” Pages 333–350 in Martyrium in Multidisciplinary Prespective Memorial Louis Reekmans Edited by M Lamberigts and P van Deun Leuven: Leuven University Press Blair-Dixon, K 2007 “Memory and authority in sixth-century Rome The Liber Pontificalis and the Collectio Avellana ” Pages 59–76 in Religion, Dynasty and Patronage in Early Christian Rome, 300–900 Edited by K Cooper and J Hillner Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Brandt, O 2012 San Lorenzo in Lucina:The Transformations of a Roman Quarter Stockholm: Swedish Institute of Rome Brown, R 2010 Group Processes: Dynamics within and between Groups Oxford: OUP Chastagnol, A 1962 Les Fastes de la préfecture de Rome au Bas-Empire Paris: Nouvelles Éditions Latines Delehaye, H 1933 Les origines du culte des martyrs Bruxelles: Société des Bollandistes Denzey, N 2007 The Bone Gatherers: The Lost Worlds of Early Christian Women Boston: Beacon Press

132

Marianne Sághy

Diefenbach, S 2007 Römische Erinnerungsräume Heiligenmemoria und kollektive Identitäten im Rom des 3 bis 5 Jahrhunderts n Chr Berlin–Boston: De Gruyter Diefenbach, S 2012 “Urbs und ecclesia Bezugspunkte kollektiver Heiligenerinnerung im Rom des Bischofs Damasus (366–384) Pages 193 250 in Rom in der Spätantike Historische Erinnerung im städtischen Raum Edited by Ralf Behrwald and Christian Witschel Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag Drury, J , and S Reicher 2009 “Collective psychological empowerment as a model of social change: researching crowds and power ” Journal of Social Issues 65:707–725 Drury, J , and C Stott 2011 “Contextualizing the crowd in contemporary social science ” Contemporary Social Science 6:1–15 Evers, A 2010 Church, Cities, and People: A Study of the Plebs in the Church and Cities of Roman Africa in Late Antiquity Leuven: Peeters Février, P A 1992 “Un plaidoyer pour Damase: les inscriptions des nécropoles romaines ” Pages 497–506 in Institutions, société et vie politique dans l’Empire romain au IVe siècle ap J C Edited by M Christol et al Rome: École Francaise de Rome Grig, L 2017 “Cultural Capital and Christianization: the Metrical Inscriptions of Late Antique Rome ” Pages 427–447 in The Epigraphic Cultures of Late Antiquity Edited by Katharina Bolle, Carlos Machado and Christian Witschel Stuttgart : Franz Steiner Verlag Guyon, J 1974 “La vente des tombes à travers l’épigraphie de la Rome chrétienne ” MEFRA 86:540–596 – 1987 Le cimetière aux deux lauriers Rome: École Française de Rome – 1995 “Damase et l’illustration des martyrs ” Pages 163–168 in Martyrium in Multidisciplinary Prespective Memorial Louis Reekmans Edited by M Lamberigts and P van Deun Leuven: Leuven University Press Hall, N 2012 “The Roman Catacombs: Material Evidence for a Changing World ” Last accessed 24 May 2015 https://www academia edu/10252764/The_Roman_Catacombs_Material_ Evidence_for_a_Changing_World Heesch, J , van 1975 “Une frappe semi-autonome sous Maximin Daza ” RBN 121:98–108 – 1993 “The last civic coinages and the religious policy of Maximinus Daza (AD 312) ” NC 153:65–75 Hornsey, M J , and M A Hogg 2000 “Subgroup Relations: A Comparison of Mutual Intergroup Differentiation and Common Ingroup Identity Models of Prejudice Reduction ” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 26 2:242–256 Magalhães de Oliveira, J C 2012 Potestas populi: participation populaire et action collective dans les villes de l’Afrique romaine tardive (vers 300–430 apr J -C ) Turnhout: Brepols Mazzoleni, D 1986 Saecularia Damasiana: atti del Convegno Internazionale per il XVI centenario della morte di Papa Damaso I (11-12-384-10/12-12-1984) Vatican: Pontificio Istituto di Archeologia Cristiana McLynn, M B 1992 “Christian Controversy and Violence in the Fourth Century” Kodai 3:15–44 McMullen, R 1990 “The Historical Role of the Masses in Late Antiquity” Pages 250–276 in Changes in the Roman Empire Edited by R McMullen Princeton: Princeton University Press Picard, J C 1998 “À propos de sépultures papales jusqu’au début du VIIIe siècle ” Pages 255–263 in Évêques, saints et cités en Italie et en Gaule Edited by J C Picard Rome: École Française de Rome Pietri, C 1976 Roma christiana Recherches sur l’Eglise de Rome, son organisation, sa politique, son idéologie de Miltiade à Sixte III (311–440 ) Rome: École française de Rome Pietri, L , Y Duval and C Pietri 1992 “Peuple chrétien ou plebs: le rôle des laics dans les élections ecclésiastiques en Occident ” Pages 373–395 in Institutions, société et vie politique dans l’Empire Romain au IVe siècle ap J C Edited by M Christol et al Rome: École Francaise de Rome

Damasus and the Charioteers

133

Rebillard, E 2003 Religion et sépulture L’Église, les vivants et les morts dans l’Antiquité tardive Paris: Éditions de l’École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales Reekmans, L 1986 “L’œuvre du pape Damase dansle complexe de Gaius à la catacombe de S Callixte ” Pages 261–281 in Saecularia Damasiana: atti del Convegno internazionale per il XVI centenario della morte di papa Damaso I (11-12-384-10/12-12-1984) Edited by D Mazzoleni Vatican: Pontificio Istituto di Archeologia Cristiana – 1995 “Recherches récentes dans les cryptes des martyrs romains ” Pages 32–70 in Martyrium in Multidisciplinary Perspective Memorial Louis Reekmans Edited by M Lamberigts and P van Deun Leuven: Leuven University Press Reicher, S 2001 “The psychology of crowd dynamics ” Pages 182–208 in Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology: Group Processes Edited by M A Hogg and R S Tindale Oxford: OUP Reutter, U 2009 Damasus, Bischof von Rom (366–384): Leben und Werk Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck Sághy, M 2010 “Martyr Cult and Collective Identity in Fourth-Century Rome ” Pages 17–35 in Identity and Alterity in the Making and Practice of Cults Edited by A Marinković and T Vedriš Zagreb: Hagiotheca – 2012 “Martyr Bishops and the Bishop’s Martyrs in Fourth-Century Rome ” Pages 31–45 in Saintly Bishops and Bishops’ Saints Edited by T Vedriš and J Ott Zagreb: Hagiotheca Trout, D E 2003 “Damasus and the Invention of Early Christian Rome ” Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies 33:517–36 Reprinted as: Trout, D E 2005 “Damasus and the Invention of Early Christian Rome ” Pages 298–315 in The Cultural Turn in Late Ancient Studies: Gender, Asceticism, and Historiography Edited by D Martin and P Cox Miller Durham: Duke University Press – 2005 “Saints, Identity and the City” Pages 165–187 in Late Ancient Christianity Vol 2 of A People’s History of Christianity Edited by V Burrus Minneapolis: Fortress Press Tsoukalas, I 2007 “Exploring the microfoundations of group onsciousness ” Culture and Psychology 13:39–81 Wertheimer, M 1922 “Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt I ” Psychologische Forschungen 1:47–58 English translation by: Ellis, W D 1938 The General Theoretical Situation A Sourcebook of Gestalt Psychology Vol 2 Highland, NY: The Gestalt Journal Press (reprinted in 1997) Wirbelauer, E 1994 “Die Nachfolgerbestimmung im römischen Bistum (3 –6 Jh ) Doppelwahlen und Absetzungen in ihrer herrschaftssoziologischen Bedeutung ” Klio 76:407–410

“Venerabili episcopo atque doctissimo Nicetae” Niceta of Remesiana and Episcopal Leadership in Fourth Century Illyricum* Carmen Angela Cvetković (Göttingen) When speaking of episcopal leadership in fourth century Illyricum, the first names that come to mind are those of the powerful and influential bishops Germinius of Sirmium, Valens of Mursa and Ursacius of Singidunum Known in modern scholarship as the “Illyrian trio,”1 they were not only the bishops of the main episcopal sees in the region, but also powerful advisors and familiares amici, in the words of Lucifer of Cagliari, of the emperor Constantius II 2 Skilled at how to exploit every opportunity of influencing the emperor, in the 350s and for more than a decade, the “Illyrian trio” dictated the official church politics of the empire, assuming authority at councils and controlling doctrinal debates that culminated in the acceptance of the homoean faith Without excelling in theological matters or in virtuous qualities, it remains difficult to perceive a crucial difference between such bishops and civic leaders 3 They were primarily scheming politicians, whose close relationship with the emperor ensured their long lasting dominance on the ecclesiastical scene of the mid-fourth century In contrast to the model of leadership embodied by these “eminences grises” of the emperor Constantius II which may be broadly labeled as “political,”4 we have at the end * 1 2 3 4

Research on this article has been supported by a generous grant awarded by the Dorothea Schlözer Programme of the Georg‐August‐Universität Göttingen Meslin 1967, 68 Lucifer of Cagliari, De non conveniendo 7 (CCSL 8, Diercks, 175) For the ability of late ancient bishops to take over the responsibilities of secular officials, see Slootjes 2006, 219–231 Markschies (1998) identifies and discusses five types of political episcopal leadership without any intention of being exhaustive in doing so: a the court bishop (der Hofbischof), b the court theologian (der Hoftheologe), c the bishop as leader of church politics (der Bischof als kirchenpolitischer Souverän), d the bishop as imperial judge (der Bischof als kaiserlicher Richter), e the bishop as civic benefactor and patron (der Bischof als städtischer Wohltäter und Patron) The close relationship between the emperor Constantius II and the Illyrian bishops Valens of Mursa and Ursacius

136

Carmen Angela Cvetković

of the fourth century the testimony of Paulinus of Nola about a different type of Illyrian bishop, called Niceta, who travelled to Nola in Italy on at least two occasions Modern scholarship identified Paulinus’ Niceta with the bishop of the small town Remesiana from the Illyrian province Dacia Mediterranea 5 This city was situated along the important road Via Militaris which traversed the centre of the Illyrian peninsula, and which was the main connection between Western Europe and Constantinople Located in the Latin speaking Illyricum, Remesiana was nevertheless in close proximity to the Greek speaking territories of this region There is no information about the early part of Niceta’s life, although a certain Nicha figures as one the addressees of a letter sent by bishop Germinius of Sirmium in 366 or 367 to a number of Illyrian bishops 6 It has been suggested that Nicha might be a corruption for Niceta as it would have been easy to mistake et for h in reading the Dacian wax tablets 7 If this is the case, then Niceta should have been at the beginning of his episcopal career and at least thirty years of age according to the canons established at Nicaea The only certain dates in his life are his visits to Nola in Italy, in the years 400 and 403, as recorded by Paulinus of Nola, and the mentioning of his name in two letters of the bishop of Rome, Innocent I (402–417) from 412 and 414 8 Based on this scarce evidence it has been conjectured that Niceta lived most likely between 335 and 414 9 This contribution examines Paulinus’ testimony about Niceta in Epistula 29, addressed to Sulpicius Severus, Carmen 17, a propemtikon or farewell poem written upon Niceta’s return from Nola to Dacia, and Carmen 27, a natalicium written on the occasion of Niceta’s second visit to Nola 10 It will be argued that despite Paulinus’ main intention to depict Niceta as an ideal episcopal leader insisting on his spiritual qualities and pragmatic skills, these sources also allow us to discern Niceta as an able church politician 11

5 6 7 8 9 10 11

of Singidunum is of first importance in pinning down their style of political leadership, which has been ascribed to the categories of “court theologian” and “leader of church politics ” They are sometimes also considered court bishops, however this type proves problematic as it came to be too narrowly defined to include these bishops, see Hunt 1989 For almost ten years, from 351 to 360, Germinius of Sirmium was the main associate of Valens and Ursacius in matters of ecclesiastical politics and in the attempts to attract the favor of the emperor Constantius II Yet, in the following decade he distanced himself from his former allies Valens and Ursacius and from their theology For the difficulty to categorize Germinius’ doctrinal position after 360, see Williams 1996 Burn 1905 On Niceta’s visits to Nola, see also Cvetković 2019, 179–206, which deals with a couple of aspects touched upon in this chapter, but from a different perspective This letter is preserved in Hilary of Poitiers, Collectanea Antiariana Parisina, series B (CSEL 65, Feder, 160–3) Burn 1905, xxxviii Innocent I , Epistula 16 and Epistula 17 (PL 20:519B–537B) On the dates of Innocent I’s letters to the Illyrian churches, see Dunn 2008 and 2013b Burn 1905, xxxv Paulinus, Epistula 29 14 (CSEL 29, Hartel, 261–262); Carmen 17 (CSEL 30, Hartel, 81–96); Carmen 27 (CSEL 30, Hartel, 262–291) Rapp (2005, 16–22) proposed a helpful threefold model based on spiritual, ascetic and pragmatic authority in her discussion of the nature of episcopal leadership in Late Antiquity In this article,

Venerabili episcopo atque doctissimo Nicetae

137

Although the main concern of this article is not to establish the accuracy of Paulinus’ account, but to deal with Paulinus’ representation of Niceta’s leadership, it is nevertheless important to begin with a closer look at these sources and a discussion of their reliability Next, an analysis will be presented of Paulinus’ portrayal of Niceta as primarily a spiritual leader followed by an examination of the possible political reasons for Niceta’s visits to Italy This article intends to shed new light on how by passing in silence Niceta’s worldly activities as a bishop, Paulinus contributed to the fashioning of an ideal of episcopal leadership which promoted spiritual and ascetic authority as the distinctive hallmark of the Christian bishops Sources The first source is a short passage from Paulinus’ Epistola 29 14 composed in 400 and addressed to Sulpicius Severus In this letter, Paulinus informs Sulpicius about the revered (venerabilis) and most learned (doctissimus) bishop Niceta from Dacia, who came to visit him in Nola after he had previously been in Rome where he was highly admired From this passage we also learn that Paulinus mentioned Sulpicius to Niceta while reading to him the Vita Martini of Sulpicius The other two sources Carmen 17 and Carmen 27 are poems and therefore often regarded as suspicious by modern historians for their value as historically reliable sources Their purpose was to encourage both illiterate and cultivated Christians such as Paulinus to persevere in a life of Christian commitment 12 Carmen 17 is a propemtikon or a farewell poem dedicated to Niceta and composed by Paulinus upon his friend’s departure from Nola, in January 400 This poem contains a description of the route Niceta was about to travel on his return voyage from Nola to Dacia For this reason it has also been attached to the tradition of itinerarium 13 Paulinus pictures the Illyrian bishop traversing the regions of Southern Italy, travelling across the Adriatic Sea to Epirus and, avoiding the overland route, continuing his journey by sea around the Greek peninsula to Thessalonike 14 Paulinus adds several more stations to Niceta’s journey: Philippi in Macedonia, Tomi in Scythia Minor, and Scupi in Dardania

12 13 14

I use “spiritual” in a broader sense as including also the “ascetic” authority In doing so, I would just like to stress the fact that in Paulinus’ texts about Niceta spiritual authority is bound up with ascetic authority Trout 1999, 181–182; Walsh (1975, 3–4) considers that Paulinus’ poems were mainly addressed to cultured Christians Fontaine 1981, 167 The view that the poem belongs both to the genre of propemptikon and of itinerarium is more recently supported by Basson 1996, 267 A route from Durrachium going overland Macedonia following Via Egnatia has been suggested by Walsh 1975, 374, n 21 The sea voyage from Epirus to Thessalonike around the Peloponnese is

138

Carmen Angela Cvetković

Paulinus’ testimony of Niceta’s journey poses a number of difficulties for modern scholars A first difficulty concerns the interpolations that over the years crept into the original text At least fourteen strophes seem to be inauthentic and another twelve verses need to be treated with caution 15 However, these interpolations, albeit considerable, do not mitigate the value of the information contained in the rest of the poem, as they simply bring more detail to some ideas that Paulinus has already articulated A more important difficulty regards the reliability of this poetic account as scholars have been debating on whether this is the description of a real journey or merely the product of Paulinus’ imagination The literal and matter of fact information encountered in this poem is usually treated as sound evidence for the historical dimension of Paulinus’ testimony 16 Scholars have also called into question the accuracy of Paulinus’ description As Niceta’s journey takes a rather winding course through the provinces of Macedonia, Scythia Minor, and Dardania, Paulinus’ knowledge of the geography of the eastern provinces has been doubted to such extent as to suggest a crucial emendation of the Paulinian text which proposes Stobi as substitute for Tomi on grounds that this revision restores the logical order of Niceta’s itinerary 17 However, this emendation has not won unanimous scholarly support More recently, Hagith Sivan argued in favor of maintaining the original version of Paulinus’ text, observing that Niceta’s stop at Phillippi in Macedonia does not follow the direct route connecting Thessalonike with Remesiana and that the poem also contains references to Niceta’s missionary activity in Scythia which appear to confirm his voyage to Tomi 18 She defends Paulinus’ familiarity with the geography of the eastern provinces reminding of his connections with his mentor, Ausonius, whose close family members held eminent positions in the province of Illyricum and whose works present frequent references to the cities of the Greek world Carmen 27 is a natalicium, a poem that celebrates the day of St Felix’ death, for on that day he was “born” from earth to Heaven This poem contains almost no references to contemporary events, but it informs about the second visit of Niceta to Nola who returned to his friend Paulinus in the fourth year since his first travel to Italy 19 This piece of information enabled modern scholars to place Niceta’s second visit to Nola

15 16 17 18 19

maintained by Burn (1905, lii) and Sivan (1995, 80), based on Paulinus, Carmen 17 17–20: Arctoos procul usque Dacos, / ibis Epiro gemina videndus / et per Aegeos penetrabis aestus / Thessalonicen Kirstein 2000, 20 f The historical value of this poem is defended by Sivan 1995, 80 The historical character of Paulinus’s poem is taken for granted by Burn 1905 and Walsh 1975 Kirstein (2000, 187) considers the passage where these stations are mentioned as unauthentic In 1705, Pagi was the first to suggest Stobi in Macedonia secunda as a more likely station on Niceta’s voyage back home Burn (1905) follows his suggestion This interpretation has been supported more recently by Duval 1980, 169 and by Kirstein 2000, 187 Sivan 1995, 80 Carmen 27 333: venisti tandem quarto mihi redditus anno

Venerabili episcopo atque doctissimo Nicetae

139

in 403 20 The poem describes at great length the renovations and the new buildings of the architectural complex erected around the shrine of St Felix, with Paulinus accompanying his guest Niceta around the site of Cimitile to point out the improvements he has made during the latter’s absence The numerous references to Niceta, Paulinus’ main interlocutor in the second half of the poem, reveal not much factual information about the Illyrian bishop However, the reverential tone adopted to address or to refer to Niceta speaks volumes about Paulinus’ genuine esteem for his visitor, suggesting that this poem was dedicated rather to the Illyrian bishop than to Felix whose feast day was meant to celebrate Niceta – The “Holy” Bishop In all sources mentioned, Paulinus speaks of Niceta in highly praising terms In Epistola 29, Niceta is introduced to Sulpicius Severus as a “revered and most learned bishop ”21 In the poems, Paulinus refers frequently to Niceta using the term sacerdos,22 which until the beginning of the fifth century designated habitually the bishop, being only rarely used for presbyters 23 The titles pater or parens commonly applied to bishops24 and employed time and again by Paulinus to address Niceta,25 indicate that, as a bishop, Niceta occupied a higher position in the ecclesiastical hierarchy than Paulinus, a simple presbyter As the same terms are used in order to express spiritual guidance, it is certain that Paulinus regarded Niceta not only as a superior in the ecclesiastical rank, but also as a spiritual father One passage is particularly explicit about Niceta’s role as Paulinus’ spiritual father and deserves to be quoted: “He exercises twin rights as teacher and father, both to approve our good achievements and to condemn our bad, to correct our mistakes and kindly to organize our future course of action ”26 In addition, such appellatives may also point out to the fact that Niceta was considerably older than Paulinus This was an argument used by Burn, Niceta’s first editor, in his attempt to estimate Niceta’s age when visiting Nola 27 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

For the incontestable dating of this natalicium, see Trout 1991 Epistula 29 14: venerabili episcopo atque doctissimo Nicetae Carmen 17 43: sacerdotem domino canentem; Carmen 17 191–192: usque felices quibus es sacerdos / praestitus oras; Carmen 27 154: sacerdotis redditus; Carmen 27 231: Nicetes, domini puer atque sacerdos Gryson 1968, 134–136 Jerg 1970, passim Carmen 17 65: unde nos iustis precis tuorum / qui suum recte repetunt parentem; Carmen 17 245: Te patrem dicit plaga tota Borrae; Carmen 27 345: nunc age sancte parens; Carmen 27 360: ergo, veni pater Carmen 27 353–355: gemino qui iure magistri / et patris ut bene gesta probet, sic improba damnet, / corrigat errata et placidus disponat agenda Throughout this paper I follow P G Walsh’s translation of Paulinus’ poems, see Walsh 1975, 283 Burn 1905, xxxv

140

Carmen Angela Cvetković

Often the titles pater or parens are accompanied by the qualificative “holy” (sanctus) 28 While sanctus is another term usually applied to bishops, in Paulinus’ description of Niceta, more than simply a mere apostrophe, sanctus is used in order to illustrate a new ideal of bishop who, at the end of the fourth century under the influence of popular writings on ecclesiastical leadership, was increasingly expected to set an example through his moral and virtuous conduct 29 Niceta’s saintliness is conspicuous in the way in which he is first and foremost identified with Christ himself Paulinus claims that the people whom Niceta encounters during his travel back home will be visited by Christ journeying on Niceta’s feet and with his countenance 30 Upon Niceta’s return to Nola three years later, Paulinus welcomes Christ who lodges in his friend’s humble heart 31 When he is not identified with Christ, the bishop is presented as benefiting from Christ’s permanent protection and guidance Departing from the rules of the traditional protremptikon which expresses the fear of the poet for friends exposed to the dangers of the ocean, Paulinus presents Christ journeying together with his bishop Niceta and protecting him from the hazards of the voyage Given Christ’s presence and assistance, nature – usually described as a wild and threatening force in the classical propemptikon – will obey the will of God, surrendering voluntarily to Niceta, the servant of God, and favoring his journey Metaphors of war and peace abound in Paulinus’ description of Niceta’s voyage back home, strengthening the idea that Niceta is in a way a miles Christi: “Wherever you extend your journey, over water, over land, and even among enemies, you will proceed armed with the helmet of salvation, and with Christ as your head ”32 Niceta is compared with other saintly figures, such as the patriarch Jacob and Paulinus’ own patron saint, Felix For Paulinus, Jacob – also called Israel – is a symbol of asceticism and renunciation 33 Therefore, when Paulinus compares Niceta with the patriarch of the Old Testament, he does so in order to refer to the bishop’s ascetic authority Similarly to Jacob, who was a fugitive fleeing to safety from his arrogant brother, Niceta is also pictured as a fugitive (fugitivus) 34 However, Paulinus observes that Niceta differs from Jacob in that he flees incessantly from the world while the patriarch fled only once Niceta’s ascetic struggle is equated with the toils to mount the ladder on which Jacob saw angels as-

