The Last Pagans of Rome Alan CameronOXFORD ane ah i in tar Keene Siege Toe Tew nin fos an Cae Cochin ie ‘mage, ad fam yen apy © aay Uv Pr ‘tne one eginmeral Nope a steno remedy ‘tal pa ag ene ethan + many rena Cheeni ety ana CUgCSg tmpens neat, nny sabre Ppa Tarvdnnctyneue © asnRas City means toe 8 ie dedi meet ade pd Foroldiende TDB, GWB, WVH, PEK, JAN and (once agin) {for CarlaACKNOWLEDGMENTS “The sees that eventually grew int this volume were sown in article I published as Jong ago 381966 and 977. Iwas in the 1980s that I fist had the idea of turning my approach to the so-called pagan reacion into a book, and it wa then that I began compiling the information on subscriptions that now ls chapters 12-14. It was also then that came up withthe ttle which, as my ideas progressed, has turned outto be ‘more ironic than | orginally intended It would (Tsuspect) have been a very diferent ‘book i had weitten i then. But | ha not yet thought out ll he issues to my oven satisfaction, and other projects (matty Greek) beckoned more insistently. Yet [never gave up on thelast pagans ané at the turn ofthe millennium decided that the moment ad come o pick up the tteads again. The last decade or so bas not oaly xen much important new work, bu also the unexpected discovery of important have incorporated radically revised versions of three easy articles, and substan tilly revised and updated the unpublished drafts of chapter 12-14. more than once toyed with the ies of publishing the material on subscriptions separately, but inthe ‘nd decided tha, despite their bulk, they formed an essential part ofthe argument of Lat Pagans, a perspective that would nave been lst in a separate poblication. All the rest has been writen inthe lst few yas. Chapters 17-18 were added at alte stage, provoked by the continuing emphais:nzecent continental scholarship onthe entirely lost (and surely tivial) history of Ncomachus Flavianus. At fist I thought of pub lishing them separately, but given the eve increasing importance accorded this his tory ia modern writing onthe “pagan reaction, they too belongin this bok. _My debt to the published work of Ald, Barnes, Bloch, Brows, Chastagnol and Paschoud (among many others willbe obvious. Many frends have sent me books and ofprints, supplied information, crmmented on dra or discusted problems with ‘cover many years. think particule of Tim Barnes, Glen Bowersock, Chlstopher Jones, Banca Ela Consoling Bob Kass, Arnaldo Marcone, Jon North, Lelia Cracso ‘Rugg, Rita Lizi Testa, Michele Salimar, Peter Schmidt, and Jim Zetzel Lam espe- cially grateful to Michele fr organtairga symposium on my viewsin May 2008 (3 ‘to Carmela Franklin orhostingi¢at the American Academy in Rome); and to Tim for generously taking the time to give the entre penultimate version ofthe manuscript thorough etal reading, saving me fom many cers._ {have also profited from criticisms and information of various sorts from Neil ‘Adkin, Tom Banchich, Doug, Boin, Philippe Beuggisser, Richard Burs, J-P. Call, Giovanni Ceceoni, Brian Croke, Michel Festy, Gavin Kelly, Dale Koney, Hartt LLeppin, Nel MeLyaa, Silvio Fanciers, Umberto Roxnanoy Cristina Sognoy John Welaweile and many others over the yeas. {wish Icouldrecallthe names ofallzhose CONTENTS ‘vino asked questions after lectures tht started a rain of thought orem to eth in iss, ene SanPieto helped with edit work on a dificult manuscript, and David Rotzan performed the Herculean task of compiling theindes ric Valladares ‘suggested the cover illustration, {am particulary grate to the Andrew Ws Mellon Foundation for awarding me an emeritus fellowship that covered mary expenses, and Poe to the Stanwood Cackey Lodge Fund of Colambia University fora generous subven- tion to defay the cot of publication Finally special thankyou to San Vranka and the staf of Oxford Press USA for accepting so forbidding» manoxciptin such di cuavren ul rimes, and for the promptest and most efickent operation Ihave encountered in Introduction 3 forty yeas of publishing books. Pagansanad Plythests 1 From Constantins to Theodosins 33 “The Pigs 93 Priests and fines 132 cmavren s Pagan Converts 173 chanran 6 Pagan Writers 206 cuarren 7 -Muroblus and the "Pagan" Culkure of His Age 238 cuarren 8 The Poem aginst the Pagans 273, (Other Chis a Verse nvectives 320“The Real Ciede of Symmachus 399 “The Pagan" Literary Revi 399 CCorsectors and Cries | 438 cuaeren 13 (Correctows and Ceitcs I as7 ‘TheLivian Revival 498 cHarren is JeTonts and Latin Translation $37 charran is Pagan Scholarship: Vergland His Commentators 367 charter 17 "The Annales of Nicomachus Pavianus L627 “The Amalesof Nicomachus Flvanus I 659 cuanrar 19 (Classical Revivals and “Pagas" Art 691 “The Historia Augusta 743 CONCLUSION 783 ‘The Poem against the Pagans 802 seuecren aIMLioGRAruy 809 noe 835 suas gaand sb % 6 ak ILLUSTRATIONS CContorniates of Apollonius of Tyana and Nero plate Parabisgo plate Milde ‘Vatican Ven: Dido sacrifices, accompanied by two eta! and acamilus Roman Vergil Three seated Trojans; man sacifies et Consulae dipych of Boethiue Symmachorum/Nicomachorum dipych Conscerato diprych (Christ and Viegindipyeh CConsecrato relefon mausoleum a gel Apotheosis of Antoninus Pius and Faust, Rome Fauvel panel Lampadiorum panst Probianus diptych Liverpool wnat panel ‘Leningrad Lion hunt diptych Milan Mary panet Maanich Ascension panel oo 702 708 na 70 nar ne mm 738 né ne 7INTRODUCTION “The ruin of paganim, in the age of Theodosius, is perhaps the only example ofthe total extepition of any ancient and popular superstition; and may therefore deserve be considered, aba singular event in the history of the thurman mind ~ Gibbon, Decline and Fall ofthe Roman Empire, Chit “The ast pagans of my tile are the nobles of late fourthcentury Rome. Although they spent thee ays movieg between their grind Roman mansions anda varety of sub- ‘rban villas, the oldest ames cwened estate all ove aly, Noeth Aftiea, and many ‘other parts ofthe empire, thus controling the ives of hondzeds of thousands. nthe ‘region of Hippo accorling to Augustin, people said that ifone particular noble con 0 pagans wosld be le” Sermoas of the age constantly exhort landowners to destroy pagan shrinse on their land (Conclusion). Prudent singled out for spe cial mention the fst able families to convert othe new faith (Ch. 5.2). Biographies ‘ofthe ascetic sins ofthe age always stress the rank and wealth repudiated by their heroes, from the younger Melania to Honoratus of Ales? While insisting that was lof no importance, Jerome fantasized that hs aristocratic groupies were descended, fo Carllus and te Sipios." “Wo ae ccasonabl sre that by e450 thore were Fee pagan nobles lft. Batthere is very lite liable erdence about the eaiest Christians in any given family, no statitics, and no conversion stories. ‘conversion ofthe st pagan as hw long they survived and what they did to defn the old cults. tis widely belived that pagan remained na majority inthe aristocracy tll at lest the 305, snd continued to remain a powerful force well into the fifth ‘century (Ch. 5). On this basi the maa focus of much modern scholarship hasbeen ‘on their supposedly stubborn resistance to Christianity Rather surprisingly they Ihave been transforms from the arrogant, philistneland-grabbers mast of them were into fearless champions of senatorial privilege, literature lovers, and aficionacos of clasical (especially Geek) culture as well a the traditional cls. The dismanthng of thie romantic myths one ofthe main goals ofthis book tunately, my subject i not $0 much the 1 wiht ema peas, Br Ps 45 2 Vitel sin iar, Vite Hoa 2 Jerome Eph arabe {Rotten dl sn ag by Sian ao: sea0 Ch $2"Thetdes that the anstocracy of Rome spearheaded 2 pagan revival” athe end of the fourth century culminating in a "lst pagan stand” defetel atthe bale ofthe ‘iver Figs, ies har, The natuce ofthe problemas changed in many ways follow. ingthe reasessment ef the cultural nd religious life fate antiquity inated by Peter Brown. But the thessso eloquently expounded more than sixty years go by Andrew Alfa and Herbert Bloch? lives of ia modified for tories of the late Roman West by scholars of pute” More important perhaps itis fixture in countess more general books that allude in passing to the end of paganism, “To cite only the mosteecent to come my way the new English translation of Filippo Coats’ archasologiel guide to Rome dates the abandonment ofthe House ofthe Vestal Virgins tothe dees oft as champions of pagans near Agua tn 394 The «context Joes ot cal fer mention ofthese" champions”"The bate athe Figidus (Ch. 3) ‘ns simply become the canonical dite for the delinive end of Roman pagans This view depends lesson evidence than on series of assumptions, many of| which contiaue to be repeated ay if established ficts."Thre is only one narat chapter (Ch, 2), describing the successive measures taken against paganism by CConstantiss Ul, Gran, and Theodosius J. The other chapters reexamine these sssumptions, sometines (inescapably, given their offen unquestioned holdin both even the mast ecenths- popular and scholarly iterate) in considerable detail Readers may be surprised to Aiscover how litle evidence thor is for this enduring myth—and how much that supports very diferent story "Therchas been mich loos allcof pagan “revival but tis nt clear what form this revival is supposed ts have taken. The term itself might suggest an increase in the numberof pgans Buc the 808 and 390s were undoubtedly period when the pace of «conversion to Christianity was accelerating (Ch), "t iswellnown,”chims one recent book, "that there was sesurgence of pagan activites and sympathy at Rome during the years 392-394°" Wha: sort of activities? What kind of sympathy? A sels of dedi tons by aristocrats ram a single st ofthe Magna Materin Rome is sometines inte preted at a revivaloferenal” cults which are held to have been wht realy dove the Jas pagans to take up arms in defense ofthe old ways. But the ntitons they atest are sore ikea zor oF uppecclas reemasonry than cults witha genuine fllowing (Ch 2), Sometimes "pagan vial” Functions asa shorthand forthe revival ofsecuaers- tre in fourth-century Rome (Ch. 1.) To be sure, Claian and Ammianus were both pagans, but Chudian t aay sate wrote for Christian patrons, Indeed the late fourth and eselyfithcentucy West is igh seen asthe gokden age of Christian iterate, poctry no less than prose (Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine, Palins, Pradents.) 5 Al nen 9a, sandman ate: loch sys 6 chosen tenement (bee ce: latay bynes 2a. 5. Rater s00, Dams 207; tbl 006-4; an Da 00,19; Cn e046. The Introdustion 5 “he aritocratsinpartiulr hve been dented the coe of coming yon opposition: Vetias Agorr Prstextatis, Q Aurel Symmachas, and ‘icomachos Pains? alolers of presthoods intestate cls. The most nen tal single source for this upped opposition, oftn iented asthe “ce of Symmachir? is Macobiues Sotumalia, a dialogue in wbich none other then races, Synmachos, end livin are the hot 2 sympasiam ated by ggoup ofaistocrats and scholars who discuss a legth sich subject = Veris oowledge of pagan cult (Ch 6). eosed tobe taken or granted hat Macrobio was timself member oft pan opposition Bat the cvlee depict ke thee of Séipio" represented in Cicero De pice, i an ginary ceaton: the speeches te puts inthe mouths of hie intevocutore rect his Interest ther than the (Chie s)-Macrobis himself we almortentily a Christi, and wot fl al century fer his drama date (2). Sever chptec ae devoted 0 thie imgortnt bt much misndentood work (Ch. 7,11 6), whi lls us more abou he ant ssa of Chris senators inthe 40 tha he ali ofpagtsin theo” itis the politcal pet ofthe supposed pagan evil that bas tracted most atetion (Ch. 2,33) Ins, Gratin ordered the ala of Victory remove rom the fenate hows, and withdew the tational pubic abies from the tt cls Syms edn mbty to curt protest. To yar Ie now fet of Roms, te wrote his celebrated formal appeal to Gran sees, Venn Il, gin asking the restoration ofstarand rubies psn reves In39 Theodoiat 1(jircaimed) decided thatthe te had come to oeyond ths half measresand eliminate ppaism, Soe iedscomprehensie ban onal forms of non-Christian cal activity wich was rigorous enforce hs was the st taf pag ist ‘rts, who rallied behind the western uruper Eugen (prodsimed ona Aoguit $92) In rtm forts upport agen (uppoei) restored both aka and sb Sis lento fly edged revival of pagan at Rome, directed by his rato van pee Nicnmachs Fayiar Ver le ofthis sory surves seis seutn hans epuration asthe pagan fnatc who “rected this eal rests almost ation the interpretation of sngle anonymous poem onthe death ofanunnamed up prefect devoted to exoipgan cl. From the roment oft acoveryin 6 the prefect was dented as Flavin and it was nfered hat he had revive al the soppondly now forbidden cats mentioned in es poom. Even accepting te entifeson “es would be a tech since the cs had been banned fo barely thre years. No does the poem say anything about the prefect rv cls he simp sic fo beeing in oc nontn. {Heer aan Throuphotihs book Lasume iat mae lon PLRE for deaf ‘nen eno empl catene vs Stay othe aura ll te be ely cloned by Faeroe edition (vl 2) "Leen pie et lergeeHomelréacon pte? Chatagnap 35 gil,More portant, the cts in the poem simply donot in. New evidence andnew arguments prove beyond shadow of dou that the prefect setts, invtich eae the poom belongs in at ther thn 394 (Ch 8)-Tis decade makes ll thedilrnoe Forin 4 sare not et bee forbidden. Deo 384 itsimply ovies evidnee of permisibl gn practi, ot pan “eal” Atone stoke tretose not onl viral allthe evidence there ver was for pag evralinthe 395 Buta forthe bel that lian wast ingleader and nspiaton. “Theol thertext tht lnds any suport tothe notion of avian agen plain ‘sasioglepongphin Rosina Elsie! try which descbes im plying tal ofhunapes oaining te etalsofasheep before the batlofthe rgd. This {reel taken outfits contest in Rafnas (here simp blancs Rains pe turf Theodosis no simprobsbiy pearing orbate by praingtothe sits) and tented at proof both of the pagan rev” and Fain natch. The agar tention pid to the Figs In modem wings hab had another unfortunate consequence (Ch. 3). he Bate hasbeen cen a drama cls between paganism tnd Chastity andthe conciston dawn tit was Theos victory at he Figis dat delt Roman apniam it destblow The pga rival was velo 2 son ait had begun® Ths means that Roman pagan bar buon seen 383 Phenomenon tht ha tobe suppressed by force. But theres 2 contemporary es fence that anyone sa the dash betwen Theodosius nd Eugenie aalious bate stall and is mst unkly thatthe Fg made ay dference to the satus of sim at Rome Snceit was aed inca dcineby the ps, isnot uPsng thatthe isa very general coreation betwen Todos vita andthe decline of pnsm (Ch. 4) Moe general theres nota shed of evidence or the ofen sted aero hte pagan nobly “ali” Bogen une. The ath that avianis the one and only pagan supporter of Bagenis we can eval ame avian salso known ave writen ahistoy, Taking his asic as xiomati aio feet pubiations hs ange th thot work mtv besa an tack tn Cartan, a major source fr ter historian both Grek nd Late Bat there is norenon to belo tht itcoerd the enptstlather than he Repco that ithasa deta poi arate ther than he bast of poe, ike most fourth century hte in Latin (Ch.178)itwass inlet wy id otasingl word “Te mos widely held axiom ofthe pgun opposition” model isha the astoc- acy of Rome “splayed their pgan ft along wi their aschment to cassia tas" in the at thy patronized an the erate they stale, ven aconsuning Passion to peserveand propagate ogan’ cle Thin venenblethei form fed ina more sie (but no maw convincing) way by Raber ok (aking both ‘a "Oe a que ceri pen ft de core dre inte gue tae de Tost rips el nal de Nica Fuven on opp an coop tol ade eign Chapel gooey troduction pagan revival and pagan revolt for granted) According to Matkus, the deft of what healed “the pagan evo” In 3p could easly have endangered the survival ofthe classical learning wth which {tha ben identified. a the generation ater Juan, and especially around the turn ofthe century, there isa perceptible hardening ofatinudeamong Western (Christians toward casical culture, Clasia education had become lnk with pagan religion in e new way The ink was forged in the hea of batt. The Fecely self-conscious vindication of ther elaims to sole rightul posession ‘of iassicl culture track new not, introduced bythe pagan reacionunder Jolln and renewed, intensified, inthe 380s and 390s. What Christians had ‘been eady to accupt before 360, they were to question anxiously forthe next octy or filty yeas “his emphasis, Lbeeve, mistaken. Is re enogh that Juan vas happyto exploit the double connotation (bohcaleand eure) ofthe tem Hellen andhis shorcved sitrpt to top Chitians