The Roman Catholic Church's Response to Barbarians, Heresy, and Warfare in Late Antiquity

By

Scott Raymond Steffens

A thesis submitted to

Sonoma State University

in partial fulfillment ofthe requirements for the degree of

Master ofArts in

History

Mary Halavais, Ph.D. Copyright 2011

By Scott Raymond Steffens

11 AUTHORIZATION FOR REPRODUCTION OF MASTER'S THESIS

I grant permission for the reproduction of this thesis in its entirety, without further authorization from me, on the condition that the person or agency requesting reproduction absorb the cost and provide proper acknowledgment of authorship.

Date: 7/1') III Signature

Street Address

City, State, Zip

iii The Roman Catholic Church's Response to Barbarians, Heresy, and Warfare in Late Antiquity.

Thesis by Scott Raymond Steffens

Abstract

Purpose of the Study:

The orthodox Catholic Church ofLate Antiquity was a very active participant in the political and social turmoil that defined fourth and fifth century Europe. The church had a vested interest in maintaining its position as the only officially sanctioned Christian sect ofthe Roman Empire. Many times the church had to rely on the support ofthe Roman government to achieve this objective.

The purpose ofthis study is to answer how the church was able to respond to perceived threats to its position as the dominate christian sect ofEurope.

Procedure:

To determine how the Church responded to perceived threats, many ancient sources were studies, and works by modem historians and archaeologists were read. Many surviving sermons, letters and treatises written by bishops from Late Antiquity were studied primarily to determine how perceived threats to the power ofthe church were dealt with. It was also important to discuss the larger social and economic context in which these works were written to better understand the relationship the church had with its non­ orthodox and non-roman neighbors.

Findings:

The response the church had to perceived threats differed from region to region. Depending on the severity ofthe circumstances of the nature ofthe threat, the church protected itself by identifying opposing christian sects as heretics and anathematizing their beliefs, or by relying on the use offorce from the Roman government to actively suppress heresies. The means in which heresies were suppressed could be from confiscation of their chUrches and wealth, forbidding them from serving in the government or military, banning them from meeting within towns and cities, or in extreme cases executing them.

IV Conclusion:

The church identified pagans, barbarians, and heretics as the main threats to its power in Late Antiquity. The policies that were implemented by the government on behalf ofthe church, and the various ecclesiastical council convened, were meant to protect the orthodox Catholic Church as the officially sanctioned religion of the Roman Empire. The imperial edicts that were issued, and the literature written by bishops, largely succeeded in defending the Catholic Church from perceived threats.

MA Program: History Sonoma State University Date:~

tv,," Acknowledgments

I would like to thank the following people for their support, dedication, and encouragement during the research and writing process ofthis thesis. Professor Judith

Abbott, chair ofthe thesis committee, for her support in guiding me through the complicated maze ofLate Antiquity, and for the many hours spent in revising, critiquing, and editing the many versions ofthis thesis. Professor William Poe, thesis committee member, for the helpful commentary he provided on Christianity in the ancient world which greatly expanded my knowledge ofhow Christianity worked. Professor Mary Halavais, thesis committee member, who has made me a better student ofhistory through her helpful commentary on my thesis. Finally, professor Michelle Jolly, for helping me organize and formulate my thesis proposal into its fmal form.

I have been fascinated with the subject ofRoman history since I was eleven years old. It all started when I stumbled upon a book my father owns called The Ruins ofPompeii. I was enthralled by the amazing pictures ofan ancient Roman city. My interest in the subject continued through my undergraduate years ofcollege. I decided that I wanted to pursue a career teaching the subject I love so much. That desire brought me to Sonoma State University.

While attending Sonoma State, I discovered the writings of Salvian of Marseille. His writing inspired me to renew my interest in Roman history and to explore the world ofLate Antiquity in greater detail. Much to my delight, I discovered a world offamous individuals, wonderful literature, and vibrant cultures. I used to think ofthe world of late antiquity as a wasteland, the beginning ofa dark age in Europe in which all literature, history and civilization had stopped.

After studying Late Antiquity, I know that is not the case. It was a world of great change, great

v debates, and powerful men and women.

The focus ofthis project has changed several times since it began. I had originally planned to focus my thesis project on how resources were used by the church to give to the poor, but I couldn't fmd enough evidence. Professor Jolly pointed out a more challenging direction, which was to explore how the church used charity as a means of protecting the church. This led me to study how the church sought to protect itself from outsiders.

Professor Abbot has been my greatest influence into how I study and research history. I took three classes ofher during my time at Sonoma State. She has given me a model of studying history that I have incorporated into my own research. She directed me to some ofthe most helpful and favorite secondary sources I've read, mainly Peter Brown's The Rise of

Western Christendom.

As a result ofthis thesis project I have become more interested in the economic and social history ofthe later Roman Empire. As I have become more acquainted with the

Theodosian Codes, which shed light into the social and economic context offourth and fifth century Europe, I have become fascinated with the economic and social undercurrents that drove the changes that defmed Late Antiquity. What I have found so wonderful about history is there there is never a shortage ofquestions to be asked, and a never ending sense ofcuriosity within me to find the answers. I know that when I fmish my time at Sonoma State, this curiosity will spark a lifetime of learning.

v Table of Contents

Acknowledgments v

Introduction...... 1

Chapters

1. Charity and Change ...... 5

2. Barbarians '" ...... 30

3. Heretics ...... 51

4. Methods ofCharity...... 75

5. Conclusion...... 92

Bibliography ...... 97

vi 1

Introduction

The history ofLate Antiquity consists ofa dazzling array ofbattles, martyrs,

Kings, Emperors, armies, and religions. This is the age ofAlaric, Attila, Leo the Great,

Flavius Aetius, Theodosius, Constantine and Stilicho. This was the age ofthe great migrations where the Visigoths, the Vandals, Huns, and many others entered the Roman

Empire. The Romans were in a constant struggle with their barbarian neighbors to try either to keep them outside ofthe empire or when they couldn't, keep them contained within it. Warfare and violence were constant threats to the stability ofRoman order.

Religious controversies spread all over the Roman world. Religious leaders sought to find common ground among the different beliefs or violently opposed compromise. Violent opposition, however, always prevented reasonable compromise. Bishops and generals grew powerful, emperors less powerful. Peasants rebelled and barbarians plundered.

The Roman world was slow to adapt to the changing realities ofa post classical world.

This thesis shows how the Roman world dealt with these changing realities. The research has led me to the following theory: the Church responded to these perceived threats by trying to extirpate opposing religions and sects of Christianity, by marginalizing barbarians, and by mitigating and condemning apostasy. Overtime, the church had to make its enemies known in order to fight them: they were barbarians, heretics, and non­

Christians.

Romans were forced to grapple with this difficult question, what to do about foreign peoples immigrating into Roman territory? Long before the reign ofConstantine

I, it was decided that Rome's armies would go no farther than the Rhine and Danube

Rivers. But the power ofthe Roman Empire extended far beyond its borders. The relationship between the Roman Empire and its Germanic neighbors went from one of 2 open hostility to peaceful coexistence (with episodes ofwarfare) as trade brought Roman

and Germanic peoples into a mutually beneficial relationship. However during the fourth

and fifth centuries, when the peaceful coexistence between Romans and Germanic

peoples broke down and many tribes invaded the Empire, emperors thought they had

found an acceptable solution; they allowed some of these tribes to settle in certain areas

and become federated allies. The Roman military employed many barbarians to serve as

mercenaries within the Roman army. Despite this apparent solution, the plan didn't work

welL Barbarians :frequently rebelled against the Romans. One major problem was the

barbarians were always considered outsiders. They didn't share the same culture,

language, or religious beliefs as many Romans did. Romans were acutely aware ofthese

distinctions and viewed the barbarians with a great deal ofwariness. This was true for

many Christian bishops, who thought ofbarbarians as a real threat to the church.

Eventually, the question was answered by the barbarians themselves, who whether by

force or by default established their own kingdoms in Roman territory.

Before the end ofthe Christian persecutions, bishops were already asking the

question, what type ofChristianity should everyone follow and why? Bishops attempted

to define what acceptable belief was through the use ofcouncils. Despite the decisions

that were made, many refused to obey. But as far as the Roman Empire was concerned;

it had answered the question as to what type ofChristianity was acceptable. Therefore,

those who disbelieved in the acceptable fonn of Christianity were labeled heretics. All

heretics became targets for the emerging universal (Catholic) Church, because their

continued existence was a threat to their power. Even though the church enjoyed

imperial support, it still worked to extirpate opposing sects. Opposing sects of

Christianity didn't consider themselves heretical at all and in fact directed much criticism 3 against the sponsored fonn ofChristianity. Also, these so called heretical sects enjoyed

widespread popular support in many parts ofEurope.

For the barbarians, assimilation into the empire was not easy, nor was it for

Romans. Sometimes tensions erupted into outright violence. Inevitably, xenophobia was

a motivation to keep barbarians marginalized. Christian bishops were not exempted from

this. Many asked, could barbarians be Christians? Writers in Late Antiquity debated

whether if so called uncivilized barbarians could ever be Christians. On the one hand, by

the beginning ofthe fourth century, many barbarians had already considered themselves

to be Christians. The Goths had been converted, and soon other groups would follow.

The problem was, these outsiders were not really Christians to the Catholic Church.

Much ofthe contemporary literature written by bishops contains scathing remarks about

the nature ofthese barbarian outsiders. As far as they were concerned, heretics weren't

Christian at all, but more or less infidels. This created a very tense situation and begged

the following question: what should be done when infidels come into contact with

Catholic congregations in Roman territory? The migrations ofthe late fourth and early

fifth century exposed the vulnerability of the Catholic Church to outside influences, and

the church attempted to maintain its position as the only true religion of the Roman

Empire.

Christianity fundamentally altered the social consciousness ofpeople regarding an

important principle, how much ofa role should the church take in caring for the poor?

Based on the writings ofboth secular and religious writers, we know the church took an

active part in caring for the poor, but the reasons that they did so occasionally had

motives that extended beyond the scope ofChristian ethics and theology. While there

were plenty ofpoor people to support through the use of charity, there were specific 4 circumstances in which poor people in Western Europe had to contend with. One of which was, being charitable towards the poor would produce members loyal to the

Catholic church, and not to anyone else. 5

Chapter One

Charity and Change

Between 312 and 512, Christian bishops fundamentally transformed cultural traditions ofpre-Christian Europe due to their understanding new and old testament ethics and their Christian religious duty. The church imposed certain behavioral expectations on bishops and believers and this affected the idea ofcharity as a religious duty. Its function will be compared with the notion of giving as was practiced by pagans

in Europe. There are two primary reasons why Christian congregations were exhorted to

social charity. First, there were theological considerations. Charity could be used to

purge the soul of sins and be reconciled with God. Secondly, the use ofcharity was a

means ofprotecting the church's interests. In a relatively short period oftime,

Christianity grew from a small marginalized religion to the official religion ofthe Roman

Empire. Despite the dissolution ofthe Western Empire during the closing years ofthe

fifth century, Christianity endured within the successor barbarian kingdoms of western

Europe.

How Charity Worked in a Pagan Empire

In the polytheistic world ofthe Roman Empire, it was a common expectation for

rich pagan landowners, who frequently served as administrators on city councils, to be

"lovers oftheir cities".1 This meant that rich elites ofthe Roman world would voluntarily

donate some oftheir wealth to their city in which they resided for the purposes of

adorning it with a new building for public use. The primary motivation of such giving

would be to bolster the personal prestige ofthe giver or to gain political support ofthe

residents. 2 While polytheistic religions ofancient Europe lacked any special dogmatic

1 Peter Brown, Poverty and Leadership in the Later Roman Empire, (Hanover, NH: University Press of New England, 2002),5. 1 Ibid, 4. 6 tradition ofgiving aid to poor people, direct contributions to destitute people did happen in the polytheistic world mostly in the form ofgrain doles. Food shortage was a frequent occurrence in the ancient world and emperors, seeking to prevent rioting or usurpation, sought to keep the people of Rome fed. A food shortage during the reign ofEmperor

Antoninus Pius (138-161 CE), prompted the emperor to use his personal wealth by buying an emergency supply ofwine, oil and grain and had it distributed to the people for free. 3 But since pagans generally considered those who couldn't enjoy a privileged life of leisure and culture as being poor, contributions made to help people enjoy such buildings was considered an act ofcharity.

This did not mean however that the destitute and penniless, the real poor according to Christian Bishops, did not have any recourse. It was common in pagan culture for the poorest members of society to gather around pagan temples in cities to petition the city for assistance, and rich patrons had a responsibility to listen to their demands but not necessarily do anything for them.4 A patron's real responsibility was to be a defender ofthe city's interests. Unless a patron wanted to lose support ofhis clientele, he would have to be responsible for the people inside the city.

The praiseworthiness ofcharity spoken about by bishops in late antiquity was never lost to Christian congregations. Bishops and occasionally emperors would preach about the need to be charitable. An interesting argument developed out ofthis position.

Bishops exhorted their congregations to be charitable not only to the poor and destitute, but also to the church.

3 Peter Garnsey, Famine and Food Supply in the Graeco-Roman World: Responses to Risk and Crisis, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988),225. 4 Ibid, 78,80. 7

Church and State in Late Antiquity

From the time of Constantine to the end ofthe Western Empire in 476, the church

and the government collaborated on religious policy issues. This symbiotic relationship

gave the church a strong advantage over other Christian sects. But the church had never

anticipated the demise ofthe Roman Empire.s Few imagined a world in which the two

would not coexist. But the sack ofRome in 410 sent shock waves through the Roman

world and soon the church had to come to terms with the realization that the world of

church and Roman state may not be able to support and protect each other forever. 6 As

the power ofthe state waned, however, the cultural and religious influence that the elite

enjoyed did not necessarily vanish with it. Rather, it adapted to the changing social and

cultural realities. Roman politicians and bureaucrats, seeking to preserve their political

and social power beyond the reaches ofthe Roman imperial government, sought to be

ordained as clergy in the Catholic Church.7 Former Roman civil servants and bureaucrats

became bishops, and tended to have more freedom exercising power outside ofthe

confines ofthe rigid structures of Roman government. 8

Bishops had many important responsibilities in their capacity as leaders of

congregations. The clergy had always been encouraged to be superior examples of

Christian behavior. In the New Testament st. Paul's first letter to Timothy mentions

rules for Presbyters to follow. Paul encouraged Presbyters saying, "Do not lay hands too

readily on anyone, and do not share in another's sins. Keep yourself pure.'>9 Bishops

were also expected to be fishers ofmen, and convert people to the church. "They should

, R.P.C. Hanson, "The Reaction of the Church to the Collapse ofthe Western Roman Empire in the Fifth Century," Vigilae Christianae, 26 (1972), 272. 6 Ibid, 274. 7 Charles Henry Coster, "Christianity and the Invasions: Synesius of Cyrene," The Classical Journal, 55 (1960),291. 8 R.P.C. Hanson, "The Reaction ofthe Church to the Collapse of the Western Roman Empire in the Fifth Century," 280. 91 Timothy 5:22-23 NSRV (New Oxford Bible). 8 be above reproach and to be supporters ofthe poor. lO "In the centuries following the writings of st. Paul, bishops expanded on this early demand of ethical behavior. Rules and regulations were imposed on bishops so that they could be held to account for misdeeds. In the turbulent years of the early fifth century, the Orthodox Church sought to consolidate its unity as a religious institution and to create a unified set of rules for its clergy to follow. The publication of the Apostolic Constitutions (c.400) and its subsequent adoption was intended, among other things, to provide guidance to bishops on how orphans and widows should be cared for:

Besides, 0 bishop, be mindful ofthe needy, both reaching out your helping hand and making provision for them as the steward of God, distributing seasonably the oblations to every one ofthem, to the widows, the orphans, the friendless, and those tried with affliction.II

The third book ofthe Apostolic Constitutions contains a passage on who was eligible to receive aid.

For what ifsome are neither widows nor widowers, but stand in need ofassistance, either through poverty or some disease, or the maintenance of a great number ofchildren? It is your duty to oversee all people, and to take care ofthem all. For they that give gifts do not oftheir own head give them to the widows, but barely bring them in, calling them free-will offerings, that so you who know those that are in affliction may as a good steward give them their portion ofthe gift. For God knows the giver, though you distribute it to those in want when he is absent. And he has the reward ofwell-doing, but you have the blessedness ofhaving dispensed it with a good conscience. But tell them who was the giver, that they may pray for him by name. For it is our duty to do good to all men, not fondly preferring one or another, whoever they be. For the Lord says: Give to every one that asks ofyou.1l

On orphans, the constitutions instruct bishops to be "solicitous about their maintenance" and to bring them into the community to take care ofthem:

Do you therefore, 0 bishops, be solicitous about their maintenance, being in nothing wanting to them; exhibiting to the orphans the care ofparents; to the widows the care of husbands; to those ofsuitable age, marriage; to the artificer, work; to the unable, commiseration; to the strangers, an house; to the hungry, food; to the thirsty, drink; to the naked, clothing; to the sick, visitation; to the prisoners, assistance. Besides these, have a

10 I Timothy 6:14,18. II Apostolic Constitutions, 3.1, tr. James Donaldson; quoted in Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 7 (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1886, accessed 30 January 2010); available from http://www.newadvent.orglfathersl07153.htm; Internet. 111bid, 3.1.4. 9

greater care ofthe orphans, that nothing may be wanting to them; and that as to the maiden, till she arrives at the age of marriage, and you give her in marriage to a brother: to the young man assistance, that he may learn a trade, and may be maintained by the advantage arising from it; that so, when he is dextrous in the management of it, he may thereby be enabled to buy himself the tools ofhis trade, that so he may no longer burden any ofthe brethren, or their sincere love to him, but may support himself: for certainly he is a happy man who is able to support himself, and does not take up the place ofthe orphan, the stranger, and the widow.13

As leaders of Christian communities, it was very important for bishops to be men ofthe highest ethical standing.

Upon this account, therefore, 0 bishop, endeavor to be pure in your actions, and to adorn your place and dignity, which is that ofone sustaining the character ofGod among men, as being set over all men, over priests, kings, rulers, fathers, children, teachers, and in general over all those who are subject to you: and so sit in the Church when you speak, as having authority to judge offenders. 14

The constitutions demand that bishops regulate the behavior oftheir parishoners. This meant bishops had to be good judges ofcharacter and regulate those who are "offenders" and those who are "penitents."u

Therefore, 0 bishop, judge with authority like God, yet receive the penitent; for God is a God ofmercy. Rebuke those that sin, admonish those that are not converted, exhort those that stand to persevere in their goodness, receive the penitent; for the Lord God has promised with an oath to afford remission to the penitent for what things they have done amiss. 16

These two extracts show that bishops were given a lot ofpower in regulating the personal actions and beliefs ofthe congregation. It also suggests that the church created and published this document in a very turbulent time in ecclesiastical history as evidenced by the numerous demands placed on bishops on how not to behave, suggesting the church was having a hard time maintaining discipline within its own clergy, or possibly losing apostates to other competing Christian sects, thus posing a threat to the church's standing.

The Apostolic Constitutions contain a prohibition against bishops taking bribes, which shows that the authors ofthe document perceived bribery to be problematic enough to

13 Apostolic Constitutions, 4.1.2 14 Ibid. 15 Apostolic Constitutions, 2.3.11-12. 16 Ibid. 10 warrant the inclusion ofsuch prohibition and demands that bishops "shall not receive gifts against anyone's life; for gifts do blind the eyes of the wise, and pervert the words ofthe righteous.,,17

Book six ofthe constitutions demands that bishops, "avoid the sad and dangerous and most atheistical heresies, eschewing them as fire that bums those that come near to it.

Avoid also schisms: for it is neither lawful to turn one's mind towards wicked heresies..."18 Nevertheless, the church clearly meant to define those who are offenders as either one who is a believer in a heretical teaching or one who has sinned against the church. In the second case, the bishop had the power over the individual to admit him or her back into the congregation or to expel. For as the bible says, "Whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."19

But the Apostolic Constitutions do not directly name specific groups it considers heretical. What are given are references to beliefs held by other Christian sects which it deems anathema. In book six ofthe Apostolic Constitutions, there is a passage which attacks atheism, and those who don't believe in the resurrection, in the immortality ofthe soul and in "judgment or retribution."zo Later on the document attacks specific beliefs held by other religious groups:

Some ofthem say that there are many gods, some that there are three gods without beginning, some that there are two unbegotten gods, some that there are innwnerable lEons. Further, some ofthem teach that men are not to marry, and must abstain from flesh and wine, affirming that marriage, and the begetting of children, and the eating of certain foods, are abominable; that so, as sober persons, they may make their wicked opinions to be received as worthy ofbelief.21

17 Ibid, 2.3.9. lBIbid 6.1.1. 19 Ibid 2.3.12, and Matthew 18:18. 20 Apostolic Constitutions, 6.2.10. 21 Ibid 11

The reference to "two unbegotten Gods" and "innumerable Aeons" is an attack on

Gnostic theology which divided the universe between the existence oftwo gods which were, in terms ofGnostic belief, directly opposed to each other. Accordingly, Gnostics believed that the God ofthe spirit was a good and loving God, and the God ofthe flesh was an evil God. The document's reference to the belief that "men are not to marry" is most likely a criticism on the beliefs of the Iberian priest Priscillian, whose religious sect was deemed heretical by the Catholic Church in part for its practice ofextreme asceticism and the forbiddance ofmarriage. Priscillian died in the later fourth century, thus this document can be dated from at least the second half ofthe fourth century.22

Peasants and Landowners in Late Antiquity

In the Roman Empire, there had always been a visible disparity between rich and poor. Economic and political circumstances expanded this disparity in late antiquity to the extent that much of the rhetoric coming from Christian bishops is a reaction to the growing poverty ofthe peasant working class and the indulgent materialism ofthe elites, who still controlled a significant amount ofwealth and property despite the troubles of the fifth century. Studying the changing relationship between rich and poor will put the

Christian response to the plight ofthe poor into a clearer perspective.