28 29 30 31 32 33 34

Carmen 17 8: sancte Niceta; Carmen 27 324–325 Tu sancte, paterno / suscipe me Niceta sinu; Carmen 27 345: sancte parens; Carmen 27 360: nunc age sancte parens Rapp 2005, 41–55; Lizzi Testa 2009, 535 f Carmen 17 15–16: quos tuo accedens pede visitabit / Christus et ore Carmen 27 154–155: ecce sacerdotis reditum satiatus adoro / suscipiens humili metantem in pectore Christum Carmen 17 137–140: qua libet pergas iter, et per undas / perque tellurem licet et per hostes, / ibis armatus galea salutis, / vertice Christo Epistula 24 8 Carmen 17 149

Venerabili episcopo atque doctissimo Nicetae

141

cending and descending In view of the bishops’ ability to conquer his body, he is referred to as victor, a title that is of course an obvious pun on the Greek name Nicetas 35 Niceta’s asceticism is mentioned again in Carmen 27, albeit in passing, when Paulinus describes the bishop as “a man as goodly in his tongue’s teaching as he is holy in his victorious spirit and his flesh subdued”36 and when he refers to Niceta’s “chaste life” (vita pudicitiae) 37 Although Paulinus pays only brief attention to Niceta as an ascetic figure, his testimony is nevertheless valuable evidence for the emergence of the new ideal of the monk-bishop, who, while fleeing from the world, continues to lead the church 38 Paulinus goes even further in his praise of Niceta’s holiness when he considers the Illyrian bishop to be, similar to his heavenly patron Felix, a saint proper 39 As a friend (amicus) of Felix,40 Niceta is invited to inspect the new buildings of the saint’s shrine and act as if he were in his father’s house Niceta is even acknowledged as a patron (patronus),41 although this title is usually reserved for Felix by Paulinus 42 Most importantly however, like Felix, due to his sanctity Niceta is seen as having the ability to communicate efficiently with God through prayer interceding on behalf of Paulinus for the remission of sins and other favors In Carmen 27 Niceta is asked to aid the unfinished works at the shrine of St Felix with prayers and to consecrate what has been achieved 43 Niceta’s power as an intercessor before the throne of God equals that of St Felix, for the Illyrian bishop is invited to play the part of the martyr saint and to pray for his friend Paulinus 44 The theme of Niceta’s intercession on behalf of Paulinus is developed also in the final strophes of the Carmen 17, which depict both Niceta’s and Paulinus’ life after death Having enjoyed the close protection of Christ throughout his virtuous life on earth, the bishop is pictured in the company of saints, occupying a privileged place in heaven in Christ’s immediate proximity From this prominent position Niceta is asked to pray in front of God for Paulinus who, having led an earthly life of less merit than Niceta, will be far removed from his friend and destined to a low and distant place in heaven What is remarkable in this passage is the idea that the “holy” bishop Niceta maintains his role as a mediator of the divine in the afterlife and that Paulinus who is tied with Niceta through the bonds of friendship and human patronage may still benefit from such connections which continue to function in heaven

35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44

Carmen 17 161–162: tuque, Niceta, bene nominatus / corporis victor Carmen 27 233: vir tam bonus ore magistro / quam sacer est victore animo vel corpore victo Carmen 27 167 On the model of the monk-bishop, see Sterk 2004 Carmen 27 150 Carmen 27 199 Carmen 17 306 See Kirstein 2000, 240 Carmen 27 356–357 Carmen 27 596

142

Carmen Angela Cvetković

Another distinctive mark of the episcopal ideal embodied by Niceta is his ability to teach for the benefit of others Niceta is not only acknowledged as a most learned individual (doctissimus) but he is also invoked repeatedly throughout Paulinus’ poems as a magister (teacher or master), being praised in addition for his wisdom and for his gift of discernment 45 In Paulinus’ works it is usually the apostle Paul and sporadically Augustine who are referred to as magister 46 Since he bestowed this title relatively often on the Illyrian bishop, Paulinus must have been genuinely impressed with Niceta’s learning and edifying activities Carmen 17 offers us a glimpse of the latter, showing Niceta involved in spreading the Christian message among the barbarians According to Paulinus, the Bessi, the Scythians, the Getae and the Dacians were all the beneficiaries of Niceta’s missionary enterprises This is valuable evidence for a new role that the fourth century bishops came to fulfill, namely their involvement in teaching Christian faith outside their communities 47 As a result of Niceta’s civilizing work “the barbarians learn to resound the name of Christ with Roman hearts and to live in purity and tranquil peace ”48 This passage suggests that Niceta’s efforts to convert barbarians to Christianity had not only religious, but also cultural and political consequences 49 The expression corde Romano refers primarily to the usage of Latin language indicating that the native Illyrian people were also taught Latin together with the message of the Christian faith 50 What is more, it has been argued that Niceta’s missionary endeavors provided Paulinus with the occasion “to rearticulate the Augustan ideal of Rome’s civilizing mission at a time when that ideal must have seemed desperate and embattled ”51 Also, Paulinus credits Niceta for succeeding through his work of conversion to bring peace to a region that at the end of the fourth century was a territory ravaged by wars and barbarian brigands Niceta’s concern for the ethical and doctrinal formation of the future Christians through pre-baptismal instruction is confirmed by other ancient sources In the fifth century, Gennadius of Marseille attributed to a certain Niceta of Romatiana, identified by modern scholars with Paulinus’ Niceta, a work in six books of Instructions to candidates for baptism 52 These works, written in Latin and preserved fragmentarily, allow us to see not only what was the content of Niceta’s teaching but they also reveal their 45

46 47 48 49 50 51 52

Carmen 17 247: et sui discors fera te magistro / pectora (…); Carmen 17 321: non unius populi magistrum; Carmen 27 233: ecce diem venit, vir tam bonus ore magistro; Carmen 27 243: sed quoniam lateri meus assidet ipse magister; Carmen 27 269: attentusque diu pascentis in ora magistri; Carmen 27 353: gemino qui iure magistri / et patris ut bene gesta probet Fabre 1949, 228, n 8 Gwynn 2012, 889 Carmen 17 262–264: barbari discunt resonare Christum / corde Romano placidamque casti / vivere pacem Sivan 1995, 87 Kirstein 2000, 221 Trout 1999, 215 Gennadius of Marseille, De viris illustribus 22 (Richardson, 105)

Venerabili episcopo atque doctissimo Nicetae

143

author as a well-educated bishop involved in normative religious debates and aware of the latest theological developments of his time These writings also bring evidence for his extensive use of Greek sources, not available at that time in Latin translations, which suggests that Niceta most likely knew Greek 53 Bilingualism would not have been something unusual for the elites of Illyricum of that age, the most famous example being that of Jerome who hailed from Dalmatia Niceta, whose episcopal see was located in the immediate proximity of the linguistic border of the Roman Empire, would have had ample opportunity to get familiar with Greek Hence, his handling of different languages coupled with his theological knowledge might explain Paulinus’ admiration of the Illyrian bishop and his praise of him as doctissimus Niceta – The Church politician There is no doubt that Paulinus’ main efforts in these texts and especially in Carmen 17 were directed towards presenting to his audience Niceta as the prototype of the “holy bishop,” whose authority is predominantly based on outstanding spiritual qualities However, as soon as questions are raised regarding the reasons behind Niceta’s visits to Italy, some more worldly aspects emerge of the role a fourth-century bishop was expected to play Although these reasons can only be conjectured, it may be, however, safely assumed that Niceta’s travels were not prompted simply by his desire to take part in the celebration of the feast of St Felix In the letter addressed by Paulinus to Sulpicius, it is mentioned that prior to his first arrival in Nola in January 400, Niceta was in Rome where he was much admired, presumably because of his learning Burn was the first to suggest that Niceta had business to conduct in Rome concerning matters of ecclesiastical discipline in the Illyrian churches that had been affected by the political transfer of Eastern Illyricum to the eastern empire in 379 54 As a tentative context for Niceta’s visit, Burn hints at the competition between the See of Rome and the See of Constantinople over Eastern Illyricum, based on the assumption that in order to counteract the influence of the latter, the bishop of Rome, Damasus (366–384) gave vicarial powers to Acholius, bishop of Thessalonike, making him metropolitan over Eastern Illyricum, as early as 384 Burn assumes that on his return home, Niceta went to inform his metropolitan, the bishop of Thessalonike, and his neighboring fellow bishops, from Stobi and Scupi in Dardania, about the results of his journey Building her argument along the same lines, more recently, Hagith Sivan sees Niceta’s journey as throwing new light on the attempts of the Roman church to extend its 53 54

Patin (1909) mentions Basil of Cappadocia, Gregory of Nazianus, Gregory Thaumaturgus and Cyril of Jerusalem as the Greek sources of Niceta’s works Burn 1905, l–lii

144

Carmen Angela Cvetković

jurisdiction over the Eastern provinces of the empire 55 In her view, Niceta’s journey as far as the episcopal see of Tomi coupled with his missionary activities among the people of Scythia, the Bessi, the Getae and the Dacians, as reported by Paulinus, had been ordered from Rome with the aim of preparing the way for a Western intervention in these territories Like Burn, she also claims that Niceta’s visits to Italy should be interpreted in the context of the rivalry between the Roman and Constantinopolitan sees generated by their attempts to secure ecclesiastical control over Eastern Illyricum 56 Whereas Burn saw the competition between the two episcopal sees reflected in the creation of the vicariate of Thessalonike by Damasus, Sivan regards the missionary work organized by John Chrysostom among the Goths settled along the Danube during his first tenure as the bishop of Constantinople (388–403) as main evidence for the rivalry between Rome and Constantinople She also considers that John Chrysostom’s correspondence with a number of Macedonian and Illyrian bishops was meant to “drive a wedge between the pope and the Illyrican church ”57 Without any doubt both Burn and Sivan were correct to point out the “political” dimension of Niceta’s visits to Italy However, their claim that these travels need to be interpreted in the context of the tensions between Rome and Constantinople is debatable as there is no substantial evidence in the sources of this time to support the existence of such frictions 58 Although politically Eastern Illyricum shifted allegiances from the West to the East at the end of the fourth century, ecclesiastically it remained dependent on the West 59 Therefore, the claims that a vicariate of Thessalonike was founded under Damasus with the aim to retain the transferred region of Eastern Illyricum within Rome’s control have been doubted by a number of scholars who do not accept the existence of such a vicariate before Innocent I’s episcopacy 60 The extant correspondence between the bishops of Thessalonike and the bishops of Rome, Damasus, Siricius and Innocent I up to 403 contains no conclusive evidence that the church of Rome claimed the prerogative to intervene in Illyricum through a delegate, nor does it require from them to report on the ecclesiastical situation of

55 56 57 58 59 60

Sivan 1995 Sivan 1995, 86 Sivan 1995, 86 The ecclesiastical control over Eastern Illyricum will become a source of increasing animosity between Constantinople and Rome, but later, in the decades after Innocent I’s death (Dunn 2013a, 697) The transfer of Eastern Illyricum to the Eastern Empire is still much debated For a brief summary, see Dunn 2013a, 683 Greenslade 1941, 17–30; Pietri 1976, 1077–1093 More recently, Dunn (2013a, 684) argues for the creation of the vicariate of Thessalonike during Siricius’ episcopacy (384–399) with the aim to counter the influence of Ambrose of Milan in the region He also observes that at the beginning of the fifth century the authority exercised by Innocent I in regard with Eastern Illyricum was not all-encompassing, but reduced to judicial matters

Venerabili episcopo atque doctissimo Nicetae

145

Illyricum which would have been the task of a vicar bishop 61 In fact, at the end of the fourth century the Illyrian churches turned for advice not to Rome but to Milan in whose sphere of influence they felt themselves to be 62 Also, although Chrysostom’s interest in the conversion of the Goths is unusual, there is no evidence whatsoever that it caused tensions with the episcopal see of Rome The letters sent by John Chrysostom to the bishops of Thessalonike, Corinth and Salona were all written while he was in exile and they are more indicative of the personal authority that John Chrysostom enjoyed among the bishops of these cities than of the expansionist tendencies of the former bishop of Constantinople Besides, as a pro-Nicene bishop in a city where the predominant form of Christianity was Arian, Chrysostom enjoyed the support of his Western episcopal counterparts throughout his episcopacy and, especially after his deposition and final exile in 404 when both the bishop of Rome, Innocent I and the emperor Honorius intervened on his behalf 63 Against this background, instead of seeing Niceta as an agent of Rome sent on a mission to counter the growing influence of the See of Constantinople over Eastern Illyricum, I propose to look for the reasons behind Niceta’s visits to Italy in Illyricum itself Niceta was a pro-Nicene bishop At the end of the fourth century the links that pro-Nicene Illyrian churches established especially with the church of Milan and other North Italian churches have been drastically disturbed by the barbarian invasions which affected the provinces of Pannonia, Norricum and Dalmatia, thus isolating Eastern Illyricum from their traditional pro-Nicene allies 64 Moreover, after the death of Ambrose in 397, the authority of the metropolitical see of Milan weakened considerably In such circumstances, deprived of the support that usually came from Milan in matters of doctrinal affairs, one may assume that a pro-Nicene bishop such as Niceta, who belonged to the Latin-speaking area of Illyricum turned most naturally to Rome in his attempt to secure new allies for his active promoting of pro-Nicene Christianity in an area in which he most likely still faced opposition from active heterodox churches 65 Among Niceta’s stations recorded by Paulinus, Thessalonike and Tomi had proNicene bishops The bishop of Thessalonike at the time of Niceta’s visit was Anysius He was a supporter of pro-Nicene Christianity and an ally and correspondent both of John Chrysostom and of the bishops of Rome, Siricius and Innocent I A letter sent by Anysius to Innocent I in 405 provides ample evidence that both were eager to lend their support to the exiled bishop of Constantinople and to condemn his adversaries 66 61 62 63 64 65 66

Pietri 1976, 1087, n 2 and 3: “Jusqu’en 403 au moins, la politique occidentale n’émet pas de pretention directe sur l’Illyricum ” Greenslade 1941, 27–29; Pietri 1976, 1077–1082 Liebeschuetz 1990, 226 Pietri 1976, 1085–1086 For evidence of the existence of Homoian bishops in Illyricum as well as of followers of Photinus and Bonosus at the very end of the fourth century, see Pietri 1976, 1083 Pietri 1976, 1088

146

Carmen Angela Cvetković

Unfortunately, evidence for the episcopal sees of Philippi and Scupi at the end of the fourth century is lacking We can only assume that they also promoted pro-Nicene Christianity, as the see of Scupi became already during Niceta’s life a metropolitanate 67 More information is available about the episcopal see of Tomi, an important centre for pro-Nicene Christianity At the time of Niceta’s visit, the bishop of this city was Theotimus, a friend of John Chrysostom and an ecclesiastical writer to whom Jerome dedicated a few lines in his work De viris illustribus Socrates, the historian, mentions that Theotimus came to Constantinople in order to defend John Chrysostom against the attacks of Epiphanius This means that he was still bishop in 402 Like Niceta, Theotimus was also a missionary bishop who attempted to convert barbarians, especially Huns and Goths settled along the Danube, from Homoian Arianism or paganism to pro-Nicene Christianity 68 If, on his way back from Rome, Niceta visited fellow bishops from both Greek and Latin territories who were supporters of pro-Nicene Christianity, it may be assumed that he was keen either on building an episcopal network or on strengthening already existing ties with bishops who could have provided the support he needed in his struggle with the adversaries of the pro-Nicene faith In addition, the letters of Innocent I addressed to Illyrian bishops, including Niceta who is mentioned by name, almost a decade after Niceta’s visits to Italy allow us to see that the pro-Nicene bishops from this region were confronted with long lasting problems of ecclesiastical discipline caused by the Bonosan crisis,69 which were not dealt with uniformly These letters show the bishop of Rome offering rational argument and advice on how to proceed in regard with those clerics ordained by Bonosus before and after his condemnation in c 392 at Capua so that the Illyrian bishops do not find themselves at variance with one another and with the practices endorsed by the Church of Rome What is more, these letters allow us to observe that as late as 414 the Illyrian churches acted somewhat independently from the Church of Rome with whose hierarchs they dared to differ in matters of ecclesiastical discipline, calling their position into question That the bishop of Rome acknowledged the right of the church leaders from this province to make their own decision seems to be confirmed by the fact that Innocent I sought to make the Illyrian bishops accept Roman authority by persuasion rather than with decrees or edicts 70

67 68 69

70

Burn (1905, liii) considers that Scupi must have become a metropolitan see between 386 and 412 Zeiller 1918, 548–549 Bonosus was most likely the bishop of Naissus, a city located in the close vicinity of Niceta’s Remesiana and not the bishop of Serdica as some scholars considered until recently (Dunn 2007) He caused both doctrinal problems for the church, refusing to accept Mary’s perpetual virginity, and administrative problems through his ordination of clerics in a schismatic sect On the relationship between the Church of Rome and the Illyrian bishops on the matter of the heretical ordination of clerics, see Dunn 2008 and 2013b

Venerabili episcopo atque doctissimo Nicetae

147

While the reasons for Niceta’s journeys may be only conjectured, the fact that Niceta travelled twice to Italy within a relatively short span of time is notable On each occasion he faced difficulties, because he traveled during the winter and thus with more tricky weather conditions, and because he had to deal with the threat posed by the wars with the Goths, as Paulinus himself reports 71 The fact that Niceta defied these difficulties shows he most likely had important and pressing business to conduct that could not be postponed for another time of the year Niceta’s business in Italy and his subsequent strange circuitous journey back home through the provinces of Macedonia, Scythia Minor and Dardania was certainly connected with ecclesiastical politics, having probably been triggered by the critical situation of the pro-Nicene Illyrian churches of that age, which, internally, struggled with the problem of heretical ordination of clerics whereas, externally, they faced opposition from other religious communities Conclusion As literary works, Paulinus’ poems are usually approached with much suspicion by modern scholars However, when read cautiously, they constitute a major source of information for a variety of topics Thus, we owe to Paulinus a great deal of our knowledge about the obscure figure of the Illyrian bishop Niceta of Remesiana Without any doubt, Paulinus’ primary concern in these poems was to praise in Niceta a set of spiritual qualities that at the end of the fourth century were expected to belong to the episcopal ideal He is presented, therefore, as a spiritual father, a teacher, an ascetic figure, a saint proper almost like Felix, a successful intercessor on behalf of Paulinus in this life and in hereafter However, delving into a discussion about the reasons behind Niceta’s travels to Nola brings to the fore other roles that he, as a late antique bishop, had to fulfill Although Niceta was the bishop of a small town in Illyricum, he was not only aware of, but also, as his writings make abundantly clear, deeply involved in theological debates regarding doctrinal normativity Paulinus’ testimony allows us to add a whole new dimension to Niceta’s promotion of pro-Nicene Christianity which was not confined to simply producing theological treatises, but included missionary activities outside his own community and a sustained effort to build ties with important episcopal sees from other regions than Illyricum We may assume that if Niceta traveled to Italy to speak on behalf of Illyrian pro-Nicene churches, he did so because he already occupied a prominent position among the pro-Nicene bishops of this region The impact he had in Rome and which Paulinus mentions in his letter to Sulpicius may come as a confir-

71

Carmen 27 335

148

Carmen Angela Cvetković

mation of his distinguished status among the Illyrian bishops of that time whom the sources remember mainly for their breaching of church discipline, by not abiding to the rules of clerical elections Thus, Niceta emerges as an able church politician who was part of a trans-regional network of pro-Nicene bishops that extended from Rome and Nola in Italy to Tomi on the shores of the Black Sea Bibliography Primary Sources Gennadius of Marseille De viris illustribus 1896 Edited by E C Richardson Leipzig: Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung Innocent I S Innocentii I Papae epistolae et decreta 1844–1864 Edited by J -P Migne 217 vols PL vol 20 Paris Hilary of Poitiers Sancti Hilarii Pictaviensis Opera 1916 Edited by A Feder CSEL 65 Berlin Lucifer of Cagliary Luciferi Calaritani Opera quae supersunt 1978 Edited by G F Diercks CCSL 8 Turnhout Paulinus of Nola Sancti Pontii Meropii Paulini Nolani carmina 1894a Edited by W von Hartel CSEL 30 Wien – Sancti Pontii Meropii Paulini Nolani epistulae 1894b Edited by W von Hartel CSEL 29 Wien Walsh, P G 1975 The Poems of St Paulinus of Nola Translated and Annotated by P G Walsh ACW 40 New York

Secondary Sources Basson, A 1996 “A Transformation of Genres in Late Latin Literature: Classical Literary Tradition and Ascetic ideals in Paulinus of Nola ” Pages 267–276 in Shifting Frontiers in Late Antiquity Edited by R W Mathisen and H Sivan Aldershot: Variorum Burn, A E 1905 Niceta of Remesiana: His Life and Works Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Cvetković, C A , 2019, “Niceta’s Visits To Nola: Between Sacred Travel and Political Mission ” Pages 179–206 in Episcopal Networks in Late Antiquity: Connection and Communication across Boundaries Edited by C A Cvetković and P Gemeinhardt Berlin: De Gruyter Dunne, G 2007 “Innocent I and Anysius of Thessalonica ” Byzantion 77:124–148 – 2008 “Innocent I and the Illyrian Churches on the Question of Heretical Ordination ” Journal of the Australian Early Medieval Association 4:65–81 – 2013a “The Church of Rome as a Court of Appeal in the Early Fifth Century: the Evidence of Innocent I and the Illyrian Churches ” JEH 64:679–699 – 2013b “The letter of Innocent I to Marcian of Niš ” Pages 319–339 in Saint Emperor Constantine and Christianity Edited by D Bojović Niš: Centre for Church Studies Duval, Y -M 1980 “Niceta d’Aquilée: Histoire, légende et conjectures anciennes ” Pages 161–206 in Grado nella storia e nell’arte Vol 1 of Grado nella storia e nell’arte Udine: Arte grafiche friulane