teaching the casi mplied a pagan monopoly on secular cate But there was neve any cious breakin the devotion of Chistian members of {he Eastern elie to Grek grammatical shetocl, and even pilsophial cure Gregory Nasnoen toner repudiated Juba’ tempt to appropiate Helens for gars and there i no sig ofthe sort of longterm anxiety about dasa elture Marks sugested among olivate Grek Chvstans ofthe hand sith centuries, ‘Markus was certainly ght dew aatontoa marked host "page (Beuer seoust) culture in Jerome, Pasiaus of Nol, Augustin, and a fw other were (Christin (ll of therm ighl ealtvated en themselves). Thee wasindeeda wave of scsi that swept through the Christan arstoceacyinthe st decades ofthe fourth century. But itis mistake to connect this hostility on the Christan sie withthe cultura activites of contemporary pagans Therese evidence of any Sort that pags themselves ft clled wpon to defnd their caltre—o ined that they si 8 "pgac culture tal ether than the culture shared by al educated people, Fo whilea ‘aw prominent Chistian nalts tacked he csi (while omtentatiosy quot. {ng the in thie ov wring), ly Christan members of he lite contine ta enjoy snedacation that consisted ently ofthe cari. Symumachus, the only pagan aio ceatfthe period whose writing allow uta fom ome mpression of ical, tans fatto have ben ss wel ead than many ofhis Christin pers (Ch. 4)-thereis no Indication that he sw himself as. sponsor of ierary eival of any ort uch ess pagan revival Leaet ofa di he charmpinn a revival of Greek eultce (Ch ‘One of the most enduring (and improbable) assumptions, constantly repeated rot only by historians but also in works on the history of scholarship and the 13 Marks pray so.8 erropuction transmission of clasical texts, that pagan aristocrats ofthe period “devoted thei ample leisue...to mading, copying and editing the eats of the classics" The ev LUence—notes known as “subscriptions” in manuscripts of classieal texts—is abun dang butshouldbeinerpretodiaan entirely ifzent and actually farmore interesting and instructive sense. tn oder to establish this point have assembled a complete dos sier of subscriptions, Greek as wells Lai, in Christan as wall as pagan texts, and reconsidered the copying and reading of text in ate antiquity (Ch, 1214) “The traditional interpretation ofthese subscriptions has always formed the core of the widespread modem belief ina “easicl rovral”in late fourth-century Rome, sponsoted by literature loving pagan nobles. But itis dificult ro know what could constitute anything so general a sasicalrevval'The most influential texts (Vegi, “Terence, Cicer, Sallst) never ell out of favor and dil not need tobe revive, What sll the fate foureh century consider classical? I chew was a revival of any perio! of Lat classcal—Lae ‘lly deo toa historians, who use ito explain ay manifest style inthe art ofthe age (Ch. 9). “The most earned, lively, billan, and colorful af my predecessors was Andeew Alf, whom was privileged to know slightly in is ol age In adton tan nt- mate knowledge ofall the relevant txt be was able to adduce as much agin from the material culture ofthe age. do not myself beliew that more than a fraction ofthis ratetal actully belong to what Alf ike to thiokofas fierce bate beteeen the ‘pagan aristocats of Rome and the Christian state, bur it cortanly illustrates what | would prefer to all the secular culture ofthe ag, aculture that imposed itself on ‘cultivated Christians and so rightly bolong in this book. A number of chapters deal ‘with the culture, both iterory an aetistc offourth- and earl fith-century Rome. “The frst documented clash between the senate of Rome and the imperial court, ‘did wot come til 397, when the altar of Victory was ist omoved from the senate house by Constantix Il, Yee Alli had no doubt that the hostility of pagan sera tors to Christianity went all the way back to Constantine, Constantine’ conversion, he insisted, “must have hit the Roman aristocracy amszingly hae” and from that ‘moment they were engaged in abicer struggle with one Christian court after anoth- ‘et Accarding to Krautheime, “contemporary writirg” suggest that Constantine's purpose in building his ist large Roman church, § Giovanni in Laterano, so far fiom the city contre was "to avoid of milue fietin witha stong pagan oppos tion headed by the senate and old families” There are no such writings ust the a lterature during these years tf what we modeens woul call the post- Stati, Juvenal (Ch 1s). The notionof “lassie revival” is pate jons of" dassiciing” va Soeen Msn ofthe mnt intitle fie amu cue ‘5 Seehof yale one (AUS pa 08) ere Spghi cone tht od soonest be eM 16 Ally pn sat ead many ten Introduction ° assumption tata Christian emperor “must have” wanted to replace the pagan tem ples of Rome with Christan churches! But itis important to bear in mind Van ‘Dams recent warning that "before Constantine was a Christian emperor, he was typical emperor? The facts that he exploited the monumental centre of Rome as typical emperor There wasn easonin principle for pagans to see Constantine's conversion as threat. Rome had afr all absorbed one new cult after another over the centuries The most recent pre-Christian innovation inthe religious sphere had ‘been Aurelia devotion to the cult ofthe Sun, which had led to the bulking of splendid new temple, commemorative games, and the cretion ofa new college of ponte, subsequent distinguished fom the old ones as ponies Soli* Symmachus would suel have been satisted with a compromise that added a college of ponies Christ. He would not perhaps have wished to jin this college himself, bur woul have been perfectly happy if his fiend Practetatus, notoriously carlos about mystery ult, had done so. -Animportnt new argument gins the idea ofa pagan opposition goingbsckto the age of Constantine has recently been advanced by John Weiswller.A smal group of Aedicatons on the bases of statues erected to fouth-century aristocrats inthe Forum ‘Romanum or Forum of ijn (the two most important puble spaces in te antique Rome) include bie imperial leer authoring the award ofthe statue and praising is recipient The cast known example is alee of Constantine granting the statue seed 01, Aris Procus while prefer of Rome in 3. Then we have the posthu ‘mous gold statue erected to Avianius Syenmachus in 376 where the dedication rer to an “atached oration” (adit eration) ingrbed ona now lst par of the base. The ‘estnown the letter of Wlentinian I that survives completeon the base ofthe statue ‘erected to the eer Favian in 31, on his rehabiation (Ch. 63), We aso have fag _ments of two frter imperial eters on the statue bases of two other fourh-centry prefets of Rome, one of hem perhaps [Rufus [Albinus), prefect of Rome in 389-9. (On the death of Practextatu, Symmachus in his capacity as city prefect, asked ‘Valentinian 1! to grant peanision fr statues to the great man, explicitly requesting some words of praise from the emperor himself "Yor rate ial the more illustrious Ifiecomesfcoma sles jadgment” (cae. thelmperal eter on Avani ‘Symmachus’ monuments characterized 3 perene uci.» tn ight of the text ‘Too mich tenon a beep to Zsolt (with Pacha 300 34-405 sn rash ap 4-34 at Csi wcen th Capos anc ‘ie bnreda sen ayo stereuyon be Sco found ane soaks own Noone "anogee wih ose Foman ease (oF 8), andthe moe forte Containopi a band 6. Caranso00 3 Wit 9, Ch av frtnteyoting rein fhe ep 23 Wiser oI am past he ahr fc bowing mes apy f hsp paper befire widowsssembled here, there can be litle doubt that Symumachus was asking fora ble peril testimonial to include on Practestas’s statue base In the eal empice it was only peovineal grandees, people who inthe ordinary ‘way would never see an emperor, who solicited and prized letters from the emperor and hal them inscribed on thei monuments But by the fourth century, when Roman aristocrats no longer enjoyed gular intercourse with the nonmlly absent emperor, “loseness to imperial power became amore precious commodity’ anda brefimperal testimonium inscribed on a statue base evidently added to the standing of even the ‘mostblue-biooded aristocrat, What ies intriguing about the surviving texts that all thove who can be identified are prominent pagans, people genealy thought of a, ‘members ofa pagan opposition. This mutt be coincidence; we can hardly doubt that similar eters adorned the statue bases of distinguished Christians. But tis nonethe es striking that members ofthe leading pagan families ofthe age al put so high premium onthe commendation ofa now Cstan emperor. And scarcely ls striking that Cristian emperoes were so lingo flaer the vanity of pagan nobles. “Alli often ris both ancient and modern hve seen the Christianization ofthe Roman world in terms of conic. Fifty years ago, 2 fous series oflectures was held atthe Warburg Instote under the ile The Confit betwen Pages and Christianity fa the Fourth Century While late antique Cheistians certainly saw themstves as ‘eognge in a battle with paganism, what is much less clear is whether pagans sw themselves fighting battle against Christianity. The military metaphor implies that ‘one side hopesto vanquish the other Yet while militant Christians undoubtedly cher ished hopes of stamping paganism out, and from the eal ith century on explicitly ‘worked towacd thie end (Conclusion), there was no battle that pagans ether could or pethaps even wanted to win, What ort of victory” could theyhave hoped for? Many ‘must have wished that Critanty had never entrod the world, but by the 380s n0 fone can have imagined that t would disappear. Most (certainly Symmachus, onthe evidence of his speech on the altar of Victory) simply asked for coexistence to be allowed to maintain the state cuts. tis not even certain that all pagans elt it necessary ‘tomaitain blood sacrifice (Ch. 4) ‘More than a century ago Samvel Dill justly remarked that "it would bea mistake tosupposethatin generalsocety thelineberweenthe two camps wassharply drawn. Ignoring this warning, many scholars have assumed tht pagans and Christians were constantly at each other throats, One trivial illustration. Symmachus was annoyed ‘when what he describes as “jeslousyoringratinude” eebbed him ofthe normal honor ‘of public statues afer his praconsular year in Alea (373/74). is suecessor, Paulos Constantius, as it happens is knowa to have been a Chistian. So itis assumed that it 1: Prsunaiythcemperoreomaines guna herque bouncing wonisfpraae steer 25 Momilan es 26 Dilien Introduction 0 sas because Spmmachos eas pagan that Constants blocked hisstatues But there {snoevidencethat Constantius was the guilty party or even fhe was, thats obstrue- tionism was due tothe religious factor. Ir was not tll much later that Symmachus cerserged (bsify) as pagan champion. ‘The notion that any Cristian would rov ‘inely do down any pagan (or vice versa) whenever he bad a chance it entirely grate: ‘tous. A subtle article by John Matthews has shown that, like many ather aristocrat, ‘Symmachus was engaged in feuds and quarrels throughout his fe ona variety of issues, socal, economic, and purely personal” Pagan aristocrat play large pat inthis book. Chapter «wil jst ube team “pogan” Here afew words on srstcrats Both term and concept are modezn with no act Latin equivalent. ‘he closes is nobilis variously defined (under the Republic, ‘consuls and descendants of consuls in the ate empire, consuls orholders ofthe urban ‘or pracorian prefecture). But such definitions do not eaprure the essence of arstoc racy. Ar Chris Wickham has putt, an aristocrat i “a member ofa (acemully anded) politcal elte...wha could wield some sort of power simply because of who he... was Sex. Petronius Probus and Q, Aurelius Symmachus, enormously wealthy landowners descended from generations of consuls, were undoubtedly aristocrats on thie definition, destined tobe VIPs fom bets. But the historian Aurelius Victor, who 10 fom humble beginnings to become prefect of Rome, wa not Despite his ius- tous office, Probus and Syramachs would not have recognize him a thei social pees. A perfect ancient definition ofarstcrat inthis sense is offered by the fist in of Probus epitaph ies pum, clarasque gens, pracelsishonore (wealthy, wellbora and istngalshe ia sank)” A new man ike Victor could lay a (rather modest) claim to only the ast ofthese ies Inher comprehensive ecent study, Michele Salzman employs the terms"senator” and aristocrat” interchangeably, at one point expiily stating that she uses the term “enatorialarstocracy...t0 refer to allholders ofthe senatorial rank of clarissimus"* ‘While pesfacly acceptable in itself, this usage blurs the distinction between nd the old aristocracy, cstinetion thats important for this book. By ca. 400 new policies initiated by Constantine and continued by his succe sort had enormously expanded the senate, untl"there were something lke 3000 jobs ineach halfof the empice leading more or less directly to senatorial status" The many newer members were inevitably of more modest stock, les likely than scons of noble familie to hew tothe trdtional cult. More important, it was scion ofthe noble {amiles who monopolized the many priesthoods in the traditional cults (Ch. 4). $0 on-ofthellenators 2 Bs anal yan sates 2 Gaur her serge Wan a. 2 cierto 3 Siento pin 3: Huet Al lo sn myo an Can 68 Samy She onven f Ambros famous aim that Christians enjoyed majrityinthe senate in 384 isanywhere near the tit, thit ved not mean that a majority ofthe od mies were ‘now Christan, A new nan ike Aurelivs Victor would never have been co-opted into ‘one ofthe ancient pristly colleges simply because he was a pagan. Ie was fom the ranks ofthe old aristocracy that we might expect to find reluctance to embrace ‘Christianity not the senate as a whole, In consequence, this book employs the tem “arstcts isely than Salzman, te designate members ofthe old families, net any and all mem ‘bers ofthe senatorial ener, From time to time also employ the more general term “alte? normally to designate educated, comfortably off people who could not boast noble bicth and did not aspire to (or at any rate win) positions in the imperial sr vice For example, on this deinition Lactantius and Libanis, Ammians, and the ‘young Augustine thoagh not aristocrats or even senators, were members ofthe (ot an) elite ore narrowly and pre ‘Roman paganism petered out with a whimper rather than a bang. But in minimizing the “pagan reaction,’ i should not be thought that my pupose isto beitle the last, pagans, to dismiss them, in the vivid chacacterieation ofa recent cts as"spinclessy selFregardng™™ What this book attacks is loss their fake to mount the defiant ‘opposition of modera legend thaa the assumption that nobles like Practestatus, ‘Symmachus, ad Flavia, in their capacity as priests ofthe state cus, must (or should) have seen it as their duty to do everything in their power ‘0 resist the encroachment of Chaistanity. But ponies were not chosen by and dl not repre ‘sent the pagans of Reme in the way bishops were chosen by and represented the Cristian community ‘There were in additions dozens of them, with no obvious leader all landowners nd ofceholder frst and priests second. Since most acquired their priesthoods in their teens of eaely twenties by virtue of birth (Ch. 4), itis unlikely that they saw themaelves, or were seen by others, asthe pagan champions they are depicted in modeen works, It was not because be was an uncompromising gan warior that Syrumachus was selected to head the embassy of389 and write his famous speech of 38, but because he was known to be a moderate who enjoyed good relations with prominent Christians (Ch. 2.1). Nor does his abundant correspondence suggsst that he took any personal steps to further the pagan cause, by lobbying fellow aristocrats or court connections privately. Remarkably enough, his letters never so much as mention the withdrawal of cult subsidies o the altar of ‘Victory (Ch, 21). What the lees (and speeches) do show is that his ain interests in ife were netwoekng, serving on embassies, and promoting the inlrests of his family (Sogno 2008). So shrewd a politician must have sven chat by the 3805 there was no bate pagans could hope to in Je: Soc 299 7, ingame Introduction a Ifthe pogan aristocracy of Rome id not afte all mount 2 dant poli and ext rer-gurd action, what did they do? For awhile they continued to preside er the tadonal cus, holding otc, managing hee estates, nd! occasionally reading casa text ina cool seaside vila (Ch 1.6). When the governet wit thew the funds necessary fr public cus, they protested. When it becane dea hat tests were not ging t achive anything, was only a mater of ime before the oralning gan nobles converted a because of coercion andaws, than athe only ‘ryt continue hoi ofce and preserve