1The GreatPersecution, the Emperor Julian and Christian Reactions
In the first twochapters, Ishallinvestigate thoseforms of book-burning and cen- sorship that weresanctioned or tolerated by the Roman authorities. In the first chapter,Ishall concentrate on two keyevents, initiatedbypagan emperors of Late Antiquity,the Great Persecution and Julian’sschool reforms, as well as on the respective reactions by Christian authors. Ishall also arguethat,while there have always been times when the Roman state did prohibit certain subver- sive ways to expressone’sopinion,such as magic and divination,aggravated forms of censorship, such as book-burning,first occurred during the period of Late Antiquity.Thischapter will thereforeask for the reasons whythis period was aspecial one in regardtocensorship. Within this consideration of Late An- tiquity,itwill also explain the censorship legislation in the ageofConstantine as areaction to the preceding Great Persecution. Iwill arguethat contemporary Christian authorsdeveloped anumber of strategies to ridicule and denigrate competingdiscourses and to blame the persecutions of the recent past on the influenceofpagan philosophy. By contrast, they labelled Christianity as the true philosophyopposed,entirely or partly, to manyofthe philosophical schools of the past.Ishall discuss the pertinent passages of Christian authors such as Lactantius,Eusebius, John Chrysostom and Gregory of Nazianzus. This under- standing of censorship will alsolay the groundwork for alater discussion of cen- sorship legislation after Christianitybecame the state religion.
1.1 Laws against Astrologersand Magicians beforethe Fourth Century
Magic wascommon and widelypractised in the ancientworld, as attested in papyri and other material evidence such as amuletsand tablets,containing magic spells, lovecharms or invocation formulae. Magic wasbound up in the rituals and cultures surroundingthe gods, religious pantheon, and religious practices of the Roman Empire. It was thereforeattached to acts of miracle-heal- ing,divination, astrology,and prediction. But scholars like the natural historian Plinythe Elderregarded magic as treachery to be separated from medicine, re-
DOI 10.1515/9783110486070-003, © 2020 Dirk Rohmann, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License. 1.1 Laws against Astrologers and Magicians before the Fourth Century 25 ligion and research in the stars as earlyasthe first century.¹ Magic worked be- cause it was suitable to summon demons. The burning of magical booksalso had powerful political,social and reli- gious connotations that informed the cultural milieu in which these acts oc- curred. Within these contexts, the act itself took on the performativeaspectsof aritual. Itsdevelopment in this sense claimed the power of that which it was trying to replace.According to the Christian apologistHipollytus of Rome (earlythird century), pagan magicians could burn magical notes to communicate with “demons.”² The Christian appropriation of the act thereforeinverted this, taking the spiritual natureofthe act of burning itself but using it to avert demon- ical power. The association of the written wordwith something magical was long stand- ing in the Roman world. Forexample the term carmen (“poem, song,writing”) originated as an archaic invocation within the context of pagan cultsorpagan philosophical schools.³ The term alsocame to be used with regard to harmful magic.⁴ The Lawofthe Twelve Tables, the earliest codification of lawin Rome, alreadyruled the death penalty against incantationsofcarmina as harm- ful magic, aligningthis charge with slander.⁵ Slanderous carmina continued to be punished in the imperial period.⁶ In Late Antiquity harmful carmina came to be associated with illegitimate pagan cult practice.⁷ Laws prohibiting and limiting its usagepredateChristian times. Some em- perors,such as Vespasianand Domitian, even expelled oppositional philoso- phers from the city of Rome in the context of bans of magic and astrology.How- ever,asIhave argued elsewhere, it seems probable that blanket bans were rarely enforced and thatall edicts and subsequent expulsions weretemporary and re- gionallylimited. Ihavealso argued elsewherethatwhile some books were burnt as aconsequenceoftreason trials in the first century AD,there is no clear evi- dence that books weredestroyed in accordance with laws against magicians, as-
Plin. nat. .. Hipp. haer. .. Liv. ..; ..;Cic. Tusc. ..: nam cum carminibus soliti illi [sc.Pythagorei] esse dicantur et praecepta quaedam occultius tradereetmentes suas acogitationum intentione cantu fidibusque ad tranquillitatem traducere. Plin. nat. .; .. Leg.XII tab. . Crawford: qui malum carmen incantassit …
No one is permitted to have books on the magic art in his possession. And anyone whois found in possession of such books,will lose his property,the books will be publiclyburnt, and he will be deported to an island. Less privileged people will be executed. Not onlythe practice but also the knowledge of this art is prohibited.
The final sentencemarks achangeinthe legal attitudes towards suspicious writ- ingsand maybethe addition of alater,possiblyChristian, copyist.¹³ It is certain- ly true that punishments of astrologers became harsherinthe late-imperial pe- riod: thosewho had knowledge of this art weretobethrown to the beasts or crucifiedwhile magicians (magi)weretobeburnt alive.¹⁴ We do not know with anycertainty when these laws wereinitiallyenforced, but Diocletian is the first emperor in Late Antiquityknown to have ordered the destruction of books: booksowned by the Manichaeans,Egyptian alchemistsand Christians. Alaw issued by the emperors Diocletian and Maximian ruled ageneral, em- pire-wide ban on astrology: “To learn and practise the art of geometry is to the publicinterest.But the damnable art of astrology is illegal.”¹⁵ At this time,
Augustus’ burningofuncanonicalSibylline Books was adifferent case: See Tac. ann. .. See Rohmann ()for book-burninginthe period between BC – AD . Suet. Tib. ;Dio Cass. ..–. Speyer (), . Cod.Theod. ..; ...Onthe history of the sententiae,Liebs (). Paul. sent. ..: libros magicae artis apud se neminem haberelicet: et penes quoscumque reperti sint, bonis ademptis,ambustis his publice, in insulam deportantur,humiliores capite pu- niuntur.non tantum huius artis professio,sed etiam scientia prohibita est. See Bavieraand Ferrini (), ,note. Paul. sent. ... Cod.Iust. ..: artem geometriae discereatque exerceri publice intersit. arsautem mathe- matica damnabilis interdicta est. 1.2 The Great Persecution 27 the term arsmathematica seems to have been limited to astrology because it was explicitlyseparated from the related field of geometry.Nosuch separation was made in corresponding laws under the Christian emperors. Diocletian’saim was to rebuild the Roman Empire after it had suffered a long period of crisis. In doing so, he introduced agreater amount of state-control on apolitical and spiritual level. This lead him, among other things, to attempt to control books. As we willsee in the next section, he also held Christians respon- sible for the instability of the recent past.
1.2 The GreatPersecution
There is no firm evidence that the Roman state burnt Christian religious books before Christianitybecame amajor religion in the earlyfourth century.Epipha- nius, bishop of Salamis in the late fourth century,mentions books from the Ju- daeo-Christian tradition found in wine jars at several occasions afterthe early persecutions.¹⁶ Christians could have hiddenthemtoavoid being identified as such. In fact,the Gnostic gospels of Nag el Hammadi have been discovered in wine jars in Egypt.¹⁷ However,this does not mean that they werehidden in re- sponse to the Roman authorities attemptingtodestroy Christian books. Initiated by Diocletian and his junior partner Galerius, the Great Persecution (303–311) is the first and onlycase whereRomanauthorities attempted to de- stroy visible monuments of Christianity such as assemblyplaces and Bibles, be- cause previous persecutions had created an increasingnumberofmartyrs and thereforestrengthened the appeal of Christianity. As Christian textsare the onlysources thatrefer to the burningofScripture and theiraccounts are likely exaggerated the question is: how was book-burning during the Great Persecution recorded by near contemporary Christian sources, exactlywhat books were burnt and what attitudes emergedinChristian texts in reaction to this? To answer this, we need to position the Great Persecution within Diocletian’s broader religious policy.The underlying motivation for anyreligious persecution probablywas the emperors’ quasi-divinestatus that was in conflict with Chris- tian monotheism. Diocletian also had some poor experiences with Christians serving in the military.Before the Great Persecution, Diocletianordered that books representing othergroups be burnt.Although there is little evidence that has survivedfrom these groups that would give further information, we
Epiph. de mens.etpond. (Moutsoulasl.–). See Pagels (), –. 28 1The Great Persecution, the Emperor Julian and Christian Reactions know that in 297Diocletian issuedanedict against the Manichaeans: theirspi- ritual leaders weretobeburntalive along with their scriptures.¹⁸ Manichaeism itself was apopulardualistic religion that originated in third-century Mesopota- mia, combiningsyncretistic elements from Christian Gnosticism,Buddhism and Zoroastrianism. Diocletianalsohad books concerning the alchemyofgold and silversearched out and burntinEgypt to cut off the rebellious Egyptians from these resources.¹⁹ Afew years later, the co-emperors Diocletianand Galerius ruled similarly against the Christians on 23 February 303.Intheir presence, the prefect of the East had achurch searched for objects of Christian worship in Nicomedia, which had recentlybecome the East’scapital city: “The Scriptures werefound and burnt.”²⁰ In consequence, “imperial edicts were published everywhere, or- dering that the churches be razedtothe ground and the scriptures be destroyed by fire.”²¹ That Diocletian’sedict against the Christians and others of similar content wereactivelyenforced is shown by severalknown Martyr Acts and Passions, re- cording the sufferingofmartyrs (although it must be noted thatthese are of var- iable historical value).²² Although the edict was valid empire-wide, most of the evidence suggests that it was most rigorouslyenforced in North Africa. This re- gion was of particularinterest for the Catholic sources because the Donatist schism later emergedfrom here. The Donatists refused to accept indulgence to- wards those Christians who had surrendered their books duringthe Great Perse- cution. Accordingtoatendentious Catholic Passion probablyofthe earlyfifth century,the Donatists believed that whoever had thrown the scriptures into the fire was destined to burn in hell in retaliation.²³ The underlying issue was particularlyimportant in cases of bishops accused of having surrendered books, but desiring to keep their offices as the Donatists wereunwilling to re- spect their legitimacy. Accordingtoanofficial document from 19 May303 preserved by Christian authors, in the Numidian city of Cirta the local curator had aChristian assembly