Venerabili episcopo atque doctissimo Nicetae

149

Fabre, P 1949 Saint Paulin de Nole et l’amitié chrétienne Paris: Éditions de Boccard Fontaine, J 1981 Naissance de la poésie dans l’Occident Chrétien: Esquisse d’une histoire de la poésie latine chrétienne du III au VI siècle Paris: Études Augustininnes Greenslade, S L 1941 “The Illyrian Churches and the Vicariate of Thessalonica ” Journal of Theological Studies 46:17–30 Gryson, R 1968 Le prêtre selon Saint Ambroise Louvain: Université Catholique de Louvain Gwynn, D M 2012 “Episcopal Leadership ” Pages 876–915 in The Oxford Handbook of Late Antiquity Edited by S F Johnson Oxford: Oxford University Press Hunt, E D 1989 “Did Constantius II Have ‘Court Bishops’?” Studia Patristica 19:86–90 Jerg, E 1970 Vir Venerabilis Untersuchungen zur Titulatur der Bischöfe in den Ausserkirchlichen Texten der Spätantike als Beitrag zur Deutung ihrer öffentlichen Stellung Wien: Herder Kirstein, R 2000 Paulinus Nolanus: Carmen 17 Basel: Schwabe & Co Liebeschuetz, J H W G 1990 Barbarians and Bishops: Army, Church, and State in the Age of Arcadius and Chrysostom Oxford: Clarendon Press Lizzi Testa, R 2009 “The Late Antique Bishop: Image and Reality” Pages 525–538 in A Companion to Late Antiquity Edited by Ph Rousseau Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell Markschies, C 1998 “Die politische Dimension des Bischofsamtes im vierten Jahrhundert ” Pages 438–469 in Recht-Macht-Gerechtigkeit Edited by J Mehlhausen Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlag Meslin, M 1967 Les Ariens d’Occident 335–430 Paris: Éditions du Seuil Patin, W A 1909 Niceta, Bischof von Remesiana als Schriftsteller und Theologe München: Lindauer Pietri, C 1976 Roma Christiana Recherches sur l’Église de Rome, son organization, sa politique, son idéologie de Miltiade à Sixte III (311–440) 2 vols Paris: Boccard Rapp, C 2005 Holy Bishops in Late Antiquity: The Nature of Christian Leadership in an Age of Transition Berkeley: University of California Press Sivan, H 1995 “Nicetas’ (of Remesiana) Mission and Stilicho’s Illyrican Ambition Notes on Paulinus of Nola Carmen XVII (Propemticon) ” REAug 41:79–90 Slootjes, D 2006 “Governor Trumped by Bishop: Shifting Boundaries in Roman Religious and Public Life ” Pages 219–231 in The Impact of Imperial Rome on Religions, Ritual and Religious Life in the Roman Empire Proceedings of the Fifth Workshop of the International Network Impact of Empire (Roman Empire, 200 B C – A D 476) Münster, June 30 – July 4, 2004 Edited by L de Blois, P Funke and J Hahn Leiden: Brill Sterk, A 2004 Renouncing the World yet Leading the Church: The Monk-Bishop in Late Antiquity Cambridge: Harvard University Press Trout, D E 1991 “The Dates of Ordination of Paulinus of Bordeaux and of his Departure for Nola ” REAug 37:237–260 – 1999 Paulinus of Nola Life, Letters, and Poems Berkeley: University of California Press Williams, D H 1996 “Another Exception to Later Fourth-Century ‘Arian’ Typologies: the Case of Germinius of Sirmium ” JECS 4 3:335–357 Zeiller, J 1918 Les origines chrétiennes dans les provinces danubiennes de l’empire romain Paris: Boccard

Controllers of Crowds? Popular Mobilization and Episcopal Leadership in Late Roman North Africa* Julio Cesar Magalhães de Oliveira (São Paulo) In 388 CE, Ambrose of Milan wrote to the emperor Theodosius in defence of a bishop accused of having conducted or instigated the burning down of a Jewish synagogue: “The bishops are the controllers of crowds, the keen upholders of peace, unless, of course, they are moved by insults to God and to His church ”1 The phrase has often been quoted in modern scholarship as an example of the double power bishops deployed in Late Antiquity as pacifiers and instigators of crowds 2 This is certainly an accurate description, as far as we are concerned with the particular style of leadership epitomized by the Christian bishop from the fourth century onwards 3 But, in explaining the twin processes of popular mobilization and demobilization, we should be mindful of the fact that the motivations and interests of leaders were not the only thing that counted Confronted with the general problem of popular mobilization and violence in Late Antiquity, scholars have long disputed its magnitude and its impact Much of the debate, however, has been restricted to questions whether the supposed stability of the classical city would have persisted in Late Antiquity and whether Christianity would be responsible for the transformation of this equilibrium 4 Scholars have also ques-

*

1 2 3 4

I am grateful to Daniëlle Slootjes and Erika Manders for the invitation to publish my contribution in this volume, based on my paper given at the conference in Göttingen I would also like to express my thanks for the comments and suggestions of the audience at the conference, and to Carlos Galvão-Sobrinho for the discussion of some of the points presented in this paper The author is though solely responsible for the errors and idiosyncrasies that still subsist Ambr Ep 40 6 (PL 16 1103B), transl Brown 1992, 103: sacerdotes enim turbarum moderatores sunt, studiosi pacis, nisi cum et ipsi mouentur iniuria Dei, aut Ecclesiae contumelia Brown 1992, 103; MacMullen 2003, 490; Hahn 2014, 398 Galvão-Sobrinho 2013; Khalos 2013 Liebeschuetz 2001, 249–83; Whitby 2006

152

Julio Cesar Magalhães de Oliveira

tioned if Christian leaders were actually able to rouse large crowds or only engaged the more restricted and manageable numbers of their clients and thugs For Ramsay MacMullen, for instance, the Later Roman Empire would be characterized through “the prevalence and high level of violence over religious differences,” which he attributed to the incendiary preaching of Christian leaders and to the inherent combustibility of their communities 5 Other scholars, such as Neil McLynn and Peter Brown, have disputed this assertion by pointing out the disproportionate reportage of violence in our sources and the ordered nature of the Late Empire According to these authors, explosions of ecclesiastical violence should be seen as no more than occasional breakdowns of a more orderly norm Although some bishops embarked in violent confrontations, they had to rely on smaller, more “professional” groups of clients and thugs, rather than on the mass of Christians 6 Rita Lizzi Testa adopted a parallel perspective, although she further minimized the religious motivations for the outbreak of violence In her view, all episodes of popular collective action in the fourth and fifth centuries would be viewed as a veiled way of maintaining the traditional aristocratic order through the all-encompassing tentacles of patronage 7 Despite differences of approach, all these studies have in common their persistent focus on the role of leadership and on the general level of tension in society Not surprisingly, none of these models tried in fact to explain the reasons for popular engagement, which is automatically attributed to the fanaticism, irrationality and deprivation of the masses, to the manipulation of bishops and aristocrats or to the failure of the mechanisms of coercion Scholars of other periods, however, have long demonstrated the inadequacy of analyses of collective action as the spasmodic result of “strain” or as the exclusive product of the rational choices of leaders Generations of historians and social scientists have reminded us that neither the presence of tension, nor the inducements of organizers are sufficient conditions for explaining the mobilization process, and this for several reasons 8 Firstly, collective actors are not isolated individuals to be occasionally affected by external inducements Rather, as Charles Tilly put it, “Actors consist of networks deploying partially shared stories, cultures and collective connections with other actors ”9 Secondly, no less than in the case of religious rituals or civic celebrations, the form and outlook of a contentious action is not born out of organizers’ heads but is culturally inscribed and socially communicated Every society has its own learned conventions of contention, a common code that organizers and participants need to share and understand in order to engage in a collective action 10 And finally, all actors

5 6 7 8 9 10

MacMullen 1990, 2003 The quotation is taken from MacMullen 1990, 267 McLynn 1992; Brown 1992 Lizzi Testa 1995 See Rogers (1998, 1–17) and Tarrow (2011, 16–34) for two general reviews of the scholarship Tilly 2003, 32 Tarrow 2011, 29

Controllers of Crowds?

153

participating in a claim-making process have their own reasons and motivations to do it It is certainly important to recognize the crucial parts political entrepreneurs played in activating, connecting, and representing participants in violent encounters 11 But we must not forget, as Pierre Bourdieu put it, that “undertakings of collective mobilization cannot succeed without a minimum of concordance between the habitus of the mobilizing agents (e g prophet, party leader, etc ) and the dispositions of those whose aspirations and world-view they express ”12 In explaining the actual episodes of popular mobilization and violence in Late Antiquity, we should, therefore, be more attentive to the dynamics of contention (i e to the mechanisms and processes that inhibit, promote or channel collective action) and to the logic of the actors (i e to the reasons and motivations of the participants in these contentious episodes) In recent years, a number of historians have offered significant studies in this direction, as we can see in the works of Carlos Galvão-Sobrinho, Leslie Dossey and Brent Shaw 13 Furthermore, my book on popular participation and collective action in the cities of late antique North Africa has tried to contribute to this discussion as well 14 In this contribution I examine the particular relationship between popular mobilization and episcopal leadership My aim is to explore – from a more bottom-up perspective – two well-known examples of attempts made by Christian bishops to mobilize or demobilize crowds in fourth and early-fifth century North Africa In this way, I hope to demonstrate the importance of a more balanced approach of the respective roles of leaders and crowds in this period The first episode I shall discuss is the mobilization of popular support by the dissident bishop Donatus of Bagaï, in Numidia, to resist the implementation of the repressive measures taken by the emperor Constans, in 347 15 In August of that year, two imperial officials, Paul and Macarius, arrived in Africa with the mission to suppress the “Donatist” dissidence by a mixture of armed repression and imperial-scale almsgiving 16 After their arrival in Carthage the emissaries found the resolute resistance of dissident leaders, in particular of the great Donatus, the bishop of the metropolis of Africa, who immediately sent letters to all his colleagues to ensure that the imperial distributions would not be accepted When the mission approached the town of Bagaï, however, events turned violent The massacre that resulted from this encounter was destined to become one of the most contested issues of the conflict between Catholics and Donatists Many years latter, the Catholic bishop Optatus of Milevis still felt that 11 12 13 14 15 16

Tilly 2003, 21 Bourdieu 1977, 81 Galvão-Sobrinho 2006, 2013; Dossey 2010; Shaw 2011 Magalhães de Oliveira 2012 On these measures, see Shaw 2011, 822–4 On Paul, see “Paulus (2)” (PLRE 1, 683), and “Paulus (2)” (PCBE 1, 839–41) On Macarius, see “Macarius (1)” (PLRE 1, 524–25), and “Macarius (1)” (PCBE 1, 655–58) On their mission, see Frend 1952, 177–82; Cecconi 1990 and Shaw 2011, 825–7

154

Julio Cesar Magalhães de Oliveira

the Catholics’ recourse to the state’s armed force had to be justified in a polemical treatise against his rivals: Whatever harsh measures might have been taken in an attempt to bring about unity, you can see, my brother Parmenian, who is to blame for them You say that we Catholics petitioned for the use of military force If that is the case, why did no one at that time witness units of the regular army in the proconsular province? Paul and Macarius were in fact coming to relieve the poor everywhere and to encourage individuals to Unity But when they approached the city of Bagaï, that other Donatus …, the bishop of this same city, wished to place a roadblock in the way of Unity and an obstacle in the way of the above-mentioned persons who were on their way to his town He therefore sent criers through the nearby villages and to all periodic markets, summoning those circumcellions who are known as agonistici or Holy Fighters to assemble at a prearranged place The crowds of men that were stirred up and inflamed on this occasion were made up of those whose madness had been incited by these very same bishops only a brief time before …17 (Opt C Parm 3 4 1–3)

A description follows of the activities of the gangs of circumcellions who assembled at the periodic markets to cancel debt contracts and to free illegally enslaved workers The horrified reaction of the local dissident bishops, who were unable to discipline them, was to write a petition to Taurinus, the Count of Africa at the time The result was a military intervention and the massacre of large numbers of militant Christians in the periodic markets of the region 18 Then, returning to the incident of 347, Optatus concludes: For what happened next, consider for yourself to whom responsibility ought to be or can be ascribed At that place, they had collected an enormous force of men and all of the necessary provisions Out of the town basilica, they created, as it were, a public granary, in the expectation of the arrival of those men against whom they would be able to exert their madness and do whatever their crazed state of mind would suggest to them – unless, that is, the presence of the armed soldiers would prevent them (Opt , C Parm 3 4 9–11)

The confrontation that ensued started when the metatores, the camp surveyors, were sent on ahead of the main body of soldiers and the crowd assembled to defend the

17

18

Opt C Parm 3 4 1–3 (SC 413, 36–38), transl Shaw 2011, 164–5: Quicquid itaque in unitate facienda aspere potuit geri, uides, frater Parmeniane, cui debeat imputari A nobis Catholicis petitum militem esse dicitis Si ita est, quare in prouincia proconsulari tunc nullus armatum militem uidit? Veniebant Paulus et Macarius qui pauperes ubique dispungerent et ad unitatem singulos hortarentur; et cum ad Bagaïensem ciuitatem proximarent, tunc alter Donatus, sicut supra diximus, eiusdem ciuitatis episcopus, impedimentum unitati et obicem uenientibus supra memoratis opponere cupiens, praecones per uicina loca et per omnes nundinas misit, circumcelliones agonisticos nuncupans, ad praedictum locum concurrerent inuitauit Et eorum illo tempore concursus est flagitatus, quorum dementia paulo ante ab ipsis episcopis impie uidebatur esse succensa Opt C Parm 3 4 3–5 (SC 413, 38–40) On this peasant rebellion, see Dossey 2010, 175–80; Shaw 2011, 168–71

Controllers of Crowds?

155

basilica beat them The wounded soldiers returned to their units and it was found that two or three had died As a consequence, concludes Optatus, “the enraged soldiers were terribly upset and their commanders were no longer able to restrain them ”19 As we can see in this narrative, the paths that led to the popular mobilization to defend the church of Bagaï and other churches in 347 followed well-known mechanisms and networks of communication These included the diffusion of letters from Carthage to other episcopal sees and the use of public criers (praecones) to send the messages of the local bishop to his rural parishioners The fact that the bishop of Bagaï had recourse to the gangs of Holy Fighters assembled in the villages and periodic markets around the town to defend his urban church also shows that Donatus had his habitual, specialized enforcers to whom he could turn And yet, what we can observe in this process of mobilization is not the enlistment of a tied clientele or the hiring of thugs, as McLynn and Lizzi Testa have assumed There is no doubt that Optatus himself was certainly trying to construct an image of the defenders of the basilica of Bagaï as a hired band of rural workers But as Brent Shaw recently noted, the very name of agonistici or Holy Fighters, which is how the men recruited in the periodic markets preferred to be called, shows that they were, indeed, volunteers committed to the defence of their religious community 20 What is more, as we can see in the gathering of provisions for distribution in the basilica of Bagaï (“as it were a public granary”), it is clear that the “enormous force of men” engaged with its defence was particularly motivated by a specific conception of what counted as Christian charity In fact, in a recent perceptive reinterpretation of peasant rebellion in late antique North Africa, Leslie Dossey showed that many of the anonymous African sermons that could have been delivered to peasant audiences in Late Antiquity interpreted the meaning of charity not only as giving to the poor, but also as “avoiding acts that removed people’s freedom, food, or dignity” The implication was that “property acquired unjustly (…) should not be distributed to the poor under the name of charity”21 There is little doubt that the same conception presided the mobilization of the crowd assembled in the basilica of Bagaï After all, as Dossey rightly noted, by their very presence, they showed that they preferred the charity of their bishop, distributed in their church, to the polluted gifts of 19

20 21

Opt C Parm 3 4 9–11 (SC 413: 44–45), transl Shaw 2011, 166–7: Iam quicquid subsecutum est uidete cui debeat aut possit adscribi Habebant illic uocatorum infinitam turbam et annonam competentem constat fuisse praeparatam De basilica quasi publica fecerant horrea, expectantes ut uenirent in quos furorem suum exercere potuissent et facerent quicquid illis dementia sua dictasset, nisi praesentia armati militis obstitisset Nam cum ante uenturos milites metatores ut fieri adsolet mitterentur, contra apostoli praecepta competenter suscepti non sunt qui ait: “Cui honorem honorem, cui uectigal uectigal, cui tributum tributum ” Qui missi fuerant cum equis suis contusi sunt ab his quorum nomina flabello inuidiae uentilatis: ipsi magistri fuerunt iniuriae suae et quid pati possent ipsi praerogatis iniuriis docuerunt Reuerterunt uexati milites ad numeros suos et quod duo et tres passi fuerant uniuersi doluerunt; commoti sunt omnes, iratos milites retinere nec eorum praepositi ualuerunt Shaw 2011, 167 Dossey 2010, 182

156

Julio Cesar Magalhães de Oliveira

the imperial commissioners 22 Note that it was through this same process of reception and reinterpretation of the discourse on charity that the gangs of Holy Fighters had previously started their campaigns against the injustice of debt and enslavement, in spite of and often in opposition to their bishops 23 Here we can see how even a hostile source could indeed be read from a more bottom-up perspective 24 This is not only because we can discern the process of distortion involved in the construction of this kind of sources and turn it upside-down It is also because the very actions recorded in it must imply certain opinions As Eric Hobsbawm once noted, “voting with one’s feet can be as effective a way of expressing one’s opinion as voting in the ballot box ”25 In this specific case, the process of distortion is particularly clear in the attempts of Optatus to associate the term agonistici (Holy Fighters), which betrayed a religious self-understanding, with the more depreciative term of circumcelliones and its connotations of “a hired band of rural workers ” But it is from the very actions of the gangs of agonistici acting in the periodic markets or of the crowd assembled in the basilica of Bagaï that we could infer the particular conceptions that informed their actions So, even if we agree upon a central role played by Donatus in connecting and coordinating otherwise isolated groups and networks, we should still recognize that the men assembled to defend the church of Bagaï in 347 had their own reasons and motivations to respond to the bishop’s summons Let us now turn to our second example which represents a different situation, in which a preacher, in this case Augustine of Hippo, attempted by all means to demobilize the militant impetus of a crowd The context is as follows In June 401, a statue of Hercules, recently restored, had had its golden beard “shaved” by the action or at least under the pressure of a Christian mob On Sunday the 16th of June, while a council of African Catholic bishops had assembled in Carthage, the faithful occupied the church not only to protest against the pagans and their idols, but also to demand the active engagement of the clergy in their struggle against idolatry It was to calm their fury, after the first attempts of Aurelius, the bishop of Carthage, earlier on the same day that Augustine was invited by his colleague to preach 26 The major preoccupation of Augustine on this occasion was to prevent the faithful of Carthage to undertake a violent action against the pagans who had petitioned the governor for the restoration of the statue of Hercules He began his arguments by explaining to his audience that verse 2 of Psalm 82, “Do not keep quiet or grow gentle, 22 23 24 25 26

Dossey 2010, 185 Dossey 2010, 180–5 Ginzburg 1992, xvii Hobsbawm 1988, 19 Aug Serm 24 (CCL 41, 326–33) is our only source that describes this event I accept the dating of 16 June 401 proposed by Perler and Maier 1969, 231–40 On this episode and its repercussions, see Magalhães de Oliveira 2012, 227–51 For the African council assembled at the secretarium of the basilica Restituta on this same day, see Concilia Africae, ed Munier, CCL 149, 194

Controllers of Crowds?

