CHAPTER FOUR

CLEMENT OF AND 'S EMPIRE

7he .fo!filment qf the imperial peace in Clement's community

Clement's Corinthians has been convincingly dated as contemporary with Domitian's reign (A.D. 81-96), and more specifically between A.D. 94 and 97 during which the "sudden and repeated misfortunes (ta~ ai

1 L.W. Barnard, Clement of Rome and the Persecution of Domitian, in NTS 10 (1963--64), pp. 251-260; Idem. St. Clement of Rome and the Persecution ofDomitian, in Studies in the Apostolic Fathers and their Background, (Oxford: Blackwell 1966), pp. 5-18. See also P. Keresztes, The , the Christians, and the Emperor Domitian, in VChr 27 (1973), pp. 1-28. 2 Hegesippus ( H.E. III,20); Melito of Sardis, Apology (Eusebius H.E. IV,26); Tertullian, Apol. 5; De Pall. 2; Lactantius, De Mort. Pers. 3; Eusebius, . II, p. 160;, Ep. 108,7; Chronicon Ann. Abr. 2112, Domit.l6; Theodoret, Graec. A.ffict. Cur. 9; Joannes Malalas, Chronograph. 10 etc. CLEMENT OF ROME AND DOMITIAN'S EMPIRE 141 ter 6 we shall argue that the subsequent development of Church Order a generation later in Ignatius of Antioch was historically in­ fluenced by both Domitian's cultic reforms and by the Apoca!Jpse itself.

PART A. DoMITIAN AND THE WRITING oF CLEMENT's CoRINTHIANS

Attempts to deny Domitian's persecution-that would break the links between both Clement's Corinthians and the Apoca!Jpse, and the cui­ tic reforms upon which my argument relies-rest upon three pre­ misses, namely:

1. The absence of any mention in pagan sources that Domitian per­ secuted the Christians, 2. The ambiguity of archaeological evidence for Eusebius' indentification of Flavius Clemens, Flavia Domitilla, and Acilius Glabrio as Christian and not Jewish martyrs, and 3. The absence of pagan evidence for persecution under Domitian and thus for martyrdom of Christians with these names. Let us now, in our first section, examine each of these assumptions in turn.

4A l. Pagan evidence: Dio Cassius 67, 14,1-3

Suetonius (Domitian. 15,1 7) and Quintillian (Inst. Drat. 4, proem.) had mentioned the names of Flavia Domitilla, Flavius Clemens, and Acilius Glabrio, but not the charges against them. However, Dio Cassius (LXVII, 14, 1-2) claims that Flavius Clemens the consul (una.tEuovnx), and his wife the emperor's kinswoman (auyy£vf1) Flavia Domitilla were charged both with a8£6tT]c; and with "turning away to Jewish cus­ toms (£c; ta t&v 'Iouoa.irov i1811 £~01c£A.A.ovtEc;)." In consequence Flavius was executed and Domitilla was exiled to Pandateria. Acilius Glabrio, who had held consular office along with the young (tov ~-LEta tou Tpa.i:a.vou ap~a.vta.), was also condemned. But Dio also mentions ( 14 ,3) that this was more than a trial of the individuals mentioned and that on the same charges "many ... others (aA.A.ot ... noA.A.oi) were condemned (Ka.t£0tl((Xa8T]aa.v), some who died (Kat Ot !lEv anESa.vov) and others who were deprived of their property (oi 8£ t&v youv oumoov £at£prt8TJaa.v)." There was therefore a quite general movement against ta -r&v 'Iouoairov i18TJ.