Font.iur.Rom. ..And see Pharr (), –. Jo.Ant. fr. (Mariev, )=Suid. s.v. Διοκλητιανός, ;and s.v. Χημεία, Adler. Lact. mort. pers. : scripturae repertae incenduntur. Eus. h.e. ..: …ἥπλωτο πανταχόσε βασιλικὰ γράμματα, τὰςμὲνἐκκλησίας εἰς ἔδαφος φέρειν, τὰςδὲγραφὰς ἀφανεῖςπυρὶ γενέσθαι προστάττοντα.Eus. m.P. pr. .Cf. passio S. Felicis episcopi (Musurillo, ). Forthe date,Lact. mort. pers. ..See also Sarefield (), – . Eus. h.e. ... Appendix to Pass.Saturnini –,ed. Franchi de’ Cavalieri, Note agiografiche = Studi e Testi (Vatican City, ), –. 1.2 The Great Persecution 29 place searched and people interrogated. Although they surrendered one large codex, bookshelveswereotherwise found empty,leading some Christians pres- ent to denounce seven Christian lectors for concealing the books. On further in- vestigation the authorities recovered 36 codices from these lectors.²⁴ According to another contemporary document churches werealso destroyed and Christian scriptures burnt at Zama and Furni near CarthageinAfrica Proconsularis. The housesinwhich Christian books werefound weretobedestroyed as well.²⁵ Prob- ablyauthentic, this document is preserved as an attachment to the anti-Donatist work of Optatus of Milevis (in Numidia), who claimed that enforcing the burning of scripture had caused manyindividuals to suffer martyrdom.²⁶ To alesser degree, book-burning is also attested outside of North Africa. Eu- sebius, the Church historian and bishop of Caesarea (in modern Israel), claimed to have witnessed with his own eyes churches being dismantled and booksbeing burnt in the midst of the marketplaces.²⁷ One Passion reports thatvarious Chris- tian bookswerealso publiclyburnt in Thrace.²⁸ As with other forms of penal vi- olence in Antiquity,book-burning was staged in apublic context for the purpose of purification and deterrence. Diocletian’sedict wassurprisingly unspecific as to what scriptures wereto be burnt. While most sources suggest thatittargeted the gospels and Christian liturgical books, others show thatabroader rangeofChristian writingswere also destroyed. During the persecution in the East under Maximian in 304,the Christian women Agape, Irene, and Chione faced trial in Thessaloniki, presided over by the Roman prefect.Their Passion is believed to have been written soon after the events. Thisdoes not implythat the words of the martyrs are recorded with historical reliability,but they certainlyreflect anear-contemporary resonance:²⁹ “Do youhaveinyour possession anywritings, parchments,or books of the impious Christians?”³⁰ The forbidden books of the Christians wereassociated with the parchment codex, indicating the link between Christian
Optat. app. .b–a(–Edwards). Optat. app. .b–b(–Edwards). Optat. ., . Eus. h.e. ... Pass.Philippi .; .; . (Franchi de’ Cavalieri, p. –,with commentary on p. –). The dateand reliability of various Martyr Acts is now discussed by Moss (), Appendix, p. –,here esp. –. Pass.Agap. et soc. . (Musurillo, ): μή τινάἐστιν παρʼ ὑμῖντῶνἀνοσίων Χριστιανῶν ἢ ὑπομνήματα ἢ διφθέραι ἤ βιβλία; Acta Eupli (Musurillo, –,ofquestionable authenticity) reportbook-burningfor Catania in Italy. 30 1The Great Persecution, the Emperor Julian and Christian Reactions texts and the codex.³¹ The prefect is recorded as charging Irene with the offence of not having previouslyadmittedtohave “planned to preserveuntil this dayso manyparchments,books, tablets,codices, and pages of the unholywritingsof the formerChristians.”³² Followingthe trial, the three women wereburnt alive and the writingsinthe cabinets and chests belongingtoIrene werepublicly burnt.³³ Giventhe circulation of Christian texts,itissafe to assume that the in- tent was to humiliate rather than to annihilate the literarytradition. Some Christians attempted to trick the authorities by offering books with dif- ferent content.These include two bishops in Carthageand in Numidia, who gave away some written notes,alongsideDonatus himself, founder of the Donatists, who surrendered medicalmanuscripts only.³⁴ Others surrendered anykind of lit- erature in their possession and it is clear that the officials confiscated the books without distinction.³⁵ There is one archaeological find, probablyrelated to the book searches,attestingthat abroader rangeofbooks than scripture wasendan- gered. In 1889,excavations in Upper Egypt uncovered acodex hidden in the wall of ahouse,containingtwo treatisesfrom Philo, the earlyfirst-century Greco-Jew- ish philosopher who wasrecognizedbylate antique Christians.³⁶ It seems that a Christian fearful of the edict had hiddenthe book there. Criticising pagan reli- gion, the Christian apologist Arnobius even claims thatcertain influential per- sons demanded asenatorial decree orderingthe burningofCicero’sbooks on re- ligion, De naturadeorum and De divinatione,because these books seemed to underpin Christian doctrine.³⁷ Although the Acts of the Martyrs suggest that authorities indeed enforced book-burning,the impact of these edicts seems to have been quite limited. For example, the edict of 303 could not have lasted beyond the edict of religious tol- erance issued by Galeriusin311, if indeed it lasted beyond its initial prosecu- tions. Eusebiusplausiblysuggests thatConstantine replacedthe loss of any
Passio S. Felicis Episcopi (Musurillo, ): “The curator Magnilianus said: ‘Hand over whatever codices or parchments youhave’”.(Magnilianus curator dixit: da librosvel membranas quascumque habes). Pass.Agap. et soc. . (Musurillo, ): ἥτις τοσαύτας διφθέρας καὶ βιβλίακαὶπινακίδας καὶ κωδικέλλους καὶ σελίδας γραφῶντῶνποτε γενομένων Χριστιανῶντῶνἀνοσίων ἐβουλήθης ἄχρι καὶ τῆςσήμερον φυλάξαι. Pass.Agap. et soc. . (Musurillo, ). Maier (), =Aug. coll. c.Don. .. (CSEL :–); Aug. c.Cresc. .. (CSEL :–). Optat. app. .band a(and Edwards): tolle clavem et quos inveneris in cathedralibros et super lapide codices,tolle illos. Roberts (), . Arnob. nat. .. 1.3 Constantine 31 copies.³⁸ Nevertheless,Speyer is probablyright to arguethat the burning of scrip- ture had apsychological impact on futuregenerations, acting as adecisive stim- ulus for some Christians to act similarlyagainst some pagans once the tables had turned.³⁹ During the persecution, Christians onlydestroyed copies of the book-burn- ing edict itself. One Christian became amartyrwhen he seized anotice of the edict postedpubliclyand “tore it to pieces as an unholyand sacrilegious thing.”⁴⁰ Eusebius adds that this Christian could expectthe punishments asso- ciated with martyrdom. Echoing Eusebius’ account,later Martyr Acts commem- orate achild having suffered martyrdom because it threw acopyofDiocletian’s edict rather than Christian booksinto the fire.⁴¹ It thus appears that in the Chris- tian response burning of the right kindsoftexts was associatedwith the fate of the bodyinthe afterlife. Ishall argueinthe next two sections that the memory of book-burning in the ageofDiocletian was still alive in the ageofhis successor, the Christian emperor Constantine.
1.3 Constantine
Constantine (306–337) was the first emperor reported to have become aChristi- an, which he did formallythrough baptism at the end of his life. He was alsothe first emperor to actively promotethe Christian Church, notablywhenhis soldiers carried the symbol of Christ on their shields in defeating his rival Maxentius at the battle of the Milvian Bridge in 312.Much has been written about Constan- tine’sreligious background, whether he wasagenuine convert or simply used Christianityasapolitical tool, and to what extent he actively sought to curb the old religion. Ishall arguethat some of the censorship laws in the ageofCon- stantine need to be seen as reactions to the events duringthe Great Persecution and that the Romanauthorities became increasinglyconcerned with the unity of the church as bishops playedanincreasing role in local administration. The scholarlyconsensus is that although Constantine took selective meas- ures to suppress paganism, he was concerned primarily with effecting compro- mise between the different religious groups.⁴² Eusebius’ Life of Constantine gen- erallytends to overemphasise the Christian character of Constantine’sreign. He
Eus. v.C. ..And see .,too. Speyer (), , . Eus. h.e. .: ὡς ἀνοσίαν καὶἀσεβεστάτην ἀνελὼνσπαράττει.Also: Lact. mort. pers. . Pass.Paphnut. et soc. (Delehay, ,with p. – for aFrench summary). Eus. v.C. .–, ;Socr. h.e. .;Soz. h.e. ..See articles in Lenski (b). 32 1The Great Persecution, the Emperor Julian and Christian Reactions givesanexaggerated account that Constantine destroyed templeseverywhere, but givesvery few examples. He suggests thatthe Aphroditetemple of Aphaca was completelydemolished,along with its dedications,⁴³ because of the temple prostitution practised there. He alsoalleges the demolition of the temple of Asclepius in Cilicia, associated with the pagan sage Apollonius of Tyana, who had turned the temple into a “holyLyceumand academy.”⁴⁴ Thetemple may thereforehavehoused books, but this is not explicitlyevidenced. Nevertheless, Eusebius’ account oftenruns contrary to extant archaeological evidence of tem- ple destruction. There werethree genres of booksthat were ordered for burning at different occasions in the ageofConstantine. The first category is thatofanonymouspam- phlets (famosi libelli). This wasnot unprecedentedbecause the emperors of the first century had occasionallytaken steps against political pamphlets they con- sidered slanderous,especiallyones published in reaction to political crises.⁴⁵ The Codex Theodosianus (9.5.1)listsatreason lawgiven by the emperor Constan- tine on 1January 314. Inscriptions give afuller text of the original edict:any pam- phlet posted anonymouslywas either to be shredded or burnt in the fire. An in- quisition (inquisitio)was to be conducted to search for the authors, who could expectthe capital punishment.⁴⁶ It is not known whether or not the edict was enforced in Rome. Although scholars suggested redatingthe edict to 320because it is addressed to the praefectusurbi Maximus (who was in office between the end of 317and 323⁴⁷), it does not seem to be related to either the Donatist or Arian controversy which just came into playatabout that time. Rather,the edict seems to echo acanon of the synod of Elvira(Spain), which probably dates from the first decade of the fourth century.Accordingtothis canon anyone