157

God,” was not in contradiction with the command of Christ: “Learn of me because I am gentle and humble of heart” (Matt 11:29) This is because God does not want the death of men, but of their errors At this point, however, Augustine was interrupted by the shouts and chanting of the crowd From this moment onwards, his tone changed But before he began to launch a harangue against the pagan gods to earn the applauses of the crowd, he had to re-emphasize the authority of the people’s shepherds against the excessive violent zeal of the mob: Your sentiments and your eager faith, and ardent charity, and tireless and holy zeal for the house of God are all quite apparent in your voices, which you have made into the clearest possible witnesses to your thoughts But now please permit the assiduous commitment of those few of God’s faithful by whom you are governed also to make itself known, I mean their commitment to these wishes of yours For you, brothers, are the people of God, as he himself said, and the sheep of his pasture In the name of God you have pastors, shepherds, servants of the Shepherd and members of the Shepherd The sentiments and will of the mass of the people for doing everything will have been made plain by these shouts of yours But the concern of the few on your behalf must be shown not in shouts but in deeds And so, brothers, since you have now fulfilled your part of the business by shouting, please allow us to satisfy you as to whether we are fulfilling our part of the business by acting We have tried and tested you Now it’s your turn to try and test us, to see if after these voices which have borne witness to your thoughts and your keenness we are slack in doing what ought to be done Now far be it from us that, after you have been found worthy, we should be found unworthy But since both you and we have one and the same will for action in the matters you have been shouting about (though we cannot share the same mode of action), we think, dearly beloved, that your will should be accepted by us, and our plan for carrying out your will should be awaited by you To prevent that members of Christ from being at variance with one another, they must all carry out what are their own proper functions in his body 27 (Aug Serm 24 5)

27

Aug Serm 24 5 (CCL 41, 330), transl by E Hill in Rotelle (ed ) 1990, 75–6: Animus uester et studium fidei, et flagrantia caritatis, et abundantia sancti zeli domus Dei, apparuit in uocibus uestris, quas satis claras uestri cordis testes habuistis Sinite ut appareat et paucorum fidelium Dei, per quos gubernamini, studium circa istam uoluntatem uestram Vos enim, fratres, populus Dei estis, sicut ipse dixit, et oues pascuae eius Habetis in nomine Dei pastores, seruos patoris et membra pastoris Multitudinis animus et uoluntas ad quamque rem faciendam istis uocibus poterit apparere: paucorum autem cura pro uobis, non uocibus, sed rebus debet ostendi Itaque, fratres, quoniam iam quod ad uos pertinebat, implestis acclamando, sinite ut probetur uobis, utrum et quod ad nos pertinet impleamus agendo Probauimos uos Probate nos, si post istas uoces testes cordis et studii uestri, nos in agendis quae agi oporteret, segnes fuerimus Absit a nobis, ut uos inueniamini probi, et nos reprobi Sed quoniam uoluntas agenda de his de quibus acclamastis, una est et nostra et uestra, modus uero agendi par esse non potest: putamus, carissimi, ideo oportere ut uoluntas accipiatur a uobis, consilium implendae uoluntatis uestrae exspectetur a nobis Vt membra Christi non discordent, impleant omnia quae in illius corpore sunt officia sua

158

Julio Cesar Magalhães de Oliveira

As Robert Markus well noted, this is “a masterly sermon, carefully designed to curb the mob’s fury without risking the loss of the clergy’s fragile control ”28 Other scholars, however, have interpreted this preaching as if it were “a rousing sermon,” deliberately intended to inflame the crowd with invocations “to smash all tangible symbols of paganism ”29 In his recent book, Eric Rebillard followed this line He proposed that Augustine “had very deliberately provoked his audience to shout for the destruction of the statues ”30 The proof, he argues, is that the preacher himself said to have “tried and tested” the faithful, who responded by shouting against the pagan statues 31 But this, in my opinion, is to misinterpret the rhetorical strategies of Augustine and the dangerous situation in which the bishops were kept The bishops were under pressure Challenged by the popular demands, the council assembled on this day at the secretarium of the basilica Restituta where they had decided to solicit from the imperial authority the radical extirpation of idols 32 And if the preacher in the afternoon stressed the agreement between the clergy and the people it was precisely because they were confronted with an autonomous and aggressive popular action That the protests in the basilica of Carthage had been prepared spontaneously, well before the mass, and through horizontal channels of communication is suggested by one of the acclamations that interrupted Augustine, as he reported later in this sermon: Quomodo Roma, sic et Carthago! “As in Rome, so in Carthage!”33 The slogan improvised at this occasion betrays previous, informal conversations among the people about the situation in Rome It is even possible to say that it was the circulation of news about a supposed increase of anti-pagan measures at the capital of the empire that had encouraged a number of ordinary Christians of Carthage to claim for a stricter implementation of the laws in Africa We should conclude, therefore, that it was the restoration of the statue of Hercules and its mutilation, and not the preaching of Augustine, that activated the “us-them” contrast and started the process of polarization between “zealous Christians” and “enemies of the church ” By polarization I do not mean the activation of “groupness,” as Rebillard put it, but a situation that forced moderates to take sides or be reduced to silence 34 Under these conditions, Augustine was forced to present himself as a representative of the militant aspirations to take control of the situation His strategy was to emphasize the common purposes of the clergy and the people, in order to remind the faithful of the hierarchy between the shepherds and the sheep of God This, indeed, was a well-tried technique of rule, already employed by traditional elites for centuries before Augustine to co-opt and restrain the more auton28 29 30 31 32 33 34

Markus 1990, 116 Brown 1963, 288; MacMullen 1984, 95 Rebillard 2012, 88 Rebillard 2012, 89 Reg Eccl Carthag Excerpta, Can 58, in Concilia Africae, ed Munier, CCL 149, 196 Aug Serm 24 6 (CCL 41, 331) On the concept of polarization as employed here, see Tilly 2003, 21

Controllers of Crowds?

159

omous popular actions 35 But what is crucial for our purposes is to note that, just as in the process of mobilization, the only means for a bishop to demobilize a crowd was to establish a concordance of a sort with the aspirations of his audience Once again, this interpretation is only possible if our evidence, in the words of E P Thompson, is “held up to a Satanic light and read backwards ”36 This is particularly important in the case of sermons, due to their obvious dialogic nature Here I completely agree with Rebillard in his contention “that sermons and pastoral treatises participate in processes of communication that leave direct or indirect traces in the texts themselves, and that the practice of ‘symptomatic reading’ or reading ‘against the grain’ allows us to recover these traces ”37 If I separate myself from the interpretation Rebillard proposes for this particular text, it is because the traces of the communicative process I identify in the sermon of Augustine seem to me to reveal a greater distrust of the audience regarding the clergy’s commitment in the struggle against idolatry To conclude, the relationship between popular mobilization and ecclesiastical leadership has traditionally been focused on the incendiary effects of preaching and the resources bishops were able to mobilize And, to be sure, as political entrepreneurs, bishops may have certainly played a crucial role in violent encounters, by their ability to connect and coordinate otherwise isolated groups and networks But as we have been able to observe by way of these two examples from fourth and early-fifth century North Africa, we should also keep in mind that the processes of mobilization and demobilization were always interactive This means that both sides of the interaction between leaders and crowds should be regarded as active political players Leaders played a crucial part in activating, connecting and representing participants in violent encounters But we should be mindful of the fact that the people in the street are still political creatures The choice to engage or not in a claim-making process is ultimately their own and must be explained in their own terms And to understand the logic of all actors engaged in this process we should not limit ourselves to the top-down and biased views of our sources Bibliography Bourdieu, P 1977 Outline of a Theory of Practice Translated by R Nice Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Brown, P 1963 Religious Coercion in the Later Roman Empire: the Case of North Africa History 48:285–305 – 1992 Power and Persuasion in Late Antiquity: Towards a Christian Empire Madison: Wisconsin University Press 35 36 37

See, for example, the discursive strategies of Apuleius and the town councillors of Carthage discussed by La Rocca 2005, 61–4 Thompson 1966, 58 Rebillard 2012, 6

160

Julio Cesar Magalhães de Oliveira

Cecconi, G A 1990 “Elemosina e propaganda Un’analisi della ‘Macariana Persecutio’ nel III libro di Ottato di Milevi ” REAug 36:42–66 Dossey, L 2010 Peasant and Empire in Christian North Africa Berkeley: University of California Press Frend, W H C 1952 The Donatist Church: A Movement of Protest in Roman North Africa Oxford: Clarendon Press Galvão-Sobrinho, C R 2006 “Embodied Theologies: Christian Identities and Violence in Late Antiquity in the Early Arian Controversy” Pages 321–31 in Violence in Late Antiquity: Perceptions and Practices Edited by H A Drake Aldershot: Ashgate – 2013 Doctrine and Power: Theological Controversy and Christian Leadership in the Later Roman Empire Berkeley: University of California Press Ginzburg, C 1992 The Cheese and the Worms: The Cosmos of a Sixteenth-Century Miller Translated by J and A Tedeschi Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press Hahn, J 2014 “The Challenge of Religious Violence: Imperial Ideology and Policy in the Fourth Century” Pages 379–404 in Contested Monarchy: Integrating the Roman Empire in the Fourth Century AD Edited by J Wienand Oxford: Oxford University Press Hobsbawm, E J 1988 “History from Below: Some Reflections ” Pages 13–28 in History from Below: Studies in Popular Protest and Popular Ideology Edited by F Krantz Oxford: Basil Blackwell Khalos, M 2013 “Pacifiers and Instigators: Bishops and Interreligious Conflict in Late Antiquity ” Pages 63–82 in The Role of the Bishop in Late Antiquity: Conflict and Compromise Edited by A Fear, J Fernández Ubiña and M Marcos London: Bloomsbury La Rocca, A 2005 Il Filosofo e la città Commento storico ai Florida di Apuleio Rome: “L’Erma” di Bretschneider Liebeschuetz, J H W G 2001 The Decline and Fall of the Roman City Oxford: Oxford University Press Lizzi Testa, R 1995 “‘Discordia in urbe’: pagani e cristiani in rivolta ” Pages 115–40 in Pagani e cristiani da Giuliano l’Apostata al sacco di Roma Edited by F E Consolino Messina: Rubettino MacMullen, R 1984 Christianizing the Roman Empire (AD 100–400) New Haven: Yale University Press – 1990 “The Historical Role of the Masses in Late Antiquity” Pages 250–76 and 385–93 in Changes in the Roman Empire: Essays on the Ordinary Princeton: Princeton University Press – 2003 “Cultural and Political Changes in the 4th and 5th Centuries ” Historia 52 4:465–95 Magalhães de Oliveira, J C 2012 Potestas Populi Participation populaire et action collective dans les villes de l’Afrique romaine tardive (vers 300–430 apr J -C ) Bibliothèque de l’Antiquité Tardive 24 Turnhout: Brepols Markus, R A 1990 The End of Ancient Christianity Cambridge: Cambridge University Press McLynn, N 1992 “Christian Controversy and Violence in the Fourth Century” Kodai 3:15–44 Perler, O , and J -L Maier 1969 Les voyages de saint Augustin Paris: Institut d’Études Augustiniennes Rebillard, E 2012 Christians and Their Many Identities in Late Antiquity, North Africa, 200–450 CE Ithaca: Cornell University Press Rogers, N 1998 Crowds, Culture, and Politics in Georgian Britain Oxford: Oxford University Press Rotelle, J E ed 1990 The Works of Saint Augustine: A Translation for the 21st Century Part III – Sermons, volume II (20–50) on the Old Testament Translation and notes Edmund Hill New York: New City Press Shaw, B 2011 Sacred Violence: African Christians and Sectarian Hatred in the Age of Augustine Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Controllers of Crowds?

161

Tarrow, S 2011 Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics 3rd Edition Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Tilly, C 2003 The Politics of Collective Violence Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Thompson, E P 1966 The Making of the English Working Class New York: Vintage Books Whitby, M 2006 “Factions, Bishops, Violence and Urban Decline ” Pages 441–61 in Die Stadt in der Spätantike – Niedergang oder Wandel? Akten des internationalen Kolloquiums in München am 30 und 31 Mai 2003 Edited by J -U Krause and C Witschel Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag

Keeping up Appearances Evaluations of Imperial (In)Visibility in Late Antiquity Martijn Icks (Amsterdam) As Roman authors knew, there was something sinister about emperors who hid from their subjects The long history of the Principate provides no better example than Tiberius, who spent the last years of his reign withdrawn on the island of Capri Tacitus attributed the emperor’s departure from Rome to the growing influence of his righthand man Sejanus, but admitted that “I am often tempted to doubt whether [his isolation] could not with greater truth be ascribed to an impulse of his own, to find an inconspicuous home for the cruelty and lust which his acts proclaimed to the world ”1 Rumours abounded about the old man’s depravities and excesses in his remote dwelling As Suetonius has it, Tiberius’s bedrooms were decorated with erotic paintings and sculpture, while boys and girls peopled the woods dressed up as little Pans and nymphs In this secluded environment, the emperor could finally discard his public mask: “Having gained the license of privacy, and being as it were out of sight of the citizens, he at last gave free rein at once to all the vices which he had for a long time ill-concealed ” Tacitus likewise stressed Tiberius’s fervent desire to get out of the public’s eye, remarking that “he resorted (…) to the rocks and the solitude of the sea, in shame at the sins and lusts whose uncontrollable fires had so inflamed him ”2 A proper princeps was not afraid to show himself and to make himself available to his subjects, especially to his fellow senators Pliny, in his panegyric on Trajan, praised the emperor for “awaiting and receiving everyone in person” during his daily audiences, noting how eager the senators were to spend time in his presence 3 One of the most evocative passages in the speech contrasts Trajan’s exemplary behaviour to that of Domitian:

1 2 3

Tac Ann 4 57: locis occultantem Suet Tib 43; 42 1; Tac Ann 6 1: saxa rursum et solitudinem maris repetiit pudore scelerum et libidinum quibus adeo indomitis exarserat Tacitus also suggests another motive for Tiberius to hide from his subjects, namely his unappetizing appearance in old age (Ann 4 57) Plin Pan 48 1–3

164

Martijn Icks

We stay behind to linger on as if in a home we share, though this is the place where recently that fearful monster built his defences with untold terrors, where lurking in his den he licked up the blood of his murdered relatives [quum velut quodam specu inclusa, nunc propinquorum sanguinem lamberet] or emerged to plot the massacre and destruction of his most distinguished subjects Menaces and horror were the sentinels at his doors, and the fears alike of admission and rejection; then himself in person, dreadful to see and to meet, with arrogance on his brow and fury in his eye, a womanish pallor spread over his body but a deep flush to match the shameless expression on his face None dared approach him, none dared speak; always he sought darkness and mystery [tenebras semper secretumque captantem], and only emerged from the desert of his solitude to create another (Plin Pan 48 3–5)

According to Pliny, Domitian’s repulsive appearance and frightful gaze clearly marked him as a tyrant The fact that he preferred darkness to light strongly suggests that his behaviour would not stand up to public scrutiny Yet secluded emperors such as Tiberius and Domitian were still considered exceptional during the Principate Just like “good” rulers, Caligula, Nero, Commodus and other notorious tyrants were said to appear regularly in public In fact, many of their most reviled acts – such as Nero’s performances as an actor and singer, Commodus’s performances as a gladiator, or Elagabalus’s extravagant religious ceremonies – took place before an audience of hundreds or thousands 4 Only in Late Antiquity did the invisibility and inaccessibility of emperors come to be regarded as structural features of Roman rule From Sulpicius Alexander in the late fourth century onwards,5 authors and orators developed the topos of the princeps clausus to describe rulers who spent their time in splendid isolation in their lavish palaces, cut off from the outside world and surrounded by unctuous eunuchs who whispered in their ears 6 Tropes such as these can tell us a lot about the way imperial visibility and accessibility were valued in Late Antiquity As I will briefly discuss in the next section, this period saw important changes in the nature of the emperor’s role Active, outgoing military leadership in the tradition of Trajan and the soldier-emperors increasingly gave way to a sedentary, ceremonious style of rule It is my aim to examine if we can detect a similar shift in elite expectations of the way emperors should appear and behave in public

4 5

6

Nero: Suet Ner 20 1–25 2; Cass Dio 62(61) 20 1–21 2; 62(63) 8 1–20 2 Commodus: Cass Dio 73(72) 17 1–21 3; SHA Comm 11 10–12; 15 3–6 Elagabalus: Hdn 5 5 8–10 Preserved in Gregory of Tours, Historia Francorum 2 9: “Valentinian [II] the emperor was shut up in Vienne in the palace [Clauso apud Viennam palatii aedibus principe Valentiniano], and reduced almost below the position of a private person ” While Sulpicius coined the term princeps clausus, it is clear that Valentinian’s seclusion is involuntary Icks 2017; see also Stroheker 1970; Chastagnol 1985; Kolb 1987

Keeping up Appearances

165

Emperors in Late Antiquity One of the most evocative depictions of a secluded emperor can be found in Synesius’s De regno, a speech allegedly held before Arcadius, although the speaker’s bluntness makes it more likely that he was in fact addressing a group of courtiers who shared his ideas on good rulership Synesius contemptuously described Arcadius as a man living in a golden cage, dressed as splendorous as a peacock, but hiding from public view 7 As is typical for a princeps clausus, he does not show himself to the people he rules over, nor does he allow them access to the palace to interact with him in person Instead of taking an active role in government or leading his troops in the field, he prefers to while away the time in idle luxury, apparently oblivious to the needs of his subjects Such sentiments should be regarded against the backdrop of changes in imperial rule that took place in the fourth and fifth centuries Starting with Gratian and particularly Valentinian II, a new, more passive kind of emperorship developed in the West Both rulers had been elevated to imperial rank at an early age and never managed to become strong authorities in their own right, but were dominated by committees and, later, powerful military figures, such as Arbogast The long reigns of Honorius and Valentinian III saw the consolidation of a symbiotic relationship between the emperor and his strong right-hand man, with the latter (Stilicho, Constantius III, Aetius) taking a proactive part in political and military matters, while the former was mostly reduced to a ceremonial and religious role 8 Meaghan McEvoy has dubbed this development the “infantilization of the imperial office,” since even as adults these emperors continued to be treated as minors, incapable of waging war and taking on a leading role in government 9 In the East, Arcadius and Theodosius II were likewise dominated by powerful individuals, although in their cases these tended to be non-military figures, such as the courtiers Rufinus and Eutropius, and the empress Pulcheria Like their Western counterparts, these emperors did not wage war in person and spent most of their days in the capital, at the centre of a highly ritualized court 10 That is not to say that emperors were indeed as remote and secluded as Synesius and like-minded critics suggest Rene Pfeilschifter has argued that late antique rulers were still dependent on the support of their subjects; support that could not be won by hiding in the shadows Emperors such as Arcadius and Theodosius II still partook in public ceremonies in Constantinople and interacted with key groups in the palace, the hippodrome

7 8 9 10

Syn De regno 11 2; 5 See Cameron and Long (1993, 127–133) for Synesius’s audience The counterarguments professed by Hagl (1997, 76–82), who holds that the speech was held before Arcadius, have been convincingly refuted by Lenski 1998 McEvoy 2013, 305–329 McEvoy 2013, 322 See Pfeilschifter (2013) for the emperor’s new role as a sedentary monarch in Constantinople

166

Martijn Icks

and other locations 11 We can assume the same was true for the emperors of the West, even though many of them held court in smaller cities like Vienne, Milan and Ravenna Honorius, for example, paid several visits to Rome in the course of his reign, during which he partook in triumphal processions and circus games, interacting with the Roman people and senate 12 Like other topoi, we should not take the image of the princeps clausus too literally, yet its frequent occurrence in late antique sources suggests that it reflects genuine concerns about the changing nature of imperial rule As such, it warrants closer scrutiny How, then, was imperial visibility conceived in the works of orators and authors from the fourth and fifth centuries? To what extent did they expect their rulers to be visible in public and what did it signify to them if they were not? What were the right and wrong ways for an emperor to be publicly visible? In this article, I will only concern myself with evaluations expressed in panegyric speeches and literary works, and hence with the views of the educated elite who produced and read out these texts From their comments, I will not try to reconstruct how late antique emperors actually appeared and conducted themselves in public, but how these orators and authors thought they should appear and should conduct themselves After a brief sketch of the relation between visibility and power in Roman discourse, I will focus on three crucial aspects of imperial visibility in Late Antiquity: the awe-inspiring nature of the emperor’s appearance (or his failure to inspire awe); his closeness to his subjects (or his distance from them); and his exemplary conduct (or lack thereof) I will not usually make a distinction between pagan and Christian emperors, nor between pagan and Christian authors, as Christianity rarely appears to have been a decisive factor in evaluations of imperial visibility during the fourth and fifth centuries The power of visibility Before turning to the aforementioned questions, we should consider how the Romans related “seeing” and “being seen” to notions of power and dominance Holt Parker has drawn attention to a paradox in Roman thinking On the one hand, power had to be displayed through public appearances Someone’s personal attire, the size of their retinue and even their place in public space all served as reminders of their position at the top of the social and political hierarchy On the other hand, people who exposed themselves to the public gaze also gave themselves up for public judgment The verdict might well turn out negative, thus making them vulnerable to attacks 13 11 12 13

Pfeilschifter 2013, 76–122 See Icks (2014) for Arcadius’s and Honorius’s continued reliance on the acceptance by their subjects See Lejdegård (2002) for Honorius’s relationship with the city of Rome Parker 1999, 167–168

Keeping up Appearances

167

Looking at someone was associated with dominance and penetration, notions with definite masculine connotations Being looked at, in contrast, meant being reduced to a submissive, “feminine” position 14 For this reason, people who made a “spectacle” of themselves, putting their bodies on display for the pleasure of others, such as actors, gladiators and prostitutes, enjoyed low social status 15 The only way a member of the Roman elite could solve this paradox was to be in control of their self-presentation; to be “the giver of images, never the object of others’ interpretation ”16 Most emperors of the Principate appear to have been acutely aware of the need to be seen by their subjects Public ceremonies such as triumphs and sacrifices allowed the ruler to display himself to large crowds Particularly important were imperial appearances in the theatre, amphitheatre and circus, since these did not only show the emperor occupying his rightful place at the top of the social pyramid, but also allowed the plebs to interact with him, making requests or uttering their opinions through speaking choirs 17 This underlines that the issue at stake was not just visibility, but also accessibility: emperors had to be available to their subjects However, they had to take care to be seen in the right circumstances and exhibiting the right sort of behaviour 18 As has been mentioned, Nero and Commodus received much scorn for their public performances as an actor and a gladiator, respectively Yet while their actions were condemned by the literary elite, the responses of other groups, such as the Roman plebs, provincials or soldiers, may have been much more favourable 19 There was no single golden standard of “proper” imperial behaviour, even though the nature of our evidence privileges elite viewpoints over those of others When emperors appeared in public, they were judged by a great variety of groups and individuals, all of whom had their own, sometimes contradictory, values and expectations Considering the vulnerability associated with exposure to the gaze of others, some rulers may have considered it an attractive option to keep their visibility limited to a minimum As Olivier Hekster points out, hiding from public view could make an emperor more powerful, albeit not necessarily in a way his subjects much liked After all, an invisible emperor could not be controlled by the public gaze, as Tiberius seems to have realized all too well What is more, by remaining hidden a ruler could be watching anyone at any time His gaze therefore became almost god-like: unseen and all-seeing This leads us to a second paradox, namely that imperial invisibility may have been, in

14 15 16 17 18 19

Parker 1999, 164–166 For more in-depth explorations of the significance of the gaze in Roman culture, see Fredrick 2002 and Bartsch 2006 See Edwards (1997) for infames displaying their bodies Parker 1999, 168 Hekster 2005, 162–163 See Cass Dio 76 4 for a good example of a speaking choir in the circus Hekster 2005, 169–170 For Nero’s and Commodus’s performances as deliberate strategies of self-representation, see Griffin 1984, 160–163; Morford 1985; Edwards 1994; Champlin 2003; Hekster 2002

168

Martijn Icks

Hekster’s words, “a very royal kind of image ”20 It is this notion that fuelled a lot of the writing on imperial (in)visibility in Late Antiquity, when critical authors voiced concern that emperors deliberately kept out of sight of their subjects and refused to make themselves available to them In the following sections, we will explore how the public appearances of late antique emperors were valued – and whether these evaluations constitute a shift in values when compared to the Principate Splendid appearances In Late Antiquity, seeing the emperor with one’s own eyes appears to have lost none of its appeal If anything, it had become an even more overwhelming experience – or at least was often presented as such by Greco-Roman orators and authors As Pacatus exclaimed in his AD 389 panegyric in honour of Theodosius: What marvellous tales shall I have to tell to the cities of Gaul upon my return! What crowds of admiring people, how great an audience, shall surround me when I say: “I have seen Rome; I have seen Theodosius; and I have seen both together [Romam vidi, Theodosium vidi, et utrumque simul vidi]; I have seen the father of the ruler himself, I have seen the avenger of the ruler; I have seen the restorer of the ruler!”21 (Pan Lat 2(12) 47 5)

