The Emperor Julian's Order to Rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem: a Connection with Oracles?1
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
68doi: 10.2143/ANES.43.0.2018765 M. B. SIMMONS ANES 43 (2006) 68–117 The Emperor Julian's Order to Rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem: A Connection with Oracles?1 Michael Bland SIMMONS Department of History Auburn University Montgomery P.O. Box 244023 Montgomery, Alabama USA 36124-4023 E-mail: [email protected] Abstract By analyzing pagan and Christian sources from the Later Roman Empire, this study concludes that the emperor Julian was motivated by oracles, a good number possessing anti-Christian content, during the critical winter of 362–363 just be- fore his Persian campaign, to develop an increasingly hostile programme against Christianity, and his reason for ordering the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusa- lem is best understood in this context. A new hypothesis is developed, which posits that Julian was inspired by the anti-Christian works of Porphyry of Tyre (e.g., Contra Christianos, Philosophia ex oraculis) to plan the destruction of the Church and to rebuild the Temple according to Neoplatonic interpretations of an oracle inspired by Porphyry which predicted the demise of Christianity 365 years after its inception.* The emperor Julian’s order to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem is one of the most perplexing and significant events in the history of the Later Ro- man Empire.2 Owing to the tenuous data available, only hypotheses have * This article is dedicated to my colleagues in the Department of History, Auburn Uni- versity Montgomery. My sincerest thanks go to the following who offered invaluable advice: T. D. Barnes (Toronto); F. Bovon (Harvard); Sebastian Brock (Oxford); Harold Drake (Uni- versity of California at Santa Barbara); Timothy E. Gregory (Ohio State); and Pier Franco Beatrice (Padua). Listing their names does not imply agreement with my argument, and all deficiencies are solely my own. I have benefited also from the comments of the two anony- mous readers of this article. 1 Unless otherwise indicated, translations from ancient languages are my own. 2 Cf. among others in the following notes: Campbell 1900, pp. 291–306; Ensslin 1923, pp. 104–99; Vogt 1939; Braun and Richer 1978; Aziza 1978, pp. 141–58; Bernardi 1978, pp. 89– 9225-06_Anes_43_04_Simmons 68 17/1/07, 4:08 pm A CONNECTION WITH ORACLES 69 been developed, which attempt to give reasonable explanations for the em- peror’s motives, viz., to: (1) reform traditional paganism;3 (2) form an anti- Christian alliance with the Jews;4 (3) restore animal sacrifices by incorporat- ing Yahwism into a revived Hellenism;5 (4) disprove the prophecies of Jesus about the Temple (Mt. 24:2; Mk. 13:2; and Lk.19:44);6 (5) ensure that the Persian campaign would be victorious by winning the support of the Jews;7 (6) memorialize his reign with magnificent buildings;8 (7) gain economic support from the Jews in the eastern Mediterranean;9 and (8) stop the Christianization of Jerusalem initiated by Constantine.10 Although all of these are both reasonable and admirable, and often are not mutually exclu- sive, none takes into account one of the most obvious features of Julian’s religious philosophy, a keen interest and fanatical belief in oracles and how they might have influenced his imperial policies. This study will attempt to clarify some of the important questions concerning the possible inter-rela- tionship between Julian’s belief in, and his attempt to revive, oracles; his order to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem; and an increasingly anti-Chris- tian posture that he was assuming immediately before the Persian cam- 98; Phillips 1979, pp. 167–72; O’Donnell 1979, pp. 45–88; Blanchetière 1980, pp. 61–81; Bernardi 1983; Wilken 1983; Demandt 1989; Levenson 1990, pp. 261–79; Penella 1993, pp. 71– 5; Id. 1993, pp. 31–43; Barnes 1998, p. 48; Penella 1999, pp. 15–31; and Simmons 2000, 2, pp. 1251–1272. 3 Cf. Athanassiadi 1992, p. 1164; Drijvers 1992, pp. 19–26; Brood 1995, pp. 32–38, esp. p. 36. 4 Cf. Adler 1893, pp. 591–651; Gardner 1895, p. 264; Ensslin 1923, p. 190; Bidez 1930, p. 305; Head 1976, p. 146, going too far by describing Julian as an example of fourth cent. Zionism; Fouquet 1981, pp. 192–202, esp. p. 201; Wilken 1983, p. 144; Avi-Yonah, 1984, p. 190; Stemberger 1987, p. 165; Lieu 1989, p. 104; Campbell 1900, p. 298; and Athanassiadi 1992, p. 164. 5 Already expressed by J. Chrysostom, Adv. Jud. 5.11.8; Cf. Simon, 1948, p. 148; Head 1976, p. 146; Bowersock, 1978, p. 89; Blanchetière 1980, pp. 72 f.; Lewy 1983, pp. 70–96, esp. p. 78; Wilken 1984, p. 189; Id. 1983, p. 144; Lieu 1989, p. 104; Brodd 1995, p. 38; Cansdale 1996–97, pp. 18–29, esp. 26 ff; and Penella 1999, p. 24. 