their ancestral olen Roman pubic "Heding priesthoodsin he state cats had brought them resige—so longa those eats were the ont gen town. But even before the closing ofthe temples in 3, thewetng was on the wal twas now the church people were oki, and ifthe ily was going to maintain its poston, they too had to jin the church, where thle wealth and connections enabled them omsntaln thelr tional arcendancy, fin her difcen ways (nd continue to read the ocesonal scl tx inthe sevilla)" Late-dich esitance would have edo pli mide, and there were ne pagan mast Paradox, pehape infact predictably, the Spach! were o become one of the leading fale ins now Chritan Rome. Symmachut cos. 31 ded pain but tin grandso, great grandeon, and grea ret grandson all Became conse (n 446, sand 52). I is sting that we know nothing about hit son Memmiss ‘Symmachus Beyond the age of eighteen in go. He was brought upa pagan (p.378), Tt there canbe ite doubt that he (or at atest is son the faire eons oF 446) ‘sentaly abandoned the faily paganism in onder to Further the family fortunes “Anephew, Aurelie Aniciue Symmachus, who nal other respect followed the ta tuna career (proconsul of Afia and prefect ofthe city) evidenty had one Aniian rent and was ley a Chita by 48-24 Aurelius Memnius Symmachus cos “Aswas pla ofthe Christan establishment 1 Norhpu ne 36 See(eg) CP nty Peo, 8 Coopers ine een 2 Chasagel Fase ss. Dn cna1 PAGANS AND POLYTHEISTS Hove dd Latin pagans come to acquire is most famous meaning? ‘The earliest doo mented mesning was apparent “uel” [em pagus aera ditt. But to judge fom surviving texts, the dominant meaning by the eaey empire was “iin, as opposed to “itary” Finally, soon afer the middle ofthe fourth century, quite suddenly we find it as the standaed Latin designation for non: Chastans es less wellknown that byas early asthe fst century the word had passed into Greek (navn), where stil survives inthe modern language—bat only inthe second of these three meanings? “How did the relglous sense develop? And why dd it not develop in Greek? ‘Medieval writers assumed the cual derivation, on the ground that pag practices tended to lingerlongetia the countsyside?So Baroni (18) assuming that Christians dismissed nonbelievers contemptuousy as country bumpkins. his sums to be the dominant view today Yet there are major objetions. In the first place his is aot 2 perspective likly ta have occured to anyone as ery asthe foueth century, when, at ny ate ia the Latin- speaking Wester provinces, che primary and most conspicuous focus of paganism was sil the cy els, presided over by the city elites above all (a, ‘we shall see) in Rome itself? Second, paganus is never used lke rusticus or agrestis for “coars” or "uncouth Notoriously, rusts stands fr lack of polish and sophistica tion ia Ovid; buthis one use ofpaganss in abelefsecount ofa rural stv sendy respectful” Three examples in Apuleius all erry the sense “wilages” "locals gaia 11S; Lape aa Prego mapos ann, maa Hh, Coigy and Gages ZPE 6 (ote) ate. rand Ory. dn Gage sad Opec as 4. Dele for rx 3 ee ston, Pry im Tx), -4 (nk ‘Aap ws Dpiandinnycampesn he ew sermons lb Dele) Mahan ‘ye Bk ean Deroogt,-o7O Dae 76 Chava soo “eter pape sg bats heal pus eae anys wth non Christen” C lor CAPT 39) 8 owen py a Adana Pele9p blow Kas 1 Su (og Ros url ny ase ben mare promnantin the En Lane Fone aa Soh lel ee rte det niles Ply Na 3 Hols igrp- 2p agen jog Ite clan dt pagans ih fat Oe a 69-70 am ator css mh / pons made Frans Popa » Pagans and Polythits s _vthout a hint of condescension. When Sidonivs describes hissy as “not urban(s) elegance but cura simplicity” (now wrbanus lpos..sed pagans simplcas), he is chiming 2 virtue (albeit disingenuousl), nota vie? Finally, after handfl of refer aces (again never pejorative) in technical terture ke land surveyors and sntiquar: sine such as Fostus by lat antiquity this sense simply disappears om the everyay language.” More generally, it would be paradorcal if western Cristian had called pagans by a name symbolizing ackof culture when eastra Christian called them by ‘aname symboliaing culture ise (hellene”) In support ofthe “vlan” destin (which goes back to Alcan 18), Hamad Aw atanton tthe widespread notion of Chrsans as soles of Chait, compleomented ‘byChaitan reluctance to serve in the Roman armyinthe period before Constantin? No [atin wrterreferso Christan: ite Chrimereofenoremphatially Un Tertllan. 1 bis De faga tn perecutione of (probably) 208/, succesive chapters fist compare ‘Chrisians to soliesand Chit to ther general (onpertor and then distinguish bishops, pests, and deacons as officers (dues) om the ‘common soldiers (gegaras mies), ‘mel the bity” Ifpaganas ad acgled its religous sense by 200, we should eetily ‘av expected oft somewhere inthe fourteen hundred surviving pages of Tertalan. “iin thie sent he only ses gent nations nd eth note the tle of hi ewo-boake Ad tines ="Agpinst [or dressed to] the pagans). Pagans he wes just twice both times ary athe sense “cian” At Decorone mite sims tha inthe eyes the Loc, 8 iran who believes counts a solder, just as a soldier who beliowes counts 2sa civilian” (qua un ta eset pagal, quam poganasest miles fils), which can ony ean that Chaist makes no distntion betwen solder snd evan, How could he have written thisifhe bad thought of pagame a implying "pagan? Here too there are chronological objections, By the time the religious sense ‘emerges in the mid fourth century, Roman armies were begining to be manned by ‘Chstians, and the Chistian public, no longerathyeatened minority, musthave been casing to Se itself asa mutant movement. ln any ease, while in most of the thity odd texts there isa lear coateat between civilian an sole, theres never any sug tgstion of hotly between them It makes no sense to see civilians a the enemy of these “toler of Christ” Soldiers are supposed to protect the civilian population ‘Aad fthe religious sent ita natural extension ofthe civilian sense, why did it never develop in the Greck-speaking East, where pagans» civilian was firmly established? (On the “svilan’ etymology, we should have expected pagans = pagan to Aesop este, on the “rstc" etymology, ater. OF course, a new usage is lkely to 1 Son. py vik 1 Nara contnc to find ocean examples docoments dng betwse the inh lane ofpp nd forename nes pute AB 3 3d 8) 1s Ontath be oats setlsmack tno 18 Defgu soothe te, Bare qn since mela he in ies apt ue) Dmnagest 34-5 rein ths ego and rg6 1H LAST PAGANS OF ROME develop well before it is list recorded in dtable surviving texts. But dhe dstbution of pupae = pagan ie peculiarly abundant and precisely dated: more than six hundced examples in at east iteon diferent writers and texsdatable between ca, 360 and 420 (476i Augustine alone)" With enly one exception (an inscription discwssedin detail below), nothing earlier. We would surely have expected at east one or two earlier exam ples if this meaning had been known to such prolific Christian writers ofthe thind or ‘arly fourth centuries 3¢ Tertllan, Cyprian, Azobius, oc Lactantius. Bren after 360, some cultivated Christians never use it at least in their writings. In his two detailed leters about the alta of Victory in 3, Ambrose uses gels nineteen times and gees, sx dimes, never pagans, nor anywhere else in his abundant surviving wetiogs. The so-called Ambrosiaster, wrtingio the 38 uses paganus more than iy ines. Sulpcios ‘Severs never uses pagan Augustine (who nonetheless used the word feey) i 160 asrage asthe qualification “those whom we ave grown accustomed t al getles (rn the popular usage, pagan." Wefindthe same formula in aw of 409 (qus vale pagans applet)” Apparently twas Feleto bea popula, vulgar ora ny rte recent ‘usage, not term that educated people were willing to use without apology” All the other tems Latinspeakiag Christians used for non-Christians were ulated from words Greek-speakiog Jews had used forthe goyi, the gentile, ftom at least the second century 8.c: genes and nation fom 28, gente (Less often ehni) ‘om eit infdelsfeom apisto.” All were words with distinely hostile connota- ‘ons. The more neutral hellene"isausage that goes backto the age ofthe Maccabees, ‘wen the hostile world ofthe gentles was represented bythe Seleucids™ Acts and the eters of Paul fequentl link’ Jews and hellenes asthe addressees of eely Christan preaching, where “hllenes” i by long-stablshed convention generally rendered “Greeks but aonetheless cleasly denotes non-Cheistians rather than just Greek. speakers. Since the eatest converts wore mostly Jews this made sense to start with But before fong most Chistians inthe Greek speaking provinces ofthe early empite ‘were ethnically o¢ at any sate linguistically Greeks, and "helene" = non-Christian right have seemed paradoxical. Yet in the late antique Bast it emerged adhe most ‘widely used term ofall” This is because it came to encapsulate early Christan hoe ‘ly to Greekeeulture, adumbratdin some passages of Paul but elaborately not 537 ‘passionately, developed by the second-century Apologists2” Nonetheless by the time 1 Pipes fom the Brepls nine ath he net gest tat te ia Arbre (4) sa lan (a). Ag Epa sadn Ra 4 Cab To 6409), sel ao ‘Tinto, Aman Ser, an ee may have ned Soret omply soe win rng py. Se Bue Bh A Ge Engh Lx he Ne Teas (100) er fsa, nase Sethe ea gus in Bae /Dinker soe tBu eed won See 9 4, "Many expe ied by Jae a9, oth m8 0m rh Bomescch 90 9 Suelo 4d feos) Lape seal the oy. 20. "EDqve aniston rome cal Apo Fae (} Goodspnd nde Pats [Lop pel x) tconen somcnin Arde, Alengor aa the etek tel fa Busa, Pde plan Gopal sea} 5. Pagans and Polytheite ” Christianity came wo penetrate educated members ofthe ete, Greek wasinescapably the language of Christan theology, Inevitably, the earlier outright hostiity to dasscal calture became sumewhat muted. Basil of Caesarea wrote an influential teatise on the profit Chistian youths could daw from "hellenc literature? and the writings of the Christian Byzantines were to develop into perhaps the most learned and allusive Iteratue ever produced. n consequence the word lost many ofits pejorative associa- tions tthe extent hat more aggressive pagans, aotblythe Apostate Julian, defiantly and proudly embraced the equation helene = pagan AC the same time unsurpis ingly in an empice whece many diferent languages were spoken, hellone-words continued tobe used to identify Greck-speakers, particularly the verb hllnze which ‘yas nonetheless just as regularly used of those who engaged in pagan practices. (Obviously the context must always have been felt suficint to distinguish these radi- aly diferent senses, both of which persevered for another thousand years, ill the end ofthe Byrantine world ‘Asoc Latio, while etn translated well enough (gntes and nations), for obvious reasons helene” di not Itmade itl ence to apply Gracutoa Latin speaking west: em pagan who may not have eves known Gree, and itis easy to see why Graeeus ganado catchon inthe West. We doin fact finda band of examplesin western “rites Faia with Grosk utage, evidently aware that they wore using paradoxical terminology—in almost every cast, intructively enough, glossed by pagan ln his ‘commentary on Galatians 2.3, where Pal calls hs companion Titus a helene (appa: ‘ently in he ethic sense,” Marius Vctorinus notes “he was a Greek, that is to say pagan" (Graces ert i et pagans). couple of pages ater (ib 4.) we find "among, GGreks, that it to say among pagans" (qpud Graces id est apud pagans). Bren more explicit. “Grecks, whom they cll helleneso¢ pagans" Victorlaus was writing 3360, the eset my datable trary texts to use pagans = pagan, a6 well asthe earliest, ‘known examples of Geen = pagan, Further proof ofthe influence of Gzeekusage here [his colnage ofthe noun paganinason the model af heleniomas™” By the ea 38s wend pagunas, et Gras in Fast of Brescia, together with a bizare piece of Latiined Greek mythology that dives the word fom "King Paganus, s the Greek ‘poet Hesiod sys" (Pagano rege. at Hevodus Grass poeta) Hesiod, ofcourse, 2 Tere es neyo pny ge the work ts fl ke 2 Bryno meas al oats: Cron py 5-9 se fo Boutngue 9p 3-68 2 See the Bliqvaordim Epp Leon sur bntnchn Grist (Vena 120), Sos i Fireman paar and" and vin fe i asin Sa reo ssl deen ol Gein) epg Capo (Bovenocope 24: Faris tin Last Le Lat 9), 4-76 3 Easel not eng th iy are mae ht Ti wa the Gest thn Jen, CChryzomtm (Hom Gal) expla wht eo tobe a raerene pagan i sgt meant Tite "warbomot Hale upg pcs 24 Grae utp pagar cng Dena rami 378 Hey ade 4 lnhenoteonGlatnes 6 2 Moat hea ten eit fl by Zale p94 8-84 to Chi 80 6-9bad uaced the (ethnic) hellene back to King Helle, som of Descalin and Pyra. Somewhat ate we sili th oeasional example in Agustin (Gray qu cam pagans dina.” Remakably enough, te erst dtable wet tous pagans in thissensealleatt the exc Latin equialon of ellene = pagan, “his equivalence seems to have been gonealyrecognined by translators, We find nother example of papuisnas in the Lata tanslion of Atanas Life of St Antony Brarius of Anioe,weiten between ea. 362 and 373" where ad page ‘smu a diet wanton of loin in Atanas. Then we have wo exam les inthe old Latin translation of the twenty-fourth canon of the Coun of Anya insug onceagain epesenting heléninosin the Gresk orginal The ame (probably ficeneuy) tractor alo comes up with paguniza to represent hlénizo inthe senses nto pagan was" Bary in he fh century Rains transated thei of Justin Martyr lost Pras Helena as Cones paganes™ Ever mote intrusive i Rfinuss tanshaion of a quotation fom Porphyry i Bebe, aiming tat the church father Origen was EXqy by EM maa Ao, a passage thats not easy ender beth accurately nd belly in ay language, Lawlor and Oukon offer “a Greskeductedin Grek earning bt this to expan why Eusbis goes on fo sccse Porphyry of ag when he sys (Lawlor and Oulton agai) that Origen “ame ‘over from the Greeks" (ex hell). Obviously what Poephyey meant was that, (Origen ‘came over rom the pags marly that he was born a pagan This cealy how Rufous understood the pasa ransting tbe ist phase a et pagans iis det Graeor studies ad the secon depen nl ® Down othe age of Constantin, sch originally Jewish ems for enemies ofthe fut patent sliced. Eater stulis have padinsulicietatenion tothe ct that pagum is the one eniely new tm to emerge. Fo those bo favor the “rust” etymology, pagans was dpreitory fom the stat ke al he obec. Acconding to Fowden for example, was because of ts derogatory” asociatons that Chstans chose aterm implying “usticty" Ahanasidand Frede gloss the word pean, ‘ui uneurne and Kahlos even detect a "nuance of barbarism For O'Donnellit ‘was “the whole point” of this asage to “adress someone Uke Vetus Agoris Praetexats a5 2‘ic’ on the ground of worship hated with men whose boots 29: Mela rd Ws, Pr Hea (er), 4 (lung aon 2 Cat 3) met ey, Fowles Ag Denpre mad 4 (ESEL ML Ques Bane {8 Ws Ati 9 hai howe sat iw, Heng cd ch (8s) S29 3. C1 Tue Bali Osa Soman adn I (9°) 36 ee Grek seigalhaeotsorvmedbat we havemorerlan complete enone mac Ger (he erat raaru Tarot 0 s 1 The time Tuner os dan secon TL 7 ely esc wa 24, Rlin Hat Balan rth Grok nl a al Pk [Bose Hat Bal 7 andor Rasa eta elas ing Grek ein Schwa hn soe on teint. 1 Fowles Anna Ee 94 Kalo 9056 Pagans and Polythelts » guished with more than mud” Its tre that one oe two Christian writers do exploit these artociations. Orosis claims that pagans were so called "fom the crorsoads and ‘lage of councry places and Prudentive at eat once bint atthe same idea (stu, _pag det). But ancient writers oved to make etyanlogicl pans andokes, ost of them based on wildly speculative and often completly false etyologies* Not ony do these two or three texts (out ofmore than 600) not prove the url” etymology; they do not even prove that contemporaries blleved iether than simply exploited ito make sn offensive point. Nor does it make much sense thatthe term selected athe diect Latin equivalent of helene should enply rst and lack oFlaring. More important, ‘webave seen that the term was fl to be vulgar unfamliar rather than ineultng ‘Asforpaganus = civilian, the fet that it appears 0 often in legal textes enough 0 ABsprove the assumption sometimes made of a pejorative connotation hee too, Nor ‘keasy to se any such connotations in Greek pagans Acwe shall see agin inthe case ‘of pagans = non-Christian, it is important not to confuse a particule context with, the word itself Naturally, itis pejorative when a Roman general in Tacitus tell is troops that they willbe pagunif they donot win an upcoming battle (where Wellesley neatly renders pagan “you are Gnsbed a soldiers") * But in most ofthe thier rele: ‘vant texts we are clearly faced witha technical term, One particularly instructive case Isa itary register dated to .0.1s6 that lists man who wa promoted to centurion ‘x pagan. Obviously most contusions rose through the cnks, but this man wat ‘granted the post crect from evan ile, without any military service at al!