The orator goes into some detail about the sensation that Theodosius’s appearance caused in the city of Emona, describing the joyous crowds that poured out of the houses and blocked the streets Other late antique panegyrists likewise emphasized the multitudes that flocked together to lay eyes on the emperor Constantine was astonished by the size of the crowd that greeted him on his arrival in Autun, an anonymous orator assures us, while another orator counted Britain “fortunate and happier now than all lands” because it was the first to see Constantine as Caesar 22 Claudian vividly describes to what heights of enthusiasm the people were stirred by the entries of Honorius: when the purple-born boy first made an appearance in Milan with his father in AD 394, the old and the young struggled for places to catch a glimpse of him, while during his AD 403/4 visit to Rome “the ground seethed with men, the lofty buildings were aglow with women ” Even the goddess Roma herself is granted a speaking part in the oration, expressing how she aches to be reunited with her son after his long ab-

20 21 22

Hekster 2005, 161–162, 171 The three rulers Pacatus is referring to are Honorius, Gratian and Valentinian II, respectively Pan Lat 2(12) 37 3–4; 5(8) 8 1; 6(7) 9 1: fortunata et nunc omnibus beatior When Diocletian and Maximian travelled to Milan, even the beasts allegedly flocked to see them: Pan Lat 11(3) 10 5

Keeping up Appearances

169

sence: “Too long, my emperor, have I, thy mother, borne in silence the hurt thy refusal to return hath done me ”23 Sabine MacCormack has drawn attention to the fact that late antique panegyric was closely intertwined with the ceremonial occasions on which it was delivered, often providing meaningful descriptions of ceremonious events In this framework, the emphasis on the eagerness of the masses to see the emperor came to signify their wholehearted consent to his rule 24 An imperial adventus may well have triggered the public ecstasy described in panegyric; more to the point for our purposes, it was the reaction panegyrists deemed fitting for those witnessing the ritual entry of a legitimate emperor The focus on ceremony also explains why panegyric often devotes so much attention to the emperor’s physical appearance “What raiment, too have we not seen, what miracles of splendour,” Claudian exclaimed, recounting how Honorius was borne aloft on the shoulders of his soldiers “‘Tis thus that Egypt brings forth her gods to the public gaze ”25 The comparison is telling In tetrarchic speeches, the appearance of the emperor had typically been described in terms of an epiphany He had been a deus praesens, a god who could be seen and interacted with 26 Due to the advancement of Christianity, this theme became less prominent in later fourth- and fifth-century panegyric, but it did not vanish completely: even a man whose request was denied by the emperor, Pacatus remarked in his speech to Theodosius, would still leave “with the consciousness of having seen the divinity” Likewise, Claudian wondered whether anyone could behold Theodosius and Honorius riding in triumph without thinking that he saw “the morning-star together with the rosy sun, or the Thunderer shine in concert with Bacchus ”27 Evidently, such praise was meant to underline the imperial majesty At the same time, it implied that the emperor was not a mundane sight: seeing him was a privilege, something to revel in and be thankful for After all, the gods did not manifest themselves among the people on a daily basis Even Claudian’s Egyptian statues would only be trotted out in the open on certain occasions, after which they would be returned to their temples 28

23 24 25 26 27 28

Claud III cons 126–130; VI cons 545–546: undare videres ima viris, altas effulgere matribus aedes; 361–365 For the identification of the unspecified urbem (129) in the first speech with Milan, see Cameron 1970, 41–42; Lejdegård 2002, 51 MacCormack 1981, 6–8, 46–48 Nowhere does this become more apparent than in Claudian’s speech in honour of Honorius’s sixth consulate (AD 404), where he claims that “the echoes of Rome’s seven hills repeat as with one voice the name of Honorius” (616–617) Claud IV cons 565–571 MacCormack 1981, 23–25 See for instance Pan Lat 11(3) 10 4–11 5 Pan Lat 2(12) 21 2: visi numinis conscientiam; Claud III cons 131–132 But see also note 36 The imperial palace was indeed often described as a sanctuary in Late Antiquity; see for instance Pan Lat 11(3) 11 1–3 Further references in Nixon and Rogers 1994, 96, n 66

170

Martijn Icks

The splendorous, godlike appearances of emperors in late antique panegyric seem far removed from Augustus’s ideal of the modest princeps However, not everyone was fond of this exalted imperial style Synesius of Cyrene complained to Arcadius that “for you the pavement is insupportable, nor may you walk about on earth in its natural state, but gold-dust must be sprinkled upon it, which your wagons and merchantmen bring you from far-away continents ”29 He inquired rhetorically whether the state of the Empire had improved since emperors had started to wear luxurious garments, or whether things had been better when they still led armies in the field, “blackened by the sun,” and behaved themselves “in all other respects simply and artlessly” As an example, he referred to the gruff soldier emperor Carinus, who had allegedly not been shy to display his bald head to a Parthian embassy and had so intimidated the ambassadors that the Parthian king, “he of the tiara and robes,” had been eager to yield to “one in a simple woollen tunic and cap ” Although several details are erroneous, the anecdote clearly expresses Synesius’s desire for a down-to-earth, unceremonious emperorship 30 The Historia Augusta likewise objected to emperors who spurned the modest style of their ancestors, complaining that Gallienus would not appear in Rome in the customary toga, but in “a purple cloak with jewelled and golden clasps” and “a man’s tunic of purple and gold and provided with sleeves ” Elagabalus was just as bad, wearing a jewelled diadem in the palace and refusing to touch unwashed linen Allegedly, he had been the first Roman to wear clothes completely made of silk 31 Although few authors went as far as Synesius in their criticism, they did point out that a splendorous appearance was not enough to make someone an emperor 32 At the same time, unworthy pretenders were often signalled by a lack of proper attributes in late antique literature; most notably the purple paludamentum A good example is Procopius, the usurper who rose against Valens in AD 365 Ammianus Marcellinus gives a scathing description of the would-be emperor’s attire on the occasion of his investiture, noting how he was dressed in a gold-embroidered tunic, since there was no purple mantle at hand, and “from foot to waist … looked like a page in the service of the palace,” wearing purple shoes and bearing a lance and a piece of purple cloth, “just as sometimes on the stage you might think that a splendidly decorated figure was suddenly made to appear as the curtain was raised ”33 Procopius, in short, was a laughing stock, a man whose splendid, but ridiculous dress immediately betrayed him as an impostor Synesius likewise associated Arcadius with the stage, hinting that the lavishly dressed youth would only be playing at being emperor until he dismissed “that which 29 30 31 32 33

Syn De regno 11 4 Syn De regno 11 5; 12 4–7 Late antique emperors would have been fighting Persians, not Parthians The story may originally have referred to Carus, since Carinus never fought the Persians SHA Gall 16 4; Heliogab 23 5; 26 1 See for instance Pan Lat 10(1) 3 1–4; Them Or 1 11c–d Amm Marc 26 6 15: ut in theatrali scaena simulacrum quoddam insigne (…) subito putares emersum See Icks (2012) for mocking descriptions of late antique investitures

Keeping up Appearances

171

is merely outward appearance and sham ”34 Ironically, it was exactly their attempts to boost their prestige through the wearing of luxurious clothing that caused these rulers to be associated with the lowliest creatures in the social hierarchy – those who made a spectacle of themselves In the eyes of Synesius and like-minded critics, true emperors should be defined by their deeds, not by their splendorous appearance Closeness to the people Imperial visibility was not only celebrated in terms of monarchical majesty and public adoration in Late Antiquity Just as emperors from the Principate had been expected to show themselves in public on a regular basis to affirm their close bond with the populus Romanus, Pacatus could praise Theodosius because “you frequently emerge and you show yourself to the waiting people, and being willing not only to let yourself be seen, but to be approached readily, you listen to the entreaties of your subjects at close quarters ” Contrary to what we have seen before, emphasis here is not put on the exclusiveness of seeing the emperor, but on the high frequency of his appearances; in fact, Pacatus boasted that “our Emperor offers himself to the gaze of all, and one can see him as often as one can the daylight and sun ”35 As the passage makes clear, imperial visibility remained closely linked to accessibility Later in the speech, the panegyrist elaborates on the theme: But what took place in Rome; the impression you made on the day you first entered the city; how you behaved in the Senate house and on the rostra; now in a chariot, now on foot, distinguished in either mode of progress, triumphant now in war, now over pride [nunc de bellis, nunc de superbia triumpharis]; how you showed yourself to all as a ruler, to individuals as a senator; how in your frequent and unpretentious public appearances [crebro civilique progressu] you not only visited public buildings, but hallowed with your divine footsteps private dwellings as well [privatas quoque aedes divinis vestigiis], all the safer, with your military guard removed, for the vigilance of a devoted people, let all these be praised by the tongues and voices of these men, of these men, I say, who on the subject of common joys will surely be able to extol more worthily what is most outstanding, and more justly what is especially theirs (Pan Lat 2(12) 47 3–4)

It is interesting how Pacatus can speak about the emperor in divine terms while at the same time stressing his humility and unpretentiousness Claudian did so as well when he described Theodosius’s and Honorius’s AD 389 visit to Rome, remarking that “never in all his life did Theodosius, best of all the gods, better deserve our love than when, 34 35

Syn De regno 12 1: τὸ φαινόμενόν τε καὶ ἐπιποίητον See also 11 7 Pan Lat 2(12) 21 2: creber egressu exspectantibus populis te fateris, nec videri modo patiens sed facilis adiri; 21 5: nec magis communem hunc diem atque solem quam nostrum imperatorem videri licet

172

Martijn Icks

triumphant over all his foes, he came with thee to Rome to sojourn within its walls, and there, following the example of the noblest emperors, lived as a simple citizen,” adding that the emperor was “as ready to lay aside his rank and visit the homes of the poor as to enter the palaces of the noble ”36 Good emperors, then, did not let their dignified position stand in the way of interacting with even the humblest of their subjects In his AD 321 panegyric, Nazarius favourably compared Constantine’s appearance to that of his tetrarchic predecessors Whereas the latter’s splendour had the same blinding effect on viewers as looking directly into the sun, the orator alleged, Constantine did not “use terror as a veil, nor present a handsome display by hiding what usually lies concealed from the outside or by putting off [his] appearances ”37 Too much magnificence, in other words, could create an insurmountable barrier between ruler and subject The use of the word “terror” (terror) is particularly striking in this context, as it would usually be associated with tyrants, who were characterized by an intimidating appearance – in particular an intimidating gaze Ancient panegyric and historiography provide countless examples of cruel rulers who subjected their subjects to frightful looks 38 In Nazarius’s speech, the mounted head of the defeated tyrant Maxentius could still inspire terror when it was displayed in a triumphal procession: “savagery was still upon it and death itself had not conquered the menacing aspect of his dreadful brow ” In contrast, Constantine’s countenance was august, graceful, cheerful and reflected “something venerable and lovable ”39 Yet in an earlier panegyric, the emperor had been described as a man “whose eyes flash and whose awe-inspiring yet agreeable majesty dazzles us at the same time as it invites our gaze ”40 Evidently, there was a fine line between the forceful, impressive gaze of the “good” emperor and the frightening, domineering gaze of the tyrant While Nazarius’s description of the tetrarchs did not put them in the same category as Maxentius, his emphasis on their intimidating splendour certainly placed them at a greater distance to the people than the lovable, cheerful Constantine, whose appearance did not radiate “excessive brightness,” but a “serene light” that attracted onlookers 41 Some emperors did not aim to dazzle or frighten their subjects with their looks, but chose to hide themselves from view altogether It was these principes clausi that Pacatus

36

37 38 39 40 41

Claud VI cons 55–62: optimus ille divorum; patriciasque domos privataque passim visere deposito dignatus limina fastu Claudian makes the point explicitly in the next lines: “Tis thus the public love is kindled when with just humanity [cum moribus aequis] modesty bids royal state stoop to the people ” Pan Lat 4(10) 5 1–3 Hekster 2005, 158–161 See for instance Pliny’s description of Domitian, “dreadful to see and to meet, with arrogance on his brow and fury in his eye” (Pan 48 4–5) Pan Lat 4(10) 31 4: suberat adhuc saevitia et horrendae frontis minas mors ipsa non vicerat; 34 4: venerandum quiddam et amabile Pan Lat 6(7) 17 1: fulgor oculorum Pan Lat 4(10) 5 4: nec intuentum iniquus fulgor retundit, sed serenum lumen invitat

Keeping up Appearances

173

had in mind when singing the praises of Theodosius, although in good panegyric fashion he refrained from mentioning any specific names As he reminded his audience, many previous rulers had “considered their royal majesty diminished and cheapened unless they were shut up within some remote part of the palace, as if in some sanctuary of Vesta, to be consulted with reverence and in secret ” There, they allegedly lived in solitude and silence, “buried in the shade of their abode,” an expression suggesting a sinister existence spent in darkness On the rare occasions that these unnamed tyrants came out in daylight, they travelled in closed sedan chairs and carriages, surrounded by armed men and lictors who lashed the people aside, so that they were “isolated even in public ”42 Evidently, the passage links imperial invisibility to inaccessibility We find many similar images of hidden, disconnected rulers in oratory and literature from the second half of the fourth century onwards What characterized these principes clausi was not just the fact that their subjects could not interact with them, but also that they seemed to be utterly disinterested in public affairs Zosimus records that the secluded Honorius and Arcadius were “quite ignorant of what was happening,” leaving matters of state to such trusted underlings as Stilicho and Rufinus Procopius, recounting an anecdote that may well have originated in the reign of Honorius, records how the Milan-based emperor reacted with dismay when he heard that “Rome had perished” – but only until he realized that it was not his beloved cock Roma that had died, but the Urbs Aeterna that had been sacked by the Goths “But I, my good fellow, thought that my fowl Rome had perished,” the relieved emperor told his keeper of poultry, not giving the matter any further thought 43 Synesius railed at length against hidden emperors in the speech he allegedly held before Arcadius, a man whom he considered a prime example of this type of ruler “Do you now fare better,” he inquired, “since the time when this initiation, usual with emperors, was instituted, and since you have taken to keeping your lairs like lizards, scarcely peeping out at all to enjoy the sun’s warmth, lest being men you should be detected as such by men?”44 Synesius, like Pacatus, spoke in general terms, not specifying which particular rulers (other than Arcadius) he had in mind Yet his remark brings up an interesting point In Synesius’s view, principes clausi were painfully aware that they were not the godlike figures they aspired to be As long as they remained hidden they could keep up the pretence, but as soon as they emerged from their palaces and subjected themselves to the judging gaze of their subjects, their true colours would become obvious In other words, according to Synesius it was not the insurmountable chasm between ruler and subject that kept these men away from the people, but fear 42 43 44

Pan Lat 2(12) 21 3–4: intra domesticam umbram iacentes; ut secretum esset in publico Zos 5 1 3; Procop Vand 1 2 25–26 See Engels (2009, 123–126) for the possibility that the anecdote originated from the reign of Honorius Syn De regno 11 5: μὴ φωραθείητε ὑπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων ὄντες ἄνθρωποι

174

Martijn Icks

of the fact that the people would discover that no such chasm truly existed, and that their emperor was just a man like any other Nevertheless, the orator advised Arcadius not to stay hidden: “Up to this day no one has ever despised the sun, although to what spectacle are we more accustomed? And if a king has courage to be a true one and shall not be disproved as such, let him be the most common possession; for he will not be the less admirable in this even if he be not the more ”45 Setting an example Synesius’s advice brings us to a third and final aspect of imperial visibility: the emperor as a role model to his subjects Matthew Roller has drawn attention to the crucial role that exempla played in Roman culture, pointing out that one of the key aspects of exemplary behaviour was the presence of an audience to witness and judge the hero’s valorous deeds 46 During the Principate, emperors and empresses became important exempla – either because their behaviour was considered remarkably virtuous or (more often) remarkably wicked When the emperor appeared in public, he did not only do so to manifest his power and to allow the populus to interact with him; he was also expected to set an example for others to follow More so than any other person, the master of the Roman world was in the public eye, where he was constantly scrutinized and judged “Good” emperors were dutiful husbands and fathers, did not overtly indulge in food, drink and sex, showed skill and courage as battle commanders, respected the gods and were devoted to the glory of Rome, thus setting the standard for everybody else Even their hairstyles and dietary habits, it appears, were copied by the upper classes 47 According to Pliny, Trajan was the very embodiment of good behaviour and surrounded himself with equally virtuous men Thus his subjects were encouraged, rather than forced, to better themselves 48 Late antique emperors were held to the same high moral standard; a fact that was intimately connected to their presence in the public sphere Addressing Honorius on the occasion of his fourth consulship, Claudian recalled the fatherly advice that Theodosius had allegedly given to his youngest son: Of this too I cannot warn thee too often: remember that thou livest in the sight of the whole world [ut te totius medio telluris in ore vivere cognoscas], to all peoples are thy deeds known; the vices of monarchs cannot anywhere remain hid [nec posse dari regalibus usquam secretum vitiis] The splendour of their lofty station allows nought to be concealed; fame 45 46 47 48

Syn De regno 13 7 Pacatus likewise compared Theodosius to the sun because of his frequent appearances; see note 35 Roller 2004, 5 Lendon 1997, 129–130 Plin Pan 45–46

Keeping up Appearances

175

penetrates every hiding-place and discovers the inmost secrets of the heart (Claud , IV cons 269–275)

Hence there was no true privacy for emperors; even their most private deeds had to be beyond reproach at all times Paradoxically, the most powerful man in the world was thus also the most restricted Whenever he introduced a new law or custom, Theodosius urged his son, he should be the first to adhere to it, for “the world shapes itself after its ruler’s pattern” and “the unstable crowd ever changes along with the prince ” Synesius agreed, remarking that perhaps the greatest gift God had bestowed on kingship was “the power that the king holds over the soul of his subjects, … for in whatsoever the king rejoices, this must at once increase and be adopted by the majority”49 Both stress the visual element in their remarks, using words like “seeing” (videre) and “showing” (φαίνεσθαι) Synesius felt that the emperor should above all be visible in his role as military commander He argued that the soldiers would greatly benefit from seeing their ruler engaging in military exercise, “for he draws the eyes of all present upon him, and no one can endure to look elsewhere when a king does anything conspicuously,” with the result that “the spectacle of a king is not a rare one to his soldiers, and his goodwill greatly strengthens the spirit of the troops ”50 Several late antique orators urged emperors to take up active command and lead their troops into battle – for instance Themistius, who deemed it “appropriate for the king to command infantry, cavalry, generals and squadron commanders ”51 In their eyes, a visible emperor was first and foremost a military active emperor, a man who displayed courage and vigour, inspired the troops and led them to victory In that regard, it would be hard to surpass Theodosius, who allegedly spent so much time waging war that “your countenance is almost as well known to the barbarians as it is to us ”52 The opposite of the virtuous, visible prince was the hidden tyrant who indulged in secret vices As Synesius assured Arcadius, “tyrants are always doing astounding things, concealing themselves from the public gaze ” This immediately brings the likes of Tiberius and Domitian to mind Elsewhere in the same speech, the orator remarked that “whoso exploits his leadership for luxury’s sake, whoso squanders his resources in revelling, esteeming that he must needs gratify all his desires (…) that man I call a butcher amongst his cattle, and I declare him to be a tyrant ”53 Although the link to invisibility is not explicitly made here, the general theme of the speech – i e the need 49 50 51 52 53

Claud IV cons 296–302: mobile mutatur semper cum principe vulgus; Syn De regno 21 7 Syn De regno 9 2: οὐδεις ἀλλαχόσε βλέπειν ἀνέχεται Likewise, Claudian’s Theodosius urged Honorius to “ride amid thy squadrons of horse or again stand foot to foot with the infantry,” since “they will advance the bolder for thy presence” (IV cons 349–351) Them Or 187d See also Claud IV cons 320–352 Pan Lat 2(12) 22 1 Syn De regno 13 6; 3 9

176

Martijn Icks

for the emperor to abandon the easy life of the palace and give active leadership to his subjects, particularly the soldiers – underlines that a secluded existence can only lead to indolence and excess For many late antique orators and authors, the sealed-off, splendorous environment of the imperial court came to be virtually synonymous with “Oriental” extravagance It was the domain of degenerate eunuchs who kept the emperor away from more appropriate companions like senators and high military officials 54 Ammianus Marcellinus, recounting with grim satisfaction how Julian drove out the corrupt palace attendants of his predecessor, remarked that “it must be admitted that the major part of those creatures maintained a vast nursery of all the vices, to such a degree that they infected the state with evil passions ” Eunuchs and other low-status servants thus counteracted the good example that the emperor was supposed to set: they undermined, rather than strengthened public morality Perhaps even more worrying, they could undermine the morality of the ruler himself As the author of the Historia Augusta claimed, eunuchs “alone cause the downfall of emperors, for they wish them to live in the manner of foreign nations or as the kings of the Persians, and keep them well removed from the people and from their friends ”55 Comments such as these evoke associations with the effeminate kings of the “East” described by Diodorus and Athenaeus According to legend, these monarchs had lived secluded lives amidst their eunuchs and concubines, indulging in all the vices and being closer to women than to men in their appearance and behaviour 56 Interestingly, the end of the reign of Sardanapalus, last in a long line of Assyrian “female-kings,” came about by an act of looking: when one of his generals gained access to the palace and laid eyes on him, he was appalled at the way Sardanapalus spent his days and decided to revolt 57 No late antique Roman emperor is said to have had an equally contemptible lifestyle, but the association of the imperial court with eunuchs and “Oriental” luxury inevitably had negative implications for rulers who spent too much time hiding away in their palace Eunapius regarded the imperial preference for leisure over warfare as a structural problem, complaining that “our Emperors in their concern for the transient turn to pleasure, while neither pursuing nor showing interest in the immortality which is brought by glory” Synesius put it even more sharply in his rebuke to Arcadius: “You rejoice only in the pleasures of the body, and the most material of these …; and so you live the life of a polyp of the sea ” To break this regrettable pattern, there was only one solution: the emperor should leave his golden cage and show himself in public, becoming what every good ruler should be to his people: “an accustomed sight ”58