Eus. v.C. ... Eus. v.C. .;Philostr. VA . with Averil Cameron and Hall (), :Thereisevidence to suggest that the temple continued to function or was destroyed later. Augustus:Dio Cass. .. with ..–;Suet. Dom. ..According to Paul. sent. . = font. iur.Rom. ant. :–,the authors of slanderous writings were to be expelled, but the lawdoes not order the destruction of these writings. Three inscriptions containingthe laware extant.QuotedinHeichelheim and Schwarzen- berger(), : sane et undique versum securitati innocentium consulatur, placet etiam famosos libellos non admitti. quos sine nomine propositos si quis invenerit, statim detrahereoportebit, ut, si forte ad se talis libellus perlatus fuerit, igni eum praecipiatconcremari, cum eiusmodi scripturam ab audientia iudicis penitus oporteat submoveri manente contraeos inquisitione qui libellos eius- modi proponere ausi fuerint, ut reperti debitis temeritatis suae poenis subiciantur. On the date,Barnes (b). 1.3 Constantine 33 who puts pamphlets in achurch was anathematized.⁴⁸ Thisshows the religious character of these pamphlets.Afew years later, in 325, Constantine presided at the council of Nicaea and is said to have burnt the petitions of bishops dissent- ing in the Arian controversy symbolically in order to end this controversy,asif the dissenting petitions had never existed and the unity of the church never been challenged.⁴⁹ The Codex Theodosianus also preserves four laws against famosi libelli (pamphlets)fromaroundthistimeperiod. Constantineseems to have react- ed to anonymouswritings circulatinginthe province of Africa,inRomeand in Tyre (Palestine)asevidencefor accusations. These famosi libelli were to be burnt, theirauthors punished,but thereisnoevidencefor systematic searches.⁵⁰ Similarlytothe pamphletscirculating in Elvira, thesepamphlets were probably of areligious character andtherefore threateningthe unityofthe church.The laws were thus areactiontoanimmediate crisis,howeverareligious ratherthanapo- liticalone.Thisindicates achangecomparedtopreviouscenturies. The second category of booksbanned in the ageofConstantine encom- passed books authored by Christians,but the definitions were vagueand impre- cise. Eusebius preserves aletter that Constantine sent to the provincial governors shortlyafter the council of Nicaea to explain an edict against certain Christian groups.The edict,perhaps issued along with the heresy laws of 326,⁵¹ is not pre- served. Yetweknow from Eusebius that similarlytoDiocletian Constantine or- dered the confiscation of assemblyplaces and the search for and destruction of books. The edict generallytargeted non-conformist Christians and specifically the followers of Arius, but also the Novatians,Valentinians, Marcionites, Pau- lianists and Cataphrygians (Montanists).⁵² Similarly to the Paulianists, Arius had put forward the idea thatJesuswas not consubstantial with God the father. The council of Nicaea in 325rejected the Arian Christological view.The Nova- tians were regarded as schismatic as they did not accept readmission of Christi- ans who had deniedtheirfaith during persecution, while the Montanistsbe- lieved in the prophecies of their founder Montanus. It is not known to what extent the edict was enforced. Eusebius certainlyexaggerates his claim that the inquiriesestablished the unity of the Church as Arianism long continued to be attractive.Infact,his testimonial is the onlyone saying that books were actuallytargeted: “this lawalsoordered the booksofthese persons to be tracked
Conc. Eliberit. c. (Mansi :): hi qui inventi fuerint libellos famosos in ecclesia ponere, anathematizentur. Rufin. hist. .. Cod.Theod. ..– (: flammis aboleri)from –. Cod.Theod. ..–. Eus. v.C. .. 34 1The Great Persecution, the Emperor Julian and Christian Reactions down, and they werecaught pursuing forbidden evil arts.”⁵³ Nevertheless, it sug- gests that this decree did targetmagic books, certain Christian booksand off- shootsthat did not conform to the council of Nicaea. Alink exists between these non-conformist authors and Epicurean atomism. EarlyChristian apologists, such as Tertullian accusedpeople like Marcion and Valentinus of having adopted Epicurean teachingfor theirtheology.⁵⁴ Although their original writingshavenot survived, it is therefore possiblethat these Gnos- tic authorsand their followers (which are mentioned in the edict)borrowed from Epicurean philosophy. The anonymous apologetic-polemical Dialogue on the True Faith in God goes even so far as to claim that Marcion accepted the Epicur- ean teachingofthe origin of the world without creation (automatismón).⁵⁵ Against this proposition is the reality that the Gnostic belief in the dualism of material and spiritual worlds seriouslydisagreed with Epicurean materialism. Thus the apologists to some extent mayhaveused this link polemicallyto cast in anegative light the Gnostic belief that the highestgod was detached from the material world. Finally, Constantine issued an edict concerning the burning of bookswritten by the Neoplatonic philosopher,Porphyry.The exact date is unknown, but it was certainlyissued before 333.The Church historian Socrates quotes aletter of Con- stantine from thatyear,inwhich, probablyresponding to specific requests, he addressed the bishops and congregations to remind them of an earlier edict not otherwise transmitted: “Porphyry,the enemyofpiety,has composed unlaw- ful books against religion, and thereforefound adeservedcompensation, name- ly that he became shameful for the future, was infected with the worst reputa- tion, and his sacrilegious books wereobliterated.”⁵⁶ Porphyry’swork Against the Christians was probablythe main target. The work itself is not extant any- more, onlyfragments survive through Christian refutations. In context,Arius
Eus. v.C. ..: ἐπεὶ καὶ διερευνᾶσθαι τῶν ἀνδρῶντὰςβίβλους διηγόρευεν ὁ νόμος, ἡλί- σκοντό τ’ ἀπειρημένας κακοτεχνίας μετιόντες. Tert. adv.Marc. .; .; adv.Val. .; ..See Schmid (), –,and, morecrit- ically, Braun (), –.Hipp. haer. . asserts alink between Marcion and Empedocles. Epiphanius of Salamis in his Medicine Chest (Panarion)lists Hellenism and its subgroups Stoics, Platonists,Pythagoreans and Epicureans among the origins of heresies (anacephalaeosis ; .., ..–). Similarly, Marcellus of Ancyra wrote against the convertedArian sophist Aster- ius. Copies of his book wereburnt: Socr. h.e. .;Soz. h.e. .. De recta in Deum fide . (GCS :). Socr. h.e. ..–,at: ὥσπερ τοίνυν Πορφύριος ὁ τῆςθεοσεβείας ἐχθρὸςσυντάγματα ἄττα παράνομα κατὰ τῆςθρησκείας συστησάμενος ἄξιον εὕρατο μισθόν, καὶ τοιοῦτον, ὥστε ἐπο- νείδιστον μὲναὐτὸνπρὸςτὸνἑξῆςγενέσθαι χρόνον καὶ πλείστης ἀναπλησθῆναι κακοδοξίας, ἀφανισθῆναι δὲ τὰἀσεβῆ αὐτοῦ συγγράμματα. 1.4 Christian Reactions to the Great Persecution 35 and his followers weretobedenominated Porphyrians because of the similarity of their respective thinking.Preserved alsobyotherChristian authors, and sim- ilarlytothe earlier edict against Ariansand othergroups,the letter explained an edict from the same year,addressed to the bishops and the people and directed exclusivelyagainst Arius and his followers: “If anyone finds abook authored by him or agreeing with him, he shallthrow it into the fire, in order that no memory of Arius or of the doctrine which he had introduced might circulate. If anyone is found guilty of concealing such booksand of not having immediatelydenounced and burnt them, then death shallbehis penalty and decapitation.”⁵⁷ Again we do not know if the edict was enforced or who mayhaveenforced it,but it was surelyinthe interest of the clergy,towhich the letter was addressed, to do so. It is thereforeimportant to note that anyone who had knowledge of the where- abouts of Arian books, needed to burnand denounce these in order to avoid ex- ecution. The edict could thus have been efficient without anyorganisedbook- searches,iftherewereasufficient amount of people willing to denounce others. In sum, it is clear that under the first Christian emperor bookswerereport- edlyordered to be burnt,although there is little information on the enforcement of these orders.This included books of various heretical content and anti-Chris- tian works by Porphyry,who seems to have playedsome role in the Great Perse- cution. Some Christian apologists claimed that some of these heretical works originated in, or were close to,Epicurean philosophy. The aim was to guarantee the unity of the church,which in turn ensuredcontrol of the state. This unity was threatened not onlybyheretical, but also by some philosophical works,which reportedlyinformed heretical opinions. Ishall argueinthe next section thatin- fluential Christian authorsblamed the responsibility for the Great Persecution on contemporaryphilosophical authors and in doing so, they argued thatsome philosophical works werenow problematic.
1.4 Christian Reactionstothe GreatPersecution
How did Christian authors respond to book-burning duringthe Great Persecu- tion?The Christian authors thatIshall discuss in this section, such as Lactantius
Soz. h.e. ..: καὶ τοῖςπανταχῇἐπισκόποις καὶ λαοῖςνομοθετῶν ἔγραψεν ἀσεβεῖς ἡγεῖσθαι αὐτόντεκαὶτοὺςαὐτοῦὁμόφρονας καὶ πυρὶ παραδιδόναι, εἴ τι αὐτῶνεὑρίσκοιτο σύγγραμμα, ὥστε μήτε αὐτοῦ μήτε τοῦ δόγματος, οὗ εἰσηγήσατο, ὑπόμνημα φέρεσθαι. εἰ δέ τις φωραθείη κρύπτων καὶ μὴ παραχρῆμα καταμηνύσας ἐμπρήσῃ, θάνατον εἶναι τὴνζημίαν καὶ τιμωρίαν εἰς κεφαλήν.Manyother versions survive:Opitz (), –;Socr. h.e. ..–;Gel. Cyz. h.e. ..– (GCS :); Niceph.Call. h.e. . (PG :A). 36 1The Great Persecution, the Emperor Julian and Christian Reactions and Eusebius (and indeed most of the Christian authors that Iwill discuss throughout this book), werethemselvesinterested in manyaspectsofancient philosophyand literature. Within this context,they tried to defend Christianity from reservations thateducated people mayhavehad. They also wanted to rival ancient authors and to createthe intellectual backdrop against which Chris- tianity could establish itself as amainstream position. Their attacks on rivalre- ligions and philosophies need thereforetobeseenwithin the context of ancient discourses of competition. Ishallargue thatoralorwritten attacks by rivalphil- osophical schools and the rival philosophies themselvescame to be seen as problematic and that these discourses to some extent provided the ideological underpinning of censorship legislation in the ageofConstantine and perhaps later.For example, Arnobius’ contemporary work Against the Pagans (c. 303) is the first polemic to suggest that pagan rather than Christian books deserved to be burnt.Incontext of the following passage, Arnobius derides pagan gods and institutions originatinginpaganism, such as the games and plays,and also poetry:⁵⁸
But if youweresomewhat enraged in behalf of your religion, youshould rather long ago have burnt these writings,destroyed those books and dismantledthese theatres, in which the infamies of the deities aredailymade public in most shameful stories.For whyhave our scriptures deserved to be giventothe flames?