* ‘Whar then ate the connotations of paganue = non-Chaistan? Undoubtedly many of| ‘the so0-od fourth andar ith-centarytxtsarevery stile After ll ost Chistian ‘waters who mention pagans do so not to pase them, butt cite thei bindness in ot accepting the one true faith. Add to thsthe act that ate imperial ws were writen {na ferocious almost hysterical idiom, an inevitably ws forbidding pagan practices sharein the vielenthetorc ofthe genre. But there isnoindcation that thove that speci _Pagantare any more violent than those that name genie or use some olensive periph ‘ass (eramples below). On atherilldefined grounds P Borgomeo argued that pagans ‘waa more negative term than gets for Augustine * But ean find no unmistakable {nleation thatthe word was fl to be pejorative in and tel{ What ned accounting frist appearance ofa new tern. ‘There was no need for yet another pejorative term. 3: ODownal yr 68 2 vlc apr cope pg Oro Ade pp {Pd Peupanos 29; Caton 8548 (at mfr od pace gs tune apr gd rat at) Psi 0 Corr Son thas abr gts ‘ma pop hugh neon barr ly nef "a? 4 Fors mas of tron tha wel known phenanen, a OFan 998 {9 Tc Hie Ways comment (Syne 9) a Peg tao (6) 4 Giism ose 9‘On the contary by ca 350 1 suggest, Christians had become asuticinty central and selfeonfident part of Roman society asa whole for a need to be fe for a fess ‘overly polemical term to denote non-Cheistans Even atthe purely palologcal eve, fs callectv pla Uke efn/gots could no easly be applied ton inividval. Latin _eniis oul, but cared este connotations. Up to the ag of Constantine, many ‘Chsistiaas had looked on the entie Roman establishment asthe enemy, and under ‘sandably employed sweeping, impresse collective nouns like ethnd/gentes that implied race apart, aace of persecutors Batwiththe end ofthe persectionsanda Chistian onthelmperial throne, Christians must hare begun to look on the noa- Chee around ther uilerenly, no longer as ‘utomatc enemies but 2s misguided fallow iizens, flow Romans in a increasingly ‘dangeroas wodld Non-Cheisians wee now indvidals wo ved nat doe o worked inthe same office. Above all they were coavetngin unprecedented numbers The ime a come fora essopenly pejorative tere to denote them. The welestablished elles” ‘was. word with enough positive atscitons toil this ole vr satisfactory in Greek, ‘swell ar being realy applicable to individuals (Is X a helene). In combination these smustbethe reasons rapidly became the standard term in the eastemprovines, And we have seen tht Mars Victorinus and Flats provide evidence ofa chortvedarempt, in the prt 60-80 to lntroce “ellne” ito Latin inthe Form of grat, glossed [pga In the event twas paginas that caught on, capil fllowed by a complex of {ecivaies leary modeled on the heléa-complex (pagan paganism) ‘Christan preachers and polemicists might continue ro denounce unbelievers inthe idfstioned way, but whatsort of terms do we find in imperalleisation? tis perhaps ‘re han coincidence that seventeen out ofthe ist eighteen extracts inthe chapter of the Thexdosan Code entitled De pag, saris temps (avr), running fom 520/381 399, avo using any specie Pagar appeas in x11 from 39, while “llthe stare general prohibitions ofthe fora “let no one.” or “we forbid anyone Bat the final ix extracts, running from 408 to 43,all use pagans. Its sue therefore sigan thats inalaw of 09 that we find the apologetic orl gentle, qua lgo ‘pages appellant (sv 46), implying hat, the ees of those who drafted imperial laws at any ate, pagans = non-Christian was sl fl to bea subliterary em. As te as ‘law 16 we fn the same gloss thos polled profino pants errs oe ge tls (a. 31). Elewhere in the Code pagunus = pagan appears as early 35 ala of 370 (v.21), butin slaw of 355 wefind an unmistakable example of pagan ina series aflaws about peopl winning honorary military rank and dhe tying to get ‘outof tier obligationsasdecurions or private cons" Apar from asingle reference in the military water Vegeiv, wring inthe 380s o€ 39057 tis the Latest surviving, silanjone Te Thole coum tes fo en te Ca pbs fe Cal Td mae 1. Nihot smog tespons lpm da mete Vege 23 rie dats Bae, Mo Meow secant lapnan nD Rees OCT etn of 2004 (4). Pagans and Poptheids * example ina lerary text of paganus = civan Ia mos contexts the aon- Chistian sense ‘briously now became dominant, at Ist in Latin In Greek pagans, however, the ‘lan sense remained dominant There wat 20 need fora new term for pagan in Geek, ‘where helene" had fr some time been standard usige. Tes instructive to compare certain similarities in the way pagumus and *hellene” ere used, While hellene” was regularly applied quite neutrall to non-Christians, at thesame te, although the wordiself certainly had no peforative etymology to color its us, a great many ofthe phrases and contexts i which it appears are grossly and “unmistakably pejorative. It san intresting exercseto compare the usage ofthe tree nid fith-century eccesiastial historians, Socrates, Theodoret, and Sozomen. Not ‘nly dil all three write within a decade ofeach cer; they covered essentially the same period and same subject mater. Yet while oeates and Sozomen both employ "he hllenes freely in neutral contexts simply to entfy non-Chaistian groups and activites there are few such neutral eferencesin Theodoret. More offen than not he ses pejorative periphrasts: “thor enslaved by impiety” “those devoted tothe deceit of idols? "iolsters? “the impious," “unholy ones” When he does use “hellene” iis mostly in loaded formols like “hellenic delusion” or “ellen thorns" We find the same with pegunus Laws forbidding pagan prices regularly use Gorm Wks gana superttio oprofanus pagan tus eror® Bat this owes more tothe stock tninatory thetorc ofthe imperial chancery than toetymalogy. “sts with hell some examples of pagams appear to be more or less neutral intone. Perhaps the clearest lustration i the usage of Opttus of Mies, his rea- tise Against the Donati, writen ca 384 (again among the east datable examples ofthe usage) For example he glosses Paul enigmatic“ planted, Apollos watered” ‘1 Corinthians 3. 6s follows“ planted—that is, I made a catechumen of a pagan hoe est de pagan satechumenon fe!)—Apollos watered—that is, he baptized the catechumen?"Inanotherchapterhe takesisucwilh the Donati practice ofcounting converts previously baptized by Cathelie bishop: as no different from pagans and baptizing them again* By some miracle you [the Donatists] have the audacity to say to each in turn “John Doe of Jane Doe, are you sila pagan” (Goi Se, Gaia Sei adhe poganus ¢sautpagona)?"* A man who at sleady professed his conversion t God you ete ssi h"Elgy wos cana eran ane ie Poop we he maid Helens (BP so hy An 3 Aad 18) ba be "xls" Cen ‘tonto ee, aswel at uber other wore ot oad in ise rae (ed (Cameron 772 5- Se te thins Aanastadi and Beadeweite of those who were grouped together as pagans by the Christian apologists, partly for reasons oF convenience, partly for reasons of propaganda” Butthiss more than justa question of convenience o propaganda— (as Rowen put t) "the lay cunning of Chistian apologists ‘There is avery cel sense in which Christsnity actualy created paganism. The development has been described with exemplary clarity by North” kis pechape missing evento say that there was such arligion as “paganism” 2% the beginning of our pelod...1t might be less confusing to say thatthe ‘pagan, before thei competition with Christianity, had no religion atallin the sense in which that wor i noxmally used today. They had no tradition of| discourse about ritual religious mates (spat from plilosophicalJebate or antiquarian treatise) no organized eystem of beliefs to which they were asked 'o conumitthemseles, no authoriy-structure peculiar to the religious are, bow all no commiiment wo a particular group of people or set of ideas otber than thee fanily and politcal context. I this is the eight view of pagan fei Sahat ter sco Gong feed me tan millon sor pon xanga tee ‘Begrotmaerty (vat pened aie 1s Fra mn fcr deine opi se narigoeaneony/ pando dan ad rey (oh), ymin Ta (Sar Fran ad PRs, Saat (eta) Nt Ron Toa: Popo he Madr Wd (abu) bth ih exe ‘blogg Hale certratn bothteevalameee sede 16 Fowen 7p Rsuaand Fey 4 Pagans and Polyheits ” {allows that we should lookon paganism quite simply a religion invented in the course ofthe second to third centusies AD, in competition and interaction with Christians Jets and other “Te lumping together of all non-Christian els (Judsm excepted) under oe be is ots an illustration of Christin intolerance. As fara the now Christian authorities ‘were concerned, whether athe local church, or governmental level those who refused to acknowledge the one tue god, whatever the dferences between them, were fo all prctical purposes indstingushabl. Thus the ojeton tha the tem “pagan “Battns cout the diversity of regions experience” of non-Christians, and suggests the Chistian perspective af world cvided int wo ditine steppin misplaced OF couse it oct. We shuld not think of fourth century non-Christians indignant protesting that they were al being humped together under a insulting sobriquet. No more bis is involved thin when (249) European, Mexizan, or Japanese nationals domiciled inthe ‘United States are nowadays all clase indiferently as “alent would be absurd to bjectthatthe term doesnot ojusiceto ther divest Inthe eyesofthe US government whatever ther ethnic oc maton ei, language or religion, they are indeed al ans. outh-century pagans naturally never refered to themselves os pagans, less ‘because the erm wa nsulkng than because the category hal no meaning for them. ‘Apsgananziousto discover whether the person he was speaking wasafllow pagan ‘would get more illuminating response by asking him whether he was a Christian! ‘Whenthe pagan Longinianus styles himself hon pagenusinaletr to Augustine (Ep. 234), the tone ofthe leter suggests irony. He would certainly not have so syed him selfing to fellow pagan ‘No one planing to teat the non-Cheitian cults of te antiquity in and for them selvesinal hee varetyand complexity wl feel any need to uses unspecica term at “pagan” She wil simply write abou the flowers of Mths is, Marna, and so on ‘And anyone studying (as Fowcen brillant di) the role of monothesm in creating universal state might jstiabl find poiytheisn” amore appropiate erm for conta {ng the role of eligi inthe pre-and post-Constantnian empire. But anyone planning, to weat the attude ofthe Cheistian establishment to non-Christian groups wil find “pagan simpler and more accurate tem. Thor seems litle pont in writing of the goveroment issuing Laws squint polybeism when the Lws themselves use terms ike "genes “pagan anda variety of ising peviphrases Indeed, those who employ ‘he supposedly neural “polytheism” in sucha context ein consequence (funinten- tionally) making the Roman government appear lesntalerant than it actually was. -owtenalso objected thatthe continued use of" pagan and “paganism” by clasical and Christian scholars “one more sign of thee isolation feom other disciplines, {.Forezpl Srl 107 onto La 000 1, SoFonieninhicspern CAMs) 868 THE LAST PAGANS OF ROME pacticularly anthropology, where‘plytheism’ isthe nocm: If"polytheism" is indeed the cerm most modeen antheopologists employ (endl that i fa rom cles) eis i not jst because they perceive it asa modera, neutral alternative to “pagan In them selves, monotheism and polytheim certainly can be values ways of classifying religions, but that is because they are leo virally contentee, As the online neylopacia Britannica puts it, polytheism “characterizes virally all cligons ther than Judaism, Christianity and Islam” Paganien has a much more restrited reference, Jn modern academic writing "pagans both more and less than a synonym (pejo: rative or otherwise) for “polythest” Whatever its connotations inthe preaching of televangelists oc Wices We sites, in cureen historical discourse, by lang-stablisned ‘convention its regularly employed as a shorthand for various facets of the noa- oF pre-Christian society ofthe Graeco-Roman word and its acighbours, excluding (for historical reasons) Judaism, For example, modern scholarly discussion of the age at hich Roman gas marred regularly distinguish berween the evidence fr Christan and “pagan” marrisges! It is also widely believed (whether eighty or wrongly is Immatesilinthiscoates)that women payeda more prominentrolein aly Christian communities than thoe“agas” counterparts In nether case doss pagan’ have any reference, deprecatory orotherwise to the religious bebo these people Itsimply |demiies social practices curentin the non- or pre-Christian Roman wed. In much the same way it isalso now used in Jewish studies toidemiy non-Jewish dues ox nod Jewish objects imagery, practices, and att ia the Jewish cites of Palestine It is aso the standard term employsd for their former eligios practices in modem studies 00 the conversion of the Ca, Slavs, Vikings, and so on" Purists might abject to the sage butitis widely accepted and not easy to thnk ofa more succinct or convenient akerntive, One might a8 vel object to the collective use of "barbarian to denote all and any people beyond the Roman frontiers, obviously deprecitory and making no Aistinction between longastablshed empires lke Sassanid Persia and tribal groupe like Goths and Huns. The eason no one does objectisthat barbarians haven modern constituency!” Fortherrore, forall its pelysylabic pretense to technicality it would be naive to assume tha “polytheism” itselfis aterm fice of pejorative connotations. To stat with, the relevant entries in Lamps Patristic Lesion evel ita a standard term of aly ‘Christan polemic, often Inked with or glossed as idolatry and atheism, The Jewish 1 Arey of the Antropsigl Index One forthe pt they yas sawed Sr nore is or "pepmane tn plthewn 1 Hoplins 95 ow 4 (asin openly emp 44 Foramcentenlaaion a he mumpon see Cty 29 ES Scarr sno Ch eth 08 1. Foren Joos at osc ops, a cer ys pan (Ce, Scan an ‘Sven apna). Lamoperigofecl bok str. the capers (tly Ga) bj 1, Shirttail wen (oul eae mane palin. Pagans and Polythests » “writer Philo refers inthe most hostile of tems to polytheism as an evil that leads to athelem” With the growth ofthe doctine of the einity nd veneration of saints, jpgans soon began to tun the reproach back on Cheistans, Here is what John Chrysostom represents pagans sying already before the close ofthe fourth century “whois this Father? Wha this Son? Who ie thi Holy Ghost? How ist that you secute us of polytheism when you have three gods?" The Saracens said the same bout the Crusaders, ac have many othaes before and sine, most conspicaously Fane amentalist Muslims of modera Christians. vena the academic level, we can hardly claim to have altogether shaken ofthe condescending Eurocentsic assumption that polytheism is «stage that mankind passes through on the way tomonotheis.Iitis true that polytheism has become the prefered term of modern anthropologists, thats because they have chosen to ignore allthis baggage. Bur the fact that theyintendit a n0 more thana mode ofcasfcation doesnot mean that all readers will acept it as such. To take an obvious example, Cristiane and Muslims tend to see Hinduitm at a classic case of polythelsm, but all indus sometimes and some Hindus aways insist that chere is in reality only one God, of whom all he distinct gods and goddesses are but forms™ One mank tae ‘onomy is another man’ condescension, No less important, polytheism inescapably implies a monothest perspective. It ‘would newer have occured to anyone in pre-Chaistian times to call himself a poly ‘heist, and even alte athe fourth century, non-Christians in differen pats of the fempize would almost certainly have thought that classifying them according to ‘whether they worshipped one or many gods blurred what they themselves would have considered far more significant difernces. Ciceo and Varro for example, ‘would have been surprised by the emphasis onthe numberof gods rather than the priestly colleges. Varo$ Aniqututes rerum ulvinarom comprised sixteen books, the it thirteen devoted to priesthoods shrines, festivals, and ritual, with only the last three coming tothe gods” A large part ofthe reason paganism yielded com: paratively easly and rapidly (st east inthe West is precisely that pagans in different part ofthe empire had so ite in common. Outside the academic contest, current use of the tem “polytheism” implies an aggressively monotbeist perspective, whether Christian or Maslin. Inthis postmodern gs, when poly- words (polyvalent, pobyemous, and the ks) have come to take on aggressively posiive connotations, some attack monotheism as “imperialism in religion” Inthe mouth of Jerry Fall or Osama bn Laden, polytheism is by no Deve 43 ll eon en Defi ny Depo Dede; Devi De sel Dear Si uth rn Jo Ch Joan Hon 4) 5. ale 50. 