54 55 56 57 58

For eunuchs at the late antique imperial court, see Hopkins 1963; Scholten 1995; Stevenson 1995 Amm Marc 22 4 2; SHA Alex Sev 66 3: more gentium aut regum Persarum See Gambato (2000) with references to sources Diod Sic 2 24 1–5 Syn De regno 10 3: σύνηθες … θέαμα

Keeping up Appearances

177

Conclusion As in the Principate, imperial visibility was a major concern for late antique orators and authors Panegyrists made great efforts to frame the visibility of the current emperor in positive terms, sometimes by contrasting him to allegedly more secluded, less approachable rivals and predecessors Critical authors voiced their own judgments Visibility and accessibility, then, remained important markers of “good” emperorship Through public appearances, rulers could be characterized as dazzlingly majestic, easily accessible, committed to their people, morally upstanding, inspirational or otherwise praiseworthy However, there were right and wrong ways for emperors to show themselves to their subjects, although contemporaries often disagreed in their judgments In particular, tension persisted between the splendorous displays of late antique monarchs and the age-old ideal of the modest princeps, so that imperial luxury and pomp could evoke praise as well as blame On the one hand, such splendour could be deemed fitting to express the emperor’s unparalleled majesty; on the other, it could be taken as a sign of arrogance or falseness It has not been my aim to assess to what extent late antique emperors did indeed become less visible and accessible than their counterparts from the Principate In whatever way we would answer this question, it is clear that panegyrists and authors invariably criticized rulers who preferred to stay out of sight, associating them with such condemnable traits as aloofness, disinterest, indolence and morally suspect behaviour Evidently, the notion that the emperor should not avoid the public gaze remained highly relevant, at least in the circles of orators and literary authors At the same time, the emphasis that many panegyrists put on the overwhelming, rapturous experience of actually seeing the emperor – especially in cities and towns where he did not normally reside – betrays a growing sense that such a sight should by no means be considered mundane or self-evident, but was a privilege It signalled that the emperors were wholly in control of their own image, appearing only when and if they wanted to Even Roma herself could only beg to catch a glimpse of her most beloved son, as she did in Claudian’s speech, but had no more right to insist on his appearance than anybody else From this perspective, power did not reside in remaining unseen – but in determining when and where to put oneself on display Bibliography Bartsch, S 2006 The Mirror of the Self: Sexuality, Self-Knowledge, and the Gaze in the Early Roman Empire Chicago: University of Chicago Press Cameron, A 1970 Claudian: Poetry and Propaganda at the Court of Honorius Oxford: Oxford University Press

178

Martijn Icks

– , J Long and L Sherry 1993 Barbarians and Politics at the Court of Arcadius Berkeley: University of California Press Champlin, E 2003 Nero Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press Chastagnol, A 1985 “Autour du thème du princeps clausus ” Pages 149–161 in Bonner HistoriaAugusta-Colloquium, 1982/1983 Edited by J Straub Bonn: Habelt Reprinted as: Chastagnol, A 2008 Pages 105–117 in Le Pouvoir impérial à Rome Figures et commémorations Edited by S Benoist and S Demougin Scripta Varia IV Geneva: Droz Edwards, C 1994 “Beware of imitations: theatre and the subversion of imperial identity” Pages 83–97 in Reflections of Nero Edited by J Elsner and J Masters London: Duckworth – 1997 “Unspeakable professions: public performance and prostitution in ancient Rome ” Pages 66–95 in Roman Sexualities Edited by J P Hallett and M B Skinner Princeton: Princeton University Press Engels, D 2009 “Der Hahn des Honorius und das Hündchen der Aemilia Zum Fortleben heidnischer Vorzeichenmotivik bei Prokop ” Antike und Abendland 55:118–129 Fredrick, D 2002 The Roman Gaze: Vision, Power, and the Body Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press Gambato, M 2000 “The female-kings Some aspects of the representation of eastern kings in the Deipnosophistae ” Pages 227–230 in Athenaeus and His World: Reading Greek Culture in the Roman Empire Edited by D Braund and J Wilkins Exeter: University of Exeter Press Griffin, M 1984 Nero: The End of a Dynasty London: Batsford Hagl, W 1997 Arcadius Apis Imperator: Synesios von Kyrene und sein Beitrag zum Herrscherideal der Spätantike Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Hekster, O J 2002 Commodus: An Emperor at the Crossroads Amsterdam: Gieben – 2005 “Captured in the gaze of power: visibility, games and Roman imperial representation ” Pages 153–171 in Imaginary Kings: Royal Images in the Ancient Near East, Greece and Rome Edited by O J Hekster and R Fowler Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Hopkins, K 1963 “Eunuchs and politics in the Later Roman Empire ” Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 189:62–80 Icks, M 2012 “Bad emperors on the rise: negative assessments of imperial investitures, AD 284– 395 ” Klio Beiträge zur alten Geschichte 94:462–481 – 2014 “The inadequate heirs of Theodosius: ancestry, merit and divine blessing in the representation of Arcadius and Honorius ” Millennium Jahrbuch zu Kultur und Geschichte des ersten Jahrtausends n Chr 11:69–99 – 2017 “Of lizards and peacocks: criticism of the princeps clausus in fourth- and fifth-century sources ” Mediterraneo antico 20:467–494 Kolb, F 1987 Untersuchungen zur Historia Augusta Bonn: Habelt Lejdegård, H 2002 Honorius and the City of Rome: Authority and Legitimacy in Late Antiquity Uppsala: University of Uppsala Lendon, J E 1997 Empire of Honour Oxford: Oxford University Press Lenski, N 1998 Review of Arcadius Apis Imperator, by W Hagl Bryn Mawr Classical Review 98 3 08 http://bmcr brynmawr edu/1998/98 3 08 html [Accessed: Nov 7, 2012] MacCormack, S 1981 Art and Ceremony in Late Antiquity Berkeley: University of California Press McEvoy, M A 2013 Child Emperor Rule in the Late Roman West, AD 367–455 Oxford: Oxford University Press Morford, M 1985 “Nero’s patronage and participation in literature and the arts ” Pages 2003–2031 in Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt II Edited by H Temporini and W Haase vol 32 3 Berlin: de Gruyter

Keeping up Appearances

179

Nixon, C E V , and B S Rodgers, eds 1994 In Praise of Later Roman Emperors: The Panegyrici Latini Berkeley: University of California Press Parker, H N 1999 “The observed of all observers: spectacle, applause, and cultural poetics in the Roman theater audience ” Pages 163–179 in The Art of Ancient Spectacle Edited by B Bergmann and C Kondoleon New Haven: Yale University Press Pfeilschifter, R 2013 Der Kaiser und Konstantinopel Kommunikation und Konfliktaustrag in einer spätantiken Metropole Berlin: De Gruyter Roller, M B 2004 “Exemplarity in Roman culture: the cases of Horatius Cocles and Cloelia ” Classical Philology 99:1–56 Scholten, M 1995 Der Eunuch in Kaisernähe Zur politischen und sozialen Bedeutung des praepositus sacri cubiculi im 4 Und 5 Jahrhundert n Chr Frankfurt am Main: Lang Stevenson, W 1995 “The rise of eunuchs in Greco-Roman antiquity” Journal of the History of Sexuality 5:495–511 Stroheker, F K 1970 “Princeps clausus Zu einigen Berührungen der Literatur des fünften Jahrhunderts mit der Historia Augusta ” Pages 273–283 in Bonner Historia-Augusta-Colloquium 1968/1969 Edited by J Straub Bonn: Habelt

An Imperial Jellyfish? The Emperor Arcadius and Imperial Leadership in the Late Fourth Century AD Meaghan McEvoy (Macquarie University, Sydney) The emperor Arcadius is not the most inspiring of late Roman imperial leaders 1 As the eldest son of the emperor Theodosius I, Arcadius was raised to the rank of Augustus at the age of 6 years in 386, and was sole eastern emperor from the time of his father’s death in 395 until his own death in 408 His reputation as preserved in the sources is underwhelming: Zosimus describes Arcadius as extremely stupid and completely apathetic,2 ruled by his advisers “like a fatted animal ”3 Similarly, Arcadius’ contemporary Philostorgius recorded that: “Arcadius … was short, slight of build, weakly, and dark in complexion … his dullness of mind was evident in his speech and the way his eyes looked as they drooped sleepily downward beneath their drowsy lids ”4 Modern historians have generally followed suit in their assessments of Arcadius 5 But perhaps the most famously insulting comments regarding Arcadius as an imperial leader were voiced by the ambassador and later bishop, Synesius of Cyrene Travelling to Constantinople in late 397 (according to the dating of Cameron) to deliver a gift of crown gold to the emperor on behalf of his city, Synesius claimed also to have delivered a stinging 1

2 3 4 5

The research for this chapter was conducted in part during my summer research fellowship at Dumbarton Oaks in 2013, and in part while I was a postdoctoral research fellow of the Alexander von Humboldt Stiftung at the Goethe-Universität in Frankfurt am Main from 2013–2016, and I am deeply thankful for the opportunities both of these fellowships afforded I am also grateful to Hartmut Leppin and John Haldon for their careful reading of this paper and all suggestions and corrections made – all remaining errors are my own Zos 5 24 1–2 Zos 5 12 1–2; similarly 5 14 1 Also Eun frag 62 2 and Philostorg 11 3 on the overwhelming influence of the chief advisers of both Arcadius and Honorius Philostorg 11 3: ὁ δὲ Ἀρκάδιος βραχὺς τῷ μεγέθει καὶ λεπτὸς τὴν ἕξιν καὶ ἀδρανὴς τὴν ἰσχὺν καὶ τὸ χρῶμα μέλας· καὶ τὴν τῆς ψυχῆς νωθείαν οἵ τε λόγοι διήγγελλον καὶ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν ἡ φύσις, ὑπνηλῶς τε καὶ δυσαναφόρως αὐτοὺς δεικνῦσα καθελκομένους See e g Bury 1923, 107; Jones 1964, 173; Cameron et al 1993, 4; McCormick 1986, 47; Icks 2014, 70

182

Meaghan McEvoy

speech, known as De regno, to the young emperor, in which he urged him to rid himself of pandering advisers, and the army of barbarian soldiers, and to take up the personal leadership of his troops and his government, as his father before him had done 6 Few scholars would now claim that this speech was ever delivered in its current form to the emperor 7 But Synesius’ outspoken criticisms have continued to resonate in later assessments of Arcadius’ character and reign Through the fault of those around him, Synesius asserted, Arcadius had developed an exaggerated sense of his own majesty, becoming “cloistered and besieged by [his] very self ” Instead of dwelling with his soldiers, living simply and leading his armies into battle, Arcadius had taken to keeping to his lair like a lizard, “(…) scarcely peeping out at all to enjoy the sun’s warmth, lest being [a man] [he] should be detected as such, by men ”8 Afraid to become an accustomed sight to his people, he had given himself up instead to pleasures of the body and so lived “the life of a jellyfish ”9 Synesius expressed the aim of his speech as giving advice to the emperor which would “lead [him] out from his palace,”10 for surely “(…) nothing has done the Romans more harm in past days than the protection and attention given to the sovereign’s person, of which they make a secret as though they were priests ”11 Arcadius: a palace-bound emperor? I do not intend to argue that Arcadius was in fact a dynamic and capable leader, much maligned by ancient and modern scholars alike It is undeniable that he never did lead his armies on campaign, or that the early years of his sole rule were dogged by the bloody rivalries of court factions vying for power, while much of the remainder of his reign was dominated by the court’s conflict with John Chrysostom 12 Yet Arcadius has

6 7 8 9

10 11

12

See for discussion: Cameron et al 1993, 126; Liebeschuetz 1990, 106–107 See principally Cameron et al 1993, 126 ff Also Icks 2014, 72, n 11 Syn De Regno 15 7: νῦν οὖν ἄρ’ ἄμεινον πράττετε, ἀφ’ οὗ περὶ τοὺς βασιλέας ἡ τελετὴ συνέστη, καὶ θαλαμεύεσθε καθάπερ αἱ σαῦραι μόλις, εἴ πῃ, πρὸς τὴν εἵλην ἐκκύπτουσαι, μὴ φωραθείητε ὑπὸ τῶνἀνθρώπων ὄντες ἄνθρωποι; Syn De Regno 14 3: τοιγαροῦν ἡ σεμνότης αὕτη καὶ τὸ δεδιέναι μὴ ἐξανθρωπισθείητε σύνηθες γενόμενοι θέαμα κατακλείστους ποιεῖ πολιορκουμένους ὑφ’ ἑαυτῶν, ἐλάχιστα κατακλείστους ποιεῖ πολιορκουμένους ὑφ’ ἑαυτῶν, ἐλάχιστα μὲν ὁρῶντας, ἐλάχιστα δὲ ἀκούοντας, ἀφ’ ὧν πρακτικὴ φρόνησις συναθροίζεται, μόνας ἡδομένους τὰς τοῦ σώματος ἡδονάς, καὶ τούτων γε τὰς ὑλικωτάτας, ὅσας ἁφή τε καὶ γεῦσις πορίζουσι, βίον ζῶντας θαλαττίου πνεύμονος See Cameron et al 1993, 131, also 138–139 Arcadius’ brother Honorius fares little better in this regard: see Icks 2014 and Smith 2007, 162 Syn De Regno 13 1: Ὁ δὲ λόγος βαδίζων ἐξάγει τὸν βασιλέα τῶν βασιλείων … Syn De Regno 14 2: φημὶ γὰρ οὐδὲν οὕτως ἔμπροσθεν ἄλλο χείρω ποιῆσαι τὰ Ῥωμαίων, ὡς τὴν περὶ τὸ βασιλικὸν σῶμα σκηνὴν καὶ θεραπείαν, ἣν ὥσπερ ἱερουργοῦντες ὑμῖν ἐν ἀπορρήτῳ ποιοῦνται, καὶ τὸ βαρβαρικῶς ἐκτεθεῖσθαι τὰ καθ’ ὑμᾶς· Such behaviour, Synesius observes, is a pretence of true majesty: Syn De Regno 17, 18 On Synesius’ criticisms, see Cameron et al 1993, 131 For detailed discussions of both these issues, see Liebeschuetz 1990 and Cameron et al 1993

An Imperial Jellyfish?

183

received very little attention in modern scholarship as a leader in his own right Moreover, his reign comes very early in the stages of a major transition in the nature of imperial rule, from the military leadership of his father Theodosius I and fourth century emperors generally, to the civilian and ceremonial-style rule of the emperors of the first half of the fifth century 13 In the east this transformation in the nature of imperial leadership led to an increasing focus on the city of Constantinople, as emperors took up essentially permanent residence there This relationship between the eastern emperor and Constantinople has received considerable scholarly attention in recent years,14 with a particular emphasis on the new forms of communication (particularly through Christian liturgical events and processions) between emperor and populace which resulted from this permanent imperial residence from the late fourth century onwards Such new emphases on the pious activities of the emperor, at a time when he no longer personally led his armies, have been convincingly linked to a new means of imperial legitimation in this era, supported by the population of the imperial city This evolution of civilian rule and relationship with the urban populace of Constantinople is one manifestation of what German-language scholarship has begun to refer to as “Kaiserakzeptanz ” The key arguments for this new development however, have tended to focus on the activities of Theodosius I as a starting point, and the marked increase in liturgical celebrations during the reign of his grandson Theodosius II, with less attention to the intervening reign of Arcadius 15 Yet Arcadius deserves his place as, if not a great innovator,16 at least an important conduit of continuity, in the development of this new ideology Furthermore, theories of Kaiserakzeptanz sit uneasily with the criticisms of Arcadius made by Synesius, whose comments evoke the idea of the princeps clausus, the palace-bound or shut-away emperor, a not unusual theme of imperial critiques of the period, appearing most famously in the Historia Augusta 17 For the particular form

13 14 15

16 17

See generally on this transformation: Diefenbach 1996, 41; Diefenbach 2002, 21; Meier 2003, 144; Icks 2014, 72; and on this change but with a western focus: Bleckmann 1997; McEvoy 2013 E g Diefenbach 1996, 41–42; Diefenbach 2002, 21–22; Meier 2003, 144; Smith 2007, 189, 212; and most comprehensively, Pfeilschifter 2013 See generally on the development of Constantinople as the principal imperial residence of the east, Dagron 1974 On this approach, see Flaig 1992, esp 174–207; Diefenbach 1996, 35–37; Meier 2003, 144–145; Pfeilschifter 2013, 496 “Kaiserakzeptanztheorie” is, in effect, one way of theorising, articulating and paying special attention to the ways in which the legitimation of imperial rule was dependent upon the goodwill of various “acceptance groups,”among which in the fifth century east under largely sedentary emperors were the various groupings and constellations (ephemeral or not) within the urban populace of Constantinople Croke 2010, 264 This particular criticism of emperors also appears in the work of the later fifth century poet Sidonius Apollinaris (Carm 5 354–363), and in a fragment of Sulpicius Severus preserved in the work of Gregory of Tours (HF 2 9) For full discussion of the princeps clausus motif, see Stroheker 1970 In relation particularly to Arcadius and Honorius, see also Bleckmann 1997, 563 and Smith 2007, 162

184

Meaghan McEvoy

of Kaiserakzeptanz through pious activity in Constantinople shared by emperor and populace to have continued to develop as a method of legitimisation, the “accepting” populace actually needed to see its emperor, and for him not to be hidden from public view in the way that Synesius asserts Arcadius was From the time of his arrival in Constantinople with his father as a child of just 3 years in 380, Arcadius was hardly ever away from the city 18 Indeed, unlike any other emperor of the fourth century, Arcadius grew up in the imperial city he would come to rule 19 During the absences of Theodosius I on his western campaigns, from 387 until 391 (against Magnus Maximus) and from June 394 (against Eugenius) until Theodosius’ death in January 395, the teenage Arcadius was the most senior member of the imperial family resident in Constantinople 20 Thanks to the careful itineraries drawn up by Seeck, we also know that throughout his 13-year reign as sole emperor, from 395 until 408, Arcadius very rarely left the city, apart from an occasional summer holiday in Ancyra 21 It has recently been rightly emphasised that prior to Theodosius I, no emperor had spent so much of his reign in Constantinople before 22 Under Arcadius, imperial residency in the city was taken to a new level entirely Clearly, given this record of Arcadius’ virtually unbroken residency in Constantinople, for those of his many subjects living outside of the city and in far-flung provinces, their chances of ever setting eyes on their emperor were almost nil, lending credence to Synesius’ claims However – the detailed examination of our available source material undertaken in this paper provides evidence for frequent occasions, both secular and religious, when the emperor Arcadius is specifically mentioned at public celebrations and was widely seen, within the city of Constantinople, suggesting that the idea of this emperor as “palace-bound” needs to be reconsidered Accessions, consular and imperial anniversary celebrations One of the more obvious moments of imperial interaction between emperor and populace was the occasion of an imperial accession and we see Arcadius taking part in such occasions both during his father’s reign, and his own Across the late fourth century

18 19 20 21 22

On Arcadius’ arrival, see Croke 2010, 244–245 On the considerable amount of time spent by Theodosius I in Constantinople, see Croke 2010, 242, 263 Though Constantine’s sons and Julian also spent some time in Constantinople during their childhoods, none experienced the long-term residency through childhood and youth that Arcadius did Seeck 1919, 273–283 Seeck 1919, 285–315 Also Bury 1923, 138; Holum 1982, 79 One of the other rare occasions when we see Arcadius leave the city of Constantinople was during the Gainas crisis, when he travelled to Chalcedon to meet with the rebel general, see Liebeschuetz 1990, 108 Croke 2010

An Imperial Jellyfish?

185

there was a growing trend for eastern emperors to be acclaimed at the Hebdomon outside Constantinople, and on the fifth anniversary of Theodosius I’s accession, on January 19th, 383, 6-year old Arcadius was there proclaimed co-Augustus 23 A decade later in 393 his brother Honorius would be similarly raised as co-emperor, with a ceremony and parade back into the city to follow in which we know Arcadius also took part 24 As an adult emperor in 400, Arcadius elevated his wife, the empress Eudoxia, to the rank of Augusta,25 and then in early 402, his infant son Theodosius II as co-Augustus 26 Thus, during the period of Arcadius’ residency in Constantinople, the populace of the city witnessed multiple moments of imperial succession, accompanied by grand public celebrations, in all of which the emperor Arcadius will have played a central role Consular celebrations were similarly events at which the presence of the resident emperor – especially when he was the one honoured with the consulate – was a given, with the holding of expensive public games a particular highlight Beginning during the reign of his father and continuing into his own, Arcadius held the consulship 6 times,27 entering on every one of those consulships while in residence at Constantinople, while his young son was also consul twice before Arcadius’ death 28 Imperial anniversaries offered similar festivities Marcellinus comes informs us in 388 the young Arcadius celebrated his fifth anniversary at Constantinople,29 alongside his father Theodosius I on the occasion of his tenth anniversary, a celebration marked with exhibitions and games 30 Indeed this auspicious imperial occasion gave rise to the creation of the famous Missorium of Theodosius, on which Theodosius, his western colleague Valentinian II, and his son Arcadius, the three reigning Augusti, are depicted 31 Imperial birthdays too were celebrated at Constantinople with games in the hippodrome,32 while the anniversary of the foundation of the city each year saw further festivities directly involving the presence of the emperor together with the populace 33 And, although the emperor Arcadius never personally campaigned with his troops, we do know of at least one triumphal entrance to the city in which he was involved As

23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

Marc com s a 383 2 See Croke 2010, 250–251 Diefenbach 1996, 45; McEvoy 2010, 178 Claudian De Cons Hon IV 203–211 See on the occasion McEvoy 2013, 138–139; Diefenbach 2002, 26–27 Chronicon Paschale s a 400 (p 567) Chronicon Paschale s a 402 (p 568); Marc com s a 402 2 See further Cameron et al 1993, 170 In 385, 392, 394, 396, 402 and 406 In 403 and 407 For details of all of these imperial consulships, see CLRE Marc com s a 387 1 Cons Const 387 1 Croke 2010, 251–252, see Croke also on further fifth-year anniversaries Also MacCormack 1981, 214 See Cod theod 2 8 19 and Croke 2010, 250 Croke 2010, 249 The continuing importance of interaction between the emperor and populace in the hippodrome has been emphasised by a number of recent studies: see especially Diefenbach 2002, 23–24

186

Meaghan McEvoy

a child of 9 years, following his father’s campaign against the Goths in 386, Marcellinus comes informs us that Theodosius “entered the city in victory together with his son Arcadius ”34 Imperial births, marriages and deaths In the late fourth and fifth centuries, ceremonies marking imperial family milestones also became very much a part of life in the city of Constantinople In 395 Arcadius was married to a woman named Eudoxia, the daughter of the late Frankish general Bauto 35 We gain a glimpse of celebrations for the marriage through Zosimus, with his description of crowds dancing and carrying garlands along with imperial servants bearing clothing and ornaments for the new empress 36 Under Theodosius I Constantinople had witnessed the birth of a number of imperial children, and this was a trend which would continue during the reign of Arcadius, whose wife Eudoxia bore him 4 daughters,37 and finally in 401, the hoped-for son and heir, Theodosius II 38 As Croke has pointed out, in later centuries, the Book of Ceremonies informs us that imperial births triggered days of civic celebrations in the hippodrome, and there is little reason to think this was not already the case in the late fourth century 39 Less festive celebrations for the city would attend the demise of a member of the imperial family in Constantinople Following the death of Theodosius I in early 395, for example, his body was transported to Constantinople for burial in the Apostoleion, and Socrates informs us that the dead emperor “was honourably interred by his son Arcadius with the usual funeral solemnities ”40 The funeral of Arcadius’ wife, the Augusta Eudoxia following her death in childbirth in 404 saw similar ceremonial, in which the emperor would again have played a pivotal role 41

34

35 36 37 38 39 40

41

Marc com s a 386 1 Also Cons Const s a 386 See McCormick 1986, 43 It is possible triumphal celebrations also occurred following the general Fravitta’s defeat of Gainas in 400, and on other occasions during Arcadius’ reign, but we have no explicit evidence for this, see McCormick 1986, 49–51; Cameron et al 1993, 238 Chron Pasch s a 395 (pp 565–566) See further Liebeschuetz 1990, 92; Cameron et al 1993, 6 Zos 5 3 1–6 Flaccilla (PLRE 2 472); Pulcheria (PLRE 2 929–930); Arcadia (PLRE 2 129) and Marina (PLRE 2 723) PLRE 2 1100 Croke 2010, 249–250 Socrates 6 1: Περὶ δὲ τὴν ὀγδόην τοῦ Νοεμβρίου μηνὸς ἐν τῇ αὐτῇ ὑπατείᾳ τὸ σῶμα Θεοδοσίου κομισθὲν τῇ νενομισμένῃ κηδείᾳ ὁ υἱὸς ἐτίμα Ἀρκάδιος Also Theophan , AM 5886; Chron Pasch s a 395 (pp 565–566); Marc com s a 395 1–3 See further Matthews 1975, 249; Icks 2014, 78 Arcadius was presumably also present at his mother’s funeral ca 485, see Holum 1982, 24 Chron Pasch s a 404 (p 569) Also for Eudoxia’s death: Socrates 6 19; Marc com s a 404 2

An Imperial Jellyfish?