Highlyeducated, much of Arnobius’ call is rhetoric. Arnobius was building on a Christian discourse intended to dissuade fellow Christians from believing things that he personally did not believe, nor is he suggesting that Christians should destroy these books. Yetitindicates the degree of anger momentarilyfelt by him over the recent burningofbooks. AccordingtoJerome (who mayhave been misinformed) Arnobius wrotethis apologistpolemic to show his bishop that he had become areal Christian after he had taught the material he now condemned.⁵⁹ This could also explain his polemicalattitude at the time of writ- ing. Lactantius,famous student of Arnobius, appears to have taken his teacher’s position further.His rhetoric was also probablymotivated by personal experi-
Arnob. nat. .: quod si haberet vos aliqua vestris pro religionibus indignatio,has potius lit- teras,hos exureredebuistis olim libros, [istos] demoliri, dissolvere theatrahaec potius,inquibus infamiae numinum propudiosis cotidie publicantur in fabulis.Nam nostraquidem scripta cur igni- bus meruerunt dari? Hier. chron.,a.Abr. ,AD (GCS :). 1.4 Christian Reactions to the Great Persecution 37 ence and momentary feelings. He had taught at the imperial courtatNicomedia as apagan teacher before becomingunemployed from 303 to c. 315 because he had converted. He states:⁶⁰
Eloquencewas extinguished, lawyers wereremoved, legal experts either exiled or slain, lit- eraturewas regarded as an evil art,and those knowledgeable in it were crushed and cursed as public enemies.
As it is discussingthe persecution of Christians and aiming to show that those responsible for this werejustlypunished by God with untimelydeaths, Lactan- tius’ narrative is certainlyexaggerated and generalising,with no referencetospe- cific cases. But his account implies that the emperor Galerius’ categorisation of public enemiesand of evil (magical) arts in scholarship was extended to Chris- tian scholars. Lactantius pennedhis Divine Institutions,ajustification of Christianity against pagan religion and philosophy, shortlybefore the edict of toleration at atime when memoriesofthe persecution werestill fresh. This work helps to un- derstand the edict against Porphyry.Addressed to Constantine, the first chapters of book five deal with the conflict between Christians,philosophers, and pagan literature: “Philosophers,orators,and poetsare pernicious” because the influ- ence of their writingscould cause Christians to waver. They are “sweets conceal- ing poison.”⁶¹ Lactantius did not criticise teachingand literatureper se, but he wanted them to be grounded in the Christian faith: “Iwishedtocombine wisdom with religion, that that vain doctrinemay cause no harm to the students.”⁶² Lac- tantius’ strategyofappropriating ancient education wasalso one designed to ap- peal to the interest of the clergy,arguing that education washelpful for the dis- semination of faith and that as Christian authors werebetter anywaythey could easilyreplacetheir pagan peers (5.1.21–8). In this context,Lactantius pictures philosophers as deriding Christians and the Bible because they lacked eloquence(5.1.18). Philosophers even felt contami- nated by the Bible and forced to purify themselvesbydestroyingand cursing it (5.1.1). He implicitlyacknowledgesthatphilosophersare similar to Christians in as much as they too consider their teachingtobethe true wayand that of the
Lact. mort. pers. .: eloquentia extincta, causidici sublati, iure consulti aut relegati aut ne- cati, litterae autem inter malas artes habitae, et qui eas noverant,pro inimicis hostibusque protriti et execrati. Lact. inst. ..: philosophi et oratores et poetae perniciosisunt … mella sunthaec venena tegentia. Lact. inst. ..: volui sapientiam cum religione coniungere, ne quid studiosis inanis illa doc- trina possit officere. 38 1The Great Persecution, the Emperor Julian and Christian Reactions other to be an error(5.1.17;5.2.5), but it is difficult to validatehis position as phil- osophical treatises against Christianity have scarcelysurvived. He does not give anynames of his adversaries. However,heseems to be thinking of one such treatise authored by Sossianus Hierocles.Asprefect of Egypt,Hierocles initiatedthe Great Persecution of 303 and wrote an anti-Chris- tian treatise shortlybefore (5.2.12– 17;known from the reply Against Hierocles,at- tributed to Eusebius). It is also likelythat Lactantius had in mind the third-cen- tury philosopher Porphyry (5.2.4).⁶³ Lactantius acknowledgesPorphyry’streatise Against the Christians,claiming that its initial positive reception “changed into blame and rejection” and thatChristians derided his work and found it “ridiculous.”⁶⁴ This appears to allude to the book-burning edict issued by Con- stantine against Porphyry,orrather an appeal to burnhis books as the edict was issued probablynot long after Lactantius wrotehis book. In the first book of the Divine Institutions,Lactantius commented on the an- cient Romans’ practice of burning religious books, noting that they destroyed all copies extant of the religious booksoftheir archaic king Numa but failed to con- ceal their actions: “everyone then in the senate was very stupid because the books could have been destroyed, but the event itself not remembered.”⁶⁵ As we have seen that Constantine issued an edict against the non-conformist Chris- tian Arius following asimilar edict against Porphyry in order that no memory of his teachingshould survive it maybethatLactantius was ideologicallyunder- pinning arobust approach to suppressing literature. Moreover,Lactantius aligns himself with earlier Latin Christian apologists, his own personal engagement with this genre showing ashift from defence to attack: “Ishalloverthrow earlier authors, together with all their writings, and cut off from future authors anypossibility to write or to reply.”⁶⁶ He implores and invites “learned and eloquent” Christians to follow his example, predicting that if successful “nobodycan doubtthat false religions will quickly disappear, and philosophyaltogether fall, if everyone shallbepersuaded that this [Christi- anity] is the onlyreligion and also the onlytrue wisdom.”⁶⁷ Lactantius was ad-
See DePalma Digeser (). Lact. inst. ..: in culpam reprehensionemque conversa est; ..: ridiculus. Lact. inst. ..–,at:nemo ergotunc in senatu non stultissimus;potuerunt enim et libri aboleri et tamen resinmemoriam non exire. Lact. inst. ..: ut et priores cum suis omnibus scriptis perverterem et futuris omnem facul- tatem scribendi aut respondendiamputarem. Lact. inst. ..: evanituras brevi religiones falsas et occasuram esse omnem philosophiam nemo dubitaverit, si fuerit omnibus persuasum cum hanc solamreligionem, tum etiam solam veramesse sapientiam. 1.4 Christian Reactions to the Great Persecution 39 vocatingthe intellectual overthrow of other positions. He does not deride the classics here because in this context he quotes the old poet Ennius. Similarly, whenever other Christian authorswrote about “philosophy” or “wisdom” in this understandingthey had in mind the true Christian wayoflife rather than the theoretical reflection about life and the world. Christian true philosophy could even mean areligious life of asceticism that did not requireliteracy.⁶⁸ Similarly,Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea and author of anotable Church his- tory,called for the disposal of certain pagan books, albeit in arhetorical ques- tion. His Praeparatio Evangelica justified the truth of the gospel against the back- ground of philosophicalattackssoon after Constantine’sand Licinius’ agreementonreligious tolerance in the edict of Milan in 313.⁶⁹ Arguing against Porphyry,heinterpreted certain philosophicaltenets as preparingthe wayfor Christianity, while refutingothers:⁷⁰
Fortopass over the nonsense of the Egyptians and their very loquacious absurdity,and to go on to the physical theories of the Greek philosophers, whatperson of right attitude would not at oncecensurethose whoattempt to give such gross misinterpretations?[…] Whyindeed do they not rejectthe shameful and improper fables about the gods as unlaw- ful and impious,and makeunseen the very books concerning them, as containingblasphe- mous and licentious teaching,and celebratethe one, onlyand unseen God simplyand purely, without anyshameful circumscription?
In this passage, Eusebius positions Greek physical theories as condemnable, as well as certain parts of poetry for their sexuallyexplicit natureand theirchal- lengetomonotheism because of their depiction of multiple gods. In order to dis- cuss physical theories by Greek philosophers regardingthe nature of the gods and the origin of the world that are opposedtoChristian theology, he quotes ex- plicitlyfrom authorslike Platoand Plutarch. Although he otherwise does not mention the philosophersthat he criticises in this book,hedoes refer to prom- inent Greek philosophershaving theorised about the origin of the world in an- other (7.12: Thales, Anaximenes, Heraclitus, Pythagoras, Epicurus, Democritus
Papadogiannakis(), –;Siniossoglou (), –;Malingrey(), – ;Laistner (), –;Ath. v.Anton. – is an interesting ancient testimonial. On the Praeparatio Evangelica,see Johnson (). Eus. p.e. .., (SC :, ): ἵνα γὰρτὸνΑἰγυπτιακὸνπαρελθώντις λῆρον καὶ τὴνπολλὴναὐτῶνκαὶἀδόλεσχον φλυαρίαν ἐπὶ τὰςτῶνσοφῶν Ἑλλήνων μετέλθοι φυσιολογίας, τίςοὐκἂντῶνεὖφρονούντων αὐτόθεν καταμέμψαιτο τοῖςτὰτοιαῦτα παρεξηγεῖσθαι πειρωμένοις; … τί δῆτα τοιγαροῦνοὐχὶτὰςαἰσχρὰςκαὶἀπρεπεῖςπερὶ θεῶνμυθολογίας ὡς ἂν ἀθέσμους καὶἀσεβεῖςπαραιτησάμενοι καὶ αὐτάςγετὰςπερὶ τούτων βίβλους ὡςδυσσεβῆ καὶ ἀκόλαστα περιεχούσας ἀφανεῖςποιήσαντες, τὸν ἕνα καὶ μόνον καὶἀόρατον θεὸνγυμνῶςκαὶ καθαρῶςκαὶἄνευ τινὸςαἰσχρᾶςπεριπλοκῆς ἀνυμνοῦσι; 40 1The Great Persecution, the Emperor Julian and Christian Reactions and Empedocles). Eusebius, like Lactantius, had amajor influenceonthe em- peror Constantine. Alater possibleallusion to the Great Persecution and following destruction of books by Porphyry is John Chrysostom’spolemical Discourse on the Blessed Babylas, against Julian and the Pagans. John (c. 347–407) is one of the most pro- lific authorsofLate Antiquity.John’spolemical thrust partlyoriginated because of aneed to competewith educated pagans and the contemporary debates of his time. Antioch perhaps exemplifies this more than most other locations. It was a culturallydiverse city in which different groups struggled for influence. The ori- gins of John’sintellectual position can perhapsbefound in his life. Based in the mountains outside of Antioch, John wasarigorous ascetic, spending two years of extreme asceticism in acave. In later life, he became presbyter of the Antioch congregation. Although not much is known about these 12 years, the majorityof sermons Iwill discuss belong to this period. Since 398 he wasbishop of Constan- tinople,aposition second in status onlyafter the bishop of Rome. However,he was banished in 403 and again in 404.Inmanyofhis sermons and otherpieces John was highlypolemical, criticising his Christian audience for lax attitudes and being well aware of competingpagan groups and schools in Antioch. The Discourse on Babylas contains an interesting passageabout the disap- pearance of philosophicalbooksthat has hitherto drawnscarceattention. I shall discuss this passageinits historicalsetting.Brieflysummarising its imme- diate context,John argues for the superiority of Christianityoverpaganism be- cause the knowledge of noteworthypagans of the past is almost lost,while the miracles of the first Christians are celebratedthroughout the then known world, citing the prophet Zoroaster and Zamolxis, disciple of Pythagoras, as ex- amples. AccordingtoJohn, there are onlyafew persons who still know these two names let alone their teachings.This, he suggests, is because their accounts are fictitious whereas the Christian truth will withstand even the mightiest attempt to destroy it: “The tyrants and emperors, the sophists invincible in their speech as well as the philosophers, sorcerers,magicians and demons have all been keen to destroy it,” puttingphilosophersalongside magicians.⁷¹ It is important to read the following passageinthis context of persecution:⁷²
Chrys. pan. Bab. . (SC :): καὶ τύραννοι καὶ βασιλεῖςκαὶλόγων ἄμαχοι σοφισταὶ ἤδη δὲ καὶ φιλόσοφοι καὶ γόητες καὶ μάγοι καὶ δαίμονες καθελεῖν ἐσπούδασαν.Cf. hom. in Mt. (PG :): “Youwill find that she (Egypt), whoisthe mother of poets,philosophers and magicians and the inventor of all forms of wizardry,now prides herself on the fishermen” (Καὶ τὴνποιητῶνκαὶσοφῶνκαὶμάγων μητέρα, καὶ τὴνπᾶνεἶδος μαγγανείας εὑροῦσαν καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις διαδοῦσαν, ταύτην ὄψει νῦν ἐπὶ τοῖς ἁλιεῦσι καλλωπιζομένην). 1.4 Christian Reactions to the Great Persecution 41
The philosophers and distinguished orators werevery famous among the people because of their dignity and ability to speak, but after the battle against us they became ridiculousand seemed no different from sillychildren. From so manynations and peoples,they werenot able to change anyone, wise, ignorant,man, woman, not even asmall child. There is so much laughter against their writings that their book-scrolls were long agoobliterated, and mostlyperished as soon as they appeared. If anythingatall is found preserved, one finds it preserved by Christians.