22 Forse een book below ns Cle Dent de sand Dehua rap tose empha. Ale» “THE LAST PAGANS OF ROME means jst a tem of taxonomy. Anyone who searches the Internet for “polytheist” or “polyttusn will discoveralarge numberof WahbhabidenunciationsofJews, Christians, and evn Shite Muslinsspolytheiss, One Website refers to Christiansas poltheist tsnitaran pagans” Whatever chances “polytheism” may once have had ofbecoming, a scienili principle of elantication have been overtaken by events In the modern ‘work hed truth is thst very fee terms the religious lexicon ar ential neutral, (One much-debated issue in current research (Ch. is the peceentage of Christian officeholders at successive dates (350, 389,430, and s0 oa). Since the point of the ‘everis sto trace the rate of Christianization, fortis limited purpose itis enough to classify all who cannot be shown tobe Christians as pagans, whatever thelr actual beliefs (about which in most cases we have no information of any sort). From the point ol view of ovr statistical inguiy all we need t know s, was he or wast he a ‘Christan’ If ot, it doesnt soften the blow to classy him as polythest rather than pagan. To take a somevhat diferent example, in standard usage"Vsigothic paganism" and "Vking paganism” simpy refer to whatever cuts the Visigths and Vikings prac: tice before they embaced Christianity” It nether describes nor judges any actual belief they held before conversion; in tel t does not even entail the assumption {hat they were polytheists aggnism certainly implies polytheism, but norall pre-Cnistian cults were infact polythist, The ruth is that from the easiest ies down into late antiquity a great ‘many pagans believed in the supremacy of one god or supreme power"* To be su, ‘most of thom aso assumed a plurality of subordinate gos but sit helpful on this bss to clasly them stuightforwardly as polytheists? Fowden himself cites the wellknown ease ofthe gremmarian Maximus of Madsuroe writing to none other ‘han his rend Avgustne: ‘haw is G Adwulling-place ofthe gods. But we have the evidence of our eyes (cerns e ‘rolunus) tha the forum of our ow town is occupied by a throng of benef un iis (slur numa). Yet who would beso foolish, so touched in the head, as to deny that there sone supreme god, without beginning, without raterl ofipring, like a great and powerful father? His powers, scattered ‘throughout the material World, we call pod under various names, since (of couse) none of us knows his true name For "god" is 2 name common toa cults 'Ihus when we honour his separate pats by dillerent forms of payer, we seen to worship im entice ek myth of uncertain authenticity that Mount Olympus is the ‘sven cians mathe se co Ching Wn 38 Thompson net Joe snd Pick 38 3H Atsniomaand Mode ys 0 Bae 3094 Noth 5-4 Jr bes (Se W Panam aan, ipa) the he tt now oat Minin, PCE Pagan and Polythits ” Despite the fct that Maximus loses his etter with the wish thatthe “gods preserve” Augustine (a routine formula, a this ease presumably intended asa joke, it surely _misplaces the emphasis to clasify him a8 polytheis.™ la modern terminology he swas a“henotheist"zomeone waa believe in one god, thought not to the exclusion ‘ofall others” But this distincton would have bean meaningles to fourth-centscy ‘Chistian, in whose eyes there was no diffrence between polythests, henotheits, orindeed atheist. They were all pagans. Even monothelts would be pagans if thelr ‘one god was aot the one true god. For Christians, the key distinction was less bet ‘ween one god and many gods than between the one tre god and fale gods, whether ‘one or many.” “Athanassadiand Frede ise the surprising objection that itis “hardly appropriate” to characterize "highly aiculate thinkers ike Ploinus or Procas” as pagans. The ee crance of such an argument is sulcently exposed hy asking whether “polythelst” ‘would be more appropriate, or even more descriptive. Nelther term (ofcourse) is remotely adsquate characterisation ofthe religious belief of anyone, whether a subtle philosopher like Proclus oan iterate devotee of Mithrs in the Roman army. But ‘whatever else Proclus was, in the eyes ofthe Christian authorities he was indeed @ pagan. a thiscase the ierelevance ofthe arguments further undedined by the fc that Ahaicellow Greeks, Christians and pagan alike, would haecalleéPlotinusand Procs ‘ot pagans but helene, characterisation both would proudly have accepted “There aren fact more sabstantial and relevant objections othe term “pagan” The “widespread use of formulas lke “pagan reaction’ “pagan propaganda, and even just “te pagane” ia much earier wsting on the end of Graeco-Roman paganism has ‘encouraged the mistaken idea that pagans a a elas possessed unity of purpose and ‘organization, at eatin the face ofthe threat posed by Chistianity.Thisisan assump- ‘on that has plagued a good deal of writing about late Reman paganism in particulae ‘Since many ofthe lst generation of Roman pagans eae from the same socal das, it ‘ha offen been taken for grantedthat there wasa "pagan pay led by afew prominent aristocrats, We shall se that thi was not so. But it ian ero that would aot be less- ‘ened by using the term “polythest” rather than ‘pagan’ Noristhe danger of seing the decline of paganism too mech in terms of Cheistian/pagan conflict in any way lessened bya change of terminology ‘Much confasion hat also baen esused by loose use of phrases Uke “pagan hte tue” oc"the pagan casi” To characteris the dassics in this way has ven se to ‘he mlsleading nin tha pags sa the cats asa buller or even weapon aya ‘Christianity. Wesball ue that theres litle eason to believe that pagans sa cass were 1, Rowe amon nimple Lass proper under hen eet gon in Bk ofthe Sean. tn orth dnt oeen tread ego, Jan Aeon The Prof Paton (Stor ses) so Rowe for xanga heen” (CAB ss)2 ‘THE LAST PAGANS OF ROME any more devoted to the esis thancukivated Chistans (Ch.9-1)-"Pagan histo riography (Ch, 17-18) is a particulary dangerous notion, unmistcably implying veiter witha conscioly pagan agenda There are one o two Greek anti-Christian bistries (Eunapivs,Zosimus), but no identifiable western, Latin ample. Yet “pol thai” classes or historiography sno soation; rather terms with no special re ‘ous associations ike “classical “casing or“ceular” Its no less misleading to ‘st of” pagan” art Whileitmaybe a convenient nd acceptable shorthand to istin- _gulsh (3p) pagan from Chistian sarcophogi, meaning those decorated with mytho- logical scenes as opposed to those decorated with biblical seanes, to assume or argue thatthe former havea “pagan” message (see Ch. 1) implies a (2 to speak) noade- nominaionaly olytheist iconography that ll non-Christians would recognize as such whatever their navidsl belt also implies (ined is fen intended to Imply) a consciously ans-Chisian purpose. Obviously “poytheist” does not help here elthee. Once again, “clasial” “secular” or just “mythological” i the simplest solution at a terminological level ‘Arandom survey of few econ studs oflate antique socaty tha employ ply ‘heat instead of pagan” turned up notasingle case where the substintion of pagan” could by any stretch of the imagination have been said convey a neyave bias of aay sort ike think that in the following pages fally than most wie have wetten on this subject. And where appropiate I occasion ally use" polythelst” Buein most cates "pagan" isthe simplest, mest fain, and most appropriate term, and I make no farther apology for singit “pagan less often and more care 2 FROM CONSTANTIUS TO THEODOSIUS ‘Daring his vst to Rome in 37, Constantius I ordered the ata of Vicory removed from the sesate house, Christian senators had understandably been distressed at having to watch while thee pogan peers burned incense before senatonl meetings. ‘Yet during tht same visit Constantius walked around Rome admiring the ancieat temples, andeven filed vacancies in the pontiical colleges, evidently iis capacity as potifex mosis The pious emperor may not have performed these duties enth siamtcally, but no doubt saw them a¢ a necessary quid pro quo. Ube was going to grant quest from Cheistian senators it was tacfl to grant a parallel equest fom gan senators, Though usually treated asa turaing point in Christian intolerance, ‘when viewed in context what this episode realy illustrates is the poliy of 1 seemingly intolerant of Christan emperors pursued whenever opto rise even th potible ‘Many Christians wndoubtedly wrged Constantius to go much further. Fimicus ‘Maternus i one vivid and notably intemperate surviving illustration (Ch 3). But emperors were reluctant to offend the rich and powerful Churehmen might put spliual vahes fst, but emperors faced more pressing proces. The reason Constants was in the West at all wa a civil war, and while few prominent Roman aristocrats hod rallied to Magnentivs (notably Proculus, prefect of Rome under [Magneotus la 3si-s2), many others had left Rome to join Constantius (notably [Adelphins, prefect of Rome from June to December 351) Azithappene,Procals was ‘pagan and Adelphius a Chesan, but theres no evidence that allegiance during the ‘war tured on religious syrpathy. Even fithad, tat was sil an argument for conc lating power pagans as fr as could be done without offending Christsn opinion. It ‘was no doubs: explained to Constantius that Roman priesthood wece social eles _nthec than riglous vocations (Ch. 4), and that the pontiff and auguss themselves never touched knife ora sacrificial victim. ‘he tarot Victory was bakin the senate house by 38, no doubt the result ofan appeal to Julan on Constantius death Inevitably, Christian senators sre bound to Ihave renewed thee demand for its removal on Julian's death. Some have argued that 1 Arma 1.41 Sym. Re 37 Rp 00, pany ana tht hia otig do SESS pe mt, ime nn ape oh ene penu THB LAST PAGANS OF ROME Julian’ ant-Chistian polices had a polarang effet on Christan/pagan relations: “There may be some tut in this but they certainly had no immediate or perceptible cffect on imperial pokey. ‘he dates simply do not ft. Sine the alta was cathy still ther in 38, it follows tae (passing over the shor reign of Jovian) Valentinian (63-75) must have tured down the appeal ofthe Christian party. This i put beyond doubt by the speech Anbeose putin the mouth ofthe (safely deceased) Valentinian adessng his son Valentinian I, beginning: Youbave misjudged me in thinking that 1 collaborated with the pagans. Nobody tld me tat there was an atari that Roman senate house. Thscan arly be tru, Symumachus represents Valentinian looking down fom heaven on “pagan pests teaeilyreproaching him “now thatthe custom ‘which fe himself was gad to preserve has been broken* Valentinian famously di his best tobe neutral in utes of eigion, and thee canbe litle doubt that he decided to concede this pot poweeil pagans. Tis natural to assame that Chrittian senators renewed thir appeal to Gratin ‘whan be became senior western Augustus on the death of Valentinian in 37. But to start with he too musthave refused, since it was not til 3 that he ordered the ltr removed again. This refusal was presumably one element inthe conciliatory policy toward the Roman aristocracy he pursued in the easy yeas ofhis eign In 8 he also tock eran nancial measures aginst the statecults,and most scholars have assumed that it was in connection with these two measures that heals repudiated the tide of potifes maximus. What we would ike to know is why he embarked on what has ad tionally ben sen a aradical new policy toward paganism “The standard views that inthe Get part of his reign Gratian was still under the influence of his old tutor Ausonius, eld to explain the pro-senatocal policies of his ‘acy yeats But after moving hie court to Milan in 381 he fell under the influence of. bishop Ambrose and deuptly tamed against the pagan aristocrats he had previously been courting. Though often repeated as though undisputed fact, nether part ofthis hypothesis ests on any soe of evidence. he fact thatAusonlus was on fiend terms ‘with Symmachus does not prove thathe was behind Gratian early policy of courting the Roman senate, Tat policy was an inevitable reaction tothe very host atitude to the aristocracy of Valentinian I's Iter years. Withia months of Valentinians death those responsible for this policy were ether dismissed or executed’ Given the ever present danger of esrpation there had never been any pointia treatingso powerful ‘group so badly, and its unlikely thatthe paganism of some ofehe most prominent ‘senator was afctorir the new policy Ausoniu himselfwas undoubtedya Christian, 5 Abo pe Mor). Refanet Ambrose a Zeer pt fence {TRerfignn st ma sc uu mtr get clea pera ot a Anom Manse 5 ormare dan Verna eepaon acy Lew so, hs 4 Fortoappoach te Bosna 986306)" 0 4 Maho -6 Prom Constants to Toodasus Fa and the fact that, like many Christians of his generation, he was devoted to classical ‘alture need not imply ay syenpathy for pagan cult. Nor wa Ausonius' the only ‘voice Gratin listened to. According to Zosimus in the ealy days of his soe reign Catia was under the influence ofcourteunuchs(p.752). Theis no evidence ofany ‘nd tat Gratin was ever favorable to paganism ar distinct fom being atacted to secular euler (On the other side, there sno eal evidence fo the ll but universal assumption that Gatan everfllunderthe influence ofAmbroseInautumns78he asked Ambrose forastatement of faith! Inthe past this was interpreted asa request om a pious but (thanks to Ausonius)theologiesly uneurored youth in search of spiritual guidance from bishop kaoten tobe impeccably orthodox It was further assured that Gratian atone succumbed to Ambrose spel, Butt this date Ambrosehad not yet published ny theological writings, and ft vas instruction the emperor was looking for, there ‘were many more senior and experienced bishops he knew beter much cose to his courtin Tier. Most ofthese bishops were Homocans, natwaly suspicious ofthe new Cathlicbshop of Milan who had placa tha loyal Homan Auontins It icemich more ikely that these Homoeans were suspicious of Ambrose and wrged Gratin to demand a personal statement of ith, Ambrose exact words are fem meam sure ulus, where the mea implies, nota theological treatise, bat Ambrose’ personal «reed Coming from an emperor, the vu s something closertoacommand tha. 3 “wish (indeed Ambros ater usesthe trm mandaveras of Gratin eequest)” Ambrose rapid fulfilled the request with De fe Io, to which he subvequently added three ‘more books. Bi begins by claiming that certain malicious minds, bent on sowing ispres, have provoked met write at greater length "The natural implications that Gratin had shown Bks (ito the bishops who had requested che statement foc thet approval Not only id the emperor not fll under Ambrose spell, Ambrose’ poler- {eal satement of faith was found wanting by his experts" Furthermore, a year oF 50 Iser Geiian agreed to “restore” a church in Milan to the Homoeans, apparently in "response toa group of Milanese Homovans and plainly without the courtesy of con- sulting Ambeose fist! leas presumably i response to this that Ambrose took the ‘extraordinary step of reusing to meet with Graian daring his visits to Milan in 379 ‘and "Its hard to resist the inference thateatons between Ambrose and Graian ‘were often strained ‘As forthe removal ofthe altar of Victory and the withdrawal ofthe subsidies, Ambrose himself expicil disclaims any esponsibilty, and while (as we skllsee) he 1 Rang 29-44 My 994 98-06 Bans 995 16-94 { Capicay she wantin by de Rams the Been pat ene Fabs eres (oa. 1 Frenampiy Vii {x Sernebyom np tyne 3s Wy SoBimespg. nh 8 Amb De file ph ara coon.6 {THE LAST PAGANS OF ROME seriously misrepresents his past conduct on more than one occasion, there ie no reason to question his veracity in tis case, When recalling in 394 his ole in diss ing Valentinian I rom restoring the altar and subsidies in 84, Ambrose add tate “was not responsible for their removal, but was responsible for preventing thee restoration’ Why would he tke pride in the one but epudiae any parti the other ‘head been equally active in both? “The two celebrated lecers to Valentini Ll sbout the altar and subsidies hive placed Ambrose $0 squarely inthe centerafthe “debate” about the ar and subsidies thatitisseldom appreciated that they wore unsolicited by andalmost certainly unwel- ‘come to their ecpient. It isinstrucive to note that when Ambrose came to writes funerary oration on Valentinian, he was tatl enough to suppres ently his ine ‘vention. Instead we bear haw! when all who wore in tendance in the consstory Christians nd pagans aie, were saying that [ubsiies and