Signs ofeconomic decline were evident in Western Europe well before the fifth century. The constant warfare which plagued the rich countryside ofGaul and Spain led to the destruction ofimportant settlements.23 The large trading routes that had enriched the Roman economy collapsed, leaving behind a smaller more regionalized economy.

Previously, long distance trading was a hallmark ofRoman economic expansion. For

22Charles Freeman, A.D. 381: Heretics, Pagans and the Dawn 0/the Monotheistic State, (New York: The Overlook Press, 2008), 142. 23Bryan Ward-Perkins, The Falla/Rome and the End a/Civilization. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 13-17 passim. 12 example, garum, a fish sauce exported from present day Portugal starting in the first century, was unavailable by the fourth. Whatever long distance exchanges occurred during this time seems to have been done only to meet the demands of the state, such as the transfer ofgrain and olive oil from Carthage to Rome to feed the masses.24 Merchants and traders tended to be government officials responsible for provisioning military units, not businessmen interested in earning a profit. Taxing agricultural surpluses in the provinces was a means ofredistributing wealth to meet the demands ofthe military, and commercial transactions declined into local phenomena. Wealth evaporated, leaving it mostly concentrated in the rich landowning class of the empire. Consequently, the peasant class, either fleeing from barbarian invasions or abandoning their farms due to oppressive taxation, sought protection from the rich landowning class. This highlights the changing economic relationship between the rich and the poor.

The elite landowning class had for centuries enjoyed the ownership oflarge villas that dotted the Roman countryside, and the land had traditionally been worked by slaves.

By the fifth century, the large pool ofslaves that worked such villas were a thing ofthe

past and the rich turned to the poor peasant class to replace them. 25 Thus the peasant

class bore the brunt ofthe hard labor that was pervasive on the large landed estates ofthe

wealthy.

The Roman tax policy oflate antiquity was another factor involved in the plight

ofthe poor. While the exact function ofthe late Roman tax system remains obscure,

there is enough extant evidence that suggests the overwhelmingly agrarian economy of

Europe was the major source oftax revenue for the state. Imperial tax policy demanded

24 J.T. Petla, "The Mobilization ofState Olive Oil in Roman Africa: the Evidence ofLate Fourth Century Ostraca from Carthage," Carthage Papers. Journal ofRoman Archeology Supplement 28. (porsmouth: RI, 1998). 2~ Innes, Matthew, Introduction to Early Medieval Western Europe, 300-900: The Sword, the Plough and The Book, (New York: Routledge, 2007),33. 13 payment oftax in cash; tax assessments were performed on landed estates every five years beginning in 287 under the reign ofDiocletian. 26 One document discovered shows that the state taxed up to ten percent of the harvest. 27 Other taxes were levied by local officials, who tended to be much more flexible in terms of payment, whether it was in cash or kind. One problem the peasants faced was that the landowners they worked for also tended to be councilmen for the towns they lived near. It was the landowners' job to levy local taxes while being landlords oftheir estates at the same time. Consequently, peasants paid their taxes and their rent to the same people.28 Sometimes this situation was too much for the peasantry to bear and peasants would abandon their farms to join barbarians or rebels groups in the countryside. One Catholic bishop noted that the problem had gotten so out of control that the situation seemed hopeless:

Who can find words to describe the enormity ofour present situation? Now when the Roman commonwealth, already extinct or at least drawing its last breath in that one comer where it still seems to retain some life, is dying , strangled by the cords oftaxation as ifby the hands ofbrigands, still a great number ofwealthy men are found the burden of taxes is borne by the poor; that is, very many rich men are found whose taxes are murdering the poor.29

The central government didn't seem to care. In an effort to maintain tax revenue, the government passed laws tying peasants to their land and requiring the sons of peasants to remain where their fathers worked. This policy in effect, as Innes has noted, cemented "the dominance oflocal elites, who were simultaneously tax collectors and landlords for their tenants ..."30 This style oftaxation made it tremendously difficult for the poor peasant class to thrive. While still theoretically free peasants (and not slaves), they worked the land to try to ensure their own survival despite the heavy tax burden from the state and from the landlords. This did however widen social divisions between

26 Ibid, 31. 27 Ibid, 31. 28 Ibid, 32. 29Salvian. Dei Gubernatione Dei, tr. Eva Sanford, (New York: Octagon Books, 1966), 107. 30 Matthew Innes, Introduction to the Early Medieval Ages, The Sword, The Plough, and the Book, 32. 14 rich and poor oflate antiquity. It is no coincidence that at this time more writings from bishops tend to emphasize the necessity ofalmsgiving and the importance ofgiving to those who were not blessed with material wealth, particularly peasants.

Urban Life and Christianity

The urban centers ofthe Roman world have tended to be romanticized as places ofculture and wealth as shown by the ruins ofplaces like Pompeii, Herculaneum,

Carthage and Rome. While perhaps the ruling elite ofRoman cities such as these did display culture and wealth, the vast majority ofurban dwellers in the ancient world did not enjoy the fruits of culture as men like Cicero and Augustine did. The reality for most urban residents was a life ofsevere hardship, disease, filth, crime, poverty, and fear. For many ofthe one million inhabitants ofthe city of Rome at the beginning ofthe fourth century, this meant living in crowded and dingy apartments, violent street gangs patrolling the streets, pestilence, and a normally short life span. Rodney Stark notes that the city of Rome itself most likely had a very high population density to accommodate the estimated one million citizens who lived there. 31 As a result, outbreaks ofdangerous diseases were frequent, and the threat of fire constant. Food scarcity and rioting was a constant fear ofpublic officials and emperors made sure the people were fed to prevent

riots. The Roman government used the grain dole for centuries as a means ofpreventing

this. This grain dole continued into the fifth century but seems to have ended around the

year 440, probably because the Vandals sacked Carthage and wrested control ofNorth

Africa away from the Roman Empire. There is no evidence that an alternative way of

distributing grain to the poor was implemented by the government after this. The

sanitation system in Rome, while complex and sophisticated for the time, was probably

inadequate to account for all ofthe waste generated by a large, tightly packed city and

31 Rodey Stark, The Rise o/Christianity. (San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1997), 116. 15 probably most waste was simply dumped into the streets. This led to conditions for disease to spread easily, especially in a population with no understanding of contamination and germs. Thus the mortality rate ofpeople inside of cities was staggering and in order for the population to remain at a particular level, the dead needed to be quickly replaced by newcomers from outside ofRome. Immigration into the cities must have been constant. The high mortality rate meant that there was a large number of orphans and widows who needed care. It is under these conditions that the church became more involved with giving assistance.

It is generally accepted by historians and archaeologists that the population of the city ofRome started to decline at around the second halfofthe fourth century, and continued to do so for several centuries following. These problems were not exclusive to

Rome. Urban centers allover the empire, were subject to the high mortality rate

described previously. The evidence for such a decline will help put the church's position

as a charitable institution into perspective. Since the church was an active participant to

the social, economic, and political conditions present in late antiquity, a case can be made

from the accompanying evidence about social and economic change and from the

writings ofbishops, that there was a larger proportion of impoverished people all over

Europe to look after.

Church Fathen and Charity

The church fathers ofthe early medieval period believed that people who had

been blessed with material wealth did not in fact own those possessions, but were rather

stewards and dispensers of it. The rich, they believed, had a special responsibility to

freely give it away to the poor. As a result, the hoarding ofwealth was condemned by

many bishops and living a simplistic and humble life was a praised virtue. Within this 16 context ofevaporating wealth and economic decline, church fathers exhorted their congregations to use charity and alms as a means ofrestoring the Christian people to their supposed high moral and ethical standing with God. Many ofthe historical events that are known to have happened informed their views on ethical and moral problems related to Christianity. This was due to the belief that much ofwhat was happening to

Europe was being interpreted as being the result of an angry Judeo-Christian God punishing the world for their sins.

St. Cyprian was one such man who wrote extensively on charity and supported his

beliefs with many citations from the New and Old Testament. His writings are more like

an exhortation to the congregation to be willing to give generously to the poor. His

beliefs were aligned with the New Testament notion that through the use ofcharity one

could be purged oftheir sins by God. In addition, showing charity to the poor was a

manifestation of divine mercy, a claim he substantiates by mentioning the story ofthe

rich man in the GospeI,32 Cyprian's work, On Works and Alms, uses the term alms rather

than charity. The Greek word for Alms, eleemosyne, means pity or mercy, and its use

reflects his belief that Christians should have mercy on the poor. Cyprian also plunged

into the faith and good works debate. It is clear by reading his work on alms that Cyprian

finds faith and works as one and the same thing. Ifone has faith in Jesus Christ then

good works must necessarily be done by him or her, or else the faith is in vain. This is

not Cyprian's idea. The idea had originated from the letter ofJames in the New

Testament. 33 But Cyprian was a well read and very intelligent thinker and he also

incorporated Old Testament writings into his theological understanding ofcharity. The

32 Ibid, 8.3. n James 2, NRSV (New Oxford Bible). 17 use ofthe Old Testament to substantiate newer Christian claims was rather uncommon, but Cyprian displays his aptitude in theology by citing the book ofIsaiah:

Break your bread to the hungry, and bring the poor that are without a home into your house. Ifyou see the naked, clothe him; and despise not the household ofyour own seed. Then shall your light break forth in season, and your garments shall arise speedily; and righteousness shall go before you, and the glory of God shall surround you. Then shall you cry, and God shall hear you; while yet you are speaking, He shall say, Here I am. l4

Cyprian includes this passage to show his audience that God should be appeased through

charitable acts to expunge sins.

Cyprian, in keeping with the anti~materialist tendency of late antique Christian

bishops, reminded his congregation that when it comes time to either save money or save

the soul, the choice should be easy. While decrying those who hoard money and goods he

explains:

You are captives and slaves ofyour money; you are bound with the chains and bonds of covetousness; and you whom Christ had once loosed, are once more in chains. You keep your money, which, when kept. does not keep you. You heap up a patrimony which burdens you with its weight; and you do not remember what God answered to the rich man. 3S

Cyprian doesn't believe that riches and wealth are much good for those who possess it

unless it is used for charity. He even believed that non Christians shouldn't be excluded

from Christian alms giving:

For whatever is ofGod is common in our use; nor is any one excluded from His benefits and His gifts, so as to prevent the whole human race from enjoying equally the divine goodness and liberality. Thus the day equally enlightens, the sun gives radiance, the rain moistens, the wind blows, and the sleep is one to those that sleep, and the splendor ofthe stars and ofthe moon is common. In which example ofequality, he who, as a possessor in the earth, shares his returns and his fruits with the fraternity, while he is common and just in his gratuitous bounties, is an imitator ofGod the Father. 36

34 Isaiah 58: 1-9 NRSV. lS Cyprian, On Works andAlms. 13, tr. Robert Ernest Wallis; quoted in Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 5, (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1886, accessed 30 January 2010); available from http://www.newadventorg/fathersl050708.htm; Internet 36 Cyprian, On Works andAlms, 25. 18

A View From Rome

The city ofRome in the middle ofthe fifth century was still one of the largest urban centers in the Roman World. Despite decades ofdecline and the violent sacking of

Rome by the Goths, the city persevered. The Senate was still intact, but the emperors had moved the central government away from Rome and re-settled in the northern Italian city ofRavenna. The power ofthe bishop ofRome was beginning to fill the void left by the emperors. Leo I was elected Bishop of Rome in 440 and his aptitude as a writer and orator served his papacy well. His papacy was also very eventful, Rome was sacked again during his reign, Attila the Hun invaded Italy as well. He also reigned during a time ofpolitical upheaval in Western Europe, as the Western Empire forfeited provinces to several usurpers and barbarian tribes.

Leo had much to say about the importance of charity. In an extant sermon, Leo preached that the food harvested by mankind is a gift from God, and those who are blessed to have food should share this great gift of God by giving some of it to those who don't have it.

Whatever therefore the cornfields, the vineyards and the olive groves have borne for man's purposes, all this God in His bounteous goodness has produced: for under the varying condition ofthe elements He has mercifully aided the uncertain toils of the husbandmen so that wind, and rain, cold and heat. day and night might serve our needs. For men's methods would not have sufficed to give effect to their works, had not God given the increase to their wonted plantings and waterings. And hence it is but godly and just that we too should help others with that which the Heavenly Father has mercifully bestowed on us. For there are full many, who have no fields, no vineyards, no olive­ groves, whose wants we must provide out ofthe store which God has given, that they too with us may bless God for the richness ofthe earth and rejoice at its possessors having received things which they have shared also with the poor and the stranger. 31

Although this writing suggests that Leo believed charity is useful from a theological perspective, he maintained the belief that charitable giving would ensure etemallife. 38

31 Leo I, Sermons, 16.1, tr. Charles Lett Feltoe; quoted in Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers. r Series. Vol. 12 (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1895); available from http://www.newadvent.oqifathersl360316.htm; Internet. 38 Ibid, 16.2. 19

Those "who have no fields ... " is a reference by Leo to the urban poor in Rome and in the surrounding Italian countryside. This area around Rome had suffered through several destructive barbarian invasions, and the economic situation was in sharp decline in the mid fifth century.

Leo based other preaching on charity directly from scripture. He expounds on the second coming of Christ by referencing the story found in the Book ofRevelations and reiterates his belief that Christ will judge everyone and separate "the guiltless from the guilty."39 He goes on to add:

... and when the sons ofpiety, their works ofmercy reviewed, have received the Kingdom prepared for them, the unjust shall be upbraided for their utter barrenness, and those on the left having naught in common with those on the right, shall by the condemnation of the Almighty Judge be cast into the fire prepared for the torture ofthe devil and his angels, with him to share the punishment, whose will they choose to do.4O

He thus makes the case that good works will earn one's place in paradise. Such a view

supported the orthodox belief that faith and works go hand in hand. To hammer home

this point to his congregation, he uses fear to encourage the congregation to show

Christian generosity to the poor and needy and to perform acts ofmercy. He states,

"Who then would not tremble at this doom ofeternal torment?,,41 Leo made it clear to his

congregation how one can earn eternal life with God: "The feeding ofthe needy is to

purchase money ofthe heavenly kingdom and the free dispenser ofthings temporal is

made the heir ofthings eterna1.,,42

Leo was also a keen social commentator and understood the cultural context from

which he preached. In another sermon, he adjusts his preaching to focus on the riches of

the elite within the congregation. This particular sermon urges the congregation to see

wealth as something that is not to be sought for its own sake, and not to be selfishly

39 Leo I, Sermons. 9.2. 40 Ibid 41 Ibid 42 Ibid 20 hoarded, but rather to see riches and other earthly possessions as proceeds from God's bounty.43 These gifts are meant to be used wisely, and the proper use ofthe gifts of God are to help give to those who are not blessed with such gifts, otherwise "the material for good work should become an occasion of sin.'~ Therefore, Leo suggests that wealth is a good asset when in the hands of the benevolent, but a source of vanity when in the hands of the wicked.

Leo summarizes his teaching about the Christian life in a short sermon in which he outlines the three basic duties of a Christian. To Leo, "there are three things which most belong to religious actions, namely prayer, fasting, and almsgiving ... ,,4S He explains that through prayer we "propitiate God, through fasting we mitigate our lusts, and through almsgiving we redeem our Sins.,,46 Leo took a practical approach to religious practice, and believed it to be a useful way to gain eternal life.

Salvian ofMarseille and Southern Gaul

Of all ofthe authors previously mentioned, none is more valuable in studying the thought process ofa later Empire bishop in the west than the fifth century bishop of

Marseille, Salvian. His greatest work, De Gubernatione Dei (On the Government of

God), was written between the years 439 and 451 and is the greatest source we have regarding not only ecclesiastical matters in Gaul in the early to mid fifth century, but the social and economic matters that were important to Salvian. Despite the warfare, his diocese in southern Gaul was still a fairly rich area with a thriving landowning, elitist class. His diocese was becoming less and less connected to the imperial government at

Ravenna, mostly due to the shifting allegiances ofthe landowning elite away from the

43 Leo I, Sermons, 10.1 44 Ibid. 45 Leo I, Sermons, 12.4. 46 Ibid. 21 imperial government and over to the increasingly powerful barbarian overlords. Portions ofSalvian's writing lament this realization and mention the threat ofbarbarian warlords.

The situation in southern Gaul degenerated as the church had to accommodate the ever present barbarian kings who were now exercising political and military control. The

Visigoths had by the year 439 firmly established themselves as overlords offormerly

Roman controlled territory in the regions near Marseille. The Burgundians had been settled in an area about 200km north ofMarseille, and the Huns, serving as Roman mercenaries under the command ofthe Roman General Aetius a decade before the invasion ofAttila the Hun, were waging a bitter war against both the Burgundians and the

Visigoths.

Salvian's writings reflect the emotions commonly associated with this level of conflict. The reader can easily note his despair, hopelessness, and pessimism as he sought to explain why these horrible events were happening in what is supposed to be a

Christian world. Rather than taking the conventional approach ofmost contemporary bishops ofblaming heretics and barbarians for all ofthe world's problems, Salvian takes an entirely different path, and blames the orthodox Christians and the rich landowning elites for not living up to the teachings ofthe gospel ofChrist. All ofthe terrible things happening around them could best be explained as God's judgment ofhuman actions, since much ofthe Roman world was, according to Salvian, infected with sinfulness.47

Salvian discussed his perceived immorality ofChristians by relying on biblical ethics found in both the Old and the New Testaments to argue that few, ifany, are in fact following the moral commandments ofGod. To Salvian, this explains why bad things are happening to good people, and good things happening to evil people.

41 Salvian, De Gubernatione Dei, tr. Eva Sanford, (New York: Octagon Books, 1966),4. 22

Who obeys his order to be content with a single tunic? Who thinks the command to walk unshod possible or even tolerable to follow? These precepts then I pass over. For here our faith, in which we trust, falls shorts, so that we judge superfluous the precepts the Lord intended for our benefit. "Love your enemies," said the savior, "do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you.» Who could keep all these commandments-ra

This lack offidelity bothered Salvian to the point that he considered those who believe that they are pure and holy to be delusional and concluded that ''the offences ofour iniquity are piled high by a false assumption ofrighteousness."49 To distinguish between these false Christians and true Christians, Salvian wrote, "He who calls himself a

Christian ought to walk as Christ walked."50 A good way to measure the authenticity ofa good Christians is to see how one makes use ofworldly goods. He warns against

Christians who fake the virtuous act ofrenouncing their wealth.

Those who make a show ofrenouncing their wealth do not appear to make their renunciation complete, and those who are thought to be carrying their cross so carry it that they gain more honor in the name of the cross than suffering in its pass ion. 51

This was followed with strong criticism against the rich landowning class, which held prominent positions ofpower in Southern Gaul. Salvian's comments on the rich must have been hugely controversial at the time his book was published, but today they are of great historical interest because oftheir implications.

Salvian launches into his discussion about the rich by juxtaposing the social and religious situation ofslavery to that ofthe rich landowning class. When he posed the rhetorical question, "Why do we wonder that God strikes us for our sins, when we ourselves strike our slaves for theirs?" the answer to him is obvious. 52 It is because ofa fundamental hypocrisy perpetrated by the rich which provides the answer: what the rich see as being evil, they do as well. For example, slaves were considered to be rogue

41 Ibid, 81. 49 Ibid. so Ibid, 82. SI Ibid, 82-83. Sl Salvian, De Gubernatione Dei 4.1.101 23 agents ofthievery, but according to Salvian their masters are thieves too for robbing the slaves oftheir fair treatment. According to Salvian, slaves steal not because they are inherently thieves, but because they are trying to stay alive. 53 He thus faults the rich for being hypocrites. He expands on this point:

But you who are noble, you who are rich, who have an abundance of all good things, who ought to honor God the more because you enjoy his benefits endlessly. let us see whether your actions are, I shall not say holy, but even harmless. What rich man, to repeat my former questions, save only a few, is not stained by every sort of evil deed?S4

He continues with this accusatory tone by adding: "Ifa slave is a runaway, so are you also, rich and noble though you are; for all men who abandon the law of the Lord are running away from their master."5S For an influential bishop to say such things about the rich is dangerous. But from his comments he makes it clear that there is plenty to blame on the rich for the present troubles. There was a tradition in the Church that made bishops consider worldly goods to be gifts from God (Leo had written about this idea and

Salvian certainly would have agreed). Salvian's bluntness on the issue stands in stark contrast with other bishops. He sees the rich landowners to be a class out ofcontrol and their behavior must be corrected lest God should punish them all. This idea is also reflected in the manner in which "high officials" have been treating the poorer regions of the empire. S6 For Salvian, there is no clear cut distinction between rich landowner and high official. But there is a clear distinction between what is morally acceptable and what is not in terms ofhow the state functions when dealing with the poor.