John appears to be saying that philosophical and oratorical books have perished and are found onlypreserved by Christians. He was perhaps thinkingofthe old philosophers (such as Epicurus) whom he could assume werehardlycirculating anymore. This passagehas been translated differently, suggesting thatitmeans either books being lost by neglect or deliberately destroyed.⁷³ In order to understand whether John is talking about loss or destruction of books, it is necessary to discuss this passagephilologicallyand to read further into the following context within the treatise.The constitution of the text is reli- able because it has been transmitted without variation in manuscripts extant since the ninth century.⁷⁴ Schatkin provides atranslation of this decisive pas- sage: “their books disappeared along time ago, and mostlyperishedwhen they first appeared.”⁷⁵ However,inboth the active and passivevoice aphanisthé- nai primarilymeans “to destroy” or “to obliterate (writing).”⁷⁶ Afurther possible interpretation of the passivevoice that is used in this passageis“suppressed”⁷⁷ with regard to writing and also “to disappear” in the context of “persons buried by asand-storm or lost at sea.”⁷⁸ John himself alsoelsewhereusesthe term in
Chrys. pan. Bab. .– (SC :–): οἱ δὲ φιλόσοφοι καὶ δεινοὶῥήτορες δόξαν πολ- λὴνοἱμὲνἐπὶσεμνότητι οἱ δὲἐπὶλόγων δυνάμει παρὰ τοῖςπολλοῖς ἔχοντες μετὰ τὴνπρὸςἡμᾶς μάχην καταγέλαστοι γεγόνασι καὶ παίδων ληρούντων ἁπλῶςοὐδὲνδιαφέρειν ἔδοξαν. ἀπὸ γὰρ ἐθνῶνκαὶδήμων τοσούτων οὐ σοφόντινα, οὐκ ἄσοφον, οὐκ ἄνδρα, οὐ γυναῖκα ἀλλ’ οὐδὲ παι- δίον μικρὸνμεταπεῖσαι ἴσχυσαν, ἀλλὰ τοσοῦτός ἐστι τῶν ὑπ’ αὐτῶνγεγραμμένων ὁ γέλως ὥστε ἀφανισθῆναι καὶ τὰ βιβλίαπάλαι καὶἅμα τῷ δειχθῆναι καὶἀπολέσθαι τὰ πολλά. εἰ δέ που τι καὶ εὑρεθείηδιασωθὲνπαρὰ Χριστιανοῖςτοῦτο σωζόμενον εὕροι τις ἄν. Speyer ()offers twodifferent interpretations: ancient literatureisforgotten (p. )or anti-Christian books have been destroyed (p. ,note ). Similarly: Schatkin (), . See Schatkin (), SC :. Schatkin and Harkins (), . LSJ, ,I.–.According to Stephanus’ Thesaurus Graecae Linguae (:–), the pas- sive voiceusuallyhas the same meanings as the active voice, including the notion of utter de- struction. Th. ... Hdt. .;Th. .. 42 1The Great Persecution, the Emperor Julian and Christian Reactions the sense of wilful destruction in the context of the loss of booksofthe Old Testament:⁷⁹
Even beforethe captivity manybooks had been obliterated and the Jews drifted into the worst degree of impiety.This is clear fromthe end of the fourth book of Kings [4Reg.22:8; 2Chr.34:14]because the book of Deuteronomy could hardlybefound and was buried somewhere in adunghill.
The verb aphanídso here means the wilful destruction of books. This is obvious also from what John says shortlybefore: “probablyitwas actuallywritten in some books, and the books have been obliterated”,because he adds the expla- nation: “manybooksweredestroyed and few werepreserved, even in the first captivity.”⁸⁰ The emperors Julian and Constantine too used aphanídso clearly to refertobook-destruction.⁸¹ Schatkin then translates apolésthai as “to perish” because this translation is common for the Aorist Middle Voice particularlyinthe New Testament.⁸² How- ever,the primary meaning in the active voice ranges from “to destroy utterly” to “to lose.” Mayertranslates this term as “to destroy” in the context of barbar- ians sacking cities elsewhereinJohn Chrysostom.⁸³ Schatkin also translatesthe phrase háma to deichthénai to English as “when they first appeared” and to French as qu’au momentmême de leur publication as if John wanted to say that philosophical and rhetorical books weresoinsignificant thatthey gotlost right after publication. However,there is no instance for deíknymi (literally “to show”)meaning “to publish”,but there is at least one passagewherethe term
Chrys. hom. in Cor. (PG :): καὶ γὰρπρὸτῆςαἰχμαλωσίας πολλὰἠφάνιστο βιβλία, τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰς ἐσχάτην ἀσέβειαν ἐξοκειλάντων. καὶ δῆλον ἐκτοῦτέλους τῆςτετάρτης τῶν Βασιλειῶν· τὸ γὰρΔευτερονόμιον μόλις που εὕρηται ἐνκοπρίᾳ κατακεχωσμένον.Igive the PG reference insteadofField’searlier edition of the sermons on Matthew and the letters of Paul as the PG is moreaccessible. Chrys. hom. in Cor. (PG :): …ἢ εἰκὸςκαὶγεγράφθαι ἐνβίβλοις, καὶἠφανίσθαι τὰ βιβλία. Καὶ γὰρπολλὰ διεφθάρη βιβλία, καὶὀλίγα διεσώθη, καὶἐπὶτῆςπροτέρας αἰχμαλωσίας. Similarly: Chrys. hom. in Mt. (PG :–): “Manyofthe prophetic books were obliter- ated; and this one maysee fromthe history of the Chronicles.For beingcareless,and continu- ouslyfalling into impiety,some they suffered to perish, others they themselvesburnt and shred- ded.” (πολλὰ γὰρτῶνπροφητικῶν ἠφάνισται βιβλίων· καὶ ταῦτα ἐκτῆςἱστορίας τῶν Παραλειπομένων ἴδοι τις ἄν. ῥᾴθυμοι γὰρ ὄντες, καὶ εἰς ἀσέβειαν συνεχῶς ἐμπίπτοντες, τὰ μὲν ἠφίεσαν ἀπόλλυσθαι, τὰ δὲ αὐτοὶ κατέκαιον καὶ κατέκοπτον). See section . (with regardtoPorphyry) aboveand . below. John :; Cor. :. Chrys. hom. in Eph. (PG :): πόλεις ὁλόκληροι κατεποντίσθησαν καὶἀπώλοντο.Mayer (), with note .Cf. Lampe, PGL, : “.med., perish, be destroyed or lost.” 1.4 Christian Reactions to the Great Persecution 43 means “to informagainst,todenounce”,related to accusers.⁸⁴ Thisinterpreta- tion is intriguing,for it matches what is described in Ammianus and elsewhere, that booksweresearched out based on privateaccusations,asweshall see in section 2.1. The term pálai (“along time ago”)speaks against the assumption thatJohn had in mind pagan booksrecentlyburnt.However,the term can alternatively,if less frequently, indeed mean “recently.” This would fit with John’srhetorical statement in the following passagethatthe destruction of Hellenism happened in “such ashort time.”⁸⁵ The philological discussion of the passageonthe loss of books written by philosophersand orators thereforeshows that John had in mind awilful destruction of books in the past rather than adeclining interest in these books. Secondly, from the aggressiveness of John’slanguagefollowing the passage on the disappearance of books, it is also clear thathewanted to give the impres- sion of destruction rather than disappearance by neglect; he compares pagans and their literature to scorpions, serpents and intestinal worms torturingthe Christian’sbody. He stresses,however,that Christians relyonpersuasion rather than on violence to extirpate other belief. In John’sunderstandingthese animals are demons, agents of the devil. It is the mission of anydevout Christian to fight these in order to avoid getting entrapped in theirsnares and draggedinto hell- fire. Emphasising the frivolouscharacter of pagan literature,this passagethus reveals amissionary strategy. It is in line with the monastic education at that time as Antony, the father of all monks, had fought the demons of his ownsex- uality in the shape of asnake or dragon.⁸⁶ Yet, having argued thatJohn wasalludingtodestruction rather than neglect of bookswhen saying that the writingsofthe philosophers and orators had per- ished, it is worth asking which writers John was thinking of in particular.Itis unlikelythat he was alludingtothe whole of ancientliterature on these subjects. Rather,because John mentions persecutingemperors,assistedbyphilosophers, John mayhavebeen thinking of the writings of pagan philosophers hostile to Christianity, particularlyPorphyry,whose writingshad indeed been ordered to be destroyed and had been ridiculedbyChristian authors long ago. In this case he would be referring to the Great Persecution that began in 303.This sup- ports the scholarlyopinion that John wrotethe Discourse on Babylas to refute Porphyry’s Against the Christians. It is also possiblethat the passagealludes
LSJ ,p., :Ar. eq. . See p. below: ἐνοὕτω χρόνῳ βραχεῖ. Ath. v. Anton. . 44 1The Great Persecution, the Emperor Julian and Christian Reactions to the magic trials and book-burning that happened in Antioch some years ago as we will see in section 2.1. This reading could be justified because John as well as his audience had experiencedthese events, anumber of philosophers were affected by the magic trials and the initial conspiracy had an anti-Christian thrust.Onbalance, John appears to conflatethreedifferent layers of historical allusion: burningofanti-Christian booksfollowing the Great Persecution, ne- glect of ancient books and possiblythe magic trials in Antioch in the 370s and the subsequent destruction of privatelibraries. Nevertheless, the assump- tion that John wasalludingspecificallytoPorpyhry can be supported by asim- ilar passagetaken from John’ssermons:⁸⁷
Iwished, if youhad plenty of spare time, to bringbeforeyou all the book of acertain im- pureGreek philosopher written against us, and that of another of earlier date,inorder to arouse youatleast,and to lead youawayfromyour exceeding laziness.For if they wereso wakeful to speak against us,what excuse can we deserve, if we do not even know how to refute the attacks against us?