ala] shouldbe restored he aloe, ike Danke, the spe of Go being tired within him, denounced the fithlessnese of the CChisans and opposed the pagans saying: "How can you think tht should estore wht pious brother [Gratin hasten away” For this would wrong both is eign and his brother, by whom he efased tobe surpassed in piety. ‘This is certainly how Valentinian would have ike his Christian subjects to vew his decision, but Ambrose intervention made that impossible the young emperor id ing tsay no al along, he could not have claimed to be the lone ole of faith surrounded by waver. on the other hand, be was thinking ofthe sort of «compromise his father might hae chosen (removing the sar but restoring the stb sides), that oute too was made impossible by Ambros, ‘More relevant inthe present contest, foe ll hat Ambrose ater claimed to have enjoyed close and afetionate relations with Valentinian, itis nonetheles cea frm these two letters that he was not consulted about the senatorial embassy of 84. He heard about it through the grapevine, and wrote requesting 2 copy of Symmachuss petition. When he had read ite wrote detailed refutation. The very fact that he was ‘obliged to wee is enough wo prove thathe was not consulted in advance and was ot present ithe forthe embassy or during the discussion of the petton. The second Jeter coreainly and possibly theists well was writen afer the decision had already ‘been made perhaps without ay inp os Ambrose at all. Te notion that, because he ived inthe same city 25 the emperog Ambrose was frequent visor at court and 50 in position to exer informa influcnes, i based on a misunderstanding ofthe nature oflte Roman courts, Persona access othe emperor was silly controled by the magister ofcioram (p. 202) and court eunuchs group with whom Ambrose had been int a: Epa 2 (= 7 Maur). hdc pres od he sere" apr” 1 Deok im (eam Let ate) From Constantin Theodosius ” expecially bad ations IfAusonivs exercised strongiafluence overhis former pupil, that was because he himself held office at court fom 375-79, and was expected 0 offer vice. There ismo evidence that Ambrose wa frequent (or welcome) visitor atthe ‘curt of ther Gratan or Valentinian I (On the basis ofhis speech about the altar of Victory, Spmmachus has ome tobe regarded 35 n uncompromising champion ofthe pagan cause anda biter opponent (of Christinity.Symsmachus himself would have been surpise by such a reputation, In the Brst pe, twas sutly fr is eratorcal ablity and extensive experience as an ‘envoy mther than for his religious commitment or expertise that he was choser as senatorial spokesman, He begins by telling his imperial addeesee that hes playiega double role: st your prefect I am transacting public business and san emvoy Lam presenting the message of my fllow-ctizens” Both hie father and ftheriaw had secved with disncton as senatorial ambassadors at court "and Symmachus himself first did s0 2€ the court of Valetian Tat Ter in 369-70 when not yet thirty, ashe was to agin and again in ater ie” Ttisimportint to bean mind that more than eloquence was requted. An emoy ‘who flt he hac misjudged the tone of his formal speech might repuethe damage at the emperor tabe or in private lobbying at court. Utila brillant paper by John “Matthews, made readors were content to mock the elegant emptiness of ‘Symmachus letters. Matthews showed that it was one ofthe prime functions of this “idiom (as he eightly called i) “to function across the boundaries of religious iference (jstas tals crossed the racial boundaras presented by the barbarian gen cralsat court)” Fellow pagans identified Symamachusas the man forthe job precisely because, though a staunch pagan, he was known co be a moderate, with as many (Chistian connections at court at anyone in public ft mst have been obvious to ‘rem the mos intrensgeant pagans that tact rather than confrontation was called for If here was tobe any chance of recovering the subsidies withdrawn by Gratian. The speech itself bears out this perspective. For allits eloquence (not tobe equated with passion), this celebrated speech ass for no more than toleration ofthe state cul: "yee must be more than one way to sucha secret" It is clea that Symmachus was willing to settle for compromise and coexistence. ‘There ienoreason to belive that he wat involved in more than the ist two ofthe (eles) sixembassice that pased between senate and court on thi issue Tn 384 he took advantage of his position as prefect of Rome (the oficial intermediary between senate and emperor)" tocenew the 38 appeal inthe form of lati, one ofthe fst. 41 Aur ina Sachs rages ah Rane (PVR) 3646 maleate prom sila der pd dvr ces ont (LS) Memes Virntn Oras VR spits cde [= | iti temps pea esi paps Res (IL 9, ‘meat = Seah) 12 Onbi may str emus, Mathews 945-7 Sogn 2008 SL Mochews ge Solan 1206 5-65 ‘5 Chatnrl gn eeeey TUE LAST PAGANS OF ROME ‘ine formal reports" he ent to courtin the course ofhis seven months in office Tht yeaesaw Practextatus as praetorian prefetof tly and Symmachusas prefect of Rome. Some have hypothesized the beginning of a pagan offensive, provoked by Gratia’s measures Its tw that Practextatus obtained a wit fom cout ordering the resto ration of objects coted from temples, which Symmachus attempted to cary ou, pe: ‘voking accusations that he had arested and tortured Christians (accusations thet ‘wese conceded tobe fale by ao lest an authority than Pope Damatus)2° ‘But they could not have taken these iniatives without ther respective prefes: tures, to which they had been appointed by the emperor. Why did Valentinian IL appoint two such prominent pagans to positions tat allowed then todo this? More spectcally, why did he athorive Pratestaus to restore looted objects to pagaa tn ples ‘rfl pagan nobles had bees by Gratans measures he did his bes o cnet then in other way, mos strikingly inthe exceptional honor accorded Pravtestatus of des- Jgnation tothe ordinary consulship for 35. fhe could notallow them public funds for the cults he coul at east allow them to protest the ibric oftheir temples. We have sleeady see 347, and we shall on see that in 389 Theodosius too felt obliged to coaciiate the pagan nobility afier turing down yet anther embassy about the ltarand subsidies. “The policy of clerics like Ambrose on such issues was very simple: no compre: ‘nis, But for an emperor, bombarded with contradictory petitions and protest from The obvious explanation is that, well ware how upset small umber of pow: at Constantius pursued similar policy when he removed the alta ia all sides, compromise was the name of the game. It isa serious ovesimpliicaion magne that any fourth century Christian emperor pursued a single consistent palcy toward pagans 0+ pagan. Valentinian II must have knowa that many Cheistiags ‘would be dstresed to see Practextatus and Symmachus holding high ofice ard restoring statues temples Bu the moe political among them would recognize the teade-of for what it was. The restoration ofa fw statuse was litle enough compared ‘with the les of public subsidies forthe cults. Mor were mort aristocrats prepared give up more thas afew months of ther precious otto public fice. Syamachuts prefecture, predictably enough, lsted barely seven months. When Pesetextaus died later in 384 Symmachus was disheartened and early in 385 resigned his prefecture «ect abandoning hie role as pagan activist. A decade Inter he was careful to ep his listance from the regime ofthe usurper Eugenio “Thethindrelaiohas aways been taken to represent Symmachusr oven most deeply held convictions Bute was not speaking straightforwacly on his own behall, Whi the formulation and the eloquence ae his itis key that some detall (especially the chose him as their ‘moeephilosophial arguments) were contibuted by those wh representative, Nothing i his creespondence suggests that this was an issue he Flt 40. Sym Rel th Chasing 6.10 ea 5-40 3 Sine Vletan Mims ws oly three the gen prsmbl cee em ale, ‘mrss undeniable bo enaly tbe pape From Constantin to Thoodosus » passionstely bout As already remarked, his letters never mention embassies, sub- sles, or even the altar of Vitor. Precisely because they rol us so tle about the soppoted pagan reaction, it was once assumed that the published version of Spmmacht' letters was carellly edited Certainly anything politically compro rising would have been removed," but his action in 38 were common knowledge and his spoech of 384 widely read and admired. Surviving lters to his oder pagan. fronds and Kinsmen reer so openly to pagan festival and even tothe meetings ofthe priestly colleges that tis dict to think of any reason why such lobbying should have been edited out ‘Second, while the celebeated ratios obviously the source of Spmmachus's rep tation af 2 pagan champion, it is less the specch than the detaled refutations by Ambrose and Prudentius that have given him this reputation. The speech itself isa remarkably moderate document, notable for its tact and reticence. Why did pagans decide to renew their plea only two yeas afer Gatian rejected iin 384? Obviously ‘because Gratian had been avecthroven in a coop and killed. Many (and not only pagans) ust have felt that thie was a consoquence of the new policy Symmachus i texceful 9 avoid oven hinting at that posbilty, but he does begin and end with Gratian, not indeed mentioning his death, but chiming instead that unscrupulous courtier had failed to inform the oungemperorabout the embassyin 3, which was {denied adlence(p.202)-He then reminds" Valentinian Il thats father, Valentinian [had not removed the altar Valentinian had been disposed (ashe might well have been) to grant the senatorial equest he could have accepted that Gratian was deceived ‘by oversalous courtiers and reinstated his father policy 1: THE ALTAR OF VICTORY AND THE LOSS OF PUBLIC SUBSIDIES LE wemay st atide the supposed influence of Ambrose, hy ddl Gratin change bis policy toward Roman paganism? Should wen fact be seeing deliberate and rad icalnew policy here atall? Iie the apparent combination ofthe removal falta, with ral o subsidies, and repadiation ofthe itl of pont maximus that has given se tothisasumption, According to Chastagnol,itwas during vsitto Rome in 376 that Pope Dimasus warned Gratin about the dangers of Roman paganism, and thar _Maecius Gracchus, prefect of Rome in 376-77, was already ceflectng this new policy ‘when he ostentatiously destroyed a Roman Mithreeum before accepting baptism. 1 Api thi sumption MeGaschy 4 1 Bar eam al Sesgs wih he wnper Naxinan. Spach bal been men cl wth Bigs, bt nso he meal ave soy mya Ylene este eran se a Bp bat a9 S338 8.9548 26 Chacalip ona° THE LAST PAGANS OF ROME “To ake the lst point fis, thee i no evidence that Gratan ever even visited Romie,® much lest met Pope Damatus, and certainly no basis for assuming that Graces was following any sor of aici pole. As forthe altar of Vitor, we have seen that ts emoval was an ee that had been raised agin and agai since 37 In all probability the inidave did not come fom ether Gratian himself or his ramedate avis. The natural assumption i that, when he moved his court to Milan in 380, (Chsistnn senators decided to renew their raquest to have the altar mowed, just as, pgan senators subsequently renewed their request to have it replaced when frst ‘Valentsan land then Bugeniue ascended the throne, approaching both asecond tine ‘when taey toa moved their courts to Mila. Their spokesman may bave bean Anicius Auchesius Bassus,pefec of Rome in 383 anda Chistian. Of course, we would ike to know why Gratan eventually granted a request his father and phaps he himself had earlier fused, but the answer may in parte no more than his general policy of cour ing the Roman senate, now increasingly Cristian andin prt the increasing influence ‘of powerful Roman Christians, now with easier acces toa court in Mian. ‘Unsurprisingly the altar of Vietorylfihasbeen eles discussed down the year. ‘Wie havent only the ples forthe restoration of ala and subsidies by Symmachus in is fica spac as preéct of Rome but loa point-by-point rebuttal by so well peed contemporaryas Ambros, bishop of Milan. Tatis tos, we have adiretconfontaion betes the lading pagan and she lading Cristian ofthe age: For many moderns this isthe confctbetween paganism and Chistian Yet no other ancient source sommuch a _mentiossit—not even Augustine, present Rome atthe ne. Outside pagan senatorial cles the afi may not have been such bg dealt we end to assume Ttisoften described as debate’ a debate chat ifthe two eas are considered in {his ight, Ambrose clearly wins Its important to be clear a the outset that this risleacing perspective. Ambrose makes a number of neat points at Symmachus's ‘expen, but fSymmachus ever saw Ambrose lters, he certainly ever responded. Initably therefore, Ambrose had the last word. Theres no evidencethat Symmachus ‘hmselfeven published his elatio, which has come down to usin two forms:ina much lates, posthumous edition of his relations; and disadvantageousy sandwiched bet ‘ween Ambrose's two responses in Bk io of Ambrose published corespondence. “Ambrose certainly scores some points. (1) Where Symachus sraightforwardly appealsto the importance of teadton, Ambrose points out thatthe Reman state had {in fact continually modified its religious practices, adding new gods fom conquered peoples, Sesn in this perspective the eventual adoption of Christianity can be repre sented a in ine with the best Roman trations. But this had been weal debate, ‘Symmachas would undoubtedly have respond tat, while Roman pagans bad no ‘objection to Chistianity beng added othe Roman cals twas another mattecentirely fora new cul replace the ld culs. That was not the Roman way. (3) Why should From Constantius Theadostus fl the state pay For the maintenance of pagan cults when it did not even maintain the ‘Chistian church? Once agin, the arguments disingenuous. While not femally mal taining the church, Christian emperors had poured favors and money nt direction {G) Ambrose claims that it was aot the pagan gods but Rome armies hat had won all, those wars down thecentures, Another good point until we remember hat elsewhere “Ambrose himso ints thatthe Chistian emperors of his own day woa their bates, not by force of arms, but simply by thee piety, in effect a Christian statement of ‘Syminachus' argument (Ch.). (4) Then there Use low number of esas. According toAmbos, twa oly with difcalty that they coal real seven,” nordid they have to remain virgins forbs. And evento they had to be paid Thisisapartcuady cheap jibe. Obviously this wa not the total amber of chaste pagan women Bot before considering the arguments ofthe protagonists any furthes,iisesenial to establish what exacly Gratin did in addicon to having the altar renowed. Since ‘Symmachs chims at, despite removing the altar, Constantius did net refuse funds Ginger) forthe Reman vals ithas generally (and surely right) been inferred that Grandin some way or othe, “eise funds, Afterall the very same sentence cms that Constants sipped sway nothing fom the privileges ofthe Vestal Ving” anit Isclear from Symmachus that Gratin dd indsed strip avy the eviegesof the Vesta. “Thestae cults were so financed dict from pablic Funds but (asin mest parts ofthe Graeco-Roman wort from thelncome of estate willed to the temples ore the course ofthe centaries® The standard assumption, bated on seve passages of Ambros that CGrasan confiscate tes temple estates, which had the tatu of publi property. But Liat has recently pointed out that Symmachus himself does aot mention temple estates, concentrating instead on the privileges ofthe Vestal, expecially their ght to receive lagaes" Anmbrose's letters, she anges, “were chetorca pieces where the bishop selected what tseomed more convenientto say or aot whileSymmachuss rdato "was an offical document...with the sole purpose of obtaining the re-estab lishment of those pagan privileges Gratan't measures had suppressed” On this basis he privileges the evidence of Symmachus and suggests that only the Vestals were affected, Indeed, dhe goes on to argue that Graans measures, far fem proving that, official paganism wer dying, appear on the contrary as testimony to an attempt 10 check the economic effects which excesive devation to the cltof Vesta was stil producing in terms of legacies and donations of large landed estates" On this view, ‘official Roman paganism was stil Uriving in 38, Not only did Gratan nt move its 135 ehertmes tere ese Win. en) pst Tats an oly wien ‘on afer Contntt Raman ist of so wld bout Romo ste Get ‘odges eons 80). Aires cal se terete ong Wea ‘doa hae wend Rpt alg tbe robe song a Ambroadsesycotanted Citas el ges ber De ope i a8 2 oda Calon ir. 376 kta 08 oe 3 Smelt oen aJinancial basis; he dno more than take steps to