6 Used often in conjunction with the Book of Daniel. Cf. J. Chrysostom, Adv. Jud. 5.11.8; Sozomen, HE 5.22; Theodoret, HE 3.15; Socrates, HE 3.20, giving a prophecy of Cyril of Je- rusalem based on Jesus and Daniel; Allard 1903, 3, p. 134; Bidez 1930, p. 305; Vogt 1939, p. 46; Ricciotti 1960, p. 224; Avi-Yonah 1976; Browning 1976, p. 176; Aziza 1978, p. 152; Bowder 1978. p. 111; Bowersock 1978, p. 89; Geffcken 1978, p. 154; Blanchetière 1980, pp. 76 f.; Lewy 1983, p. 72; Wilken 1983, p. 141; Id. 1984, p. 189; Lieu 1989, p. 104; Cameron 1993, p. 97; Potter 1994, p. 171; Smith 1995, pp. 7 and 217; Penella 1999, p. 24; Potter 2004, p. 514. 7 Cf. Avi-Yonah 1976, pp. 192 f.; Cansdale 1996–97, pp. 26–8. 8 Avi-Yonah 1976, pp. 192 f., following Ammianus Marcellinus 23.1.2. It is interesting that Josephus, Jew. Ant. 15.380–1, gives similar reasons for Herod’s rebuilding program. 9 Cansdale 1996-97, pp. 26-8. 10 Cf. Vogt 1939, p. 49; Wilken 1983, p. 143; Feldman 1993, p. 404; On Julian and the Christians in general see (e.g.): Bidez 1914, pp. 406–61; Braun 1978, pp. 166–75; Dupont 1979, pp. 197–216; Scicolone 1979, pp. 420–34; Hunt 1985, pp. 186–200; Drijvers 1992, p. 22; Smith 1995; Penella 1999, p. 24. 9225-06_Anes_43_04_Simmons 69 17/1/07, 4:08 pm 70 M. B. SIMMONS paign. I hope to show indisputably that oracles motivated Julian’s policies more significantly than has been thought and to offer yet another hypoth- esis related to his order to rebuild the Temple. I. Ammianus Marcellinus and Julian on the Temple Project We begin with the only pagan text related to Julian’s order to rebuild the Temple: … diligentiam tamen ubique dividens, imperiique sui memoriam, magni- tudine eorum gestiens propagare, ambitiosum quondam apud Hieroso- lymam templum, quod post multa et interneciva certamina, obsidente Vespasiano, posteaque Tito, aegre est expugnatum, instaurare sumptibus cogitabat immodicis, negotiumque maturandum Alypio dederat Antiochensi qui olim Britannias curaverat pro praefectis. (Amm. Marc. XXIII.1.2)11 What Ammianus omits here is noteworthy. The fact that there is no as- sociation between the rebuilding and Julian’s religious policies merits seri- ous attention because the Roman historian is usually careful when covering Julian to note the emperor’s excessive superstition and the relation between portents, omens, and imperial policies.12 Apparently Ammianus deliberately ignores the religious interpretation of the event, preferring to give an exclu- sively secular explanation; Julian wanted to memorialise his reign by great public works.13 Yet his presentation of the Temple project as one of a number of unfavorable omens' which climaxed with the failure of the Per- sian campaign can perhaps be best understood as a negative assessment of the overall religious nature of the emperor’s actions during the last months of his life.14 Also, the nature of the literary evidence must be critically evalu- ated on an individual basis: Jewish sources are completely silent,15 only one 11 I use here Rolfe 2000: “…and eager to extend the memory of his reign by great works, he planned at vast cost to restore the once splendid temple at Jerusalem, which after many mortal combats during the siege by Vespasian and later by Titus, had barely been stormed. He had entrusted the speedy performance of this work to Alypius of Antioch, who had once been vice-prefect of Britain.” Seaver 1978, pp. 273–84, argues that Ammianus and the Chris- tian writers substantially agree about the rebuilding attempt, so we should accept it as histori- cal. 12 E.g., Amm. Marc., XXI.1.7–14; XXII.12.6–8; XXII.14.3. 13 On attempted explanations of the omissions, see Philips 1979, p. 168; Hunt 1985, p. 194; Matthews 1989, pp. 110–12; and Barnes 1998, p. 48. 14 Cf. Philips in Achetemeier 1979, pp. 168, 170; Penella 1999, p. 18. 15 Perhaps Adler 1893, p. 625, gives the best explanation for the silence: Julian’s failure to rebuild the Temple caused the Jews to omit all references to the event. See also Bacher 1897– 98, pp. 168–72: the Jews rejected the plan; Avi-Yonah 1976, p. 197 (a neutral attitude from most Jewish leaders); Bowersock 1978, p. 90 (Palestinian Rabbis were hesitant); Seaver 1978, p. 276 (bitterness over the failure); Lewy 1983, p. 71 (Julian had no contacts with Jewish sages 9225-06_Anes_43_04_Simmons 70 17/1/07, 4:08 pm A CONNECTION WITH ORACLES 71 pagan historian mentions it, and Christian writers who do mention it are not, with the exception of Gregory of Nazianzus and Ephrem, contempora- neous with Julian’s reign. From July 362 to March 363 Julian was in Antioch, and he died 26 June 363 during the Persian campaign.