187

Celebrations such as imperial accessions, consulships, anniversaries, funerals, marriages and births were moments when we would traditionally expect the emperor to be seen marking the occasion together with his subjects; yet it is worth remembering that this was still very much a new phenomenon in Constantinople under Arcadius, as permanent imperial residency in the city began to take hold Furthermore, the sources also provide us with other occasions unique to Arcadius himself of imperial interaction with the populace Military occasions Early in Arcadius’ sole reign, we also know of at least one major instance of interaction between this very non-military emperor and his soldiers In mid-395, a large eastern army was returning to Constantinople, led by the Gothic general Gainas following the western campaign against Eugenius Zosimus provides the most detail on the turn of events: (…) when the soldiers were approaching Constantinople, Gainas went ahead to tell the emperor Arcadius of their arrival (…) As Arcadius was pleased to see them, Gainas urged the emperor to meet the soldiers as they entered the city, on the ground that it was usual for soldiers to be given this honour The emperor, therefore, was persuaded to go out of the city to meet them, followed by Rufinus as praetorian prefect When they had prostrated themselves and received the proper welcome from the emperor, on a signal from Gainas they all surrounded Rufinus and struck him with their swords One cut off his right hand, another his left, while another decapitated him and went off singing a victory paean (…) 42 (Zos 5 7 4–6)

Arcadius therefore, upon making the journey outside the city walls to greet these returning troops, was treated to the brutal murder of his praetorian prefect Rufinus before his eyes Here then was a less pleasant instance of interaction between emper42

Zos 5 7 4–6: τῶν δὲ στρατιωτῶν ἤδη πλησίον τῆς Κωνσταντινουπόλεως ὄντων, φθάσας ὁ Γαΐνης ἀπήγγειλεν Ἀρκαδίῳ τῷ βασιλεῖ τὴν αὐτῶν παρουσίαν, καὶ ὡς παραγένοιντο τοῖς πράγμασι πεπονηκόσιν ἐφιέμενοι βοηθεῖν Τοῦ δὲ βασιλέως ἡσθέντος ἐπὶ τῇ τούτων ἀφίξει, ὑπαντῆσαι τοῖς στρατιώταις εἰσιέναι μέλλουσι παρεκάλει τὸν βασιλέα Γαΐνης· ταύτης γὰρ τῆς τιμῆς ἠξιῶσθαι τοὺς στρατιώτας ἔλεγε σύνηθες εἶναι· πεισθέντος δὲ τοῦ βασιλέως καὶ πρὸ τῆς πόλεως ὑπαντήσαντος, εἵπετο καὶ ὁ Ῥουφῖνος, οἷα τῆς αὐλῆς ὕπαρχος· ἐπεὶ δὲ προσκυνήσαντες τῆς προσηκούσης ἠξιώθησαν παρὰ τοῦ βασιλέως φιλοφροσύνης, δόντος Γαΐνου τὸ σύνθημα πάντες ὁμοῦ τὸν Ῥουφῖνον ἀπολαβόντες ἐν μέσῳ τοῖς ξίφεσι παίουσι Καὶ ὃ μὲν ἀφῃρεῖτο τῆς δεξιᾶς, ὃ δὲ τὴν ἑτέραν ἔκοπτεν, ὃ δὲ τὴν κεφαλὴν τοῦ τραχήλου χωρίσας ἀπῄει, παιᾶνας ᾄδων ἐπινικίους· See also Eun , frag 64 1, and (briefly): Chron Pasch s a 395 (p 566); Socrates 6 1; Sozomen 8 1; Marc com s a 395 5 The tale is also related in Claudian’s invective, In Rufinum, see especially 2 366–386 and 2 405–415 See further on the political context for the assassination: Cameron 1970, 90–91; Liebeschuetz 1990, 92; Cameron et al 1993, 5–6; Pfeilschifter 2013, 485–486

188

Meaghan McEvoy

or and subjects at Constantinople: Yet it is worth noting that Arcadius himself was entirely unharmed and unthreatened: his hated prefect was the sole target, not the emperor 43 An imperial baptism We hear of major ceremonial and celebrations in the city accompanying the baptism of Theodosius II in 402 – notably the first known infant baptism of an imperial child – as recounted by Mark the Deacon’s Life of Porphyry Scholars continue to argue over the authenticity of this text, however we do have other sources attesting to the child Theodosius’ baptism by John Chrysostom, the then patriarch of Constantinople 44 Mark the Deacon describes the procession from the church to return to the palace, led by the patricii and illustres, dignitaries and soldiers through a city hung with garlands and silks, while near the infant walked the emperor Arcadius himself, “with a cheerful face that was shining more brightly than the purple he was wearing (…)”45 The story famously goes on that through the collusion of the empress Eudoxia, some petitioners who had previously had their request denied by Arcadius, on this occasion succeeded in having the infant Theodosius grant their petition Waylaying the procession as it left the church, the courtier carrying the baby was seen to nod its head when the petitioners approached, leaving Arcadius unable to refuse their request 46 As Van Nuffelen has recently pointed out, the tale reminds us that even during staged imperial ceremonies, events could be hijacked 47 Yet for our purposes, it is important to note that here was this supposedly palace-bound emperor, presenting his infant son in an immensely public environment, to the population of the city in which he lived, and who were obviously very much a part of celebrating this milestone in the imperial child’s life

43 44

45 46 47

McCormick 1986, 48; Liebeschuetz 1990, 90 See for discussion, Van Nuffelen 2012, 191, n 35; Barnes 1989; Barnes and Bevan 2013, 25–26; Liebeschuetz 1990, 199–200; Cameron et al 1993, 155 Chrysostom’s baptism of Theodosius is attested also by Socrates, who has Eudoxia refer to her son when talking to Chrysostom as “your spiritual son … whom you received out of the sacred font” (Socrates 6 11) Similarly (but less specifically), Sozomen 8 10 Theophanes states that Chrysostom had “sponsored [Theodosius II] at his baptism”: Theophan , AM 5892; also repeated at AM 5893 Mark the Deacon, Life of Porphyry 47 Van Nuffelen suggests it is unlikely Arcadius failed to see through the charade, but was left with little option but to acquiesce: Van Nuffelen 2012, 191–192 Also Kelly 2013a, 4; Diefenbach 1996, 52; Pfeilschifter 2013, 491–492 Van Nuffelen 2012, 192

An Imperial Jellyfish?

189

Relic translations The arrival of saintly relics in the city provided further opportunities for emperor and populace to come together during Arcadius’ reign This was a type of event for which Arcadius’ father Theodosius had set the immediate precedent, when in 391 the head of John the Baptist was brought to Constantinople 48 Theodosius’ efforts in endowing Constantinople with more robust Christian credentials through the importation of holy remains would be enhanced and consolidated during the reigns of his son and grandson 49 At some point in the first years of the fifth century (probably between 400–402), relics of unknown martyrs were received at Constantinople to be transferred to the church of St Thomas at Drypia, an occasion marked by two surviving sermons of John Chrysostom who presided over the ceremonial 50 Attention in modern accounts has focused almost solely on the empress Eudoxia’s involvement in the transfer of the relics: the empress took part in the night-time torch-lit procession to accompany the relics, removing her diadem, following the reliquaries like a maidservant, mixing with the crowd, and according to Chrysostom garbed in a “robe of humility” rather than the imperial purple 51 Yet while Eudoxia’s devotion may have been more eye-catching, it is important to note that Arcadius too, personally attended the occasion, though separately from his wife According to Chrysostom, the emperor and empress chose not to attend together,52 since there was concern that the emperor’s bodyguard would have overwhelmed the pious devotion of his subjects through “the press of horses and the clash of armed soldiers ”53 When Arcadius did attend the next day however, he too laid down his diadem, while his guards laid down their arms, and “(…) they all came with a subdued mind, as if they entered from earth into heaven ”54 Similarly, in 406, two years after the Augusta’s death, we hear from the Chronicon paschale that: “(…) the remains of St Samuel were conveyed to Constantinople (…) with Arcadius Augustus leading the way, and Anthemius, praetorian prefect and former consul, Aemilianus,

48 49 50

51 52 53 54

Chron Pasch s a 391 (p 564); Sozomen 7 21 See further on Theodosius I’s efforts in relic translation: Croke 2010, 255; Liebeschuetz 1990, 164–165; Also Diefenbach 1996, 44; Croke 2010, 255; Holum 1982, 20–21; Klein 2006, 83; Kelly 2013a, 42 Croke 2010, 256 Also Ward-Perkins 2012, 60–61 The two sermons are John Chrys Homilia dicta postquam reliquiae martyrum (PG 63:468–472) and John Chrys Homilia dicta praesenti imperatore (PG 63:473–478) In perhaps 403 the relics of St Phocas were also apparently transported to Pontus and received in Constantinople by Arcadius and Eudoxia, for discussion see Van Nuffelen 2012, 197; Diefenbach 1996, 46; Meier 2003, 146–147 John Chrys PG 63:470 60–2; See further Kelly 2013b, 224 For detailed discussion of Eudoxia’s role, see Kelly 2013b, 223–224 Also Liebeschuetz 1990, 168; Klein 2006, 83 John Chrys PG 63:472 28–30; Kelly 2013b, 231–232; also Holum 1982, 58 John Chrys PG 63:472 20–1; Kelly 2013b, 224; Van Nuffelen 2012, 197 John Chrys Homilia quod Frequenter Conveniendum Est (PG 63:467–72 and 473–77, esp 473); see Van Nuffelen 2012, 197; also Kelly 2013b, 232; Klein 2006, 83; Liebeschuetz 1990, 168

190

Meaghan McEvoy

city prefect, and all the senate; these remains were laid to rest for a certain time in the most holy Great Church ”55 Over the course of the fifth century, such demonstrations of imperial devotion would become increasingly crucial to the ideology of the divine blessing of the emperor, and the intrinsic link between a non-campaigning emperor’s piety and the victories of his armies 56 This development of a new relationship between resident emperor and city populace through highly-charged liturgical occasions is crucial to theories of Kaiserakzeptanz in this era, bringing with it a new form of imperial legitimation through demonstrations of imperial humility and piety in which the population could take part alongside their emperor 57 And while these events may have escalated further during the reign of Theodosius II, their prominence under Arcadius is already evident 58 Monument dedications and everyday activities The available source material therefore provides us with many specific instances of the emperor Arcadius’ public involvements in the life of the city of Constantinople, both secular and liturgical – and we can guess at further highly likely imperial appearances Though we have no specific information about the ceremonies involved, a number of major dynastic monuments were commissioned and completed during the period of Arcadius’ residency The Theodosian obelisk on the hippodrome was erected in 390, during the time Theodosius I himself was absent in the west following his defeat of Magnus Maximus 59 Each of the four sides of the carved base of the obelisk depicts imperial figures, essentially the emperor Theodosius and his colleagues – including of course, Arcadius As MacCormack pointed out, Arcadius himself was the only figure

55

56 57

58 59

Chron Pasch s a 406 (p 569): Καὶ αὐτῷ τῷ ἐνιαυτῷ ἐκομίσθη τὰ λείψανα τοῦ ἁγίου Σαμουὴλ ἐν Κωνσταντινουπόλει διὰ τῆς Χαλκηδονησίας σκάλας μηνὶ ἀρτεμισίῳ πρὸ ιδʹ καλανδῶν ἰουνίων, προηγουμένου Ἀρκαδίου Αὐγούστου καὶ Ἀνθημίου ἐπάρχου πραιτωρίων καὶ ἀπὸ ὑπάτων Αἰμιλιανοῦ ἐπάρχου πόλεως καὶ πάσης τῆς συγκλήτου· ἅπερ ἀπετέθη πρός τινα χρόνον ἐν τῇ ἁγιωτάτῃ μεγάλῃ ἐκκλησίᾳ See further Holum 1982, 90; Diefenbach 1996, 46; Kelly 2013a, 42; Klein 2006, 84 Diefenbach 1996, 35; McEvoy 2010, 163–170 As Diefenbach emphasises, it is striking that relic translations greatly increase in the first half of the fifth century as the binding of imperial rule to Constantinople itself is taking place (Diefenbach 1996, 43–44, 48) Such relic translations came to take on a similar form to an imperial adventus (Diefenbach 1996, 47, 63; also Diefenbach 2002, 25) On imperial demonstrations of humility on such occasions, see Diefenbach 2002, 31–39; on the connection of such demonstrations of humility with the traditional civilis princeps concept, see Diefenbach 2002, 31–32; Meier 2003, 147 On the importance also of the emperor’s orthodoxy in this relationship, see Diefenbach 1996, 52; also Meier 2003, 145 On the “high point” under Theodosius II: Diefenbach 2002, 24; Meier 2003, 145–146 Marc com s a 390 3

An Imperial Jellyfish?

191

depicted who was actually in Constantinople at the time of the obelisk’s erection 60 It is highly likely the young emperor attended any ceremony inaugurating the immense monument with its inscription celebrating Theodosius “and his everlasting descendants,” a clear message of the dynastic strength and legitimacy of the house of Theodosius 61 The scenes depicted on the obelisk also represent the context in which many of Arcadius’ Constantinopolitan subjects may have most often encountered him: presiding over celebratory games in the hippodrome The Forum of Theodosius, begun in 384, was another major monumental commission of the Theodosian house, featuring an equestrian statue of Theodosius I, a column carved with victory reliefs, and further equestrian statues of Arcadius and Honorius 62 Perhaps completed in 393, the year of Honorius’ accession, the three Augusti Theodosius I, Arcadius and Honorius, may all have been present for its inauguration 63 Additionally, the Column of Arcadius, commissioned by Arcadius himself, began construction in 402 on the Xerolophos hill 64 The very creation of these new monuments and public spaces offered further opportunities for the emperor and his subjects to come together There are also likely to have been a number of everyday activities which involved the emperor’s venturing out into the city, activities so mundane they are only occasionally mentioned in the sources In the Dialogue of Palladius on the life of John Chrysostom, for example, it is mentioned in passing that Arcadius frequently went to take exercise in the plain beside the city, in the fifth district 65 And we learn incidentally from the ecclesiastical historians that Arcadius regularly attended public church services on major feasts, since during the imperial family’s conflict with Chrysostom, Arcadius several times sent word to the patriarch that he would not attend church as usual since he would not take communion with Chrysostom until he had cleared himself of the charges made against him 66

60 61 62 63 64

65 66

MacCormack 1981, 57 Arcadius’ younger brother Honorius was in the west with their father at the time ILS 821 See further Smith 2007, 213; Icks 2014, 75 Holum 1982, 11–12 For further details see Croke 2010, 258–259 Icks 2014, 75 Croke 2010, 259–260 See for details Bauer 1996, 187–203 The column, with its crowning statue of Arcadius, was only completed during the reign of Theodosius II in 421: for a detailed discussion, see Beccatti (1960, 151–264) and most recently Matthews 2012, 211 Also Ward-Perkins 2012, 57–58; Bauer 1996, 203–212; Cameron et al 1993, 238; McCormick 1986, 49; MacCormack 1981, 57; Liebeschuetz 1990, 120–121, 273, 277 Pallad Dialogue 34 At Christmas: Socrates 6 18; Sozomen 8 20 At Easter: Socrates 6 18 McLynn argues that after the reign of Theodosius I emperors tended to restrict attendance at public church services to major feast days – but as Van Nuffelen observes, this still left plenty of occasions (McLynn 2004, 265; Van Nuffelen 2012, 193)

192

Meaghan McEvoy

Constantinople-bound, rather than palace-bound? With these examples of frequent interaction between Arcadius and the population of Constantinople in mind, can the description of this emperor as palace-bound really be justified? The term arises primarily out of emperors like Arcadius (and his brother Honorius) being non-campaigning rulers who kept sedentary courts, and were frequently believed in their seclusion to be overly dominated by eunuchs, women, and self-serving advisers – in contrast to the numerous military emperors of the fourth century who campaigned with their soldiers Yet as the examples discussed of Arcadius’ various outings in Constantinople suggest, non-campaigning did not necessarily mean no contact whatsoever with their subjects 67 Synesius’ De regno supposedly declared to Arcadius that “… cities defying computation bow before you, the greater part of which have never beheld you, nor have even hope of beholding such a sight that is indeed beyond their aspirations ”68 This was undeniably true – Arcadius rarely stirred from Constantinople itself Yet although the greater part of his empire would never set eyes on him, it seems likely that a subject living in the emperor’s capital of Constantinople during the reign of Arcadius had in fact a pretty good chance of seeing the emperor, albeit from a distance, on a fairly regular basis Nor was this a tiny number of people: though estimates of the population of Constantinople vary widely, general figures for ca 400 AD suggest the number of inhabitants to have been around 400 000 69 And it was this group of privileged imperial subjects which since the reign of Theodosius I, and increasingly under Arcadius, was being treated to a range of opportunities to participate in imperial life This participation involved not only occasions such as accessions or triumphs, but also imperial birthdays, consular celebrations, marriages, births and deaths,70 everyday imperial outings and extraordinary events such as the arrival of relics 71 Such occasions brought the emperor and populace more frequently together than perhaps ever before, forging a new relationship between the imperial house and the inhabitants of this city Moreover the creation of new ceremonial venues (such as the Forum of Theodosius) and extraordinary liturgical occasions such as the arrival of saintly relics in the city offered even more opportunities for emperor and subjects to come together at Constantinople 72 It is worth noting, thinking

67 68 69 70 71 72

For comments on non-campaigning, military emperors and their sedentary courts, see e g MacCormack 1981, 68; McCormick 1986, 47, 92–93; Whitby 1992, 296; Icks 2014, 69 Syn De Regno 4 2–3: πόλεις δὲ ἀριθμὸν νικῶσαι προσκυνοῦσιν, οὐδὲ ὁρώμενον αἱ πλείους, οὐδὲ ἰδεῖν προσδοκῶσαι τὸ κρεῖττον εὔχεσθαι θέαμα Ward-Perkins 2000, 320 By the 6th century, a population upward of 500 000 is estimated: Haldon 2005, 39 Croke 2010, 250 Also Diefenbach 2002; Holum 1982, 10 As Kelly writes, “Constantinople was a city on parade,” full of processions and festivals: Kelly 2013a, 42 Croke 2010, 254–255

An Imperial Jellyfish?