Salvian's writings provide important evidence which suggests the imperial government was notorious for confiscating property from those who couldn't afford to pay taxes. Such property was handed over to the state, which sometimes meant

S3lbid .4.3, 102-103. S4lbid. 4.3 103-104. ss Ibid. 104. s'lbid. 105. 24 distributing property to state officials. Such a practice enraged Salvian for both ethical and religious reasons. First, this practice violated his notion ofbenevolence to the poor.

Good Christians should help the poor and not steal from them. Second, men like this were warned about in scripture:

How often do you find a rich man's neighbor who is not himself poor, who is really secure in his acts and position? Indeed by the encroachments of over powerful men, weaklings lose their property or even their freedom along with their goods, so that it was not without reason that the Sacred Word alluded to them both saying: "Wild asses are the prey oftions in the wilderness; so poor men are a pasture for the rich." And yet not only the poor but almost the whole human race is suffering this tyranny ... Nothing causes greater devastation in the poorer states than the high officials. S7

He cites the destruction ofmuch of the western world, including the Spanish provinces, North Africa, and Gaul as proof that the rich are to blame for mining the good standing Christians used to enjoy with God.

As a consequence of this reality, many peasants abandoned their farms and joined barbarian tribesmen or adopted a life ofbrigandage. Salvian's statement about the declining fortunes of the Roman Empire can be corroborated by another contemporary bishop, Orosius, who commented that "there are certain Romans among them who prefer to sustain poverty in freedom among the barbarians than the constant oppression oftaxation among the Romans."'! This phenomenon of

Romans shifting their allegiance to barbarian warlords did in fact occur in

Western Europe during the first and second tumultuous decades of the fifth century when Gaul and Spain were plundered and Romans. choosing to submit to the rule and protection ofbarbarians, rather than endure the oppressive Roman state, changed their loyalties accordingly. This was noted by Salvian when he commented on a rebellious group of peasant farmers in Gaul known as the

Bagaudae. Poor farmers, unable to endure the large burden of taxation by the

S71bid, 4.4.105. sa Orosius, Historiae adversum paganos, VIT.4I.7, quoted in Sanford, On the Government ofGod, 106. 25

Roman government, abandoned their farms and joined the rebellious Bagaudae or a barbarian group where according to 8alvian, ''they seek among the barbarians the Roman mercy, since they cannot endure the barbarous mercilessness they find among the Romans."s9

Roman bishops were concerned about the actions ofChristians in earthly life because oftheir conviction ofwhat judgment will come to them in heavenly life. But this begs the question, If God loved everybody, why does he allow the upright to wallow in poverty and the wicked ofindulge in luxury? It was not uncommon for bishops to believe that earthly goods were blessings from God.

8alvian insisted that God does punish those living on earth.60 8t. Ambrose of

Milan (d. 397), took a different approach to answering this question. Ambrose,

writing in response to those who charged that God doesn't care about human

affairs because there are wicked people who are "rich, joyous, full ofhonors, and

powerful and those who are "in wanf' are upright", wrote in his treatise On the

Duty ofthe Clergy, that God indeed does take great interest in human affairs in

the earthly life. 61 He warns that although the rich might seem blessed and upright,

the fayade is most likely hiding the truth oftheir chaos:

Why do sinners have abundance of wealth and riches, and fare sumptuously, and have no grief or sorrow; while the upright are in want, and are punished by the loss ofwives or children? Now, that parable in the Gospel ought to satisfy persons like these; for the rich man was clothed in purple and fine linen, and dined sumptuously every day; but the beggar, full ofsores, used to gather the crumbs ofhis table. After the death ofthe two, however, the beggar was in Abraham's bosom in rest; the rich man was in torment. Is it not plain from this that rewards and punishments according to deserts await one after death?62

~9 Salvian, 5.5 141. 601bid, 119. 61St. Ambrose, On the Dutiea o/the Clergy, 1.13.47, tr. H. de Romestin, E. de Romestin, and H.T.F. Duckworth; quoted in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, r series, Vol. 10, (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing co., accessed 30 January 2010); available from http://www.newadvent.orglfathersl34011.htm); Internet. 62 Ibid, 15.57. 26

Ambrose's Theology leads him to conclude that the actions ofthe rich against the poor will not go unpunished because God has promised judgment to all in the afterlife.

"Why did you not aid the widow, the orphans also, when enduring wrong? Were you powerless? Could you not help? I made you for this purpose, not that you might do wrong, but that you might check it". 63 He believed that the rich tended to be poor in spirit but the poor were rich in spirit and had a better chance of gaining a favorable judgment from God.

The Poor and the Ruling Class

The poor oflate antiquity suffered under warfare, violence, taxation, and oppression as a result ofrich landowners, war, and laws imposed on them by the state, according to the Church Fathers. The real nature oftheir suffering is difficult to ascertain with certainty, but there are important clues available in the extant writings of Salvian and other bishops which shed light on the subject.

What was it, exactly, that drove the poor to rebellion and sedition? Salvian offers important insights that help answer that question ofwhat drove the poor.

The world ofLate Antiquity contained its share ofbigotry and prejudice against foreign peoples. With the large number offoreigners now living in

Roman territory, cultural assumptions about them were bound to appear. Such notions ofracial, cultural and social superiority are exposed in Salvian's writings, and he himself admits that he believes that Romans are "incomparably superior" to barbarians and states that there are two different types of barbarians: "heretics and pagans.'>M He does not explicitly mention the barbarians as being Germanic outsiders, but he does imply that the "heretics and pagans" are outsiders with

63 Ibid, 16.63. 64 Ibid, 4.13, 121. 27 respect to proper Christian orthodoxy and Roman cultural identity. The Visigoths and Vandals were Arian heretics, and the Huns were pagans. But Salvian uses their position as outsiders to compare them to Romans, who, he argues from a moralistic point ofview, are worse than the barbarians. He boldly stands his ground, recognizing that what he is saying is hugely inflammatory, "You who read these words are perhaps vexed and condemn what you read. I do not shrink from your censure; condemn me ifI do not succeed in proving my words.,,6s He goes on the say that it is the fault ofChristians for not living well enough because through the mission ofthe church afl who proclaim Christ know the law, but choose not to follow it.

Salvian's stance on the rich's relationship with the church represents a

Christianized version ofa social tradition that had existed within the Roman

Empire for at least two centuries. There had always been rich citizens living in the towns and cities ofthe Roman Empire. Their position as elitists within

Roman society normally led to different expectations for them when it came time to civic responsibilities. Christian emperors themselves eventually became more involved in the direct care ofthe poor. The best evidence for this comes very late in the Western Roman period from a law issued by the emperors Valentinian and

Marcian in the year 451: "it is a feature ofour humane rule to look after the interests ofthe destitute and to ensure that the poor do not go without food."66

Conclusion

Before Christianity became the official religion ofthe Empire, rich citizens were expected to be patrons oftheir cities, and contribute funds to the

6S Ibid. Meodex Justinianus 1.2.12; quoted in Peter Brown, Poverty and Leadership in the Later Roman Empire, (Hanover, NH: University Press ofNew England. 2002), 1. 28 construction of public buildings, which could include anything from temples to bath houses. 67 Although the motivation for this tended to be political rather than altruistic, the rich were expected to be lovers oftheir cities, not lovers ofthe poor. 68 Christianity fundamentally altered the Roman understanding ofwhat the proper relationship should be between rich and poor and further developed the social category of the impoverished. Paganism didn't have a dogma on how to treat the impoverished, but Christianity developed a scripture based theological and moral position on how the poor should be treated. They imposed this view on society as Christianity became legitimized through the actions ofChristian emperors. As the church became wealthier and more powerful, bishops assumed the social position ofthe rich patrons that pagans used to enjoy, and hence bishops were in a strong position to influence the way in which the poor were treated and how collected funds were to be used.

67 Ibid, 4. 68 Ibid, 5. 29

Chapter Two

Barbarians

The barbarian migrations into the Roman Empire in the fourth and fifth centuries had a strong impact on the church. Barbarians were either non-catholic Christians or pagans, and they were perceived as an existential threat to the Catholic Church. Some bishops believed that God's wrath would be unleashed on the world for perceived disobedience to the Catholic Church. The Church's great ally through these turbulent years was the Roman government which implemented protective laws. The evidence suggests that the state and the church worked together to neutralize existential threats.

The years 376-476 are especially important when studying the reaction the church and state had to barbarian migrations because the primary source material that has survived show that the church had an overwhelmingly negative reaction to their presence in

Roman territory, ranging from wariness to panic over specific historical events like the

Visigothic invasion ofItaly in 410, a large invasion ofGermanic tribesmen in 406 and the invasion ofAttila the Hun in 451.

Incursion into Roman territory was not a new phenomenon, but settling foreign peoples into Roman lands and next to Roman people was. The barbarians brought with them their own cultural and religious traditions and were not willing to relinquish them for the sake ofbeing more Roman. Previously, people conquered by the Romans were normally allowed to keep their temples, their own leadership, and in some cases even their own autonomy in return for some sort oftribute to the emperor or soldiers to serve in the military. But these barbarian peoples were not really conquered in the traditional sense. Some tribes were allowed to enter by Emperors and were told to s~ttle at a 30 specified region. Other tribes became conquerors themselves by taking over large amounts ofRoman territory.

Defending the Empire

The late fourth century was the beginning ofthe period in which certain barbarian groups, like the Goths, petitioned the Roman government for sanctuary in Roman territory. Others simply moved in on their own accord. If emperors failed to keep barbarians out, they wanted at least to keep them contained in land near the borderlands ofthe empire. Ifthey accomplished this, they would succeed in keeping them as far away as possible from the largest urban areas ofthe Roman Empire and in helping the army protect the borders against other barbarian raiders. However, keeping foreign peoples out ofRoman territory was a very difficult challenge. The length ofthe Roman frontier was so vast that it was almost impossible to manage effectively. Some groups settled inside Roman territory without the government even knowing they were there, let alone without permission.69 Ammianus frequently reports incursions into Roman territory by Frankish and Alemmanic tribesmen during the reign ofJulian. But the

Romans wanted to maintain peaceful relations with the barbarians on the other side ofthe

Rhine and Danube. The emperor Julian made several peace treaties with barbarian tribes.70 During Julian's career as a general in the army and briefly as emperor, he succeeded in keeping the barbarians out. Julian then took steps to reinforce the border defenses to further ensure that the boundary between Rome and Germania was clearly defmed.

The later Roman Empire had a long standing policy of settling foreign peoples within its borders for the purpose ofnational defense. This was advantageous to the

69 Robin Seager. "Roman Policy on the Rhine and Danube in Ammianus." The Classical Quarterly. 49, 2 (1999),590. 70 Ibid, 590-591. 31

Roman military establishment for several reasons. First, the professional Roman legions made famous by their extensive conquests ofEurope, North Africa, and Asia were largely a thing ofthe past by the fifth century. The overwhelming cost ofmaintaining a huge military force, and recruitment problems, meant that the government had to find alternative ways ofproviding adequate border defenses.71 Barbarian federates were the solution to this problem. This was the case for the Visigoths who settled near the Danube

River in Moesia in 376.72 It was also true for the Burgundian people, who were settled in

Alsace in about the year 420 to keep out the Alemanni.73 Second, making friends with otherwise hostile barbarian troops meant fewer enemies for Rome. The Roman government used thousands ofbarbarians as mercenary troops along the borderlands as a convenient way for the army to employ barbarians in the military, which served as a means ofkeeping the mercenary barbarians busy fighting wars for Rome, and to keep other barbarians out. These settlements should not be viewed as barbarian conquests.

They were governed by Roman officials and were expected to follow Roman laws. The real "conquest" came later in the fifth century as a result ofthe central government's loss ofpower to govern provinces and consequently barbarians that had settled there became by default the effective rulers ofthe former Roman territories. This however, was not the case everywhere in Western Europe. There are examples ofRoman territory being conquered by invading barbarian tribes, such as in Spain and North Africa. As I will show later on, the church had strong reactions to such events.

Despite the necessity ofusing barbarian mercenaries, this plan did have many drawbacks which often led to violent warfare between Rome and the barbarian settlers

71 Matthew Innes. Introduction to Early Medieval Western Europe, 300-900. (New York, Routledge. 2007),80. n Ammianus Marcellinus, Histories. Tr. Walter Hamilton. (London, Penguin Bookss, 1986),31.3.1. 73 E.A. Thompson. "The Settlement ofthe Barbarians in Southern Gaul .." The Journal ofRoman Studies, 46 (1956), 69. 32 during the fourth and fifth centuries. The Visigoths rebelled against the Roman government several times between the years 378 and 440, and the Vandals rose up at least twice during the fifth century. Ammianus describes how, as a result ofthe Roman generals not allowing the Gothic settlers enough "means ofsubsistence", the Goths armed themselves and rebelled. 74 One problem the Empire faced was to what extent the state would allow the barbarians to assimilate with the established culture once they were settled inside Roman territory? Emperors to settle barbarians on land which the barbarians would then have to defend.75 After the Gothic invasion ofItaly and southern

Gaul (408-414), the Roman General Constantius came to an agreement with their King

Wallia to settle the Visigoths in Spain in order to keep the Vandals in check. 76 Only a few years afterward, the Visigoths were given more land in Aquatania, a very prosperous region ofthe Empire. This was a strategic military move to defeat peasant rebellions in the Gallic province ofArmorica. 77 Thus the Romans had federated allies (foederati) positioned in between two potential threats. The term Dediticii identified barbarian settlers employed by the Roman army for regular service.78 However, with any sort of settlement between native born and foreign peoples, cultural and religious differences arose between barbarians and Romans which produced noticeably strong reactions within the halls ofchurch and state. The barbarian settlers clung to their cultural traditions and their religious beliefs, which often clashed with established Roman culture.

The abuse the new settlers endured from unscrupulous Roman authorities doomed this approach to failure, and served as a catalyst to barbarian insurrection and warfare.

74 Ammianus Marcellinus, Histories, 31.5.4. 75 E.A. Thompson, "The Settlement ofthe Barbarians in Southern Gaul," 67,70. 76 Ibid., 67. 77 Ibid,70. 78Thomas S. Burns, Barbarians within the Gates o/Rome: A Study ofRoman Military Policy and the Barbarians, co. 375-425 A.D. (Indiana University Press, 1995), 12. 33

The Goths and Vandals were two tribes who were abused by Roman government officials; both tribes were driven to insurrection and violence against the Roman state.

The Goths succeeded in killing a Roman emperor and annihilating his army at the Battle ofAdrianople in 378. The Vandals succeeded in conquering half ofnorth Africa in the year 439. A pervasive anti-German sentiment manifested itself in the laws and proclamations issued by emperors and by the actions ofthe Roman military.

Fortunately, the responses the church and the state had to these insurrections are fairly well documented in the form oflaws contained in the Theodosian Code and numerous treatises, letters, and sermons that were written by influential members ofthe

Catholic church. How strongly the church reacted to such events varied widely over the course oflate antiquity. The church's reactions tended to range from vociferous contempt to mild acquiescence to their presence. An examination of the laws contained in the

Theodosian code as well as the contents ofthe surviving literature will reveal that during times ofcrisis the state and the church panicked. What tended to happen was the church and state cooperated to mitigate any type of threat that could be produced from a conflict.

In terms ofreligion, this meant barbarian heresies would be expunged with the force of law at the behest ofthe Catholic Church. Their rites were criminalized, they beliefs anathematized, and their church property seized. This approach was applied to any barbarian group that wished to enter the empire. However, this approach could not function ifinsurrection occurred.

Barbarian Violence

A major crisis ofthe later fourth century was the disaster ofthe battle of

Adrianople, which annihilated a Roman army and enabled the Goths to plunder Thrace.

A vivid account ofthe violence has been preserved by Ammianus, who wrote it only a 34 few years after the battle. Apparently the Goths were driven by hunger and their own

"native ferocity" to go into the countryside and wreak devastation everywhere they went.

Everything was involved in a foul orgy ofrapine and slaughter, bloodshed and fire, and frightful atrocities were inflicted on the bodies offree men. Sights as fearful to relate as to behold met men's sorrowing eyes... 79

Ammianus goes on to mention the failed siege of Constantinople in 378, which most likely terrified the government. In times of crisis, people turned to their religious beliefs to find answers and to seek inspiration. Ambrose, the late fourth century bishop of

Milan, was one such Roman who did so. Gratian asked Ambrose to write a proof ofthe divinity ofJesus Christ. Such a proof would necessarily refute the teachings of the various heretical sects of Christianity that did not believe in the divinity of Christ.

Ambrose also included criticism ofthe Arian sect, which taught that Christ was of a different substance than God the father. Gratian made his request just before he left

Milan to join his uncle, the emperor Valens, in the war against rebelling Goths.

Ambrose wrote a highly theological work as the official response to this request,

Exposition ofthe Christian Faith, and in the prologue Ambrose explains the reason why

Gratian should know the true faith:

Your sacred Majesty, being about to go forth to war, requires ofme a book:, expounding the Faith, since your Majesty knows that victories are gained more by faith in the commander, than by valor in the soldiers. For Abraham led into battle three hundred and eighteen men, and brought home the spoils ofcountless foes; and having, by the power of that which was the sign ofour Lord's Cross and Name, overcome the might of five kings and conquering hosts, he both avenged his neighbor and gained victory and the ransom of his brother's son. So also Joshua the son ofNun, when he could not prevail against the enemy with the might ofall his army, overcame by sound of seven sacred trumpets, in the place where he saw and knew the Captain ofthe heavenly host. For victory, then, your Majesty makes ready, being Christ's loyal servant and defender ofthe Faith, which you would have me set forth in writing. 80

79 Ammianus Marcellinus, The Later Roman Empire (London: Penguin Books,1986), 31.8.9. 80 St. Ambrose, Exposition ofthe Christian Faith. 1.3. tr. H. de Romestin, E. de Romestin and H.T.F. Duckworth; quoted in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 2* Series, Vol. 10 (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1896 accessed 20 May 2010), available from (http://www.newadvent.orglfathers/34041.htm); Internet. 35

Ambrose thus believed that knowledge ofthe true faith, and loyalty to it, would bring victory for the Roman people and to the faith itself. God would bring victory to those who defend the true faith, and would destroy those who oppose it. This was a central component ofthe belief shared by the majority ofCatholic bishops who lived through these years ofwarfare and violence in Late Antiquity.

This type of response would become more common as future crises unfolded in the western empire. A major crisis ofthe fifth century began on New Years eve 406 when several Germanic tribes, the Vandals, Alans, and Suebi, took advantage ofa frozen

Rhine river to cross into Gaul. 81 The resulting devastation and panic can be ascertained from the Theodosian Code and from various letters written by bishops. Apparently these groups ofbarbarians were highly destructive as they took advantage ofthe absence ofany organized Roman resistance and pillaged much ofGaul and Spain. Bishop Hydatius of

Aqua Flaviae in Spain, wrote a detailed chronicle ofthe events when the barbarians reached Spain and devastated the towns they encountered.82 His chronicle is important because it provides not only historical references to the actions ofthe barbarians upon entering early fifth century Spain, but also because it reveals clues about the personal reactions this particular clergymen had to the violence. Hydatius was a Catholic bishop who lived in a largely Catholic territory of Spain, and his writings indicate that he despised barbarian Arian invaders. Hydatius wrote about how the barbarians "ran wild through Spain" and how a deadly pestilence came in the wake ofbarbarian raids.s3 He also adds details about the subsequent famine which drove people to cannibalism and thus these unfortunate events prove that "the four plagues of sword, famine, pestilence

81 Allen Ward, Fritz Heichelheim, Cedric Yeo. A History ofthe Roman People. 31d ed (Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1998),493. 82 Bryan Ward-Perkins, The Fall ofRome and The End o/Civilization. (London: Oxford University Press, 2005), 16. 83 Hydatius, The Chronicle ofHydatius. ed. R. W. Burgess, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993),83. 36 and wild beasts raging everywhere throughout the world, the anmmciations foretold by the Lord through his prophets came to fulfillment."84 This last reference cites the Book ofRevelations, thus indicating that Hydatius thought the world was coming to an end soon and the heretic barbarians would be responsible for its ending.