It is likelythat one of these Greek philosopherswas Porphyry and John explicitly justifies the fact thathis writingswerepreserved by some Christians in that they needed to give well-informed counter-arguments against pagans. The other, much older author was probablyCelsus, who wroteatreatise against Christianity in the second century. Another interesting aspect in this passagebyJohn Chrysostom is his derision of philosophical opinions thatare contrary to Christianityaswehaveseen that he describes the philosophicaltradition as laughter.John thus usesthe derision of texts and their authors as an effective weapon to cast doubtonabook’swor- thiness. This motif has atradition in ancientrhetoric. As Quintilian wroteinthe first century, “we laughnot merelyatthose words or actions which are astute or hi- larious, but also at those which are stupid, hot-tempered or shy. The motivation for this is thereforeambiguous, since laughter is never far away from derision.”⁸⁸ In Greek philosophyderision was occasionallyused as arhetoricaltool. The atomist philosopher Democritus, for example, was known as the laughing phi-
Chrys. hom. in Jo. (PG :): ἐβουλόμην, εἴ γε σχολῆς ἀπελαύετε πολλῆς, εἰςμέσον ἁπάντων ὑμῶνμιαροῦ τινος Ἕλληνος φιλοσόφου βιβλίον καθ’ ἡμῶνεἰρημένον ἀγαγεῖν, ἑτέρου πάλιν πρεσβυτέρου τούτου, ἵν’ οὕτω γοῦν ὑμᾶςδιανέστησα, καὶ τῆςπολλῆςνωθείας ἀπήγαγον. εἰ γὰρ ἐκεῖνοι μὲν, ὥστε καθ’ ἡμῶνεἰπεῖν, τοσαῦτα ἠγρύπνησαν, τίνος ἂνεἴημεν συγγνώμης ἡμεῖς ἄξιοι, εἰ μηδὲ τὰςπροσβολὰςτὰςκαθ’ ἡμῶνεἰσόμεθα ἀποκρούεσθαι; Quint. inst. ..: neque enim acute tantum ac venuste, sed stulte, iracunde, timide dicta ac facta ridentur,ideoque anceps eius rei ratio est, quod aderisu non proculabest risus. 1.4 Christian Reactions to the Great Persecution 45 losopher,apparentlybecause of his derisory attitude towardshis fellow citizens, and was thereforeinturn derided.⁸⁹ This specific case mayhaveserved as aprec- edent for the derision of philosophyinChristian texts.Inthis specific connota- tion laughter has the purpose of provingotheropinions to be wrongand not wor- thyofrefutation. This can in turn implythatamong those who shared this attitude there was an unwillingness to include the content of the derided philos- ophies in writing.For example, Platohas been citednot to have ever mentioned Democritus in his works.⁹⁰ John Chrysostom uses the metaphor of laughter particularlyoften not just with regardtopagan philosophy, but also with regard to paganism as a whole. In doing so, he combines this motif with medical metaphors.For exam- ple, in the immediate context of the passagequoted abovefrom the Discourse on Babylas he compares the termination of Hellenismtothegradual perishment of abodyinfected with long-lastingputrefaction (13):⁹¹
If this satanic laughter has not been completely deleted from the earth, whathas already happened is sufficient to convinceyou concerning the future. Because the greater part has been destroyed in such ashort amount of time, no one will rival us anylonger on ac- count of the remainder.[…]Paganism had been spread all over the earth and possessed the souls of all human beings and so much later,after so much force and progress, was it de- stroyed by the powerofChrist.
John’scommemoration of the Great Persecution probablycaused him to ridicule ancient philosophies in response to those philosophers(like Porphyry) who ridi- culed Christianity.Astriking example of this theme can be quoted from the sec- ond Homily to the GospelofJohn:⁹²
See Pellizer(). D.L. Democritus . Chrys. pan. Bab. .– (SC :–): ὥστε εἰ καὶ μὴ τέλεον ὁ σατανικὸςοὗτος ἐξή- λειπται γέλως ἀπὸ τῆςγῆς,ἀλλ’ ἱκανά γε τὰἤδη γενόμενα πιστώσασθαι καὶὑπὲρτῶνμελλόντων ὑμᾶς. τοῦ γὰρπλείονος καθαιρεθέντος ἐνοὕτω χρόνῳ βραχεῖ περὶ τοῦ λειπομένου οὐδεὶςφιλο- νεικήσει λοιπόν. … ὁ μὲνγὰρἙλληνισμὸςπανταχοῦ τῆςγῆςἐκταθεὶςκαὶτὰςἁπάντων ἀνθρώπων ψυχὰςκατασχὼνοὕτως ὕστερον μετὰ τὴντοσαύτην ἰσχὺνκαὶτὴνἐπίδοσιν ὑπὸ τῆςτοῦΧριστοῦ κατελύθη δυνάμεως. Chrys. hom. in Jo. (PG :–): τούτων γὰρ ἔνια ἐζήτησαν μὲνοἱπερὶ Πλάτωνα καὶ Πυθαγόραν· τῶνγὰρἄλλων οὐδὲἁπλῶςμνημονευτέον ἡμῖνφιλοσόφων· οὕτω καταγέλαστοι ἐντεῦθεν μεθ’ ὑπερβολῆςγεγόνασιν ἅπαντες. οἱ δὲ τῶν ἄλλων θαυμασθέντες πλέον παρ’ αὐτοῖς, καὶ πιστευθέντες εἶναι κορυφαῖοι τῆς ἐπιστήμης ἐκείνης, οὗτοι μάλιστα τῶν ἄλλων εἰσίν· οἳ καὶ πολιτείας μὲν ἕνεκεν καὶ νόμων συνθέντες τινὰἔγραψαν· ὅμως δὲἐνἅπασι παίδων αἰσχρότερον κατεγελάσθησαν.Cf. Maxwell (), . 46 1The Great Persecution, the Emperor Julian and Christian Reactions
The followers of Platoand Pythagorasinvestigated some of these questions.Thereissimply no need for us to remember the other philosophers; they have now all become so excessive- ly ridiculous;and those whohavebeen moreadmired among them than the rest and who have been believed to be the experts in that science, aresomorethan the others;and they have written compositions on the subject of the state and the laws,and in all have been derided moreshamefullythan children.
John’sverdict on these unnamed philosophersisfounded on their diversity of opinions which conflict with Christianity’sunifiedvision. By contrast, “they have erred agreat error,and, like blind or drunkenpeople, have dashedagainst each other in their error.”⁹³ Moreover,justlike the pagans had generallyderided the follyofthe messageofthe cross in the beginning,soare now pagan world views derided as madness by Christian authors.⁹⁴ In consequence, John passed over other philosophicaltraditions than those of the Platonists and Pythago- reans (which wereclose to each other)inthe context of the abovepassage. Borrowingfrom Christian and Platonic traditions and constitutinganother recurrent theme in Christian authors, their ridiculousness is closelylinked to “children” as aperiphrase for Greek philosophers, as well as to the devil, both here and in the passagequoted above.⁹⁵ Within this theme,John singles out phil- osophical traditions on the transmigration of souls and in particular the Pythag- orean belief that souls transmigrated into plants, ridiculing both vegetarianism and the notion that human beingsare aspecies of animalsasinconsistent with the Christian belief in creation.⁹⁶ It is acommon theme of Christian authorstoname the old philosophers “children”,implying that the Judaeo-Christian tradition is older than, and supe- rior to,Greek philosophyand religion. Thus, Cyril of Alexandria provides a doubtful, circumstantial account comparing the Jewish and Greek traditions up to the birth of Christ based on the Olympic calendar.⁹⁷ From this he derives his claim thatChristian tradition is older than Greek literacy⁹⁸ and that the Greek philosophers had borrowed anything thatmight be construed as truth
Chrys. hom. in Jo. (PG :): καὶ καθάπερ τυφλοὶ καὶ μεθύοντες, καὶἐναὐτῇτῇπλάνῃ ἀλλήλοις προσέῤῥηξαν. This argument is clearlyput forwardinChrys. hom. in Cor. (PG :–). Thus in Chrys. hom. in Ac. (PG :); hom. in Jo. (PG :–); hom. in Cor. (PG :–). Chrys. hom. in Ac. (PG :–). Throughoutthe Middle Ages, Christian scholars con- demned metempsychosis:Maaz (). Cyr. Juln. .– (= PG :C–A).Chapterisation for the first two books according to the edition by Burguièreand Évieux as well as for the first five books according to the most re- cent edition, GCS NF .Igive the PG references in addition. Cyr. Juln. . (= PG :A). 1.4 Christian Reactions to the Great Persecution 47 from the Christian tradition.⁹⁹ He refers to Solon’ssayinginPlato’s Timaeus that “youGreeks are always children” because they have no written record so far as evidence of their limited abilities.¹⁰⁰ ForCyril, the line was clear: whenever the Greek sages had agreed with Christian scripture, they had also agreed among each other,inspired by God,whereas in anything else they had been of dissent- ing,abominable opinions, and in astate of delirium.¹⁰¹ In making this point, Cyril adds some biblical quotations and allusions,¹⁰² noting,for example, that it was onlyafter the Great Flood,the tower of Babel, and the confusion of lan- guages thatmen werebrought to worship that which is created, such as the sky,sun, moon and elements, instead of the one God.¹⁰³ Nevertheless,John Chrysostom occasionallyadmits that philosophical writ- ingsdisagreeingwith the Christian world view werestill accessible. Forexample, in the nineteenth Homily against the Statues,written after the Statue Riot,John says that, although it can hardlybefound anymore, the follyofthe philosophers is evident if one unfolds their book-scrolls written long ago.¹⁰⁴ In these, the read- er is offered the opinions that there is no divine providence and no creation, opinions that are opposed to Christian teachingand that John finds “most ridiculous.”¹⁰⁵ This passageimplies thatitwas at that time still possibleto read the opinionsofthe old philosophers. In asermon on the GospelofJohn, John Chrysostom reiterates his point that philosophical writingscan at best be found in the possession of Christians,echo- ing the passageonthe disappearance of books in the Discourse on Babylas. John argues that on the one hand, educated Christians just as John himself might still find it useful to studyancient philosophytoimprovetheir own writings, but on the other they should disclose their knowledge onlytoridicule philosophy. By
Cyr. Juln. . (= PG :A–B). Cyr. Juln. . (= PG :D): Ἕλληνές ἐστε παῖδες ἀεί. Cyr. Juln. . (= PG :C). Cyr. Juln. . (= PG :D). Cyr. Juln. . (= PG :A). Chrys. stat. . (PG :): κἂν ἕνα αὐτῶνλαβὼνφιλόσοφόντινα τῶν ἔξωθεν ἀγάγως εἰςμέσον νῦν· μᾶλλον δὲ νῦνμὲνοὐδένα ἔστιν εὑρεῖν· ἃνδὲτινα τούτων λαβὼν, καὶ τὰ βιβλία τῶνπάλαι παῤ αὐτοῖςφιλοσοφησάντων ἀναπτυξας ἐπέλθως, καὶ τί μὲνοὗτοι ἀποκρίνονται νῦν, τί δὲἐκεῖνοι τότε ἐφιλοσόφησαν παράλληλα θεὶς ἐξετάσως, ὄψει πόση μὲν ἡ τούτων σοφία, πόση δὲἡἐκείνων ἄνοια. Chrys. stat. . (PG :–): καταγελαστότερα;cf. in illud, Paulus vocatus.etde mutat. nominum . (PG :–). 48 1The Great Persecution, the Emperor Julian and Christian Reactions contrast,hesuggests that the less educated audience is discouraged to study pagan philosophyatall:¹⁰⁶
But enough of this; or rather even this is out of measure. Forinorder to learn anythinguse- ful from these authors,itwould be necessary to wasteevenmoretime; but just in order to observetheir awkwardness and ridiculousness,morethan enough has been said by us al- ready.