193

back to Philostorgius’ description of Arcadius’ at the start of this paper, that this was hardly a description one could have gleaned from a coin image or statue of the emperor – it is very likely the Constantinopolitan Philostorgius’ unflattering portrait of Arcadius was an eye-witness account 73 Philostorgius, like other Constantinople residents, presumably had frequently seen the emperor out and about in the city As both Van Nuffelen and Kelly have recently emphasised, imperial participation in public ceremonial, even choreographed ceremonial, had its risks for an emperor 74 We have already seen the way in which on a number of occasions, Arcadius’ public appearances were overtaken by the actions of others – such as in 395 when his prefect Rufinus was slain before his eyes, or of the manipulation of the occasion of his son’s baptism by petitioners in 402 The emperor had to be able to deal with such eventualities without losing face or causing a riot 75 And though we know little of Arcadius’ reactions in such situations, we also know of no disastrous public relations incidents personally involving the emperor This is an argument from silence of course, so we should not place too much weight on it – but it is worth noting that this is not the case for either his brother Honorius, who is reported to have somehow offended the population of Rome during a visit to the city, or for Arcadius’ son Theodosius II, who in 431 during a formal inspection of Constantinople’s public granaries, had stones thrown at him by a hungry crowd 76 One further episode from the sources is worthy of our attention in relation to the emperor Arcadius’ excursions in Constantinople Socrates tells us of an occasion when Arcadius visited the district of Caria, where there was a tree associated with the martyrdom of Acacias, and also nearby a large mansion housing many people: “A little chapel was on that account built near [the tree],” Socrates tells us, “which the emperor Arcadius one day thought fit to visit, and after having prayed there, left again All who lived near this oratory ran in a crowd to see the emperor; and some going out of the mansion referred to, endeavoured to pre-occupy the streets in order to get a better view of their sovereign and his suite, while others followed in his train, until all who inhabited it, including the women and children, had wholly gone out of it No sooner was this vast pile emptied of its occupants, the buildings of which completely environed the church, than the entire mass [i e the mansion] collapsed Then there was a great outcry, followed by shouts of admiration, because it was believed the emperor’s prayer had rescued so great a number of persons from destruction ”77 (Socrates 6 23)

73 74 75 76 77

Bury 1923, I 107, n 1 Van Nuffelen 2012, 185; Kelly 2013b, 241–242 Van Nuffelen 2012, 185–186 See also Kelly 2013a, 50 Theophan AM 5895; Malalas 13 49; Cameron 1970, 384 Marc com s a 431 3 For discussion see Kelly 2013b, 240–241 Socrates 6 23: Ἐν τῇ Κωνσταντινουπόλει οἶκός ἐστιν μέγιστος, Καρύαν ἔχων ἐπώνυμον Ἔστι γὰρ ἐν τῇ αὐλῇ τοῦ οἴκουδένδρον καρύα, ἀφ’ ἧς κρεμασθῆναι λόγος τὸν μάρτυρα Ἀκάκιον καὶ τελειωθῆναι·

194

Meaghan McEvoy

It has been suggested that the flocking of the crowds to see the emperor attests to Arcadius seldom appearing outside of his palace, yet we know from other source evidence that this was not really the case 78 Perhaps it is better to view their reaction as the normal response to the appearance of a celebrity on the scene – even one whose appearance might be well-known – as indeed the crowds who flock to view royal occasions even today in the United Kingdom illustrate And perhaps this is how we should really view Arcadius’ relationship with the populace of Constantinople – he might be a familiar sight, and certainly not so hidden away in his palace that his physical appearance was unknown – but he was still a celebrity, surrounded by hype and ceremonial, and undoubtedly bodyguards Indeed as Synesius himself declares of his ideal ruler: “… he draws the eyes of all present upon him, and no one can endure to look elsewhere when a king does anything conspicuously”79 Conclusion Arcadius is a particularly overlooked late Roman emperor, remarkable more for his absence than his presence in modern studies of the period No panegyrics of Arcadius survive to temper the negative view of Synesius His more dynamic father or more long-lived son (or sometimes even his wife, Eudoxia)80 instead claim the limelight – yet nevertheless between these two pivotal reigns stands Arcadius, surely no less important in his own times than his father or his son 81 Indeed, his reign marks a juncture, the crucial moment of change between the military-style emperorship of the fourth century, which was beginning to give way to the more civilian, ceremonial-style imperial rule which would predominate through the first half of the fifth century in both east and west 82

78 79 80 81 82

δι’ ἣν αἰτίαν καὶ οἰκίσκος τῷ δένδρῳ παρῳκοδομήθη εὐκτήριος Τοῦτον ἱστορῆσαι {ὁ βασιλεὺς} Ἀρκάδιος βουληθεὶς εἰς αὐτὸν παρεγένετο, εὐξάμενός τε αὖθις ἀπεχώρει Πάντες δὲ οἱ περιοικοῦντες τὸν εὐκτήριον οἶκον ἐπὶ τῷ θεάσασθαι τὸν βασιλέα συνέτρεχον Καὶ οἱ μὲν ἔξω τῆς οἰκίας γενόμενοι προκαταλαβεῖν τὰς παρόδουςἐσπούδαζον, ἀφ’ ὧν φανερώτερον τότε τοῦ βασιλέως τὸ πρόσωπον καὶ τὴν περὶ αὐτὸν δορυφορίαν ἡγοῦντο θεάσασθαι,ἄλλοι δὲ ἐπηκολούθουν, ἕως ἅπαντες σὺν γυναιξὶν καὶ παιδίοις ἐκτὸς τοῦ οἴκου ἐγένοντο Καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο εὐθὺς ὁ περικείμενος τῷ εὐκτηρίῳ μέγιστος οἶκος ἅπας κατέπεσεν Ἐκ δὴ τούτου βοὴ σὺν θαύματι ἐπηκολούθει, ὡς ἡ τοῦ βασιλέως εὐχὴ τοσούτους τῆς ἀπωλείας ἐρρύσατο Repeated in less detail in Theophan AM 5899 As Leppin notes, the event as repeated by Socrates emphasises Arcadius’ closeness to God (Leppin 1996, 122) Seeck 1922,V 545; Bury 1923, I 107, n 1 Syn De Regno 13 2: βασιλέως δὲ σωμασκοῦντος καὶ θυραυλοῦντος καὶ ὅπλοις ἐννεάζοντος οἱ πανταχοῦ δῆμοι θέατρόν εἰσι τῶν τε γὰρ παρόντων ἐπιστρέφει τὰ ὄμματα, καὶ οὐδεὶς εἰσι τῶν τε γὰρ παρόντων ἐπιστρέφει τὰ ὄμματα, καὶ οὐδεὶς ἀλλαχόσε βλέπειν ἀνέχεται, βασιλέως ἐν ἀπόπτῳ τι δρῶν-τος· On the over-emphasis on Eudoxia’s influence, see Liebeschuetz 1990, 198 See Croke’s comment at 2010, 264, n 174 McCormick 1986, 47; and generally McEvoy 2010

An Imperial Jellyfish?

195

Synesius’ criticisms are testament to the fact that views of Arcadius as palace-bound, and hidden from view, did exist among some contemporaries, and for those millions of inhabitants of the empire living beyond the walls of Constantinople, or like Synesius, attempting to gain an interview with the emperor, it was surely a reasonable reproach Nevertheless, the views expressed by Synesius in his De regno are not only unlikely to have been delivered at court, but as Cameron suggests, Synesius’ particular objection to Arcadius as a “palace-bound” emperor may have stemmed in part at least from personal disgruntlement at dealing with an emperor and court with little interest in his petition 83 And while scholars have long emphasised the transition from an active, campaigning emperor in the fourth century to a civilian, sedentary emperor in the fifth century, it is Arcadius himself (and his brother Honorius) whose reign straddles that divide Perhaps this is why in the east, Arcadius, rather than his no-more military son Theodosius II, bears much of the brunt of ancient frustration and modern criticism for his lack of campaigning and his Constantinople-centred life 84 Yet as Arcadius’ various attested outings in his city suggest, whatever their critics might say, non-campaigning emperors with sedentary courts did not necessarily experience no contact whatsoever with their subjects Indeed, for the inhabitants of the imperial capital, the reign of Arcadius heralded a whole new era of intense interaction between emperor and populace, and of striking intersection between imperial ideology, leadership and crowd involvement And while it might be argued that the city of Constantinople constituted in some sense an extension of the palace, as we have seen, even the behaviour of the people of the emperor’s home city was not always predictable or controllable Arcadius, his family, and his retinue, were a frequent sight in Constantinople, taking part in major imperial and civic celebrations, sharing family events with the populace, and joining with them in emotionally-charged liturgical occasions, such the reception of holy relics Whether or not he was “weak and sluggish” as Jones declared, or should be compared to a jellyfish or a lizard as Synesius did, his reign saw not just a consolidation of his father’s concentration on Constantinople as the locus of major dynastic imperial ceremonial and monument-building, but also the firm foundations of the civilian and ceremonial-style imperial rule that was to dominate the entire first half of the fifth century As such, Arcadius made an important contribution to the incremental growth of civic loyalty to the house of Theodosius within Constantinople, to the build-up of belief in the family’s dynastic legitimacy and the ideology of the divine blessing of the emperor In so doing, he also succeeded in handing on a stable government to his very young son, whose full accession on the death of Arcadius in 408 was unchallenged 83 84

Cameron et al 1993, 93, 127–132, 136 See also Elton 1996, 103 Though Theodosius II does not entirely escape criticism from contemporaries for his preference for diplomacy over war: see Priscus, frag 3 1 and frag 3 2

196

Meaghan McEvoy

Bibliography Barnes, T D 1989 “The baptism of Theodosius II ” Studia Patristica 19:8–12 –, and G Bevan 2013 The funerary speech for John Chrysostom Liverpool: Liverpool University Press Bauer, F A 1996 Stadt, Platz und Denkmal in der Spätantike: Untersuchungen zur Ausstattung des öffentlichen Raums in den spätantiken Städten Rom, Konstantinopel und Ephesos Mainz: Philipp von Zabern Becatti, G 1960 La Colonna coclide istoriata: Problemi storici, iconographici, stilistici Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider Bleckmann, B 1997 “Honorius und das Ende der römischen Herrschaft in Westeuropa ” Historische Zeitschrift 265:561–595 Bury, J B 1923 History of the later Roman Empire : from the death of Theodosius I to the death of Justinian (AD 395 to AD 565) London: Macmillan Cameron, A 1970 Claudian: Poetry and propaganda at the court of Honorius Oxford: Clarendon –, J Long and L Sherry 1993 Barbarians and politics at the court of Arcadius Berkeley: University of California Press Croke, B 2010 “Reinventing Constantinople: Theodosius I’s imprint on the imperial city” Pages 241–264 in From the Tetrarchs to the Theodosians Edited by S McGill, C Sogno and E J Watts Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Dagron, G 1974 Naissance d’une capitale: Constantinople et ses institutions de 330 à 451 Paris: Presses universitaires de France Diefenbach, S 1996 “Frömmigkeit und Kaiserakzeptanz im frühen Byzanz ” Saeculum 47:35–66 – 2002 “Zwischen Liturgie und civilitas Konstantinopel im 5 Jahrhundert und die Etablierung eines städtischen Kaisertums ” Pages 21–49 in Bildlichkeit und Bildorte von Liturgie: Schauplätze in Spätantike, Byzanz und Mittelalter Edited by R Warland Wiesbaden: Reichert Elton, H 1996 “Fravitta and barbarian career opportunities in Constantinople ” Medieval Prosopography 17:95–106 Flaig, E 1992 Den Kaiser herausfordern Die Usurpation im Römischen Reich Frankfurt: Campus Verlag Haldon, J 2005 The Palgrave Atlas of Byzantine History Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan Holum, K 1982 Theodosian empresses: women and imperial dominion in late antiquity Berkeley: University of California Press Icks, M 2014 “The inadequate heirs of Theodosius: ancestry, merit and divine blessing in the representation of Arcadius and Honorius ” Millenium 11:69–99 Jones, A H M 1964 The later Roman empire 284–602: a social, economic, and administrative survey Oxford: Blackwell Kelly, C 2013a “Rethinking Theodosius ” Pages 3–64 in Theodosius II: rethinking the Roman empire in late antiquity Edited by C Kelly Cambridge: Cambridge University Press – 2013b “Stooping to conquer: the power of imperial humility” Pages 221–243 in Theodosius II: rethinking the Roman empire in late antiquity Edited by C Kelly Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Klein, H A 2006 “Sacred relics and imperial ceremonies at the Great Palace of Constantinople ” Pages 79–99 in Visualisierungen von Herrschaft: Frühmittelalterliche Residenzen Gestalt und Zeremoniell Edited by F A Bauer Byzas 5 Istanbul: Ege Yayınları

An Imperial Jellyfish?

197

Leppin, H 1996 Von Constantin dem Großen zu Theodosius II Das christliche Kaisertum bei den Kirchenhistorikern Socrates, Sozomenus und Theodoret Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht Liebeschuetz, J H W G 1990 Barbarians and bishops: army, church and state in the age of Arcadius and Chrysostom Oxford: Clarendon Press MacCormack, S 1981 Art and ceremony in late antiquity Berkeley: University of California Press McCormick, M 1986 Eternal victory: triumphal rulership in late antiquity, Byzantium, and the early medieval west Cambridge: Cambridge University Press McEvoy, M 2010 “Rome and the transformation of the imperial office in the late fourth – mid fifth centuries AD ” PBSR 78:151–192 – 2013 Child emperor rule in the late Roman west, AD 367–455 Oxford: Oxford University Press McLynn, N B 2004 “The transformation of imperial churchgoing in the fourth century” Pages 236–270 in Approaching late antiquity: the transformation from early to late empire Edited by S Swain and M Edwards Oxford: Oxford University Press Matthews, J 1975 Western aristocracies and imperial court, AD 364–425 Oxford: Clarendon Press – 2012 “Viewing the column of Arcadius at Constantinople ” Pages 211–223 in Shifting cultural frontiers in late antiquity Edited by D Brakke, D Deliyannis and E Watts Bloomington: Ashgate Meier, M 2003 “Göttliche Kaiser und christliche Herrscher? Die christlichen Kaiser der Spätantike und ihre Stellung zu Gott ” Das Altertum 48:129–160 Nuffelen, P , van 2012 “Playing the ritual game in Constantinople (379–457) ” Pages 183–200 in Two Romes: Rome and Constantinople in Late Antiquity Edited by L Grig and G Kelly Oxford: Oxford University Press Pfeilschifter, R 2013 Der Kaiser und Konstantinopel: Kommunikation und Konfliktaustrag in einer spätantike Metropole Berlin: De Gruyter Seeck, O 1919 Regesten der Kaiser und Päpste für die Jahre 311 bis 476 n Chr Stuttgart: Metzler – 1922 Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken Welt Vol 5 Stuttgart: Metzler Smith, R 2007 “The imperial court of the late Roman empire, c AD300 – c AD450 ” Pages 157– 232 in The court and court society in ancient monarchies Edited by A J S Spawforth Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Stroheker, K F 1970 “Princeps clausus: Zu einegen Berührungen der Literatur des fünften Jahrhunderts mit der Historia Augusta ” Pages 273–283 in Beiträge zur Historia-AugustaForschung, Bonner Historia-Augusta-Colloquium 1968–1969 Edited by A Alföldi Bonn: Habelt Ward-Perkins, B 2000 “Land, labour and settlement ” Pages 315–345 in The Cambridge Ancient History, Vol XIV: Late antiquity: empire and successors, AD425–600 Edited by A Cameron, B Ward-Perkins and M Whitby Cambridge: Cambridge University Press – 2012 “Old and New Rome compared: the rise of Constantinople ” Pages 53–78 in Two Romes: Rome and Constantinople in Late Antiquity Edited by L Grig and G Kelly Oxford: Oxford University Press Whitby, M 1992 “From frontier to palace: the personal role of the emperor in diplomacy ” Pages 295–303 in Byzantine Diplomacy Edited by J Shepard and S Franklin Aldershot: Variorum

Index accessibility 11, 164, 167, 171, 173, 177 Ablabius 68 Acholius 143 Ambrose of Milan 121, 145, 151 Ammianus Marcellinus 104, 106–109, 113–114, 119–120, 122, 170, 176 Antioch (Antakya) 27–29, 41, 44, 51–53, 57, 92 – Council of 85 Anysius 145 Arcadius 11, 165–166, 170, 173–176, 181–195 army 10, 14, 127, 154, 182, 187 Augusta Treverorum (Trier) 21–22, 24, 27–29, 39 Augustine of Hippo 37–38, 42, 156–159 Augustus (first emperor) 9, 11, 102, 104, 170 Augustus (imperial position) 22, 24, 40, 50, 61, 106, 181, 185, 189 aula (audience hall) 24, 27, 29–30 Aurelius of Carthage 156 Aurelius Victor 109–111, 11–114 Ausonius 36, 38, 138 Autun 39–40, 168 Basilikos Logos 38, 103 bishops 7, 11–13, 64, 66–67, 84–86, 128–130, 135, 137, 139–140, 142–143, 146, 151–156, 158–159 – of Rome 117, 119–126, 136, 143–146 Caligula 164 canon (law) 84–85 Carthage 153, 155–156, 158 ceremonial 20, 27, 46, 165, 169, 186, 193–195 Christians, Christianity 11–12, 50–51, 57, 64–65, 67, 75, 83–89, 92–94 117–119, 121–125, 128–130, 142, 145–147, 151–156, 166, 169, – persecution of 49–51, 53–54, 57–58, 123 circus 24–26, 28, 30–31 Circus Maximus 29 Claudian 36–38, 43, 168–169, 171, 174 Codex Iustinianus 64 Codex Theodosianus 64 Coins 13–15, 21, 49–60, 62 Commodus 164, 167 Constantine 11, 29, 39–40, 50–51, 53, 61–77, 84, 86–87, 89, 93, 106, 168, 172 Constantinople 64, 143–145, 183–195

Constantius II 37, 39 100, 105–114, 135 Constantius Chlorus 29, 43 crowds 27, 30–31, 117–119, 122–124, 126, 128– 130, 151–159, 168, 193–194 Damasus 117–130, 143–144 Dio Chrysostom 103 Diocletian 20, 29, 57, 64, 68, 106 Domitian 163–164, 175 Domus Flavia 27, 30 Donatus of Bagaï 153–156 Donatists 88, 153 Elagabalus 164, 170 elite 10, 12, 14, 35, 38, 62, 129–130, 143, 158, 164, 166–167 epigrams 119, 124–130 Epitome de Caesaribus 109–110, 113 Eumenius 44 Eunapius 40, 176 eunuchs 164, 176 Eusebia 110, 112 Eusebius 11, 50, 65 Eutropius 76, 109–110, 113–114 Felix Romuliana 24, 27 Galerius 50, 53, 58 Gallienus 170 Gallus Caesar 106, 110 Gennadius of Marseille 142 Germinius of Sirmium 135–136 Gratian 42, 87–88, 165 Gregorius 73 Historia Augusta 170, 176, 183 Holy Fighters 154–156 Honorius 11, 87, 91, 145, 165–166, 168–169, 171, 173–174, 185, 191, 193 Hosius of Corduba 67 iconography 15, 20, 57 ideology 9–10, 13–14, 21, 30, 35, 81, 94, 183, 190, 195 Innocent I 136, 144–146 inscriptions 91, 124, 128–130

200

Index

Jerome 119, 143 Jews, Judaism 82–84, 86, 88–90, 92, 94 – laws regarding 87–94 – Patriarchs 90–93 John Chrysostom 11, 85–86, 94 144–146, 182, 188–189, 191 Julian 36–38, 40, 45, 76, 91, 106, 111–114, 176 Justinian 64, 76 leadership 10, 12–16, 30, 35, 81, 90, 99–114, 117–119, 136–137, 140, 151–152, 159, 164, 175–176, 181–183, 195 Libanius 36, 38–40, 44, 92 Licinius 29, 50–51 Magnentius 10, 112–113 Mamertinus 38, 45 martyrs 85, 118–130, 141, 189, 193 mausoleums 24–25, 29–30 Maxentius 44, 172 Maximian 39, 43–44 Maximinus Daia 49–51, 53–54, 57–58 Menander Rhetor 38, 103 Mediolanum (Milan) 27–29, 145, 168 mobilization 101, 151–153, 155–156, 159 monuments 29, 62, 125, 129, 190–191 Nazarius 172 Nero 164, 167 Niceta 136–148 Nicomedia (Izmit) 28–29, 50, 52–53, 57–58 North Africa 16, 42–43, 66, 118n3, 151–161 Optatus of Milevis 153–156 orators 35–36, 38–41, 44–46, 168, 175–177 Pacatus 41, 43, 168–169, 171–173 palace 11, 16, 19–31, 126, 164–165, 170, 172–173, 176, 182–184, 188, 192, 194–195 panegyric 35–46, 114,163, 166, 168–170, 172–173 Panegyrici Latini 36–37, 43–44 Patroclus 72 Paulinus of Nola 136–145, 147 persecution 49–51, 53–54, 57–58, 83, 88, 118– 119, 123, 127 Philostorgius 181, 193 Pliny 36, 163–164, 174 Principate 163–164, 167–168, 171, 174, 177 Procopius 41, 170, 173

relics 189, 192, 195 Roman law 15, 58, 63–77, 82, 86–94, 121, 158, 175 Rome 11,13, 16, 20, 21–22, 25–31, 39, 41, 42, 43, 64, 105, 113, 117–126, 128–130, 136, 137, 143–148, 158, 163, 166, 168, 170–173, 193 Silvanus 110 Sirmium (Sremska Mitrovica) 28–29 Sixtus II 125–127 Soldiers 10, 37, 112–114, 127, 154–155, 164, 167, 169–170, 175–176, 182, 187–189, 192 Sozomen 76 Statues – Hercules 156–158 – imperial 41, 62, 169, 191, 193 – riot of the 44 Sulpicius Severus 136–137, 139 Symmachus 36–39, 42, 45–46 Synesius 165, 170–171, 173–176, 181–184, 192, 194–195 Tacitus 163 Taurinus 154 temples 24–25 Tetrarchy 20, 31, 106 Themistius 36–37, 39, 41–42, 44–45, 175 Theodosius 41, 43–45, 87, 168–169, 171, 173– 175, 183–186, 189–192 Theodosius II 87, 165, 183, 185–186, 188, 190, 193 Theotimus 146 thermae (baths) 29–31 Thessalonica (Thessalonike) 27–29, 145 Tiberius 163–164, 167, 175 Trajan 163–164, 174 Ursinus 119–122 Valens 41, 170 Valens of Mursa 135 Valentinian 39, 42, 87, 121 Valentinian II 42, 37, 165, 185 Valentinian III 165 Vetranio 110–114 visibility 28, 164, 166–168, 171, 173–175, 177 Viventius 121 Zosimus 106, 111–114, 173, 181, 186–187

This book focuses on the functioning of Roman leadership in the period of the Tetrarchs to Theodosius (284–395). Our volume starts from the idea that the imperial and ecclesiastical administrations became interdependent in this period and thus presents an integrated approach of imperial and religious leadership. As the spread of ideology plays a key role in creating societal consensus and thus in wielding power successfully, the volume analyses both types of leadership from an ideological angle. It examines the communicative strategies employed by Roman emperors and bishops through analyzing the

ISBN 978-3-515-12404-1

9

7835 1 5 1 2404 1

ideological messages that were disseminated by a variety of media: coins, architectural monuments, literary and legal texts. The central question of this volume is how, in a period in which an important shift took place in the power balance between church and state, emperors and bishops made use of ideology to bind people to them and thus to interact with their ‘crowds’, whether they be the inhabitants of the city of Rome or Constantinople, the subjects of the Empire at large or the members of the various religious communities.

www.steiner-verlag.de Franz Steiner Verlag