Indeed one world was ending in Spain. The time in which Spain would be a region governed by the Roman emperor was coming to an abrupt end. Unlike the barbarian federates in Gaul who were settled by the Roman government with the specific task ofprotecting the borderlands, this group ofbarbarians invaded Spain on their own accord and carved out for themselves regions ofthe Iberian Peninsula which later became autonomous barbarian kingdoms. This was an act ofpure conquest, about which the Roman government could do little. Hydatius reports that:

They apportioned to themselves by lot areas ofthe provinces for settlement. The [Hasding] Vandals took possession ofGallaecia, and the Sueves that part of Gallaecia which [is] situated on the vety western edge ofthe Ocean. The Alans were allotted the provinces ofLusitania and Carthaginensis, and the Siling Vandals Baetica. The Spaniards in the cities and forts who had survived the disasters surrendered themselves to servitude under the barbarians, who held sway throughout the provinces.85

Hydatius makes another revealing statement about his sentiments towards the vandals, who had settled in Spain in the early fifth century. The Vandals were known to be steadfastly Arian, and when their King, Gunderic, seized the Spanish city ofHispalis.

Hydatius wrote: "he impiously tried to lay hands on the church ofthat very city, by the will ofGod he was seized by a demon and died. His brother Gaiseric succeeded him as

King.,,86 He cannot help but add in the next sentence that Gaiseric converted to Arianism from Catholicism, "thereby becoming an apostate."87 Therefore Hydatius reveals his utter contempt for heretics and Vandals.

84 Ibid. 85 Hydatius, The Chronicle ofHydatius 49; quoted in Heather, The Fall ofthe Roman Empire: A New History ofRome and the Barbarians. (London: Oxford University Press, 2006), 208. 86 Hydatius, The Chronicle ofHyda/ius. 89-90. 87 Ibid. 37

Hydatius is one example ofa Catholic bishop who was vocal in his condemnation ofanyone who opposed the Catholic Church and supported heresy in the face ofa barbarian incursion. He exposed a certain Maximinus, an Arian bishop in Sicily, who aided King Gaiseric in the year 440 to attack the city of Panormus with the objective to persecute the orthodox Christians and compel them to convert to Arianism. This reference to an Arian bishop suggests that Arian bishops allied themselves with Arian barbarians in order to secure freedoms that had been previously taken away by imperial edicts (e.g. the anti-heretic laws in the Theodosian Code) or to secure for themselves the protection ofnew barbarian overlords.

Hydatius also includes an ugly incident in which the Gothic King Theoderic sacked the Spanish city ofBracara:

King Theoderic made for Bracara. .. on Sunday, 28 October he sacked it, an action, which although accomplished without bloodshed, was nevertheless tragic and lamentable enough. A great many Romans were taken captive and the basilicas ofthe saints stormed; altars thrown down and broken up; virgins ofGod abducted from the city, but not violated; the clergy stripped right down to the shame of their nakedness; the whole population regardless ofsex along with little children dragged from the holy places of sanctuary; the sacred place filled with the sacrilegious presence ofmules, cattle and camels. This sack partially revived the examples ofheavenly wrath written about 1erusalem."n

Hydatius' emotionally charged response to this action is an example ofthe utter helplessness he felt at the hands ofthe invading barbarians. He seems to understand that there was nothing that he could do about the behavior ofthe Goths, other than encourage the people who read the chronicle to remain steadfastly Catholic. This consolation reflects his belief that Judgment Day will eventually come to those who persecute the church.

Hydatius records an account ofthe Hunnic invasion ofItaly. His perspective on the invasion is unique due to the references he makes to divine providence as being

II Ibid, 107. 38 responsible for the Hun's evacuation ofltaly in the summer of452. He makes no reference to the actions ofPope Leo I in negotiating with the Huns and asserts that the

Roman general Marcian crushed the Huns with his Roman auxiliary troopS.89 He claims that the Huns met with "heaven sent disasters: famine and some kind ofdisease.,,90 1ms makes sense from a Catholic point of view; the Huns were largely pagan and their evacuation ofltaly a sign of providence.

Barbarians and The Law

Hydatius' chronicle leads the reader to believe that barbarians were a major threat to the stability ofthe empire and to the Catholic Church in any region. The Theodosian

Code agrees with this conclusion. The Theodosian Code is a collection oflaws that were compiled under the auspices ofthe eastern Emperor Theodosius II (401-450), a representative ofthe Theodosian dynasty that had been ruling both halves ofthe Roman

Empire ever since the death ofthe dynasty's founder, Theodosius I, in the year 395. It was published in the year 438 and it contains laws about everything, including heretics, religion, taxation, trade, and the military. It is the best primary source available on what was happening in the Roman Empire in Late Antiquity. There are addenda to the codes from later emperors and the ftna11aws contained in the book are from the late 460's.

Book VII ofthe Theodosian Code contains important evidence on how the government reacted to incursions from barbarians. When the Goths under their ambitious king Alaric invaded Italy, the Roman government panicked. 1ms is noticed in several laws that were issued by the emperors Honorius and Arcadius, the sons ofTheodosius I, who ruled from Ravenna and Constantinople respectively. While Gaul was burning and

Italy being invaded, an extraordinary law was issued exhorting slaves to "offer

89lbid.,103. 90 Ibid. 39 themselves up for military service".91 This extraordinary law, issued in 407, shows clearly that affairs were going very badly in the west. That same month the emperors tried another attempt to recruit as many men as possible into the military:

On account ofour imminent necessities, by this edict we summon to military service all men who are aroused by the innate spirit of freedom. Freeborn persons, therefore, who take arms under the auspices ofmilitary service for love ofpeace and ofcountry shall know that they will receive ten solidi each from our imperial treasury when affairs have been adjusted92

The addition ofthe "when affairs have been adjusted" clause as the end ofthe text was a risky promise the state had to make in light ofits dire military situation. The men who joined the military could only be paid ifRome defeated her enemies.93 This desperate trend oftrying to recruit as many men as possible continued until shortly before Rome was sacked in 410. The government extended its recruiting policies to Africa, Sardinia,

Sicily and Corsica. This time however, new recruits would be paid thirty solidi rather than ten.94 The plea was more emphatic. Before, the emperors had merely summoned men to service. Now in the year 410, they are demanding recruits from areas beyond

Italy, suggesting that the attempts to recruit men in Italy had failed, or eligible men fled to other regions.

There is evidence that the church panicked in the face ofbarbarian incursions as well. A curious law issued in 408 "prohibits those persons who are hostile to the

Catholic sect to perform imperial service within the palace, so that no person who disagrees with us in faith and in religion shall be associated with us in any way.,,9S The reasons for a law like this at this time are nwnerous. Firstly, Alaric was ransacking Italy in the year 408, and had even threatened the capital city of Ravenna, where this law was

91 Codex Theodosianus 7.16,172. 92 Ibid, 7.17,173. 91 Ibid. 94 Ibid., 7.20, 173. 9S Ibid., 16.5.42,457. 40 proclaimed and where the western emperor Honorius lived. Secondly, many ofthose who were in imperial service were barbarian allies recruited from the border lands. They would have been from tribes like the Huns, Franks, even the Goths; the Roman general

Sarus was a former Gothic ally ofAlaric who had joined the imperial service. Few ofthe barbarian soldiers would have been observant Catholics. Finally, the risk of sedition by non-catholic, barbarian soldiers was too great to ignore, especially since Alaric was threatening Rome. This was a policy enacted to protect the power ofthe emperors and the church.

The government took a step further in preventing any possible uprising against the church and the state that same year when the emperors decreed:

... all members of the office staffs shall be on guard that no person who dissents from the priesthood ofthe Catholic Church shall have an opportunity for unlawful assembly within any municipality or any secluded part ofthe territory thereof. 96

This law was meant to mitigate any harm done to the church as a result ofapostasy. The government was concerned about this matter because clergy would out offear ofthe

Arian barbarians would leave the Catholic Church and seek the clemency ofthe Arians.

What evidence is there that during times ofcrisis the church and the state worked in concert to neutralize an existential threat? These laws can be linked to other historical events that occurred in Italy at the same time. The late fifth century historian Zosimus wrote a detailed account ofthe Gothic invasion of Italy and his Historia Nova contains a disastrous incident that was instigated by Roman soldiers. Stilicho, an ethnic Vandal and popular Roman general, was executed on frivolous charges of sedition and treason brought by the emperor Honorius. Some within the imperial government believed that

Stilicho was secretly conspiring with the Goths to seize the throne, an act that would have ended the Theodosian dynasty that supported the Catholic Church. But in reality the

96 Ibid, 16.5.45,458. 41 charges were probably false and the response by the emperor to execute him was a knee jerk reaction. In a shocking display ofbrutality, when the Roman soldiers heard the news ofthe alleged barbarian plot they slaughtered "all the women and children in the city, who belonged to the Barbarians."97 This caused thousands ofbarbarian refugees to flee to Alaric and join his fight against Rome. The city Zosimus referred to is Rome in the year 408, around the same time that the aforementioned anti-barbarian and anti-heretic laws were being issued. This event corresponds well in time with the law banning people hostile to the Catholic faith from imperial service within the palace. The massacre ofthe barbarian women and children must have occurred sometime between the death of

nd Stilicho (recorded as August 22 , 408) and the issuance ofthe law (November 2Th, 408).

Zosimus did record that because the barbarians were, "highly incensed against the

Romans for so impious a breach ofthe promises they had made in the presence ofthe gods, they all resolved to join with Alaric, and to assist him in a war against Rome.,,98

Another contributing factor to the fear surrounding the presence ofbarbarians in

Italy was the supposed consequences ofallowing paganism and heresy to regain its former position within the empire. The historian Sozomen wrote about how Alaric, while besieging Rome, appointed the Senator Attalus to be his puppet emperor in Rome.

Attalus' position as Alaric's puppet emperor in Rome was made, however, expendable when the Emperor Honorius in Ravenna attempted to negotiate a compromise with Alaric and Alaric deposed Attalus. Sozomen goes on to say:

The failure which had attended the designs of Attalus was a source of deep displeasure for the pagans and Christians of the Arian heresy. The pagans had inferred from the known predilections and early education of Attalus, that he would openly maintain their superstitions, and restore their ancient temples, their festivals, and their altars. The Arians imagined that, as soon as he found his reign firmly established, Attalus would reinstate

97 Zosimus, New History, 5.161. (London:Green and Chaplin, 1814), available from http://www.tertullian.orglfatherslzosimus05_bookS.htm; Internet. 98 Ibid. 42

them in the supremacy over the churches which they had enjoyed during the reigns of Constantius and of Valens; for he had been baptized by Sigesarius, bishop of the Goths, to the great satisfaction ofAlaric and the Arian party.99

As far as Sozomen and many other Catholics were concerned, Attalus' baptism by a

Gothic bishop carried with it implications of usurpation and sacrilege.

Episodes of anti-barbarian prejudice were not isolated to Italy. It was pervasive throughout the entire empire. It was written about by various Roman intellectuals in the fourth and fifth century. Synesius of Cyrene was a neo-Platonist turned Catholic bishop who argued that all barbarians should be expelled from the military. Synesius, writing his essay On Imperial Rule to the emperor Arcadius, argues that barbarians should not be in

the armed forced because since barbarians are foreign bom, they are not as civilized as

native born Roman men. He wrote:

Nor must the legislator give arms to those not born and brought up under his laws, for he has no guarantee oftheir good conduct from such as these. Truly it is the part of a foolhardy man or ofa prophet to see and have no fear of this mass of differently bred youth pursuing their own customs, and at the same time practicing the art ofwar in this country. 100

He goes on to argue that the proper usefulness ofthe Goths under Roman rule for

them is to work in agriculture and to defend Roman land. He sees no place for barbarians

in Roman civilization. He believes that Roman courage should suffice in defending

Roman territory. He mentions in one poignant statement:

Unfortunately the barbarian does not understand chivalrous conduct. From the very beginning till now these men have treated us with derision, knowing both what they deserved at our hands, and what they were assumed to deserve; and this reputation of ours has encouraged their neighbors to make their way hither. Now hordes offoreign mounted archers keep pouring forth seeking out our easy-going people, begging for their indulgence and pointing out the case ofthese scoundrels as a precedent for it. 101

99 Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History, 9.9, tr. Chester D. Hartranft; quoted in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, r Series, Vol.2 (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1890); available from http://www.newadventorglfathersl26029.htm; Internet. 100 Synesius, On Imperial Rule, tr. A. Fitzgerald (Livius.org http://www.livius.orglsu-z.synesiuslsynesius_monarchy_14.html). 14.108.8. (Looking for reference) 101 Ibid., 15.1097. 43

This document was written around the same time that Italy, Gaul and Spain were being overrun by barbarian hordes. Synesius' sentiments about barbarians represent a typical response by a people facing devastation during warfare.

Regaining Control of Rampaging Barbarians

Even though much of Western Europe was overrun in the early fifth century, the government continued to attempt to control the barbarians and to resettle them in other regions ofthe empire. This approach was used again with the Goths in the year 418 when they settled in Southern Gaul and with the Burgundians in 440 when they were settled in the Rhone valley. The government used this political approach as a means of keeping the Goths caged into their allotment of land in southern Gaul and northern Spain.

This time Roman generals employed a new tactic. Rather than trying to defeat the Goths in open combat, as they had already lost an entire army to the Goths at Adrianople, they decided to starve them into submission. Naval blockades put in place by the Roman general Constantius against the Visigoths cut off all possibilities of trade. 102 The Goths eventually agreed to surrender to the Romans and become federated allies in return for a large supply of grain. 103

The state had to implement a way in which the settlers would want to stay within their newly acquired territory. The placement ofthe Goths in the area around Bordeaux was a curious move by Constantius. The area was known to be rich and fertile with numerous large villas. Wealthy senators and emperors had hailed from Southern Gaul.

As part of the agreement between the state and the Goths, landed estates were divided between the Roman landowners and the Gothic settlers, so that barbarians could own property for themselves, which in turn meant they would have something worth

102 E. A. Thompson, "The Settlement ofthe Barbarians in Southern Gaul." The Journal ofRoman Studies. 46 (1956), 65~75. 103 Ibid. 44 defending against other marauding barbarians.104 Walter Goffart theorized the Roman government allocated public revenues (like taxes and provisions) and small allotments of land to the Goths when they were initially settled in Aquitaine.lOs Now that the Goths had land to defend, they would be less likely to revolt against Rome, and more likely to help Rome in times ofusurpation and invasion. This seems to be exactly what happened shortly after the initial settlement in Gaul in 418. Their territory around Bordeaux lay in between two areas ofmilitary conflict, Northern Spain (which according to Hydatius, was being ravaged by the Vandals) and Armorica (northwestern France). The Goths were employed by the Roman generals to attack the Vandals in Spain, and then to suppress a peasant uprising in Armorica. 106 This tactic seemed to have worked well for several decades. The Goths remained in their settled territory, effectively contained.

Despite hopes to contain the barbarians, the power ofthe Roman state faded as the situation in Gaul deteriorated into confusion. Usurpers in fifth century Gaul caused all sorts of problems, often using barbarian allies in their bid to take the throne away from the already established emperor. Honorius had to face this problem from the years 407·

413 when the Roman General Constantine III rebelled in Britain and made his way through Gaul, eventually establishing a capital in Arles. 101 This put considerable strain on the central government, which had to deal with Alaric's Goths and a rebellion at the same time. In addition, there was a series ofpeasant uprisings in Gaul; later Attilla's invasion of Gaul further complicated matters. By the later fifth century. there was nothing preventing barbarians from establishing kingdoms over formerly Roman provinces. As

104 Ibid,70. 10SWalter Goffart, Barbarians and Romans A.D. 418-584: The Techniques ofAccommodation, (Princeton., NI: Princeton University Press, 1980), 123. 106 Ibid,71. 107 I.F. Drinkwater. "The Usurpers Constantine m (407-411) and Iovinus (411-413)," Britannia, 29 (1998), 269. 45 the fifth century progressed, bishops had to grapple with this new reality. How would they maintain their position in the church while being ruled by barbarians?

One way to do so would be to cooperate with barbarian kings. By the middle of the fifth century there is evidence that bishops began to accept the fact that the barbarian presence would be permanent. Such was the case for Sidonius Apollinaris, Bishop of

Clermont. He lived through the transitional period in Gaul when the Roman government collapsed and the barbarian kingdoms rose. His writings tell us that he had direct contact with at least one Gothic king. Dozens of his letters to his friends have survived. He wrote openly about his sentiments regarding the Goths. Sidonius' feelings are rather paradoxical. On the one hand he shows respect for the Gothic King Theoderic and on the other utter contempt for the behavior ofthe Goths during a period ofviolence. But nonetheless it is clear that Sidonius recognizes that the Goths are a strong people who had become intertwined with the late antique Roman culture ofGaul.

Sidonius wrote favorably about the Gothic King Theoderic to his brother in law in about the year 455. He praised the king's physical stature and his manners. He thought ofhim as a praiseworthy and honorable monarch.

Well, he is a man worth knowing, even by those who cannot enjoy his close acquaintance, so happily have Providence and Nature joined to endow him with the perfect gifts offortune; his way of life is such that not even the envy which lies in wait for kings can rob him ofhis proper praise. 108

Sidonius here does not display the same anti-Germanic sentiment as some earlier bishops had. The letter suggests that Sidonius recognizes that the Goths are a regular fixture amongst the population ofhis native southern Gaul. This would make sense since the

Goths had been settled in that region for forty years at the date this letter was written, even before Sidonius was born. Yet his admiration for the Gothic king did not mean that

10& Sidonius Apollinaris, Letters, 1.2.1 tr. O.M. Dalton, 1915; available from http://www.tertullian.orglfatherslsidonius_letters_Olbookl.htm; Internet. 46 he held a favorable opinion ofthe Goths in general. Later on in his life the Goths took over territory near where he lived and his city was threatened by them. He wrote about these troubling times, and unsurprisingly he is frank about his disgust for the Goths and his anxieties about his people. Writing to another bishop he stated:

Rwnor has it that the Goths have occupied Roman soil; our unhappy Auvergne is always their gateway on every such incursion. It is our fate to furnish fuel to the fire of a peculiar hatred, for, by Christ's aid, we are the sole obstacle to the fulfillment oftheir ambition to extend their frontiers to the Rhone, and so hold all the country between that river, the Atlantic, and the Loire. Their menacing power has long pressed us hard; it has already swallowed up whole tracts ofterritory round us, and threatens to swallow more. We mean to resist with spirit, though we know our peril and the risks which we incur. But our trust is not in our poor walls impaired by fire, or in our rotting palisades, or in our ramparts worn by the breasts ofthe sentries, as they lean on them in continual watch. Our only present help we find in those Rogations which you introduced; and this is the reason why the people ofClermont refuse to recede, though terrors surge about them on every side. 109

Sidonius makes no reference to aid coming from the Roman State, no help from the

Roman army, and no help from any other allied barbarian tribe. He only relies on rogations, or solemn prayer, in the hope that he and his people will be saved by the war mongering Goths. This letter was written in 474, a time when the Western Roman

Government was virtually non-existent in Gaul. His letters suggest that Sidonius had lost hope in the future ofthe Roman Empire.

Sidonius reacts with strong condemnation against the Goths when they caused

more trouble under their King Euric in the 470's. He wrote a letter to a fellow bishop

explaining that future generations will know what "old friendship means" as a result of

the Goth's treaty-breaking. Apparently the Goths had taken over more territory by force,

despite a peace treaty that had existed between them and the Romans.IIO The broken

treaty was originally an agreement that the Goths would protect Roman territory, rather

than attack it.lll Despite the lost trust Sidonius had in the Goths as protectors ofRoman

territory, what concerns him most is not the loss Roman laws but ofChristian law.

109 Sidonius, Letters, 7.1.1. 110 Ibid., 7.6.4. III Ibid. 47

I must confess that formidable as the mighty Goth may be, I dread him less as the assailant of our walls than as the subversion of our Christian laws. They say that the mere mention ofthe name of Catholic so embitters his countenance and heart that one might take him for the chief priest ofhis Arian sect rather than for the monarch ofhis nation. Omnipotent in arms, keen-witted. and in the full vigor of life, he yet makes this single mistake--he attributes his success in his designs and enterprises to the orthodoxy ofhis belief, whereas the real cause lies in mere earthly fortune. For these reasons I would have you consider the secret malady of the Catholic Church that you may hasten to apply an open remedy.ll2

The Catholic Church in Gaul at this time was in great distress as a result ofthe actions of

Euric. Sidonius laments the unfortunate state in which the church lay in several Gallic cities, which as a result ofthe barbarians, had been abandoned or vacated by bishops, leaving the congregation to fend for themselves. 113

As the fifth century continued, the vioelnce near the Danube and Rhine rivers was still pervasive. An example ofthis was the province ofNoricum in the mid-fifth century, today modem Austria. Severinus, a saint and resident ofNoricum and contemporary of

Attila the Hun, was witness ofthe violence and fear caused by the violent domination of barbarian tribesmen. In this region, the centralized Roman Empire was already a memory; the empire the natives knew was the Hunnish Empire just across the Danube

River where the Huns had been in control ofthe territory for some time. 114 Here the

Roman civilians were exploited for their material wealth, gold, and skilled manpower in exchange for protection by barbarian warlords. lIS However the breakup up ofthe Hunnish

Empire in 454 exposed the region to new barbarian tribes who had previously been under control ofthe powerful Hunnish leadership. Soon waves oftribesmen, seemingly out of nowhere (the source calls the men, Alamanni) ransacked the towns and cities. Eugippius, who wrote The Lifo ofSeverinus, records the last gasp ofthe Roman border defenses in

112 Ibid., 7.6.6. 1l3lbid. 114 Peter Brown. The Rise o/Western Christendom: Second Edition, (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing 2003),125. m Ibid, 124. 48 the region, and how the area was essentially left to defend itself against the barbarian onslaught.