This passageexplains whyJohn repeatedlycalls ancient philosophyridiculous while finding it necessary to protect the faith from philosophicalcounter-argu- ments. Hischoice between the two positions dependedonthe degreeofeduca- tion that he expected from his audience. Further allusions to the burningofbooks duringthe Great Persecution are found among Prudentius’ poems (earlyfifth century), which include acollection of martyr hymns (Peristephanon). Originallyfrom Spain, Prudentius eventually had aprestigious if not specifiedoffice at the court of Theodosius (379– 395)¹⁰⁷ and it is likelythat he had livedinRome for some time.¹⁰⁸ Before giving acloser readingofthe Vincent hymn, Ishalldiscuss alate antique mosaic thatis probablybasedonthis hymn and thatalludes to book-burning duringthe Great Persecution. Alunetteonthe south wall opposite the entrance of the imperial mausoleum of the Theodosian family(built c. 430 – 450) depicts asaint traditionallyinter- preted as the martyr Lawrence.¹⁰⁹ Lawrence ultimatelybecame the patron saint of both librarians and fire – apeculiar combination. Themausoleum is at- tributed to Honorius’ sister,Galla Placidia (d. 450) – probablythe construction’s patron – and was built in the backyardofSan VitaleBasilica with its famous mo- saics of Justinian and Theodora. Some scholars have interpreted the mosaic as showing asaint burningheretical books and the chapel interior as awhole to depict the dissemination of the gospels,¹¹⁰ leading one scholartosuggest that
Chrys. hom. in Jo. (PG :): ἀλλὰ τούτων μὲν ἅλις· μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ ταῦτα πέρα τοῦ μέτρου. εἰ μὲνγάρτιχρήσιμον παρ’ αὐτῶν ἦνμαθεῖν, ἔδει καὶ πλέον ἐνδιατρίβειν· εἰ δὲὅσον τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην αὐτῶνκαὶτὸνγέλωτα κατοπτεῦσαι, καὶ ταῦτα πλέον τοῦ δέοντος εἴρηται παρ’ ἡμῶν.Cf. hom. in Ac. (PG :). Prud. praef. –. Tränkle (), ,note provides alist of scholarlycontributions that argueinfavour of –;thus also Harries (), –;Tränkle suggests . On the identification with Lawrence: Deichmann (), , ;onthe date, p. ;Low- den (), –. Strzygowski (), ;Bovini (), ;Diehl (), ;Cabrol and Leclerq(), : livre, sans doute hérétique. 1.4 Christian Reactions to the Great Persecution 49 the scene generallyrefers to the destruction of ancient literature by flame.¹¹¹ Ar- guing against the book-burning interpretation, others have suggested that the parchment codex carried by the saint in the depiction is agospel or another Christian book.¹¹² However,thatthe cabinet alreadyshows four gospels, each with its title given, indicates that the fifth book, that of the saint,isdifferent from the gospels, because no title is given.
Figure 1. MausoleumofGallaPlacidia in Ravenna,mosaic of “St Lawrence” Photo: Nadine Urbschat
Earlyattempts by scholarship to relatethe scene to Prudentius’ Lawrence hymn (Perist. 2) have been criticallyreceived.¹¹³ The arrangementofthe mosaic departs from the traditions established by other Lawrenceimages. Mackie has thereforesuggested that the mosaic wasanillustration of Prudentius’ Vincent hymn.¹¹⁴ Iagree with this view also because in the Vincent poem, as Iwill show,the Spanish martyrisforced to disclose the sacredwritingstobeburnt. Both poems have several elements in common, including the gridiron, as has
Antoniades (), –. Nordström (), ;Deichmann (), .Others have interpreted the saint as Christ holdingthe books of human recordsonJudgment Day: Bovini (), –, . Dütschke(), –;See Courcelle (), on attempts in favour of the Lawrencehy- pothesis. Mackie (), , –;Mackie (). 50 1The Great Persecution, the Emperor Julian and Christian Reactions been shown by Desantis.¹¹⁵ This alignment of the mosaic with Vincent rather than with Lawrencetherefore supportsthose scholars who have argued that the mosaic alludes to book-burning. The west and east lunettes have deer drinking the water of eternal life. Abovethe lunettes, there are arches supposedlyshowing eight apostles as well as doves again drinking from avessel or fountain. Yetthe book is central to the scene as awhole. The bases of the cross arches have vine scrolls,taking up amotif that we will see again in Contra Symmachum and other poems by Pru- dentius in section 3.3. To Mackie “the acanthus represents the unbroken tie with classicaltradition.”¹¹⁶ The apostles also carry book scrolls.While vine tendrils are common even in Roman pre-Christian mosaics, scholars have nevertheless persuasivelylinked the reception forwarded in the mausoleumtothe parable of the vineand the branches in the Gospel of John (15:1).¹¹⁷ Iwould like to add that this is supported by afifth-century codex of Pliny’sletters that contains asubscription “enclosed by scrolls of vine-tendrils” (CLA 1660).Thisarchaeolog- ical find shows that this symbolwas actuallyemployed as ornamentation for classicalbooks. It is also worth noting that the opposite lunetteshows Christ the Good Shepherd protecting his flock of sheep. This indicatesthat the whole imagery represents the protection of the Christian congregation from evil. This weight of established interpretation suggests that the scene subtlyalludes to book-burning in the sameway that Prudentius’ martyraccounts do, as Iwill argueshortly. The historical setting of Prudentius’ Vincent hymn shows its link to book- burning as it is situatedduring the Great Persecution.¹¹⁸ In Prudentius’ hymn, Vincent,the martyr,istortured after he deniedoffering sacrifices to the emperor. However,hemockshis torturers. The torturer,Datianus, who was governor of Spain,¹¹⁹ demands Vincent to surrenderhis books: “At least reveal your con- cealed pages, your hidden books, that the teachingwhich disseminates falsity maybeburned with the fire it deserves.”¹²⁰ The martyr replieswith what at first glanceseems to be the judge’sconsignation to hell:¹²¹
Desantis (), . Mackie (), ;cf. Apoc. :–. Bovini (), . On aprose version of adateunknown, Simonetti (); Palmer (), –. Prud. perist. .; PLRE ,Datianus , . Prud. perist. .–: saltem latentes paginas | librosque opertos detege, | quo secta pra- vum seminans | iustis cremetur ignibus. Prud. perist. .–: quem tu, maligne, mysticis | minitaris ignem litteris, | flagrabis ipse hoc iustius. | romphaea nam caelestium | vindex erit voluminum | tanti veneni interpretem | lin- guam perurens fulmine. 1.4 Christian Reactions to the Great Persecution 51
Youyourself will burn moredeservedlyinthe fire with which youare viciouslythreatening our mysticwritings,for the sword will retaliateour heavenlybooks,burningwith its light- ning-flash the tongue that speaks such poison.