prevent the Vestas resources act ally increasing in the futue Bt there ae problems with this interpretation. ‘The series of senatorial embassies tocour (atleast sixbetween 32and394) strongly suggests that pagans found Gratian’s measures very damaging indeed fo the finances ofthe cults. And the distinction Lia laws between Ambrose’ shetorcl pieces" and Syenachusé “ofc document” is risleading, Symmachus wa no less chetorci than Ambrose. He, too, carefully elected which topics to dell on and which to skate ove. Its unwise to ase any argument on what Symmachus does not sa. Concerned contemporaries on both sides knew exactly what the measures were, snd who and what wa affected Nether Ambrose nce Symmachus had toaudess every detail, ‘Much hasbeen written onthe importance ofthe cut of Victory to the last pagans, bust was suely foe torical and psychological wasoes thar Symmachus devoted hs bestefforts to Victory in the hope that Ch link drew between recent military defeats and the moval ofr alta. Inthe after rath ofthe catastrophe defeat ofAdranople thiewasthe angoment most kel to hit home with Chustansa¢ wall as pagans. for the actual alae, SymmachusToylly ‘represents it as the place where senators swore allegance tothe emperor, glossng ‘overs far more obvious and significant ole asa locus pagan cult ofeings, vividly cevokedby Ambrose (two separate descriptions of Cristian senators with eyes steam {ng ror te smoke and choking on cinders)? “The withdrawal ofthe Vestal tins at ect would be impressed bythe ivileges was lest a feontalatack paganism than an attempt to tansfertheirno-doubt extensive fnancial resources to the state ‘Syminachus contrive to make it seem petty and vindictive by claiming thot their emoluments were now being used to pay dock worker,” protesting that even frvedmen were allowed to receive logacies (Rel. 314-1). Unlike all che other pub ici eacendotes, Vestals were entiely supported by state funds, From the shetorical point of view it was surely because they were potentil objects of sympathy that he devoted so much space to spinster Ladies abruptly trled out of theie modest apartments." ‘Nine out ofthe twenty sections ofSymmachus's pea arc concerued with nancial less, a poineglefully exploited by Ambrose, who fers at least a dozen times to ‘what he represents asthe pagan obsession with money. Sometimes i general terms (we glory ia [the] blood [of martes], they worry about eas”), but no fewer than 1 Arbre pg (= Mat oan fe Mae 3 ils popu ace pital ator ame spent on ala wayne rahe hin shan 14. "Ue plea i own cllege ad oben enone [Symachs] wal ootane heated» ce (La ate). ot he pny soe athe te, wer ot epee om pe ss prs hom i ipeton nt (6.7 ‘genpiventer 3). se enn ura Ep. 4s epte Prom Constants to Theodosius * cight times he represents the pagans s asking forthe cost of sacrifice once even claiming that "thc rituals cannot survive without money” We cannot dissss0 consistent elisn as “thetori’ That the inant loses even Symmachus acknowl: tedges Included the confiscation of estates receives confirmation from a resript of Honorius seat to Carthage in August 415, commanding that" sn accordance with the constitution ofthe sated Gratin... ll land asigned by the alse doctrine ofthe ancients to thee sacred tual shallbejoined tothe property of ou privy purse. Thu, fom the time when public expenditure on the worst supertition was forbidden, the revenues shall e exacted from the ‘ulawl possossorsthereo....Wedecre that ths regulation salle observed ‘not only throughout Afica, bu throughout all egions situated in our word Liz insists that this aw has nothing todo withthe decree of Gratan as she econ structs it fom Symmachus. But it fits pesfecdy Ambrose's remark that “no one has deprived the temples of votive offerings (donara) or the haruspces of legacies; only cetates wore confiscated, and this because they [the pagans] didnot use in a manner ‘worthy of aigion what they defended by ight of religion”™ The first ase responds to Symmachus’ complaint about the ban on legacies to Vestal sting two options spparendy not allected by Gratans measures: votive offerings to temples and legacies te haraspces, Such precise claims would be counterproductve if not rue. Here at least we most privilege the evidence of Ambrose, Clesly, estates that Christane saw as underwriting pagan cults were confiscated by Gratin, A law addeessed tothe pro- ‘consul oF Aisin 408 reiterates an earlier ban that “withdrew revenues from the em- ples thistime assigning them tothe army" What aa thisbebutthe decree of Gratan tewhich Symmachus and Ambrose refer? ‘Were temple estates til avalableas at as 382? Ambrose claims that it was "now many years since the rights ofthe temples lua templorum) were abolished al over the wor which might seem to imply that the rights of Roman temples had also lng since been abolished. Yet the point ofthat “allover the world” might be that, 1 ede eee scifi pvr sation (prs fai da (phat pes (0) apt serra Cet cl a eet accra prin pres (Be sigma pana 9) lee onsen hip sacra (Ep ec. Mat 9) 13 vernon nc quan pow rea 7 1). {3 emattnnbs quorsergero ou lpn end do tin ota ner bee Ua tae empress pe spettio dtrmi er ra ab ‘tris npn (Col Thad 030.9) Ne ten dora br. dees ea ol rec on fig ster a gon te defetiren Aai p 3 4 empl dean at Co Ted 9 ale vin i Sir le) reveals iets a eterno an reba, dese fe PPO of lb Forwaed yim toe socom aA 1 fete printer rt ah bat ut, ebesp.7 9“4 {THE LAST PAGANS OF ROME ese rights had been abolished everywhere ele it was naw high time that Roman tempie estates were abolished as wllthat this isthe prefenble interpretation ‘would seem to be bome out by a passage in his later speech (391) on the death of. ‘Valentinian I Rome had sent envoys in order to recover the rights ofthe tamples (proper cupersla templram iar), the unholy prerogatives (prsieie) of thelr ‘psesthoode;? the performance of thee streets... And when [Valentinian 11] was cononted with the precedent ois father [Valentini T] that during his reign no one had taken chem (es, = teroplorim dura ete) away, be replied “you pesise my father because he did not take them aay ave taken them sway ether. Did then xy Ether estore them, that you can cemandl that mst estate (reddee) them? Fall, even fy father had restored ther, my brother [Gratan] took them away and in this would vather imitate my brother” ‘he same phras, an templorun equated withthe “unholy prerogaivesoftheie pres hoods” and the “performance ofthe sacred ites" Later in the speech Ambrose describes hove the day before hi death Valentinian hd agin "refused the privileges of the temples" (tmploram privilege denegavt, repeating this form onthe following pipes The senatorial embassy had evidently pointed out o Valentinian that his father had not taken away the “eights ofthe temples” suggesting that he should fllow his, father rather than his brother example "Rights" and “privileges” ofthe temples ae sague phrases, but surely imply temple estates ether sha the pivileges ofthe Vestas. iso, hen these rights were evidently not withdrawn unl after Valentinian I—and so by Gratin. ‘here may also be another text, Zeno bishop of Verona attacks landowners ‘who allegedly protect ‘smalking shrines” on their etates and ae “struggling every day to hang onto their temple rights" Landoveners struggling to hang onto theittemple sights" look very much ike Symmachus and is pagan peers inthe bos” Presumably til then the social standing and inuence ofthe arktecratic priests of the state cus (Ch, 4) ha secured exemption forthe Roman temple estates. We may recall the case of the 364 aw forbidding nocturnal sacelies.”Prateatatus, then po ‘consul of Achaea, obtained an exemption forthe Blesnian Mysteries, presumably [= sensor pone pri, Deck Vp Lise 20057 alte fi cr bat ampere and apr p73 9) 4 Desh Vibssande {Whar ier hid ome he comple wee brother ka deed eeu Arbre, ms 4 onl gu copa eta Tah. {1 Zeno rc ate se nows deh supe ba hs wih Ambon Deas (Ci ge] om the on woul sport ter 6 (Ln 9,8). ‘Nostra wre bal sus be ble bse of hee prsaned suo wth Back Image When asl of pening mtr ava deed je art Ape at re {Sel chars, and concord defence on crt he ves (ber 0 dood ante ace Ap s-t). From: Constants fo Theodosius 4s protesting thatthe emperors cannot have meant to ince sich age-old and (above al respectable sitesin theirban* Ina eter this brother Celsius Titans, precisely atable shorty before his destin 380 il carne of Africa, Symmachus reports that, a pontiial treasurer (pontfilsarearius) called Rufus i visting Acs to maintain the college’ rights to it estates in Viga, an ancient city 105 km west of Carthage (an cpiscopal seat fora east 10 years) He urges Tianus to do all thats in his oficial power and personal zeal to belp Rufus. As teas 380 the Vga estates wee threatened ‘atnot yetlttothe college of pontifs® One of the awscited above reveals thatsome Alcan “temple revenues” had still not been reassigned as ate as 408 “These revenues no doubs pad fora muttude ofrautne expenses connected with thestate cults overandabove he cost ofsacrificialanimals. But nothing upset Christians ‘50 much asthe dea of animal serie. Whether or not public eelebrations of the state alts weresillaccompaniedby sacrifice slate asthe 38 (below), since few Chaitans were key towatch them and know for sure, was safe fe Chistian poli to focus on thisaspect The hostile language ofboth Ambrose andthe laws i enough to suggest ‘why Symrmachos avoided explicit mention ofestats that he knew would be characte taeda “paying for sacrifice" He alludes just once tothe expense of what he refesto by the vague term carimania. Bete to focus on Victory and Vestals. His concentration con the Vestal ani fact be reconciled with the traditional interpretation. ‘The wetings ofthe land surveyor frequently mention estates owned bythe Vestals° and it maybe thatitwas mainly the income from these estates that kept the state cult going ® The ‘ban on legacies woe presumably intended to bar ich pagans from circumventing the confsationsby leaving the Vestas new estates Butwhether or notitwastempleestats _xparate from the Vestal’ stats that Gratian confiscate, curiously litle attention hat ‘been pin the past othe sheer numberof attempts made to get them restored. twas ‘enough to assume thatthe men involved were pagan fanatics. But even so that woul rotexplain why the financing ofthe cls was apparently fel to be so croc ‘Why was the money so impoctant Some scholars have argued that it wa simply the expense ofthe cults that moet concerned Spmmachus and his peers Paschouul saw ‘Symmachus himself as « miserly parvenu, uawiling to part with his own money:* Ascoedingto MeGeachy, "Control ofthe priesthoods meant control oflanded estates’ ‘and "Roman paganism, deprived of government support, would no longer bea source Zanes 1-4 Alertticilaad aconeamont ore certo finies theBomapse td Kars: Kavi Chto Th Sued Opal he Bes pers (57) 49. Bp wi Calrsovte O Vpn Lapel Lest say (0 cig ie) 2 ont pole om regan apt, {Thee et omar fve oppose Roman rae than lel empl, apnea rs ws level {5 Gampball son 74 Hy comment 2-5 Wing 00 26.7. {5 lesb baled the Nl psoralen wn onal pubes: Wing 005, Bist 4. Pachou 6 79-83 Cameron py 477- $0 showing hatte algun test othe a ‘amy° “THE LAST PAGANS UF HOME ‘ofncome and prestige to the asetocracy But there were a great many priosts, andit ‘sunlkely that thare was enough ofa surpls to contribute substantially othe wealth ‘of any individual es, We happen to know the emoluments ofArval brethren: from ‘he eeign of Trajan right down to the 2205 they received the princely sportula of 120 dena each time they participate in the annual Banguet.* “The altar of Victory has always been the center of atention for modern scholars, ‘but pagans wouldhardiy have been sted f Gratin o Valentinian ha given way ‘on the sole asue of the altar but stood fen on cult subsidies. Wen giving brief his tory ofte issue later to Eugen, Ambrose summarize the goal of Symmachus's ratio as restorig (edd) what wa withdraen from the temples identified a couple ‘of sentences ater with the expense ofsacrifce, without even mentioning the alte” A page orso ater he characterizes the petionsto Eugeniushimselfin the same words: “the envoys askod you to restore [subsidies] tthe temples (peru leg ut temps redder). Ue Formal in effect exchaes the altar, which pagans wanted restored to the senate house, aot a temple Ini funerary speech on Valensinian La year earlier ‘Ambrose described the senatorial evoys as coming "to recoverte rights ofthe tm pls and the unholy privileges of thei priesthood” agin without even mentioning, the altar of Viton. Cleary the subsidies were the real sue. According to thre separate passage of Zosimas, the key fac about the traditional para ual of Rome was that they had to be performed publi andat publicexpense Verve, this would expan all hose embassies. Festa passage (09.3) that eepresents “Theodosius coming to Rome aftr the Frigid and teling Roman senators that the treasury was burdened by the expense of rites and sacifces and that he ‘wished to abaish them, not only because he didnot approve of them, but also ‘because the aun neoded more funds. Although the senatorsai that rites not performed a public expense were not performed propel, fr this reason the rite of steriice ceased, and other rituals handed down from thee forefaters ‘were abandoned. “The second (¢.38) describes how S statue of Cybele nd disrespected a Vestal, wile Serona, eemoved a necklace from 3 ‘hen Theodosius the elder came to Rome after the suppression of the ty ~Bogeniutandinstled in everyone 2 contempt of the holy tes by refusi Finance religion with public mane. Te priests and priestesses were driven out and the temple deprived ofall worship. 5: MGs ganda gaa Bane SE Nong aly 6 eps cop 6h Shel igh Se ao, tasand cet ach a 030 sx lpg bi fi ee nanptsafsran (Bpetc). rom Constantin to'Thendosius ” ‘there are problems with both tas, st because Theodosius did aorgo to Rome afer the Frigidus and second because, while the detail about the end of sacrifice fits Theodosior's ban on sueifie, the speech about the expense of sacri fis Gratian much beter. ‘he senators’ response implis that this was the rst time the _question ofthe cost ofthe cults had come up, and here the contemporary evidence (of Symmachus and Ambrose points unmistakably to Gratin measures in 383. It Jooks 28 if Zosimus, who apparently knew nothing aboot Gratansaat-pagan mez- sures, mistakenly ascribed them o"Theodesis (Ch, 1.6). He would ast be the fist to make this ervor. Quodvoludeu of Carthage, writing between 44s and 4s aims that Symmachu'spoech about the altar of Victory was addressed to Theodosius ® nde indasimilarerorin the manuscript tradition ofthe third Relaiitself which five the addvessce as Theodosius instead of Valentinian” Zosimus' coverage of Foeth-century western fis is thin, bu this snot (I suspect the only reason he Fils to mention the altar of Victory, since this isasilence he shares withall the ecce fiat histocians (even Roinus, writing in Aquileia in 4o2)andall the chroniclers, in fact it is worth pointing out that, if Ambrose had not taken it upon himself to intervene, we would only have known about Gratia’s measures and the senatorial protests from Symmachus' speech, While causing great distress to the pagan sen tort of Rome, Gratian’s measures seem to have made itl impression anywhere ele Ie was Theodosius who went down in history as the emperor whe proscribed paganism, and itis perhaps not surprising that Gratians contribution wis transferred to blemore celebrate sucesso “The third texts the story of sual that would dive Alarie away from Rome, but only “fit was performed at public “expense, with the senate gong upto the Capitol and performing the appropiate cae _monies bth there andi the for ofthe city” (Ch. 3). he fact that al hee Zosiman texts emphasize the need for pubic Fonding and public performance suppers the conclusion thall derive fom the same pagan source consuked by his source Oly ‘odorus during bis Roman vist Despite the cofusion about emperor and context, the deta about the need for public Fonding ofthe cls isintrinstally phusibe. I fits the clear distinction drawn by the Antonine antiquary Pompeius Fetus between “public ituals, which are performed on behalf of the people at publi expense” and “private ritvals, which are performed For individual men, files and householde™= Btrusean harupice in 408, who cined to know a {4 Camaro et at 48-9 aged ior of hs ws 3 Ba now bebe that Eas 5 25 righ o reer sees Dopp 7-4. .9. Qos, Leds promes i RB (08) (Pa 6) (Amat fcr) anche was asia Valen rt or amps Spams, ‘ue pager od aetinon Bo). 