At the time when the Roman Empire was still in existence, the soldiers of many towns were supported by public money to guard the frontier. When this arrangement ceased, the military fonnation were dissolved and the frontier vanished. I 16

It did not take long for the people to bear the brunt ofthis collapse ofgovernment.

Eugippius records that people were forced to flee towns and cities and became refugees.

Severinus, unlike many other bishops who were deeply concerned with religious affiliation, didn't seem to care what religion people belonged to or how they worshiped; survival was most important.

Thus the church tended to view barbarian outsiders with wariness. Barbarians' association with heretical sects and their propensity to violence made them the target of scathing diatribes and repressive state legislation. The church's contempt for the outsiders tended to be amplified in times ofmilitary and humanitarian crisis, as noted in the Theodosian Code and the writings ofAmbrose and Hydatius. Yet during times of relative peace the literature has a less urgent tone, showing that the church was a highly reactive institution. This does not suggest however that the church's sentiments differed about the barbarians. As far as the church was concerned, barbarians were agents of

Satan.

116 Eugippius, Life ofSeverinus 20.1; quoted in Brown, The Rise ofWestern Christendom, 123. 49

Chapter Three

Heretics

The adoption ofone religion and the persecution ofall others was done for two primary reasons. First, the state considered the existence ofother Christian sects to be incompatible with the officially sanctioned (as defined by the council ofNicaea) Catholic

Church and thus a threat to the religious unity ofthe Roman Empire. Second, the state believed that barbarian invaders were agents ofheretical sects, which posed an existential threat to the Roman Empire and the Catholic Church. The primary sources, most notably the treatises and chronicles offifth century Roman bishops, and the Theodosian Code, indicate that the church and the state wanted to mitigate any possible threat to the power ofthe Church and to prevent apostasy_ The Empire therefore took an active role in trying to extirpate both threats through legal, ecclesiastical, and ifnecessary, military means.

Paganism was still a major feature in Europe and North Africa but Christianity

was quickly becoming a significant presence. Its growth during the fourth century

facilitated the development ofvarious Christian sects which had their own theological

interpretations ofscripture and the nature ofChrist. Each had its own areas ofinfluence

and its own churches and bishops. Influential and learned clergymen like Pelagius and

Arius wrote extensively about their beliefs on the nature ofChrist and his relationship to

God the Father. Their writings were translated into different languages and spread over

large areas ofRoman territory. The Christianity oflate antiquity was an amalgam of

different philosophical and religious traditions that competed for dominance.

Religious tolerance was not a recognized virtue amongst either clergy or secular

government authorities. Religious disputes and political intrigue forced the Roman

government to mediate between opposing systems ofbelief in the fourth century through 50 ecclesiastical councils. One ofthe more important councils was the first council of

Nicaea in 325. The outcome ofthis council was the adoption of one faith over another, and consequently a precedent was set against which all opposing faiths were judged. The

one sect that was adopted at the council was later to become the one official faith ofthe

Roman Empire, and all others would be marginalized and persecuted out ofexistence.

Christian bishops met at Nicaea, a small town in western Asia Minor. The

emperor Constantine called the council together to settle an old dispute between two

Christian beliefs once and for all. His decision to hold the council at Nicaea had

important political undertones whose outcome would have significant consequences for

his relationship with the Christian Church.

Constantine had recently become master ofthe Eastern Roman provinces, and

thus his efforts to settle differences at Nicaea reflected his desire to consolidate power in

the east. For him to attempt this through using the church suggests that the church had by

this time become a recognizable source ofpower and influence. Church councils were

not a new phenomenon in the reign of Constantine. He had already attempted to coerce

religious unity in the west at a council ofArIes, which did little to end religious strife

between orthodox and heretical bishops. The same situation was present in Asia Minor

as two opposing Christo logical parties feuded over dogma, power, and bishoprics. Arius,

a learned bishop from Alexandria, preached a Christo logy that was in direct opposition to

the Christology ofBishop Athanasius, another Alexandrian native and supporter ofthe

orthodox view ofChristianity. The main point ofcontention between them was the

nature ofChrist, whether or not Christ was ofthe same substance (homoousios) of God

the father. l17 Orthodox bishops believed that Jesus Christ was ofthe same substance as

117Robert M. Grant, "Religion and Politics at the Council ofNicaea," The Journal o/Religion, 55 (1975), 8. 51

God the father, which meant that Jesus has always existed with God the father. Anans believed that Christ was created and is therefore distinct from God the father.

Anus had attracted a significant following ofboth clergy and lay people in Egypt and Palestine yet his ideas were controversial. His belief that Christ is of a different substance from God the Father had gotten him expelled from his see in Egypt, and had angered many bishops who agreed with Athanasius that Christ was ofthe same substance as the Father. l18 The clergy who met at Nicaea were not concerned with the political unity ofthe empire; rather they were concerned about settling the controversy. Constantine, however, was a very clever politician and his presence was a sign ofhis political agenda.

He was not a theologian or a philosopher. Rather he was interested in getting a consensus on this particular Christian doctrine and institutionalizing it with the purpose ofgarnering unity and support from the Christian bishops. 119

Nicaea was a convenient choice for Constantine. The council met at an imperial palace that had recently been taken from Constantine's eastern predecessor, LiciniUS. 120

The town was located very close to Constantinople, a major urban center and Christian stronghold. Constantine showed that he was concerned about these proceedings; he even presided over them. 121 The evidence from the meetings makes it clear who was in charge:

Since by the grace of God, a great and holy synod has been convened at Nicaea, our most pious sovereign Constantine having summoned us out of various cities and provinces for that purpose, and it appeared to us indispensably necessary that a letter should be written also to you on the part ofthe sacred synod in order that you may know that subjects were brought under consideration, what rigidly investigated and also what was eventually determined on and decreed. 122

118 John Cullen Ayer. A Source Book For the Ancient Church: From the Apostolic Age to the Close ofthe Conciliar Period. (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1926),293. 119 Grant, "Religion and Politics at the Council of Nicaea." 2. 120 Ibid 121 Ibid, 6. 122 Socrates, Historia. Ecclesiastica.1, 9, tr. A.C. Zenos; quoted in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. 2, (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1890, accessed 30 July 2010); available from http://www.newadvent.orglfathers/26011.htm; Internet. 52

The pro-Athanasian party at the synod won out over the Arians and the subsequent Nicene Creed that was adopted by the synod proved to Constantine's satisfaction that an official and universal church doctrine had been adopted, a doctrine that could be set against all others who did not agree with the Christological conclusion that Christ is ofthe same substance as the Father. Constantine thought that he had achieved religious unity in the east and had consolidated his power over the Christian churches and solidified his position as sole ruler in the Roman Empire. The Arian position was condemned and its adherents were labeled as heretics .

. . . the impiety and guilt ofArius and his adherents were examined into, in the presence of out most pious Emperor Constantine and it was unanimously decided that his impious opinion be anathematized. with all the blasphemous expressions and tenDS he has blasphemously uttered, affinning that the son ofGod sprang from nothing, and that there was a time when He was not; saying, moreover, that the Son ofGod was possessed of a free will, so as to be capable either of vice or virtue; and calling Him a creature and a work. All these the Holy Synod has anathematized, having scarcely patience to endure the hearing ofsuch an impious or, rather, bewildered opinion, and such abominable blasphemies. 123

The original creed that was presented at the synod was accepted by most bishops and proclaimed by the Emperor Constantine. 124 Interestingly enough this creed was presented by church historian and bishop Eusebius, who stated at the synod that this creed had already been in use by his church for some time; showing that the orthodox theology had been an established position within Christianity for many years ifnot centuries. 125 A revised form ofthis creed is still recited today at Catholic Mass as the Nicene Creed. 126

Constantine, however, soon realized that the controversy did not end and would not be ending anytime soon. The Arian bishops in the eastern provinces ofthe empire still held onto a considerable amount ofecclesiastical power and were not willing to

123 Ibid. 124 Socrates, Hist. Ec., 1. llS Ibid. 126The original creed ofthe synod is not the same Nicene Creed recited today. It underwent several revisions until its CUITent form was proclaimed by the Emperor Theodosius in the year 381. Harnack argued that the original Creed was presented by Eusebius, but some Coptic Christians believe that the original creed was authored by Athanasius. 53 accept the Nicene Creed, despite its support from the Emperor. In the year 339, two years after the death of Constantine, an Arian council at Antioch expelled Athanasius from his see in Alexandria and nominated the Arian Gregory of Cappadocia to take his place. 127 Athanasius fled to Rome where in another council in the year 340 he was vindicated by Pope Julius. 121

The political conflict between the Arian and Nicaean parties wouldn't be settled until the year 380 when the Emperors Gratian, Valentinian and Theodosius proclaimed the Nicaean form of Christianity to be the official religion ofthe Roman Empire.

It is our will that all the peoples who are ruled by the administration ofOur Clemency shall practice that religion which the divine Peter the Apostle transmitted to the Romans, as the religion which he introduced makes clear even unto this day. It is evident that this is the religion that is followed by the PontiffDamasus and by Peter, Bishop ofAlexandria, a man ofapostolic sanctity; that is according to the apostolic discipline and the evangelic doctrine, we shall believe in the single Deity ofthe Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, under the concept ofequal majesty and of the Holy Trinity. 129

This proclamation does not make specific reference to the Nicene Creed. Rather it refers to Pope Damasus and Bishop Peter ofAlexandria, two orthodox apologists who vigorously opposed Arianism. A subsequent law in the following year makes the religious policy of the emperors clearer and outlines specific penalties for those who refuse to follow the law. The emperors, writing to a Proconsul in Asia (an Arian stronghold) stated:

We command that all churches shall immediately be surrendered to those bishops who confess that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are ofone majesty and virtue ... all, however, who dissent from the communion ofthe faith ofthose who have been expressly mentioned in this special enumeration shall be expelled from their churches as manifest heretics and hereafter shall be altogether denied the right and power to obtain churches, in order that the priesthood ofthe true Nicene faith may remain pure, and after the clear regulations ofour law there shall be no opportunity for malicious subtlety. 130

127John Cullen Ayer. A Source Book For the Ancient Church, 310. 128 Ibid. 129 Codex Theodosianus, XVI, 2.1, tr. Clyde Pharr. (Greenwood Press, New York. 1969),440. 130 Codex Theodosianus, XVI 1.3,440. 54

The language of the text shows that the 380 law issued by these emperors (the one quoted above) was ignored and Arian clergy continued to practice their religion. Another interesting feature ofthis law is its punitive nature. For the emperors to order that property be seized and redistributed to those who practice 'the true Nicene faith' was a rather dramatic step in suppressing Arian Christianity. These laws criminalized certain beliefs, a very rare occurrence in the history ofthe Roman Empire. However, the imperial government quickly realized they were nearly impossible to enforce. Laws regarding religion started to become repetitive, indicating that the government's official position on the Nicene faith was meant to be imposed on everybody. Conflicts such as these would come to define the religious climate oflate antiquity as the state and the now official

Catholic Church sought to destroy these 'malicious subtleties' or heretical beliefs.

The heresies do not disappear from the'historical record as a result ofthe actions ofthe Emperors Gratian and Theodosius. Rather, they are found in other areas ofthe empire. The fourth century Arian preacher, Ulfilas, translated the Bible into the Gothic language and converted the Goths to Arian Christianity. In the Western Roman Empire,

Priscillian, an Iberian bishop ofAvila, started what became known as the Priscillianist movement in the late fourth century. He emphasized strict ascetism and rejected marriage and earthly honors. The Berber cleric Magnus Donatus founded the Donatist sect in

North Africa which flourished in the fourth and fifth centuries. These were Christians who argued that the church must be a church of saints, not sinners and advocated that known sinners be banished from the church, with no hope ofreconciliation. There were many more heretical beliefs, all ofthese heresies were problematic for the church and state. As a result, there was a progression in the measures taken against such heresies that ranged from mildly punitive; to extremely severe. 55

It did not take long for anti-heresy legislation to be issued by Constantine following the council ofNicaea. Only a year after the council had ended a law was issued stating that "privileges that have been granted in consideration ofreligion must benefit only the adherents ofthe Catholic faith."!3! It also added that "heretics and schismatics shall not only be alien to these privileges but shall also be found and subject to various compulsory public services."132 A precedent of favoring Catholics and marginalizing those who were not had been set. The method ofimposing 'compulsory public services' on non-Catholics would soon become a common method of marginalization. The public services had become a common Roman practice in late antiquity in which almost everyone was put into direct service of the government, similar to the modem practice in some countries ofcompulsory service in the military. As the fourth century progressed the laws against heretics become more severe. For example, in the year 378 the

Emperors Valens, Gratian, and Valentinian issued a law stating, " ... in order that the illicit practice of heretical assembly should cease, we command that all places should be confiscated in which their altars were located under the false guise ofreligion, whether such assemblies were held in towns or in the country outside the churches where om peace prevails.,,133 This law was issued at Trier to Hesperius, who was the prefect ofthe city. This is clear evidence that heresies were widespread and well known in both eastern and western halves of the empire, and the fact that the government had to pass a law forbidding heretics from even meeting shows that the government was fighting a losing battle against the rising tide of heresy. Another futile attempt at stopping all heresy was attempted at Milan in the year 379, which was at the time the capital of the Western

Empire.

131 Codex Theodosianus, XVI, 5.1,450. 112Ibid. 133 Codex Theodosianus XVI, 5.4, 450. 56

All heresies are forbidden by both divine and imperial laws and shall forever cease. If any profane man by his punishable teachings should weaken the concept of God, he shall have the right to know such noxious doctrines only for himself but shall not reveal them to others to their hurt. 134

This law shows that there were many heretical preachers traveling and teaching their beliefs to the people. The state took an interest into stopping such activity to protect others from apostasy and heresy. It is significant that such a law was passed in the year

379. This was only a year after the disastrous battle ofAdrianople in which a Roman army was defeated and the Emperor Valens slain by the rebellious Goths. The Goths were converted by the Arian preacher Ulfilas perhaps not two decades before this rebellion occurred on Roman soil.

Another law passed in 381 by the same emperors shows just how afraid the government had become of heretical movements and their threatening presence to the

Catholic Church:

Crowds shall be kept away from the unlawful congregations of all the heretics. The name of the One and Supreme God shall be celebrated everywhere; the observance, destined to remain forever, of the Nicene faith, as transmitted long ago by Our ancestors and confirmed by the declaration and testimony ofdivine religions, shall be maintained. The contamination ofthe Photinian pestilence, the poison ofthe Arian sacrilege, the crime of the Eunomian perfidy and the sectarian monstrosities, abominable because ofthe ill­ omened names oftheir authors, shall be abolished even from the hearing ofmen. \35

This law goes on further to define those who follow the Nicene faith as the only true adherent ofthe Catholic religion, suggesting that there were some who claimed to be

Catholic but didn't fully accept the Nicene Creed. 136 Italso goes on to say "who are not devoted to the aforesaid doctrines shall cease to assume, with studied deceit, the name of true religion."137 It also forbids heretics to assemble in towns, to hold offices within the church, and banishes known heretics from cities "in order that Catholic churches throughout the whole world may be restored to all orthodox bishops who hold the Nicene

134 Codex Theodosianus XVI, 5.5,450. m Codex Theodosianus, XVI, 5.6.1, 451. 136 Ibid, XVI, 5.6.2. 137 Ibid, XVI, 5.6.3. 57 faith.,,138 This law was issued at Constantinople in 381 which was close to the epicenter of the Gothic insurrection. The Romans and the Goths were still fighting and the Goths had been laying waste to the Thracian countryside. 139 It seemed reasonable to the average lay person to convert to Arianism to avoid any possible repercussions from the rebelling gothic warriors. The state and the chmch sought to prevent any such thing from happening. Repetitious laws similar to the aforementioned ones were also passed in the years 383 and 384 which the Arians, Eunomians (a branch ofArianism) and newly named sects, the Apollinarians and the Macedonians, were targeted by the state. They

were banned from assembling in towns and cities, and were banned from building their own churches and meeting places. If caught, their property would be seized and be

'vindicated to the fisc' or in other words, handed over to the state as a means of raising

money. 140

Thus the problem that the chmch faced with heresies became more complicated

dming the latter half ofthe fomth centmy as heretical movements came to be associated

with invading barbarian tribes looking for plunder. The naime ofthe laws issued shows

clearly that Christianity was mostly an mban movement and its missionaries established

chmches and other meeting places inside oftowns and cities rather than in rmal

communities. The emphasis the emperors took at banishing heretics from Catholic

circles and preventing them from even being in towns and cities shows clearly that

heresies were spreading within mban areas as well and were operating openly alongside

the catholic clergy. Towns and cities were also a favorite target for invading barbarian

tribes because Roman civilization (its laws, cultme, and wealth) emanated from cities.

138 Ibid. 139 Ammianus Marcellinus. The Later Roman Empire. Book 31.8, tr. Walter Hamilton. (London: Penguin Books, 1986),425. 140 Codex Theod08ianus, XVI 5.12, 452 and XVI 5.13, 453. 58

Threatening a Roman city could elicit concessions from the government. The Gothic

King Fritigern used this tactic at Constantinople following the battle of Adrianople. By the end ofthe fourth century, a bishop had become as Henry Coster argues, "defender of his flock against predatory soldiers and officials, and against barbarian invaders," couldn't allow such threats to exist, and enlisted the help ofthe state to protect them. 141

The Roman Empire officially became a Catholic one in the year 380 when the emperors issued an edict from Thessalonica proclaiming that those who follow the religion ofSt. Peter "shall embrace the name of Catholic Christian" .142 This settled the debate as far as the emperors were concerned, but for the Christian clergy the debate was far from over and religious controversies and heresies would continue to proliferate all over the Roman Empire. The government, fearing the presence of barbarian heretics and pagans threatening the power ofthe Catholic Church, tried to implement harsher regulations with the intention to at first stopping, then later eliminating any hint ofheresy within Roman territory. An examination of fifth century laws dealing with religion and heresy reveals that the Roman state became seemingly paranoid and obsessed with

heretics.

State Sponsored Religion

The state had two preferred methods ofpromoting its official religion. By

patronage ofthe Catholic Church and by suppression ofnon-Catholic sects. Shortly after

the edict ofMilan, a law was issued by Constantine addressing the issue ofCatholic

clergy being harassed by heretics. This is one of the first instances in which the word

Catholic was used within the context of Roman legalism. This suggests that the term

Catholic was already a well-established religious and theological tradition within the

l4ICharles Henry Coster. "Christianity and the Invasions: Synesius ofCyrene." The Classical Journal. 55 (1960),296. 142 Codex Theodosianus 16.1.2, 440. 59 realm ofChristendom. The law also states that the Catholic clergymen were being forced into compulsory public services. something Constantine didn't like. Therefore the law states: " ... ifyour Gravity should fmd any person thus harassed, another person shall be chosen as a substitute for him that henceforward men ofthe aforesaid religion shall be protected from such outrages.,,143 This law was issued in 313, the same year that the edict ofMilan was issued, thus showing that fostering Christianity was an early priority of

Constantine.

Soon other laws were issued that further protected the Catholic Church from those trying to harm it. A law issued ten years later protected Catholic clergy from such services compulsory public services, decreeing that those who are serving the "Catholic sect" are protected from being forced to perform "the ritual ofan alien superstition" and those who try to force Catholics to do so are to be "beaten publicly with clubs." 144

The term "alien" in this context comes from the Latin word Alienus. The word carried a legal defmition within the Theodosian Code of"not being connected" to the true religion ofthe empire. 14S

The laws in the Theodosian Code differentiate between Christians and heretics using legal terms. Non-Catholics. Jews and pagans were considered to be Alieni, those who where faithful to the church were given the legal term, Christianae Dignitates, or

Christian dignity, which conferred upon those certain privileges and a respectable status in society. 146 Such privileges could be being appointed to an imperial office or serving in the imperial household or holding a high social ra.nl4 something that was conferred by the emperor. In other words. the law only treated faithful Catholics to be legitimate citizens

143 Codex Theodosianus 16.2.1,441. 144 Codex Theodosianus 16.2.5,441. 14'Carolina Lo Nero, "Christiana Dignitas: New Christian Criteria for Citizenship in the Late Roman Empire." Medieval Encounters. 7 (2001) 160. 146Ibid, 159. 60 in the Roman Empire, and those who were not were labeled alieni. This legal concept is illustrated more clearly by a law in the Theodosian code which states that ifanyone becomes an apostate by "giving themselves over to sacrifices... they shall be branded with perpetual infamy and shall not be numbered even among the lower dregs ofthe ignoble crowd.,,147 Perpetual infamy or in Latin, perpetua infamia, was a legal term that meant anyone who voluntarily "renounced their inborn dignity as Christians and the rights that accompany that dignity."I48 The aforementioned rights Christians enjoyed were therefore closed off to those considered Alieni,or those apostates who now lived in perpetual infamy.

Constantine's sons continued the policy of protecting the church by issuing laws exempting the church from taxation. The wording ofthe text is quite interesting because

Constantius addresses the law directly to the clergy: " ... no person shall obligate you and your slaves to new tax payments, but you shall enjoy exemption."149 A law issued in the year 349 by Constantius reiterates the policy started by Constantine that "all clerics must be exempt from compulsory public services and from every annoyance of municipal duties. Their sons moreover, must continue in the Church, ifthey are not held obligated to the municipal councilS."ISO This law is more ambiguous; it includes the collective term

"clergy" without specifying ifthe clergy must be catholic, or ifit includes Christian clergy, or if it includes clergy ofany religion. But since the emperors already passed laws protecting the Catholic Church from compulsory public services and there is no further evidence in the code that this privilege had been extended to other clergy, let alone Pagans, therefore it is safe to say that this law pertained only to Catholics.

147Codex Theodosianius 16.5.7,466. 141Carolina Lo Nero. "Christiana Dignitas: New Christian Criteria for Citizenship in the Late Roman Empire," Medieval Encounters, 7 (2001) 161. 149 Codex Theodosianus 16.2.8, 442. 150 Ibid, 2.9. 61

As the fifth century commenced, the state sought to further protect the church by granting clergymen certain legal immunities. A law issued by the Emperors Honorius and Theodosius allowed clerics to be accused of wrong doing only before bishops, and not secular officials. lSI Another law issued in the year 408 demands that ifa bishop removes a member ofthe clergy from his ministry or church and bans him from the church, then that ex-clergyman must be "vindicated to the municipal council, so that he may no longer have :free opportunity to return to the church."IS2 In other words, clergy have the privilege ofbeing exempted from compulsory public services, but not ifthey were a former member of the clergy.

The evidence shows that the state purposefully elevated the church above the secular legal system. The church was given the right to police itself and the secular legal authorities did not have the ability to accuse the church in court, or have the right to bring charges against the clergy. The patronage ofthe church by the Roman Emperors demonstrates their desire to protect it from outside forces like secular authorities, heretics and barbarians. In fact, the church acted as a self regulatory institution, and its bishops policed their own congregations with normally little interference from government authorities. This was problematic for the church. Many parishes ran self-sustaining communities that were able to raise funds operate independently. However, this semi- autonomy made it profoundly difficult for the church to monitor and regulate the beliefs ofindividual bishops. Policing minds became a major priority for the church, which was an impossible task. Nevertheless, the church sought to create a unified set ofstandards for bishops so that such a thing wouldn't happen. The Apostolic Constitutions contain guidelines in which the bishops were expected to follow, ranging from proper conduct to

lSI Codex Theodosianus 16.2.41,447. 152 Codex Theodosianus 16.2.39,447. 62 charitable practices. In an attempt to prevent apostasy, one section ofthe document demands that clergy and laity:

Abstain from all the heathen books. For what have you to do with such foreign discourses, or laws, or false prophets, which subvert the filith of the unstable? For what defect do you find in the law of God, that you should have recourse to those heathenish fables? For ifyou have a mind to read history, you have the books of the Kings; ifbooks ofwisdom or poetry, you have those ofthe Prophets, ofJob, and the Proverbs, in which you will find greater depth of sagacity than in all the heathen poets and sophisters, because these are the words of the Lord, the only wise God. Ifyou desire something to sing, you have the Psalms; if the origin ofthings, you have Genesis; if laws and statutes, you have the glorious law ofthe Lord God. Therefore utterly abstain from all strange and diabolical books.153

For the church to place this much importance on keeping its clergy and laity from reading books it found offensive meant that it must have been a big problem for them. It also shows that heretical literature must have been flourishing in Europe. The document goes to state that the "Catholic Church is the plantation of God and His beloved vineyard; containing those who have believed in His unerring divine religion; who are the heirs by faith ofHis everlasting kingdom"lS4

Bishops were directed by the Apostolic Constitutions to avoid being influenced by heresies and schisms. The document directly addresses all bishops and states:

Above all things, 0 bishop, avoid the sad and dangerous and most atheistical heresies, eschewing them as fire that burns those that come near to it. Avoid also schisms: for it is neither lawful to tum one's mind towards wicked heresies, nor to separate from those of the same sentiment out ofambition. For some who ventured to set up such practices of old did not escape punishment. ISS

A noticeable concern addressed in this passage is the defection ofpriests to heresies, which suggests that ambitious bishops would throw their allegiance from one sect, to another.

153 Apostolic Constitutions, tr. James Donaldson; quoted in Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 7 (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Pbulishing Co., 1886); available from New Advent.org http://www.newadvent.orgifathers/07151.htm; internet; 1.2.6. 154 Ibid, 1. us Ibid, 6.1. 63

The church thought of competing sects of Christianity as a source ofblasphemy whose agenda was to denounce everything the church believed in. The document takes a polemical turn when explaining the true nature ofheresies calling them:

Now all these had one and the same design ofatheism, to blaspheme Almighty God, to spread their doctrine that He is an unknown being, and not the Father ofChrist, nor the Creator ofthe world; but one who cannot be spoken ot: ineffable, not to be named, and begotten by Himself; that we are not to make use ofthe law and the prophets; that there is no providence and no resurrection to be believed; that there is no judgment nor retribution; that the soul is not immortal; that we must only indulge our pleasures, and turn to any sort ofworship without distinction. 1S6

The church's perception is one of contempt, which hid the reality that heretical sects and preachers were in fact performing their self imposed duty ofpreaching their version of the Gospel ofChrist. But this perception is important historically because it implies a high level of tension that was prevalent in late antiquity. The entire basis ofthe Church's understanding on heresies was their supposed disbelief in any type ofGod at all. Such teachings were considered a grave threat.

To rectify any possible confusion as to the true doctrine bishops were supposed to follow, the constitutions includes an interesting passage which presents an abbreviated version ofthe Nicene Creed mixed with other orthodox creeds.

But we, who are the children of God and the sons ofpeace, do preach the holy and right word ofpiety, and declare one only God, the Lord ofthe law and ofthe prophets, the Maker ofthe world, the Father of Christ; not a being that caused Himselt: or begot Himself, as they suppose, but eternal, and without original, and inhabiting light inaccessible; not two or three, or manifold, but eternally one only; not a being that cannot be known or spoken of, but who was preached by the law and the prophets; the Almighty, the Supreme Governor of all things, the All-powerful Being; the God and Father ofthe Only-begotten, and ofthe First-born ofthe whole creation; one God, the Father ofone Son, not ofmany; the Maker of one Comforter by Christ, the Maker ofthe other orders, the one Creator ofthe several creatures by Christ, the same their Preserver and Legislator by Him; the cause ofthe resurrection, and ofthe judgment, and ofthe retribution which shall be made by Him: that this same Christ was pleased to become man, and went through life without sin, and suffered, and rose from the dead, and returned to Him that sent Him. We also say that every creature ofGod is good, and nothing abominable; that everything for the support oflife, when it is partaken of righteously, is very good: for, according to the Scripture, all things were very good. We believe that lawful marriage, and the begetting ofchildren, is honorable and uodefiled; for difference ofsexes was formed in Adam and Eve for the increase ofmankind We acknowledge with us a soul

lS6 Apostolic Constitutions, 6.2.10. 64

that is incorporeal and immortal-ilot corruptible as bodies are, but immortal, as being rational and free. 1S1

The Christo logical musings and the theological discussions in this passage are very orthodox in nature. The Nicene creed is consistent with this exposition in the Apostolic

Constitutions in that is too declares that Jesus is God's only begotten son. The added passage about lawful marriage and the begetting ofChildren is interesting from a historical standpoint as well. It was included here to clear any confusion about the position the Catholic Church took on marriage and children. Some sects ofChristianity did not condone marriage and instead demanded strict celibacy and asceticism. This was true ofthe Pelagians in Gaul and Britain as well as some Gnostic groups in Syria and

Egypt. There could be no excuse now for Catholic bishops not knowing the true position ofthe Catholic church regarding this issue. Bishops were now expected to tow the line for Catholicism.

In another attempt to stop heresy, the state resorted to confiscating wealth from convicted heretics. This practice is practice is illustrated by a law issued in year the 407 that was directly aimed at punishing several groups operating in the empire. Specifically they were the Phrygians and the Priscillianists. It declares their heresies to be a "public crimen and authorizes the Roman authorities to "pursue the aforesaid persons by the confiscation oftheir goods."158 In addition, the law forbids the children ofconvicted heretics ofreceiving any inheritance from their heretic parents at all unless "they have abandoned the depravity oftheir fathers; for we extend pardon to those persons who repent oftheir transgressions."159 Finally, this law allows the state to confiscate property

U1 Apostolic Constitutions, 6.3.11. ISS Codex Theodosianus 16.5.40.1,457. 1S91bid, 16.5.40.5. 65 from an owner of"a landed estate" ifthat owner knowingly harbors congregations of heretics. 160

In another anti-heretical act, the Emperors Honorius and Theodosius issued a law prohibiting "those persons who are hostile to the Catholic sect to perform imperial service within the palace, so that no person who disagrees with Us in faith and in religion shall be associated with Us in any way.,,161 Those same emperors went a step further when they issued another law banning "Montanists, the Priscillianists, and other breeds of such nefarious superstition" from imperial service, thereby preventing them from serving in the army.,,162 Despite this ban, the law explicitly states that these heretics are not exempt from performing compulsory public services. 163

Apparently tension between certain Christian sects erupted into outright violence.

One law contained in the Theodosian Code refers to those who have committed

"outrages" against African bishops. While the text ofthe law does not specifically accuse any group ofwrongdoing, it does mention by the a group ofheretics called the Donatists, by warning them that they "shall not suppose that the provisions ofthe law previously issued against them have diminished in force."I64 In Northern Africa during the late fourth and fifth centuries there was a sect ofChristianity known as Donatists who were notorious for their violent activities against Catholics. This sect emphasized that the church was supposed to be a church ofsaints and not sinners and refused forgiveness for offenders against their rules. Apparently some of the secular judges might have been

Donastist sympathizers because the law implies that the judges neglected their

160 Ibid. 161 Codex Theodosianus 16.5.42,457. 162 Codex Theodosianus 16.5.48, 458. 163 Ibid. 64 1 Sirmodian Constitutions in Codex Theodosianus, Title 14,485. 66 responsibilities to prosecute offenders. 165 The law mentions that the violence might even have been condoned by certain persons:

"We learn that throughout Africa so much has been pennitted to the rash lawlessness of certain persons who afflicted with various tortures, bishops ofthe Christian faith who had been snatched from their own homes or, what is more atrocious, who had been dragged from the inner sanctuaries ofthe Catholic Church."I66

The text ofthe law makes note ofa specific deed that was done, a deed that is not known, but the length ofthe text suggests that this was a serious attack on the bishops ofthe

African church. The law authorizes the judges in Africa (apparently the secular ones) to seek out the perpetrators ofthe violence and ifconvicted, the perpetrators shall be sentenced to the mines or deported and their property seized.167 The law authorizes the use ofcapital punishment for convicts. This law is very similar to another law issued in the year 409 which mentions violence directed towards Catholic Churches.

Ifany person should break forth into such sacrilege that he should invade Catholic Churches and should inflict any outrage on the priests and ministers, or on the worship itself and on the place ofworship, whatever occurs shall be brought to the notice ofthe authorities by letters ofthe municipal senates, magistrates, and curators, and by official reports ofthe apparitors who are called rural police, so that the names ofthose who could be recognized may be revea1ed. 161

This law demands capital punishment for any violator; thus authorizing the state to kill on behalf ofthe church. But this begs the following question: how much did the church influence the state when it came time to religious policy, and how does it connect to their relationship with heretics and barbarians?

The Church Fathers and Heretics

To answer this question it necessary to examine the literature written by some of the more influential bishops who had close ties to the imperial government. Pope Leo the

Greatwas a prolific writer and bishop of Rome from 440 to 461. His works provide

16'lbid ,484. 166lbid, 484. 167lbid 161 Codex Theodosianus 16.2.31, 44S. 67 important insights into his agenda as pope and the world in which he lived. He also maintained close ties to the Senate in Rome and the emperor in Ravenna; his plea to

Attila the Hun to stop the invasion ofItaly demonstrates how much the state had entrusted its interests to the church at Rome The zealous nature of his beliefs are noticeable. Leo wrote about heretics in Italy during his reign as pope. Many ofLeo's published sermons and letters are extant. In one sermon Leo argues that as a response to the almsgiving and charity practiced by his congregation, Satan proliferated heresies in order to harm them. 169 He emphasized that:

... under a false profession ofthe Christian name he may conupt those whom he is not allowed to attack with open and bloody persecutions, and for this work he has heretics in his service whom he has led astray from the catholic Faith. 170

He goes on to substantiate this argument with New Testament scripture, reminding the congregation that heretics can come "in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravaging wolves:m1 He goes on in the sermon to attack the Manichees on their religious rites and beliefs as an example ofa group ofpeople who, "gathered together with all manner offllth in these men as if in a cesspool."172 The Manichees were not christian heretics, but rather adherents ofa separate religion, Manichaeism. This religion originated in Persia around the third century and spread throughout the Roman world by

Manichaean missionaries. Manichaenas believed in two Gods, the God ofmatter and the

God ofthe spirit. They believed that anything coming from matter was corrupting and

evil and the God of spirit was good. Christian bishops strongly opposed such beliefs and

sought to extirpate any hint ofManichaeism from their diocese.

169 Leo I, Sermons, 16.3, tr. Charles Lett Feltoe; quoted in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, rtSeries, Vol. 12. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1895, accessed 291anuary 2010); available from http://www.newadvent.orglfathersl360316.htm; Internet. 170 Ibid. 171 Ibid. 172 Ibid, 16.4. 68

Leo had to deal with this problem when a community ofManichees was discovered in Rome under his watch. He tried to denounce the Manichees by accusing them ofengaging in orgies with young girls. 173 He makes reference to an inquisition performed to investigate the Manichaean sect, an inquisition that proved to his satisfaction to reveal the true nature ofthis religion. We can doubt this inquisition in

Rome really provided an accurate description ofManichaean rites and practices. But to

Leo's Roman congregation, his words resonated. He pleaded to his congregation to

"renounce all friendship with these men who are utterly abominable and pestilential," and report any Manichaean adherents to the authorities. 174

His anti-Manichaean sentiment and advocacy for the suppression of this heresy was effective. His passionate rhetoric was able to influence the emperor to enact legislation which states "that ifany ofthe Manichaeans should be apprehended anywhere in the world, he shall receive, by the authority ofthe public security, the penalties which the laws have sanctioned against persons guilty to Sacrilege.,,17s Apparently the emperor in Ravenna was listening because a law issued during Leo's reign seems to imply that the discovery of the Manichaean congregation in Rome was a recent occurrence as seen in a law that states that the Manichees "have been revealed by their very manifest confession in the court ofthe most blessed Pope Leo...,,176 This law was proclaimed at Rome in the year 445. Leo was single handedly able to influence state policies by simply speaking.

Pope Leo was just as vicious attacking heretics groups as well. The Pelagians were a Christian sect that originated in Britain in the fourth century by its founder,

Peiagius, a Christian priest who believed in the doctrine offree will, and denounced the

\7.l Ibid. 14 1 Ibid, 16.5. 175 Nov. Val, 18.1,531. 116 Ibid. 69 doctrine of original sin. These views were opposed to the orthodox belief of predestination and original sin. Leo became aware that a group ofPelagians were receiving communion from the Catholic Bishop ofAquileia, close to modem Venice. The problem was however, they were doing so without first having renounced their heretic religion. Leo insists in a letter that a provincial synod be convened in order to compel the

Pelagians to renounce their heresy and proclaim their loyalty to the Catholic Church. 177

He goes on to argue his case that the Pelagians' view of God's grace was unscriptural, thereby revealing a major objection he harbored for this particular sect He cites New

Testament writings as proof that this sect was in error. I78 Leo was therefore a staunch opponent non catholic beliefs.

st. Athanasius was a leading opponent ofArianism during the fourth century and frequently wrote anti-Arian literature. He was present at the council ofNicaea and supported the orthodox Christological doctrine that Christ is ofthe same substance as

God the father. He was well connected with imperial politics and was a shrewd church politician in his own right. Despite his aptitude for politics, he was frequently at odds with emperors and other bishops and he was exiled from various sees he occupied five times. He did manage however, to enjoy imperial support from the emperor

Constantine. I79 He wrote History ofthe Arians which he argues from a moralistic position that the Arian sect is to be denounced and rejected by all for the sake oftheir souls. He attempts to denounce Arianism by showing his audience that whenever Arianism is

"overthrown by argument" they resort to violence and imprisonment ofwhoever

177 Leo I, Letters, 1.2. 118 Ibid, 1.3. I7~obert M. Grant. "Religion and Politics at the Council ofNicaea," The Journal ofReligiOn. 55 (1975) 1, 11. 70

disagrees with them. 180 He even expresses his utter contempt for Constantine's successor and son, the Arian emperor Constantius, whom he compares to Pilate in his degeneracy because Constantius banished certain Catholic bishops from their sees for their refusal to accept Arian dogma. 181

Athanasius approaches his highly subjective work on the Arians from a purely

moralistic point ofview. He does not make use oftheology or philosophy to refute the

claims ofthe Arians. Rather he attempts to show his audience that the immoral behavior

ofthe Arians is enough to condemn them. He makes frequent use ofthe term "wicked"

and "impiety" to make his case. However powerful his language might have been, his

bias reveals a double standard. He is correct to point out the anti-catholic violence

employed by Arians, but neglects to mention that Catholics were involved in the same

sort of activity against the Arians. This should not be a surprise; Athanasius was trying

to incriminate the Arian faith. But many Catholic bishops and clergy at that time were

also responsible in instigating anti-Arian violence.

Attempts to incriminate other heretical sects were initiated in North Africa as

well. This time it was 8t. Augustine ofHippo who was at the forefront of fighting

against a radical sect of Christians called the Donatists. He was highly vocal in his

condemnation ofthe Donatist sect, which flourished in North Africa during his career as

bishop ofHippo. Reading his essay on Donatists would suggest to the reader that the

Donatists had a particular propensity to violence. In a letter he wrote to Boniface, Count

ofAfrica, he reported:

Anyone who had shown contempt for their hard words were compelled by harder blows to do what they desired. The houses of innocent persons who had offended them were either razed to the ground or burned. Certain heads of families of honorable parentage,

180st. Athanasius, History ofthe Ariana, 8.67. tr. M. Atkinson and Archibald Robertson; quoted in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, r Series, Vol. 4 (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1892 accessed 30 January 2010); available from http://www.newadvent.orglfathersl28158.hlm); Internet 181 Ibid, 7.68. 71

and brought up with a good education were carried away half dead after their deeds of violence, or bound to the mill, and compelled by blows to turn it round, after the fashion ofthe meanest beasts ofburden.III

Augustine goes on to further report the unthinkable; Donatists had rioted in Carthage and violently attacked Catholic Churches. His descriptive language ofthe actions ofthe

Donatist attacks on the churches in Carthage was an attempt to convince the ruling bureaucracy that indeed the Donatist set should be extinguished. Augustine, referencing a decision by the Catholic Church in North Africa declaring Donatist baptisms to be void, tried to show that the Donatist response to the decision reveals their true nature as a heretical group, and only true conversion to Catholicism would save their souls.

Then indeed they blazed forth with such fury, and were so excited by the goadings of hatred, that scarcely any churches of our communion could be safe against their treachery and violence and most undisguised robberies; scarcely any road secure by which men could travel to preach the peace ofthe Catholic Church in opposition to their madness and convict the rashness oftheir folly by the clear enunciation ofthe truth. They went so far, besides, in proposing hard terms ofreconciliation, not only to the laity or to any of the clergy, but even in a measure to certain ofthe Catholic bishops. For the only alternative offered was to hold their tongues about the truth, or to endure their savage fury. 113

The emperor in Ravenna became aware of the troubles that the church was facing in Carthage. There are several laws contained in the Theodosian Code that were intended to specifically deal with Donatists. The nature of these laws was comparably punitive to most ofthe other laws which sought to suppress heresy.