4 "Tesora inp ng Ton tine backrfenc in Zain cunt er eeeuton m op soba retence tthe vs pebble fr Oped waa surat bgan 48 (4, Fost, Deven fst by. sb Lady Upon, Dg asa,8 THE LAST PAGANE OF ROME “That the state cults of Rome were indeed financed from public funds i solidly documented ict "No oter text say thot they had to be pad fr by the stat or that they bal to be performed publidy But then nether issue had come up before. Until Gratin, every: thing to do with the sate cults had been paid for out of public fonds, and until “Thcodoius all rituly ofthe state cots had been pevfocmed publi e was not ill, GGratian and Theodosius that Roman pagans were fed ist withthe withdrawal of public funds, and thes with being forbidden to pefoer thelr uals publi It was entirely natural that they should have protested that puble funding and public performance were indispensable features ofthe waditiona eults. Wiis the inispensabilty of pubic funding chat lies behind Symmachuss Relato and the series of pagan embassies to cout, then it is unlikely eat Graian'sconfisca- tion ofthe relevant funds (whether temple or Vestal estates) was perceived ky anyone except Roman payans as a now policy, 2 concerted assault on Roman gaganism Emperor from Constantine on had been confiscating civie revenues all over the empice, temple estates among them, as part ofa general policy of exercising tighter control ove civic Finance. Jlitn briefly cestored sstatesconiseated by Constantius, ‘but most of them wore again confiscated by Valentinian and Valens! Ifthe Roman temple estates managed to escape confiscation, it was only a matter of time before a ‘government in urgent need of money to pay oops Finished the job. In 38, inthe aitermath of Adsanople,eaisng troops was a peloity, whereas in 394-95 Theodosius had more troops than be knew have to handle (p. 9). There was ao reson why GGratian or his adviser should have anticipated the indignant senatorial reaction. ‘Members ofthe priestly colleges were wealthy men who could easily have pid fr the ‘espenses ofthe festival and th stipends ofthe Vstals and temple personnel out of their own pockst, ‘Why then were they reluctant to foot the bill themselves? As we sll seein more detailin chapter 4 theres an obvious sense in which the leaders of Roman paganism were the pons and other publi scents, But however seriously they tock their aties, these were not men wh had devoted theives toa eligin they had in heir maturity been elected to represent and defend, Take Symmachus himsef, a loyal, ‘pagan who had done his dutyn 383 and 3, yet a moderate, respected by Chisans and pogans alike, Ihe had made good the los of public money or Raancing the state cults, he woull have been accused, o use Ambrose's phrase of "paying fr sacrifice” [Not many pagans can have been willing to cenbrace so total an identification withthe state cls ‘Linu oo Maral ty ae to Fas 9 26-99 $79 of the Le ana ys repo oregon Cone], Cros S76 [al 5.3) ‘Th thong of suk w aba premacity a in the Caseiran Lex alone Genetic (a4 sce Roan Sas fp 0.2 4. Belmar eu-as Licht3y Ch sop. -77 Gok Gal, Goa | ! | | From Constants to Theodosius ” Private contributions had alays been encouraged. In earlier times the sich and ambitious had paid forthe building and repair of temples a well as baths, porns, bridges, and aqueduct, in part at least because such expenditure enforced their standings public benefactors, We know of four ates of estoration of pagan temples inate fourth-century Rome. In357/9, ymmachus father in-law, Orbis restored a temple of Apollo; in 367/8, ractextatus restored the poetico ofthe Def Consentesin the Forum and demolished pivate buildings that had been erected too close totem ples in 374, Chhudkus Hermogenianus Caesars repaired the portico ofthe temple of Bonus Bventus damaged by a flood; and between November 375 and August 378, ‘Sempronius Fausts, prefect ofthe com supply, estored the temple snd poetic of sis at Ports, the latest dstable oficial estoration of a pagan temple inthe ame ofthe emperors The ist three areal nove from other sources to have been pagans. Praetextatuss dedication ofthe portico of the Dei Consentes characterizes the statues at sacrasancta simular, butts going to fa to interpret the (heavily estored) Foxmaul cul in flora antigua resttuto) a implying eestoration of ul rather than jut ornamentation * Philippus, PVR ca. 400, restored a nymphaoum ad pri: rm cultum; Roman nymphses were not cult sites Ts also important to add that, since al these men were acting in their ofl capacity as pefects ofthe city, they _were not spending their own money. Te same applies othe cas from Ostia apr “fete annane was likesge entitled to draw on public fonds The main eoe of Isis a {the harbor of Rome was ae patron ofthe corn supply, and so her temple was appropri- stely restored by the pragfctus nance at publ expense (p. 695). By the fouth century, many of Rome's centuries-old pubic buildings and monu- mente were inevitably in rgent need of estoration. In 366 Symmachus pee restored the Aurelian bridge; in 37 Pobianus restore the Basia Juli ing Albin restored baths on the Aventing; ca. 443 Quadratians restored the baths of Constantine’ Ia recy case these were project undertaken or supervised by prefect of Rome ia ofie. _Atany given moment there must have been along ist oF building in need of restors- tion fiom which new prefacts would presumably choose. It wat probably only the ‘more commited pagans who opted for temples. Thee musthave been many who tok. care to choose less controversial projects such as bridges, bats, oF aqueducts. One ‘sample is Volusianus Lampadius, ponies Solid tauroboliate. Duraghistwo year tenure of ace (365-66) he sponsored more restorations than aay other prefect we now of he erected or moved a numberof statues restored a asl forthe Aqua Claudia," and claimed to have restored no fee than thirten bridges between Rome Ge Wand kine 98 4 1 oo Bloch ng ey Kabat neat 6. Know ie eats CL a8 dy, wi IL. (08) {Boe sourcas and ew ther expe, Weis 94,4 07 {Lined Chango not 7 CLvitees je = 1S. 1; Chagoo! és sas: For» et parece 2004 steep.° ‘rite Last Pagans OF ROME and Ostia” More gener; Amvlanus mocks him for having his name insxbed on buildings as though he had built rather than just restored them. But despite his obvious personal religiosity (p.144),0tasngle tomple ‘he choices made by Orfitus and Prastextats drew attention to theit commit meat to malatain the deteriorating fabric of Rome’ temples, a commitment that was sll acceptable to populir opinion inthe 3s0s and 360s. Nor was It their wn money they were spending. As or bath Practextats and Claus, wat not aetal temples they restored, but thes porticos, public areas outside the temples. Fastus also restored the portico of te temple of Isis at Portus. Tere i no record of ny temples restored by iter of the Syonmach, and while he elder Flavian was neverpreect of. Rome, the younger Flavan was, ands faras we now he restored no temples either. “The fact that ao kncwn temple restoration can be dated later than the 370 has been linked to Graton’ measures: “In 38% a decree was issued banning the use of poblicfunds on pagan temples” Thats to say, ts assumed that pagans weve eager to restore temples, and had be prevented by law. There i certaily no evidence foray such ban, The reassignment of temple revenues would have removed one possible source of funding, but there was nothing to stopa pagan using his own money ihe ‘wanted, Chastagnol combined the absence of dated temple restorations afer s78 with his own dentiication ofthe Phlippus who played tole in the erecton ofthe church ‘of , Paolo fuel le mura in 390 a ity prefect, sd concluded that in 38 pagan tor ples lost their status ae public monuments, which was transfered to Chistian churches He tookt fer granted that Gratian embarked on a radial policy of elim ating paganism in 382, But it was only ewo years Inter, in 384, that Valewtinian IL authorized Prastexatos and Spromachus to restore looted statues to tei temples. 1k is in fact case from the pronouncements of sucessve westem governments _dowa to the Ostrogeths that Roman temples continued tobe considered public mon uments and were protecku under direpenalies rom spoition.* AnedetofHonorius in 3 evens that zealot had been producing laws forbidding sacrifice as utification {or destroying or despoiing them.” While no temple is knawn to have been restored later than 378 twasnot he intention of ether emperors or kings tht such prominent ‘monuments in the city center should be let to collapse. In sio/ts Theodore com plsned that temples that be had “ssgned fr epac ave instead been given over 0 demolition” The fact that it has survived tothe present day in such excell shape suggests thatthe Pantheon wat caeflly maintained daring the two centuries when it ee er ‘7 Forthe temple of loca see Ch. 7 Megp 073 95 ston Win eo 1,46 Kalo ps 4. 1 Chatagel teu ind ish othe euseton o h Phigpa 78 Seon Fav Ramsnsone 9 384-9379 7 5 Cal Thad oat Now oy God 308-36 7 Caio Vana ean Bar Fane Ranson 3006 6, From Constants to Theodosius * ‘was no longeran active temple and before it was timed into the church ofS. Mara ad _nartyesinthe early seventh century. An imperil rescript of 368 or370 was readin the ‘Pantheon presumably now used as some srt of assembly all” As lates 472/73 the ‘ety prefect Anicis AciliusAginaius Faust restored ot indeed temple, butastatue ‘of Minerva damaged by the collapse ofa roofin re during civil disturbance! “The decline of temple restorations by prominent pagans is surely due less to legal prohibitions than to their increasing eluctance tobe identified with scrlBie. There is _ery litle evidence for private patronage ofthe tate cults inthe fourth century 363 “whole By the as decades ofthe century pagan senators may have elt that contib- ‘ting 1 the repair ofa pagan temple identified them too conspicuously with 2 now sncressingly unpopular cause 2: PONTIFEX MAXIMUS “That leves Gran’ repudiation ofthe ancient pagan tile of pont: maximus? sllegedly “sn uncompromising break with polytheism and the ol gods of Rome" Battie not ery to ste why this should have been such a decisive signal to the pogans ‘of Rome Itwas almost four enturies since the office had been held by 2 Romana tocrt and during that period its imperial holders had vastly expanded its scope and powers!"To give singe illustration, rom a eaely as Augustus emperors were regu lay consulted and gave detailed rulings on the qualieations for and privileges ofthe leusinjanpriesthoods at Athens While fst-and second-century emperors had at leas spent much oftheir time in Rome and 0 failed the primary obligations ofthe ‘fice toward the evi cults of Rome, by the sos ithad ben well overa century since any emperor had resided in Rome. Constantine paid thee brief visits (33, 31, and 536), Constantivs Il one (357), Theodosius one (89), and Gratin himself not even fone. Constantius visit was probably the last ocasion on which an emperor bad attended to pontifical busines in person "The date and context of Gratian’srepaiation have been mach debated over the years, but the most basic question of ll has not been raise since the seventeenth cent. Didithappen atall! The only source is digression onthe pnts maxis fina chapter of Zosimas sho through with absurdities and errors fom stro fnsh (Ch. 178). Sisteenh- and seventeenth-century scholars denounced it as 2 pagan Fora moe cpl aament Eringon 9573363 Leino 46.8 1, Garam n Beal and North 9a0-3 Ml 4a? Aber bg hee no ot Fy tmperr bing tthe pediment ary age (Rape 08 9) Be. Meso 5 Tharatonapes taf the lr testa Cameron 07, 34-842 "TH LAST PAGANS OF ROME. slander, refsingtobelive that ny Christian emperor had eer consented te accept theo inthe it place, Bu th evidence ofiaseipons now makes it erin that they id hein Chsan emperors aceptedte te, soone or tr (might seem) one mn ave efi, snd gen the expt testimony of Zsimus that it vas Grate, the apparently concerted measures of Gain guns the Roman cults seemed t provide the obvious context I a also buen taken for granted that all subsequent Chzstan emperors followed suit “Te fit problem is Zosimt chim tht Gratin eased the potifilrobe when ‘the pontls rouge it to him the ging his ign 367) Fora Reman scrip tion of 7 shows Yletinin Valens and Gran al bearing the tle Nor can we interpret the being of his eign a he moment when he became sennewetem Agustus on Valentinian death a 37 0 even sl ring Augusta on Valens eatin 198 Borin bis Grtarur ato of379 Ausons compares Gratan to Vesta flamer and Ponies in i has” and even compares the “leon” foc is own consul: othe pontifical tions, sceingthat you [Gratin] who presided over them are pontf mae ‘nut nd a partcptor in the designs of God (643). the grounds that Thendoss “ovecuredorcefusnd teil Alli argoedthatitmusthavebeendeopped by anuary sypthe dato Thedosiacession Ba this runs up agist Ania, who dd ‘ot delivers pec the second bal of, a court in Tes. Could Ausonis i self Chest, have been so gauche sto se hi ofalimagerifthe emperr wo ba appolnet hi cons aso een ected he tie on eos grounds? The fact that Theodosis never tested with the ie proves nothing Two de Jeations come intoplay (ILS oan 7) butts ot jus pots masimus thy ac, butthe whole ofthe second halfofthe tind ity of imperil ies. ilstrati heres Gratin lst ape the sroinsexptin a ithappenstheltestnown insertion offerte fall syle” L Gratianus pie el maximus vitor a truenphator semper Augustus, 0 ‘ex maximus, Germanicus maximus, Alarannicus maximus, Franicus max- lnmus, Gothicusmaaimmus,triburicoe potest Imperator consul prim, pater patria, proconsa "The (all syle had become exceptionally care by this date. There are in fit only three other examples known forthe half-century ater Coastantine, one eich for ‘Constantius Jun, and Valentinian The great majority of fourthcuntury and all {Sry Ciao porponing ob etna caning lene Yale nd Gate 3 nner mormar nb webu Enterta, seal oon bea IES 7 ty. Feehan Ang sant patron ($30 Rapes. 5 {6 Alina Spr nth bksanon eps athe sso day. 5 1 7a and CL 8 ary (aon oly fom sghventeey copes) fom Carbs for ‘Wstinin (oe sds otha bt gee efron py ch wal gh 3). From Constantive to Theodosius s Inter dedications commemorating emperors fer (omitting victory ites) only plus ibe masimus victor ac trwmpator semper Augustus (o some minor variation. Since itis only inthe fll uealature that we ever find pontifex maxon (together with the entre sequence fom tribuniia potstatis to proconsul italicized above, itis not significant that the two inscriptions naming Theodosius, both of which ofe the now standard abbreviated iulature, donot inch, Since we hve no edicts or eer of “Theodosius {offering the ll uate there i simply no way ofknowing whether he sed or refused these of ponifer maximus. "Thete sin fact no reason to belive that the fl style was evr formally abolished cocevensigaiicantly modified. Tiss more than an argument from silence, noris ita mere technicality. Though extremely rar, it nonetheless survived for atleast another century and a hall. There is one example each from the ith and sixth centuries: an edict of Marcan and Valentinian TI from 452; and 3 letter of Anastasius frm $16. _Remakably enough, given the protracted discussion about Grain’ epudlation of the tile, ao one seems to have appreciated the significance ofthe fat that both doc ‘ments include the te pont. ere isthe style accorded Valentinian Il and Marcian in an impeval eter dated 7 Bebruary 432 (correcting afew obviously corrupt minor deta) * Imperstores Casares Flavius Valentnianus, powtifer incltus, Germanicus fnchitus, lamannicusincltus, Sarmaticu inl, tib- ‘nce potestas vices septies, imperator vcs septic, et Flavius Marcianus, pont incitus, Germanicusincltus, Sarmaticu init, Alamannicusinclius, Franccus inclu, tlbuolelae potastatis ter, imperstor iterum, consul “And here is the style of Anastasius in a leter addressed to the senate of Ros ins” Impertor Caesar Flvive Anastasius, ponies incus, Germanicus inci, Reancicus inclius, Sarmaticus inclius, trbunicicae potestatis XXV>, Impercator> 20KV, consul teri, pius, felix, victor ac triumphator semper Angustus, pate patria, proconsl “These ae oficial documents: Ifwe compare the dtulature of these rwo lemers with ‘the 370 dedication of Valentinian I, Valens and Gratin, the only diference (apart {ACO a 54-3 fr Stl Baron, Roan Expr othcoing Ch 2. Te the ao ‘wee eho tomentonthn eta hstonnion wn eli al dele toda denna at bt ya een re see ot Gl ln nn wets Bares taming 2 Pach soe tases thse pelle de lima ns ot es poses’ pte ‘Weitere Zon nba dare!Py "THE LAST PAGANS OF ROME, from iteration numbers and vietory ties) isthe substitution of inclu fox mass ‘tougiou: Sosystematiea change mustbe both intentional snd oa. Fram the late second century on emperors often adda a mains to thelr victory Wes ‘Particas ‘nasi and the Hk). Tis asin to was regularly eplaced by inci in the RB