Comparing the laws contained in the Theodosian Code and the writings of the church fathers reveal that the relationship between the church and the state evolved from being initially neutral shortly after the edict ofMilan to very symbiotic in the fifth century. The state enacted legislation to protect the church from heresy and schism. The church frequently appealed to the state for actions to

1I2St. Augustine, Letters, U. J.R King,; quoted in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 1" Series, Vol. I, (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1887, accessed 30 Januw:y 2010), available from (Newadvent.org, http://www.newadvent.orglfatherslll02185.htm). 185.4.15. 183 Ibid, 185.4.18. 72 be taken against heresies. The scope ofthe religious controversies clearly intensified as Christianity grew in the fourth century due to the diversification of

Christian teachings to all parts ofthe Roman Empire. Whereas in the first balf of the fourth century it was common to see teachings ofheretics anathematized and their bishops expelled from their sees, by the latter fourth century it had become common to see laws that forbade all meetings ofheretic congregations in towns and cities, and the churches and meeting places ofheretics confiscated and turned over to the government. Finally, by the fifth century it was common to see laws that called for the death ofheretics. Despite the efforts ofthe church and state to destroy heresies through legal means, it was unsuccessful. Heresies persisted well beyond the end ofthe Roman Empire in the west. 73

Chapter Four

Methods ofCharity

Christian Charity was practiced in the ancient world primarily to fulfill ethical and religious duties that were expected by bishops, to protect against the spread of heretical beliefs, to mitigate devastation brought by barbarian invaders and to ensure the survival of a community of believers. The specific methods used were not uniform and tended to be adapted according to local circumstances. By Late Antiquity, the church had already been involved in the task ofhelping people in distress for centuries. The tradition had a scriptural, theological and ethical basis to it and one ofits strengths was its

practical flexibility in implementing charitable practices. Depending on the situation,

Christian charity tended to be performed in a way that sought to address a particular need

in a particular place to ensure the survival ofa community. After centuries ofpersecution

by pagan emperors, Christian communities became well adapted at being able to endure

hardships.

The primary sources from late antiquity regarding charity normally do not go into

explicit detail about how resources were distributed to the poor. Much ofwhat is written

about how charity functioned was written by bishops exhorting their congregations to

altruism in the face ofa catastrophe. Others make allusions to charitable acts as into part

ofa larger religious context. However there is enough evidence available to draw

conclusions on how some resources were utilized and how they were distributed. There

is also enough evidence to show how certain groups ofpeople were labeled "poor" by the

church and what the poor were entitled to receive. 74

Who were ideDtified as being poor?

It is important to define who was considered poor in the ancient world. The term as it was applied in the Roman Empire did not have the same meaning as is understood today. Even then, the meaning ofthe term changed over time. Being poor was not defined as being destitute, homeless, or penniless. Rather, being poor meant lacking in a life of"leisure and independence regarded as essential to the life ofa gentleman."I84 In this sense, the majority ofthe population ofany given Greek or Roman city was therefore considered poor because they didn't have a large estate to enjoy or as much money to spend as rich citizens might. Romans tended to describe the poor not as destitute beggars, but rather those who have "just enough to keep them going in leisured indigence and their chief struggle is not to keep from starving, but to avoid the degradation ofhaving to work.,,185 Nor were the poor necessarily landless. They could

own small plots of land in the countryside and even own slaves. Those who were

penniless and homeless were the destitute and were frequently spoken about in

disparaging terms.

Wealthy Romans would often use their position ofpower to gain the support of

the poor. This would often come in the form ofdonations that the wealthy would make

to a community in exchange for some form of support, whether it be a gift in exchange

with a wealthy patron or for votes in an election. This practice had already been common

for centuries before the rise ofChristianity in Europe, as shown by the ancient institution

ofthe patron and client relationship. Patrons, who were almost certainly wealthy

citizens who owned large estates, would routinely give gifts to clients (who were

generally the poor people), which could mean certain individuals or entire communities.

184A.R. Hands, Charities and Social Aid in Greece and Rome, 62. m Ibid. 7S

Sometimes patrons would even donate or bequeath some of their property to a community for the public to enjoy. But giving gifts to a community would almost certainly carry with it the expectation of getting something in return. l86 While this might seem like more of an economic transaction, in the Roman Empire an offer of a gift with the expectation of a return meant an offer offriendship and was the basis offriendly intercourse and exchange between client and patron. 187 As A.R. Hands put it, "The offer ofa gift represents an offer of friendship, an offer not lightly to be rejected, since the number offriends which a man has may well be as important to his security and prestige as the value of his material possessions.,,188 This Latin term used to describe the practice ofgift giving is beneficia.

This relationship was, in fact, a ''vertical social structure, binding together people ofa higher and lower rank.,,189 The relationship clients had to endure with their patrons was not always a pleasant experience. Some Romans complained about the ritualistic aspect ofthe salulano or "morning salute" which meant a client having to go to a patrons house. The Roman poet Martial wrote an epigram to his patron:

IfI didn't wish and didn't deserve to see you "at home" this morning Paulus-,well, then, may I live even farther from your Esquiline home than I do. As it is, I live on the Quirinal, near the temples of Flora and Jupiter. I must ascend the steep path, up the hill from the Subura, and the filthy pavement ofthe slick steps. I can scarcely break through the long droves ofmules and the marble blocks being hauled at the end ofmany cable ropes. Then, as the end of these thousand labors, something even more annoying happens:, Paulus, your doorman tells me, who am thoroughly exhausted, that you are not "at home" .190

This institution did have its critics. Towards the end ofthe Roman republic an into the early imperial age, some Roman writers wrote about giving without expecting anything in return. This idea was somewhat ofa departure from the previous social

186 Ibid, 18. 187 Ibid, 26. 181 Ibid, 30. 119 Ja-Ann Shelton, As the Romans Did. 2nd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press 1998), 14. 1901bid. 76 practice, but the first century stoic philosopher Seneca wrote: "Doing good simply means paying out; if you receive anything in return, then you do good business, but ifthere is no return you make no loss". 191 Cicero makes a similar statement, "Ifwe are truly liberal and beneficent we do not make a profitable business ofdoing good".192 This message of giving without expecting anything in return was adopted by Christianity and referenced by late antique Christian writers as an important aspect ofreligious observance. Their discussions about the importance ofcharity redefined who was considered poor.

Increasingly, Christian bishops included the penniless and the destitute into the list of those eligible to receive aid.

Christianity's Idea of Giving

Pre-Constantinian bishops had developed specific methods which helped ensure the survival ofChristian communities despite the challenges they faced. Persecutions instigated by the pagan Roman government had forced Christian communities to figure out how to endure with what they had. Charity for these early churches was a means of survival. Therefore the charitable activities the church performed during the fourth and fifth centuries were not innovations, but rather a continuation of practices that had already been developed as early as the time of St. Paul in the first century. Whereas pagans were generally accustomed to giving gifts to individuals or communities in return for friendship or political support, christian bishops taught their congregations to be lovers ofthe poor and and sought to give money to the real poor ofthe city, rather than to give money to adorn the city with beautiful buildings. 193 The Christian idea ofgiving

191Cicero, de amic. 20, 71; Seneca, de. be. 16, I; quoted in A. R. Hands, Charities and Social Aid in Greece and Rome, 30. 1921bid. 193Peter Brown, Poverty and Leadership in the Later Roman Empire, (Hanover, NH: University Press of New England, 2002), 6. 77

"involved, rather, a gesture that reached out, by preference, to touch the outermost margins of society."l94

The earliest figures of Christianity frequently expounded on the virtues ofcharity.

S1. Paul's writings were hugely influential to the early Christian church. Developing charitable institutions within Christianity could largely be traced back to the influence

Paul's writings had on Christian consciousness. Clement of Rome, one ofthe first

Christian bishops in Rome wrote towards the end ofthe first century to the Christian community at Corinth which was dealing with a crisis. The Corinthians wrote to

Clement seeking his advice regarding a schism in the church. Clement noted that within the Corinthian churc~ opposing sides had become too infatuated with power, and sparring factions within the community were threatening to leave. Sin is the underlying assumption behind all ofthis trouble and Clement writes, " ...righteousness and peace are now far departed from you, inasmuch as every one abandons the fear ofGod, and has become blind in His fai~ neither walks in the ordinances ofHis appointment, nor acts a part becoming a Christian.. "19S What did this Christian bishop believe would be an acceptable solution to this problem? Clement wrote that the community must rely on one another for support and warned them not to let personal pursuits take precedence over the true meaning ofbeing a Christian. One passage explains, "Let our whole body, then, be preserved in Christ Jesus; and let every one be subject to his neighbor, according to the special gift bestowed upon him. Let the strong not despise the weak, and let the weak show respect unto the strong.,,196 To Clement, power and glory were not the objective of being apart of a community, as some apparently sought. But rather, being part ofa

194 Ibid, 8 19~Clement ofRome, Epistles, 1.3, tr. John Keith, quoted in Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 9 (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., accessed 28 September 2009); available from http://www.newadvent.orglfatherslIOIO.htm); Internet. 196 Ibid, 1.38. 78 community meant having a shared responsibility to the message ofChrist in order to ensure the community's survival. Clement's epistle dates from the late fIrst century, a time when Christianity was just beginning to feel the hardships ofRome's anti-Christian persecutions. Clement was influenced by the writing of Paul, who had died probably around thirty years before Clement's fIrst epistle.

New Christian congregations tended to adapt the writings ofthe New Testament to give reason for charitable endeavors. But these activities tended to be applied only to

Christians sharing resources within the community rather than to non-christian outsiders.

The second and early third century Bishop of Carthage, Tertullian, explained how this

worked in an apology he wrote for Christianity. Tertu1lian's exhaustive defense of

Christianity sought to show the pagan world that Christianity is really a humble and

simple religion by describing the way in which his Christian society functioned.

Tertullian wrote, "We are a body knit together as such by a common religious profession,

by unity ofdiscipline, and by the bond of a common hope. We meet together as an

assembly and congregation, that, offering up prayer to God as with united force, we may

wrestle with Him in our supplications.,,197 He then goes on to describe how the resources

ofthe community are used:

On the monthly day, ifhe likes, each puts in a small donation; but only if it be his pleasure, and only ifhe be able: for there is no compulsion; all is voluntary. These gifts are, as it were, piety's deposit fund. For they are not taken thence and spent on feasts, and drinking-bouts, and eating-houses, but to support and bury poor people, to supply the wants of boys and girls destitute of means and parents, and of old persons confined now to the house; such, too, as have suffered shipwreck; and ifthere happen to be any in the mines, or banished to the islands, or shut up in the prisons, for nothing but their fidelity to the cause of God's Church, they become the nurslings oftheir confession. 191

Tertullian's church used funds as a means ofsupporting those in need. An interesting

aspect ofTertullian's community is that it extended help to those who have been banned

197 Tertullian, Apology,. 39, tr. S. Thelwal1; quoted in Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 3, (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885, accessed 28 September 2009); available from http://www.newadvent.orglfathersl0301.htm; Internet. 198 Ibid. 79 from society. It was a common Roman practice to send undesirables such as criminals, and dissidents to places that no other self respecting Roman would go to, such as mines, prisons or deserted islands. But according to his own writing, the recipients ofthe charity were Christians only, and it was most likely Christians who were sent to prisons, mines or deserted islands.

Cyprian of Carthage, a bishop in the mid third century, wrote about how his

congregation had grown. Despite living during the persecutions, his epistles reveal

important evidence about how membership in the congregation seems to have increased.

Cyprian records an example ofhow individual benevolence led to large donations to the

church, when he wrote that the church had raised 100,000 sesterces. l99

Carthage was a Christian stronghold even before Tertullian and would remain so

until the Muslim invasions in the late seventh century. But there were plenty ofother

places where the tradition was growing ofsharing resources to help the poor. St. Justin

the Martyr died around the same time that Tertullian was bom (c. 165) and defended

Christianity in Asia Minor and at Rome. He wrote an apology to the emperor Antoninus

Pius in which he sought to explain the true nature ofhis Christian congregation. His

apology reveals interesting details about how similar his community functioned to that of

Tertullian's. Justin's community would meet every Sunday, and then "the memoirs ofthe

apostles or the writings ofthe prophets are read".200 He goes on the describe a voluntary

collection, the funds of which were collected and sent to "the president, who succors the

orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and

those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care

199 AdolfHamack, The Mission and Expansion ofChristianity in the First Three Centuries, (New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1972), 157. 200Justin Martyr, First Apology, 57, tr. Marcus Dods and George Reith; quoted in, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885, accessed 30 September 2009), available from http://www.newadvent.org/fathersl0126.htm; Internet. 80 ofall who are in need."20I The emphasis is on using money to help the poor within the community who cannot help themselves.

It was typical Roman social practice for women who were widowed to remarry.

Sometimes women would be allowed to inherit some oftheir deceased husband's estate, but in general it was rare to see a female property owner in Roman society. Women who remained widowed were often destitute, and would do anything they could to survive.

Therefore the church took the position that it was necessary and praiseworthy to help widows. The Apostolic Constitutions agree with that conclusion. Bishops were expected to distribute "seasonably the oblations to every one ofthem, to the widows, the orphans, the friendless, and those tried with affiiction."202 Bishops were also charged with responsibility to taking care oforphaned children:

When any Christian becomes an orphan. whether it be a young man or a maid, it is good that some one ofthe brethren who is without a child should take the young man, and esteem him in the place ofa son; and he that has a son about the same age, and that is marriageable, should marry the maid to him: for they which do so perfonn a gn:at work, and become fathers to the orphans, and shall receive the reward ofthis charity from the Lord God. 203

Despite the persecutions ofthe third century, Christianity continued to make modest inroads with city and country dwellers. By the year 250 the church in Rome had to support not only the poor but also the clergy, who had grown to a reported 100 members.204 The church also had to support 1500 poor people, a number that required a substantial amount offunds.20S The church made it a priority of showing hospitality to strangers, who were a very common presence in Roman urban centers. Tens of thousands ofmigrants would enter cities every year. The fact that the Christian church

201 Ibid. 202 Apostolic Constitutions, 3.1.3, fr. James Donaldson; quoted in Anle-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 7 (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1886, accessed 30 January 2010); available from http://www.newadvent.orglfathersl07153.htm; Internet. 203 Apostolic Constitutions, 4.1.1 204 Adolf Harnack. The Mission and Expansion o/Christianity in the First Three Centuries, 157. 20S Ibid. 81 took an interest in taking care of strangers meant that they would most definitely add people to their congregation. But while the church helped strangers, strangers were also expected to help the church in some way as well because the church did not want people to develop the habit ofbeing free loaders.

To what extent did the church help strangers? The sources provide several instances in which strangers were helped, but the amount of help a stranger would expect to receive was certainly not uniform through the empire. Parishes tended to be autonomous establishments, except for the fact that they were expected to follow official orthodox dogma. As far as day to day functions go, that was strictly a local matter. For example, Justin the Martyr mentions in his first apology that a small part ofthe church collections goes to "strangers sojourning among US".206 He was most likely referring to traveling Christian preachers and missionaries who moved from city to city collecting funds to spread the their beliefs to other regions. St Paul is probably the most prominent example ofthe christian preacher performing such an activity and collecting funds along the way. But this did not always apply to preachers and missionaries. In the eastern provinces, housing strangers became a well organized system staring in the fourth century. Eastern churches, particularly in Egypt, accommodated strangers in places called Xenodocheia. 207 These were asylums that were attached to the church where the clergy allowed strangers and poor people to stay. Eventually their role expanded to include care for the poor and sick. 208 This form of establishment would eventually spread to the west in the sixth century where Xenodocheia were spoken about by Pope Gregory the Great 209 Egyptian churches also developed establishments that were meant to give

206 Justin Martyr, First Apology, 37. 207 Frances Niderer, "Early Medieval Charity," Church History, 21 (1952),286. lOS Ibid. 209 Ibid, 286. 82 assistance to the poor. There churches set up the Diaconia, which meant office of serving, which were places were the poor would go to receive food. 2lo The Diaconia were normally attached to monasteries. In order to provide for the poor the monks who ran them, the Diaconitae, would allocate food received from collections at the church to the poor staying there.2lt The emperor Julian, himself a neo-Platonist who had revoked many ofthe privileges given to Christians during the reign ofConstantine and his succeeding sons, noticed that Christianity's use of charity to orphans, widows, and strangers was succeeding in causing the "spread ofatheism" into the countryside.212 The term atheism was frequently applied to Christians by polythesists seeking to punish or criticize Christians for not paying due respect to the traditional Roman gods. Julian clearly resents the fact that such irreverence to his gods had spread. His surviving correspondence records this observation while traveling on campaign near Antioch, suggesting that the practice ofChristians giving aid to the poor had already begun to evolve into the more complex charitable establishments such as the Diaconia and the

Xenodocheia. Frend suggests that this phenomenon created a sense of social justice within Christians helping the poor and those being helped by the Christians. This is an ideal that the old pagan religious traditions lacked.

Diaconia appeared in the records in the fourth century and became more common in the east as more were established in Judea and Syria during the early medieval period after the fall ofthe Western Roman Empire. The names Diaconia andXenodocheia were not given to establishments that served the same purpose in the west.

There is an example in which an eastern bishop contributed wealth directly to the poor people. Bishop Atticus of Constantinople, who lived in the first halfofthe fifth

210 Ibid, 285. 211 Ibid, 287. 212 W.H.C. Frend, "The Failure ofthe Persecutions in the Roman Empire," Past and Present, 16 (1959), 2. 83 century, sought to gain approval from the people of Constantinople apparently in an attempt to quell the religious violence in the city and to win over support from the Arian faction. Socrates Scholasticus, writing about the predicament in Constantinople says,

''that he (Atticus) perceived the church was on the point ofbeing divided inasmuch as the

Johannites assembled themselves apart, he ordered that mention ofJohn should be made in the prayers ... ,,213 The term Johannites refers to the supporters ofJohn Chrysostom, a faction ofChristians loyal to his views. Scholasticus also preserved in his discourse a letter written by Atticus which contains his solution to quell religious tension in the city and win popular support:

I have been infonned that there are in your city ten thousand necessitous persons whose condition demands the compassion ofthe pious. And I say ten thousand, designating their multitude rather than using the number precisely. As therefore I have received a sum of money from him, who with a bountiful hand is wont to supply faithful stewards; and since it happens that some are pressed by want, that those who have may be proved, who yet do not minister to the needy-take, my friend, these three hundred pieces ofgold, and dispose ofthem as you may think fit. It will be your care, I doubt not, to distribute to such as are ashamed to beg, and not to those who through life have sought to feed themselves at others' expense. In bestowing these alms make no distinction on religious grounds; but feed the hungry whether they agree with us in sentiment, or not. 214

This letter was written to an acquaintance ofAtticus who was charged with the care and proper distribution ofthe money. Giving away money to the poor was not an unprecedented practice in late antiquity, but nevertheless its use is not very well documented in the surviving literature.

Barbarians, Charity and the West

The barbarian migrations into Roman territory did feature a fair amount of violence. This was especially true in Gaul, Spain, and Italy in the first half ofthe fifth century. As I have already argued, barbarian raiders frequently attacked small towns and farms to coerce local authorities into giving them a share of local resources or dissuading

213 Socrates Scholasticus, Ecclesiastical History, 7.25, tr. A.C. Zenos; quoted in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, r Series, Vo1. 2 (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Cop., accessed 4 Apri12010); available from http://www.newadvent.orglfathersl26017.htm; Internet. 214 Ibid. 84 them from resisting.2lS Other times this tactic was used to obtain positions ofpower within the Roman government. But what did this mean for the people caught in the middle ofbarbarian incursions? It meant that town dwellers and poor peasants were in a very vulnerable position. With the absence of an effective Roman government, bishops were expected to look after the interests of these people. Bishops then had to do whatever it took to protect people from the horrors ofwar. Charity was a means of achieving this objective.

What charitable practices were specifically performed in the west that helped the poor and strangers? One such method was ransoming captives of war from barbarian enemies. A prisoner ofwar was not a new category ofpeople eligible to receive aid from the church. The topic had been written about in Christian circles at least since the third century. Cyprian mentions freeing captives as a virtuous activity and provided scriptural justification for it. 216 He quoted Matthew 2S:34 in one ofhis epistles: " .. .1 was a captive and you redeemed me ...".217 Ambrose of Milan also mentioned the topic but in a different context. His justification to ransoming captives came both from a political point ofview as well as a scriptural point ofview. His reign as bishop was a time of crisis and warfare for the empire and he thought freeing captives from the barbarian enemy was necessary

"to snatch them from the hands ofthe enemy; to take people away from death, and, especially, to take women away from dishonor; to give children back to parents, parents to children; and to restore citizens to their country.,,218 He added that the wealth of the church is to be used for the salvation of souls rather than for the adornment ofchurch

21S Peter Brown, The Rise o/Western Christendom, 211d. ed,. (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing 2004), 107. 216 Cyprian, Epistles, 62.4; quoted in William Kllngshirn, "Charity and Power: Caesarius of ArIes and the Ransoming of Captives in Sub- Roman Gaul." The Journal a/Roman Studies75(1985),184. 217 Cyprian, Epistles, 62.1. m William Klingsbirn. "Charity and Power: Caesarius ofArIes and the Ransoming of Captives in Sub­ Roman Gaul," 185. 85 buildings. Noting how the apostles in the gospel were sent forth to spread the gospel without silver or gold, Ambrose concluded that church vessels could be sold and the money put to use to redeem people captured in war. 219 For Western Europe in the fmal decades ofthe Roman Empire and the early decades ofthe sixth century, the almost constant warfare resulted in large numbers ofprisoners. The church used its resources to free perhaps thousands of prisoners. One example ofthis practice was by Caesarius of

ArIes, a bishop who used church resources to ransom prisoners from captivity. 220

Caesarius became bishop ofArIes in 502 and died in the year 542. His life witnessed the transition from the last gasps ofthe Roman West into the post-Roman early medieval world. His city was initially controlled by the Visigoths, then the Ostrogoths, and finally the Franks. During this period the practice ofstealing human beings was a profitable industry. The captive whose ransom was paid was expected to pay back those who freed him or her, and ifthis couldn't be done then the person was put into a form a debt servitude whom the person, or redemptus, would work his or her way to pre-captive status.221 However, bishops were charged with the responsibility of freeing captives from enemies. Klingshim argues that besides the more obvious scriptural and ethical reasons for this practice, Caesarius undertook the task offreeing captives because ofhis congregation's own expectations; parishioners probably had family members that had been taking prisoner.222 Also, the performance ofthis task bolstered the prestige of a bishop that did it well, and Caesarius knew that failure to do this well could mean the end ofhis time as a bishop.

ll9Ibid. llOfuid. 221 Ibid. :w Ibid, 187. 86

An account ofCaesarius' life is extant. The Vita of Caesari us was written by his fellow clergymen a few years after his death and records an instance in which Caesarius was compelled to act on behalf ofcaptives immediately after his city was captured by the

Ostrogoths in 508:

In Aries, however, when the Goths had returned with an immense number of captives, the sacred basilicas were filled with a dense crowd ofunbelievers (infideles), as was the bishop's residence. On those in great need the man of God bestowed a sufficient amount offood and clothing alike, until he could free them individually with the gift of redemption. When he had spent all the silver which his predecessor, the venerable Aeonius, had left for the maintenance ofthe church (mensa ecclesiae), he observed that the Lord had dipped bread into an earthen bowl and not a silver chalice, and had advised his disciples not to possess gold or silver. The sacred worlc then proceeded all the way to t!te disposal of the articles ofdivine service; indeed, when the censers, chalices, and patens had been given for the redemption of these men, the consecrated ornaments (species) of the church (templum) were sold for the redemption of the true church (verum templum). Even today the blows ofthe axes can be seen on the podiums and railings from which the silver ornaments ofthe small columns were cut away.223

Caesarius resorted to using the wealth acquired by the church to free captives from servitude, and thus not only freed many men from captivity but also lifted his own prestige. Caesarius took perhaps an unusual position on freeing captives who were barbarians, Jews, or Arian heretics. His vita reports that he justified this action by saying

Caesarius would have preferred these people to be ransomed by him rather than endure the yoke oftheir infidelity:

Let no rational man, redeemed by the blood of Christ, having lost his free status, be coerced into becoming an Arian perhaps, or a lew, or a slave from a free man, or a servant ofman from a servant ofGod. 224 The concern about forced conversion was enough to justify the use ofwealth to prevent such an occurrence. But this created a problem for the parish in ArIes. How did they support the poor and the redeemed captives after they were ransomed? According to his vita, they were supported by a grain dole that was distributed by the church. The vita records an instance in which Caesarius ordered the last of the supply of grain to be

223 Vita Caesarius, 1.32; quoted in William Klingshim, "Charity and Power: Caesarius ofAries and the Ransoming ofCaptives in Sub-Roman Gaul," 189. 224 Vita Caesarius, 1.32; quoted in, William Klingshim, "Charity and Power: Caesarius ofAries and the Ransoming ofCaptives in Sub- Roman Gaul," 190. 87 distributed to those being supported and miraculously, a new shipment ofgrain arrived in the city the next day from none other than the Burgundian king.

St. Augustine's parish at Hippo helped people in distress by providing clothing.

In a letter written by Augustine while he was away from Hippo in the year 410, he mentions:

It has been reported to me that you have forgotten your custom of providing raiment for the poor, to which work ofcharity I exhorted you when I was present with you; and I now exhort you not to allow yourselves to be overcome and made slothful by the tribulation ofthis world, which you see now visited with such calamities as were foretold by our Lord and Redeemer, who cannot lie. You ought in present circumstances not to be less diligent in works of charity, but rather to be more abundant in these than you were wont to be.21S

The implication in this sentence is the "custom" ofgiving clothing and garments to the poor has been around for a long time. Apparently this letter was written when Augustine was offon official church duty and was written closely before or after the sack ofRome.

It was also written during the height ofthe Donatist schism in North Africa Whatever the case, there is reason to believe that either case caused consternation in his parishioners. Augustine's response shows that he believed in the power ofcharity even more during a time ofcrises for the church.

Plague was a constant threat to the population ofthe ancient world. Deadly plagues killed large numbers ofpeople in the Roman Empire. There are a number of instances in which deadly plagues spread through Europe between the second and sixth centuries. Cyprian lived through one such outbreak. The deadly plague gave Christians another great opportunity to display their charitable acts by helping to help poor families pay for the burial oftheir dead and by providing support for the dying. Cyprian mentions this duty when writing to a certain Demtrianus, a pagan. "You blame the plague and the

mSt Augustine, Letters, 122.2, tr. J.G. Cunningham; quoted in Nicene and Post- Nicene Fathers, JIt Series, Vol.1 (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., accessed 30 Januaty 2010); available from hnp:llwww.newadventorgltatherslll02122.htm); Internet. 88 disease, when plague and disease either swell or disclose the crimes of individuals, no mercy being shown to the weak ... the same people are slugging in the discharge ofthe duties ofaffection ... they shun the deathbeds ofthe dying, but make for the spoils ofthe dead."226 Cyprian evidently saw great importance ofattending to the sick and dying.

To what extend did the church lend support to slaves? Christianity helped to change the way slaves were viewed and treated in late antiquity. Slavery was still a prominent feature ofthe social landscape in Late Antiquity. However, the church never questioned the morality ofthe institution of slavery nor actively worked for its abolition.

Slaves were an accepted part of life in late antiquity. What did change was the possibility ofslaves being considered active and full members of Christian churches. Slaves could be manumitted and important positions in the church were open to them. st. Patrick was one such example of a former slave turned Christian bishop. Despite the fact that slaves were now open to membership in the church, they were not typically eligible to receive material aid from the church. Slaves were still considered to be property oftheir owners rather than autonomous persons in charge oftheir own destiny and therefore were not categorized as being among the poor. Christian preachers did however, encourage slaver owners to respect the dignity oftheir slaves and to abstain from cruelty and sexual abuse. 227 Bishops however, normally reserved direct aid for free persons. Slaver owners were expected to "ensure that slaves were fed, clothes, and protected."228

The use ofcharity as a means of survival and as a means offulfilling

Christian ethics enabled the church to survive the confusing decades ofLate

Antiquity. Bishops used charity as a means ofhelping the impoverished and

22liCyprian,per pont., ix; quoted in Harnack, The Mission and Expansion o/Christianity in the First Three Centuries. (New York: Harper Torch Books, 1961), 172. :U7 Adolf Hamack, The Mission and Expansion a/Christianity in the First Three Centuries, 170. :us Peter Brown, Poverty and Leadership ofthe Later Roman Empire, 60. 89 people displaced by war, redeeming prisoners ofwar, and providing for the basic needs oforphans and widows. Bishops were the key figures in putting charitable ideas into practice, which meant that bishops were responsible for implementing charitable activities in their communities. In the case of warfare, bishops undertook the ransoming ofcaptives as a result ofthe demands ofthe congregation. Whatever the situation was, Christian bishops were usually on scene imploring Christians to use some oftheir resources for charitable use for the good ofthe greater community. 90

Chapter 5

Conclusion

Barbarians, heretics and non-Christians were the three biggest threats ofthe

Catholic church in Late Antiquity. The church wanted them to be marginalized, extirpated and suppressed by the Roman government. The Roman government in late antiquity was the church's great ally and supporter. This support for the church was codified into law by the Emperor Theodosius in the year 380. The law states, "It is our will that all peoples who are ruled by the administration ofour clemency shall practice that religion which the divine Peter the Apostle transmitted to the Romans ... We command that those persons who follow this rule shall embrace the name ofCatholic

Christians."229 The name Catholic (Greek for Universal) was born out ofthe theological beliefs of orthodox Christianity, which believed that Jesus was ofthe same substance of

God the Father and was begotten by him.

The fourth century was a turbulent time in the history of Christianity as numerous interpretations of Christianity spread to all comers ofthe Roman Empire. Christianity also spread to many barbarian groups in the fourth century. But this new freedom to worship soon encountered new problems. Bishops and theologians debated about what type of Christianity should be practiced and what to do with those who refused to obey.

Theological interpretations of scripture abounded and were anathematized by church councils. Getting everyone to agree with the councils, however, was impossible.

The orthodox view ofChrist emphasized that Chris had always existed with the father and was begotten by him through Mary the mother ofJesus. The Arian view stressed that Christ was created by God. The Roman emperor Constantine was eager to settle this dispute between the two factions in order to earn the support ofthe majority of

229Codex TheodosiamJ3, 16.2-1. 91 bishops and to consolidate power in the Roman Empire. The council ofNicaea adopted the orthodox view of Christ, and the Arian position was anathematized.

There were many other christian sects that refused to obey the religious edicts issued by emperors demanding that everyone obey the Catholic Church. There were the

Donatists in Northern Africa, the Priscillianists in Gaul and Spain, the Eunomians in the eastern provinces, and dozens of others. The government and the church labeled those who were not faithful as heretics and as time went on the measures taken to marginalize and extirpate them became increasingly severe. During and shortly following the reign of

Constantine, heretics' beliefs were anathematized and their followers were banned from entering cities unless they accepted the orthodox faith. Later in the fourth century, when the church became increasingly concerned about the growth and power ofheretical sects, laws were issued by the emperors at the behest ofthe church to seize the wealth and property ofheretics and ''vindicate it to the fisc" or in other words, turn it over to the state. Emperors demanded that their books be burned, and their members imprisoned

Enforcing laws such as these proved to be impossible and by the fifth century the government resorted to completely banning heretics from serving within the army or the imperial household and in some cases executing them.

The barbarians who entered the empire during the fourth and fifth centuries were either pagans or heretics. The church perceived their presence in Roman territory to be a serious threat and sought to either keep barbarians marginalized, or to convert them.

Neither approach proved to be successful and many Catholic bishops considered barbarians to be uncivilized, agents ofSatan, or both. Hydatius of Aqua Flaviae in Spain recorded in his chronicle the violence that occurred in Spain when various barbarian tribes crossed the Pyrenees and sacked city after city. Hydatius :frequently referred to 92 them as "impious" and credited the will of God when the Vandal King Gunderic was

"seized by a demon and died."230 The church eventually had to accept the fact that the barbarian presence was permanent and gave up trying to extirpate them. I

The church took an active role in redefining many ofthe old social traditions of ancient Europe. Previously, the pagan notion of charity was based on how much a wealthy patron can donate to a city to adorn it with public buildings. The reason why a rich pagan would do this would be to gamer support amongst his clientele. To pagans, the idea of selflessly giving goods to the poor was foreign. Rather, the poor were defmed as those who couldn't enjoy the cultured life. The penniless and destitute were a category unto themselves and were looked upon in negative terms. Christian bishops began to include the destitute as those who were eligible to receive charitable contributions from the church. Many christian bishops wrote about the importance of giving goods and services to the poor for many different reasons. First, there were biblical reasons why the destitute should be given aid. Many cited the gospels as proof that Jesus Christ himself demands that the poor should be helped. There were also ethical and practical reasons why the destitute should be considered amongst those who are entitled to receive aid.

Salvian ofMarseille (d. 450), wrote about how the rich have special responsibilities in being charitable towards the poor and was deeply concerned that the wrath of God was being unleashed upon the Roman world because rich Romans, who claimed to be

Christians, were ignoring this responsibility and were instead leading a life ofhedonism and greed. Being charitable towards the poor was also a means of mitigating the effects ofapostasy amongst parishioners whose religious loyalties were uncertain. Finally, being charitable could ensure the fidelity ofa congregation in the face ofan impending disaster,

23OJIydatius, Chronicle, 20-60 passim. 93 which meant an encroaching group ofbarbarian heretics. The Theodosian code contains

laws issued to prevent those from fleeing to heretics and punish those who actually did.

The church took some specific measures to alleviate the suffering ofthe poor. In

fourth century Egypt, a system ofcharitable aid had already been established within

monasteries where monks called diaconitae distributed food to the poor. Another

charitable service emerged in Egypt at the same time, the xenodocheia, which were

lodgings for strangers. The role eventually expanded to serve as asylums for foreigners,

and for the sick and poor. These services grew in popularity in the eastern provinces and

eventaully would be established in Asia minor, Judea, and Constantinople.

Ransoming hostages and prisoners ofwar was a popular practice the church was

involved with in the western provinces where invading barbarian tribes made stealing

human beings a profitable industry. Several bishops wrote about the importance of

ransoming captives for a variety ofdifferent reasons. Cyprian endorsed the practiced by

citing Matthew 25:34 as scriptural justification. Ambrose ofMilan endorsed it because

he felt it was a moral imperative to reunite stolen people to their families and to bring

women back from dishonor. Bishop Caesarius ofArIes (d.542) was known for using the

resources ofhis parish to ransom prisoners. His Vita, reports that he melted down silver

objects to pay for ransoms. The probable motivation to undertake such action was by

pressure from his congregation to help bring back their stolen family members. But there

is also a passage in his vita that suggests Caesarius wanted to ransom hostages to prevent

them from being converted to Arianism, Judaism, or becoming slaves.

The Church never succeeded in its objective of imposing religious and

theological unity in the Roman Empire in Late Antiquity. It also failed to

marginalize barbarians intruding in Roman territory. As the Roman era in 94 western Europe came to a close, the church had to accept the fact that their presence would be permanent because barbarians because the de facto rulers of formerly roman territory. It wasn't until the sixth and seventh centuries that barbarian successor kingdoms embraced Catholic Christianity. Where the church succeeded most was in permanently redefIning the idea ofcharitable giving. The destitute and penniless were included into the defInition of what it meant to be poor, and selflessly giving aid to the poor became a universally recognized virtue. 95

Selected Bibliography

Primary Sources

Ambrose, Exposition ofthe Christian Faith. ed. Kevin Knight. New Advent.org.

Ambrose, On the Duty ofthe Clergy, ed. Kevin Knight. New Advent.org.

Ammianus Marcellinus. Histories, tr. Walter Hamilton. New York: Penguin Books, 1986.

Apostolic Constitutions, ed. Kevin Knight. New Advent.org.

Athanasius, History ofthe Arians, ed. Kevin Knight. New Advent.org.

Augustine, Letters. ed. Kevin Knight. New Advent.org.

Clement ofRome, Episltes. ed. Kevin Knight. New Advent.org.

Codex Theodosianus. tr. Clyde Pharr, Princeton. NJ: Princeton University Press, 1952.

Justin Martyr. First Apology. ed. Kevin Knight. New Advent.org.

Didache. ed. Kevin Knight. New Advent.org.

Eugippius. Lift ofSeverinus. tr. George Robinson. London: Oxford University Press, 1914.

Hydatius, Chronicle. ed. R.W. Burgess (1993).

John Chrysostom. Treatise on Alms. ed. Kevin Knight. New Advent.org.

Justin Martyr. First Apology. ed. Kevin Knight. New Advent.org.

Leo I. Sermons. ed. Kevin Knight. New Advent.org.

New Oxford Annotated Bible. 3med New Rivsed Standard Version. ed. Michael D. Coogan. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.

Novels ofValentinian. tr. Clyde Pharr. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1952.

Paulus Orosius. The Seven Books ofHistory Against the Pagans. tr. Roy Deferrari. Washington D.C.: Catholic University ofAmerica Press, 1964.

Salvian, De Gubernatione Dei. tr. Eva Sanford. New York: Octagon Books, 1966.

Socrates Scholasticus. Historia Ecclesiastica, ed. Kevin Knight. New Advent.org. 96

Sozomen, Historia Ecclesiastica. ed. Kevin Knight. New Advent.org.

Synesius, On Imperial Rule. tr. A. Fitzgerald. Livius.org.

Sidonius Apollinaris, Letters. Tr. O.M. Dalton, 1915. Tertullian.org.

Sirmodian Constitutions. tr. Clyde Pharr. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1952.

Tertullian, Apology. ed. Kevin Knight. New Advent.org.

Zosimus, New History. tr. Green and Chaplin. London. 1814. Tertullian.org.

Secondary Sources

Ayer, Joseph Cullen. A Source Book For Ancient Church History. From the Apostolic Age to the Close ofConciliar Period New York: AMS Press, 1970

Bowersock, O.W., P. Brown, O. Grabar eds. Late Antiquity: A Guide to the Post Classical World Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999.

Brown, Peter. "The Diffusion ofManichaeism in the Roman Empire." The Journal of Roman Studies, 59 (1969), 92-103.

_____. Poverty and Leadership in the Later Roman Empire. Hanover, NH: University Press ofNew England, 2002.

_____,. The Rise ofWestern Christendom. 2nd Edition. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2004.

Burns, Thomas S. Barbarians within the Gates ofRome: A Study ofRoman Military Policy and the Barbarians, ca. 375-425 A.D. Indiana University Press, 1995.

Coster, Charles Henry. "Christianity and the Invasions: Synesius ofCyrene." The Classical Journal. 55 (1960), 290-312

Drinkwater, J.F. "The Usurpers Constantine III (407-411) and Jovinus (411-413)." Britannia. 29 (1998), 269-298.

Fox, Robin Lane. Pagans and Christians. San Francisco: Harper Collins Publishers, 1986.

Freeman, Charles. A.D. 381: Heretics, Pagans and the Dawn ofthe Monotheistic State. New York: Overlook Press, 2009.

Frend, W.H.C. "The Failure ofthe Persecutions in the Roman Empire." Past and Present. 16 (1959), 10-30. 97

Garnsey, Peter. Famine and Food Supply in the Graeco-Roman World: Responses to Risk and Crisis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.

Goffart, Walter A. Barbarians and Romans A.D. 418-584: The Techniques of Accomodation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1980.

Grant, Robert M. "Religion and Politics at the Council ofNicaea." The Journal of Religion. 55 (1975), 1-12.

Hands, A.R. Charities and Social Aid in Greece and Rome. London: The Camelot Press, 1968.

Hanson, R.P.C. "The Reaction ofthe Church to the Collapse ofthe Western Roman Empire in the Fifth Century." Vi~i/ae Christianae 26 (1972), 272-287

Harnack, Adolf. The Mission and Expansion ofChristianity in the First Three Centuries. New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1962.

Heather, Peter. "The Huns and the End ofthe Roman Empire in Western Europe." The English Historical Review. 110 (1995), 4-41.

___~_. The Fall ofthe Roman Empire: A New History ofRome and the Barbarians. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.

Innes, Matthew. Introduction to Early Medieval Western Europe, 300-900: The Sword, The Plough, and The Book. New York: Routledge, 2007.

Jones, A.H.M. The Later Roman Empire 284-602: A Social, Economic, and Administrative Survey. Vol. 1. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1964.

Lizzi, Rita. "Ambrose's Contemporaries and the Christianization ofNorthern Italy." The Journal ofRoman Studies. 80 (1990), 156-173

Lo Nero, Carolina. "Christiana Dignitas: New Christian Criteria For Citizenship in the Late Roman Empire." Medieval Encounters. 7 (2001) 146-164.

MacCormack, Sabine. "Sin, Citizenship, and the Salvation of Souls: The Impact of Christian Priorities on Late-Roman Society." Comparative Studies in Society and History. 39 (1997), 644-673.

MacMullen, Ramsay. Christianzing the Roman Empire, A.D. 100-400. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1984.

______'. "Social Mobility and the Theodosian Code." The Journal ofRoman Studies. 54 (1964). 49-53

Niederer, Frances. "Early Medieval Charity." Church History, 21 (1952),285 98

Peiia, J.T. "The Mobilization of State Olive Oil in Roman Africa: the Evidence of Late Fourth Century Ostraca from Carthage," in Peiia, ed, Carthage Papers, Journal 0/ Roman Archaeology Supplement 28. (porsmouth, RI, 1998)

Rayner, A.J. "Christian Society in the Roman Empire." Greece & Rome. 33 (1942) 113­ 123.

Saradi-Mendelovici, Helen. "Christian Attitudes Toward Pagan Monuments in Late Antiquity and Their Legacy in Later Byzantine Centuries." Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 44 (1990), 47-61.

Seager, Robin. "Roman Policy on the Rhine and Danube in Ammianus." The Classical Quarterly, 49, (1999), 579-605

Shelton, Jo-Ann. As The Romans Did. 2nd ed New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Stark, Rodney. The Rise o/Christianity. San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1997.

Thompson, E.A. "The Settlement ofthe Barbarians in Southern Gaul." The Journal 0/ Roman Studies, 46 (1956),65-75

Ward-Perkins, Bryan. The Fall o/Rome and the End o/Civilization. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.