This passageagain shows the close association of book-burning and the burning of the human body. The “tongue” (lingua)may also be translated in afigurative sense as “language” or “speech.” Ihere agree with those scholars who have ar- gued that from acomparison of the hymns on Cyprian and on Romanus lingua can also be ametonomyfor written record.¹²² This metonomyfits into my later readingofitmeaning wicked tongue, ametaphor for anti-Christian ideas ex- pressed either in writing or in speech, as Ishall show in section 3.3. Ishall also show the use of “poison” as asynonym for false philosophyand heresy. While this passagecan be aligned with Prudentius’ claim that Christianityhad overcome the errors of the past,itisalso possibletoread this passageaspropos- ing thatcertain pagan books have been or needed to be burnt.Nor is it astretch of interpretation to suggest that this mayhavebeenproposed as aretaliatory re- sponse to the burning of Christian books duringthe Great Persecution. The Passion of Philipp has asimilar scene of divine revengefor the burning of divine Scripture in Heraclea in Thrace. It has apolemical thrust against the forum that the philosophers used to roam:¹²³
Afire was made in the presenceevenofthe citizens and foreigners that weregatheredto- gether,and he threw all divine scriptures into the blaze. Suddenlyaflame ascended up to heavensopowerful that fear detained individual spectators from lookingatsuch afire. Some, however,were sittingaround blessed Philipp in the forum, where everythingisfor
Malamud (), –.Roberts (), note : “the conflation of languagede- rivedfromthe martyr cultwith the traditional pagan claims for the survival of works of litera- ture.” Mastrangelo (), : “In the work of Prudentius, lingua stands for poetry (Cath. .) and the correct faith (catholicam linguam, Apoth. ), which must be disseminated throughwrit- ing,speaking, and singing.” Pass.Philippi .– (Franchi de’ Cavalieri, –): igne subposito,adstantibus etiam civ- ibus peregrinisque collectis,scripturas omnes divinasinmedium misit incendium.tanta subito ad caelum flamma praecessit, ut stantes singulos formido ab expectaculo tanti ignis arceret. quidam vero circabeatum Philippum in foro sedebant, ubi venale quodcumque proponitur.adquos cum pervenisset hic nuntius, praesentibus exponebatdicens: ‘viri qui Heracleam incolitis,Iudaei, pa- gani velcuiusque religionis aut sectae, iam nunc extremi temporis,futuracognoscite, Paulo apos- tolo commonente, qui dixit: revelatur enim iraDei de caelo super omnem impietatem et iniustitiam hominum. et in Sodomis ideo venit iraiusta propter iniustitias eorum, ut si Sodomorum timeant iudicium et iniustitiam fugiant et quaerentes qui sit qui hoc fecit iudicium, ad eum convertantur ex vanis lapidibus et sint salvi. quare his,quibus per Orientem in Sodomis ignis apparuit, signum iudicii et indicium fuit irae caelestis.acneinsoloOriente pius se ignis ostenderet, in Sicilia quoque atque in Italia visa est resdigna miraculo’;Speyer(), ;cf. Just. apol. . 52 1The Great Persecution, the Emperor Julian and Christian Reactions
the sale. The messenger[Philipp] came to them and explained to those in his presence: Peo- ple of Heraclea, Jews,and pagans, followers of every religion or sect,beawareofthe fu- ture,now that the end of time is near! The apostle Paul has warned us: ‘Forthe wrath of God is revealed fromheavenagainst all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men’ [Rom. 1:18]. Therefore,righteous anger comes to Sodom because of their unrighteousness: if they fear the judgment on the people of Sodom, if they abstain from their unrighteous- ness and searchfor Him who made this judgment,they will convert to Him and be saved from their vain snares. Therefore,ithas been asign of the judgment and awitness of the divine anger to the people throughout the East to whom appeared the fire in Sodom. And the pious fire arose not onlyinthe East,but also in Sicilyand in Italythere was seen some- thingworthytobecalled amiracle.
The Passion was originallywritten in Greek and has survivedinrevised Latin translations, although not without alteration. The modern editor Franchi de’ Cav- alieri suggests that the text was first penned in the first quarter of the fourth cen- tury and thatalaterhand probablyadded to the eschatological passagequoted above. He also argues that it is likelythat the passage’send was written after temples such as the Serapeum in Alexandria had been destroyed – adding weight and meaning to these sections. Confirmingthis,the phrase “in Italy” is missing in one old manuscript.¹²⁴ It is likelythatthis is asimilarlylateraddition, meaning that the phrase perhaps alludes to Christian book-burning in Western parts of the Roman Empire, justifying this actionasretaliation for the burning of Christian books. At anyrate,texts like these conveyamessagethat Christian- ity had overcome the errors of the past. Asimilar scene can be found in another of Prudentius’ martyr hymn, related to the martyr Romanus and situated in Antioch duringthe Great Persecution. The passion of Romanus again showsclose association between the book and the bodyasitisstriking that the torturer orders Romanustobeburnt: “Youare con- demned to be devoured by fire and youwill soon turn into ascant ash heap.”¹²⁵ While amonstrous pyre is being built up and the flame fed with dried grass, the martyrhimself, just like in the scene of book-burning in the Vincent hymn,is positive thatthis judgment actuallypertains onlytoanevent of future times: “This kind of passion is not assigned to me, and agreat miracle stillremains to happen.”¹²⁶
Franchi de’ Cavalieri, Note agiografiche , –. Prud. perist. .–: ignibus vorabere | damnatus et favilla iam tenuis fies. Prud. perist. .–: nec passionis hoc genus datum est | et restat ingensquod fiat mira- culum. 1.4 Christian Reactions to the Great Persecution 53
Some Martyr Acts of the fifth and sixth centuries stillcommemorate the burning of Christian scripture duringthe persecution in Italy¹²⁷ and in the East.¹²⁸ One such text reports that pagan priestsburntthe books “of their own idols”,overcome by the martyr’ssteadfastness.¹²⁹ The historicalcredibility of these textsisdoubtful, but they indicate that such memoriessustained long after.For example, the Coptic Martyrdom of Victor also depicts a “magician” who came to burn his “magic” books and to convert to Christianity.This un- named “magician” had prepared poison to execute the martyr Victor of Antioch in atrial in the ageofDiocletianbut sawhis powers defeated.¹³⁰ Just before his death, Victor prophesised that eight yearslaterall philosophers and orators will die when they meet for lunch in ahouse that will fall down.¹³¹ This appears to be an allusion to the destruction of temples such as the Serapeum of Alexandria. A medievalLatin Martyr Actlocates asimilar story in Spain around the same time.¹³² We can see again that Christian Martyr Acts link book-burning during the Great Persecution to the death of memory as far as magic or inimicalphilo- sophical traditions are concerned. In sum, anumber of Christian authors demonised pagan philosophybe- cause, they argued, some philosophers had advised emperors such as Diocletian to persecute Christians. Philosophers and theirtextsand teachingswerethere- fore portrayedasenemies of Christianityand as demons able to destroy the souls of the faithful and to drag them into hell. Authors such as Lactantius and Eusebius acted as advisorsofthe emperor Constantine and therefore appear to have influenced the censorship legislation of thattime, justasphilosophers like Porphyry had informed the decision of the emperor Diocletian to destroy Christian texts.Inthe next section, we will see that Constantine’ssuccessors con- tinued to curb specific pagan forms of magic and divination, although their in- tent was to battle oppositional forces and stabilise their dynasty,and that the
Pass.Alexandri (ActaSS Sept. :): gesta nostrasecretius habe, quoniam tempus malum est; Pass.S.Victoris Mauri (ActaSS Maii :): in Milan; Pass.Firmi (ActaSS Aug. :): omnia scripta velgesta Christianorum,inVerona; Pass.Gordii Caesariensis Cappa- doc. (van Esbroeck, ). Kynopolis in Egypt: Pass.Dioscori (Quentin, ); Abitinae: Pass.Saturnini .– (Franchi de’ Cavalieri, –); Pass.Gordii Caesariensis Cappadoc. (van Esbroeck, ). Pass.Paphnut. et soc. (Delehay, ): οἱ δὲἱερεῖςθεασάμενοι τὸ βιβλίον τῶνεἰδώλων αὐτῶνκαιόμενον. Martyrium Victoris Fol. b(Budge, /). Martyrium Victoris Fol. a–b(Budge, /). Pass.Facundi et Primitivi – (Fábrega Grau :): maleficus omnes codices suos in igne combusit (). 54 1The Great Persecution, the Emperor Julian and Christian Reactions emperor Julian’sshort-livedattempt to revive aspecific form of pagan higher ed- ucationled to further reactions by Christian authors keen to reverse just this.
1.5 Julian and the Constantinian Dynasty
Constantine’ssons, Constantius II (337–361) and Constans I(337– 350), contin- ued to favour Christianity. Zealous Christians, such as monks, destroyed temples, although alaw forbade this practice, and it wasperhaps not before 356that sac- rifices and worship of images werebanned by threat of capital punishment.¹³³ It is not clear to what extent these laws wereimplemented, and paganism contin- ued long after. The anti-pagan legislation underConstantine’ssuccessors ruled against cer- tain aspects of paganism perceivedtobedangerous rather than against pagan- ism per se. Nevertheless,these earlyreligious laws pavedthe waytolater book- burning laws and reported acts of book-burning.In357,Constantius issuedan edict to the people of Rome, banning all kindsofdivination. He visited Rome in that year.Under the threat of capital punishment it was forbidden for anyone to consultpersons involved in this art,includingastrologers (mathematici), prophets (vates)and representativesofthe old Greco-Roman religion involved in divination.¹³⁴ It is possible thatConstantine reacted to slanderous rumours about his reign, as some emperors did in the first century.Itisclear that this kind of divination would have attracted the most attention. Nevertheless, the link between paganism and divination must have been welcome to the clergy. Thus, the council of Ancyra in 314had defined the act of divination as “being in accordancewith the customs of the pagans.”¹³⁵ Around the same time, afurther lawbyConstantius, addressed to the people of Rome, condemned those who practicedthe magic arts (magicae artes). Ex- emptions from torture, traditionallyenjoyed by persons from the upper strata of society,werewaivedincases of magi,who “are to be regarded as enemies of humankind” as well as anyone involved in divination “including even a mathematicus.”¹³⁶ This explains whyaccordingtoAmmianus people of high
Cod. Theod. .. (lawbyConstantius and Julian in Milan). Constantine mayhaveruled against sacrifices (Cod.Theod. .. alludes to this, however,without the threat of capital punishment), but this is debated; see recentlyWallraff (), –. Cod. Theod. ... CAnc. can. (Mansi :): auguria vel auspicia, sive somnia veldivinationes quaslibet, secundum morem gentilium. Cod. Theod. ..–,at:humani generis inimici credendi sunt … vel etiam mathematicus. 1.5 Julian and the Constantinian Dynasty 55 rank weretortured duringthe magic trials in the 370s, as we will see in section 2.1. With areferencetohis father Constantine, Constantius alsoruled pamphlets (famosi libelli)tobeburnt.Itthereforeappears that the problem of slanderous writingscontinued in Africa.¹³⁷ There is evidence that on at least one occasion Constantius enforced these laws, albeit in adifferent region. In 359, Constantius conducted trials in reaction to offensive scriptures maliciously forwarded to him from the temple-archive of the Egyptian BesatAbydos. The main location and focus for this investigation, which involved tortureregardlessofrank,was Scythopolis in Palestine (between Antioch and Alexandria). Ammianus mentions aphilosopher and alearned poet,who was later acquitted, among the victims.¹³⁸ His account suggests that prophecies on the fate of the emperor wereparticularlyunwanted, but that it was ultimatelythe decision of the prosecutor to punishany form of pagan div- ination. Constantius’ successor Julian (361–363) was the onlyacknowledgedpagan emperor since Constantine. His Christian adversaries chargedhim with apostasy. Much has been written about Julian’spsychological development, his intellectu- al and educational background, and what inspired the emperor to turn from Christianitytothe previous state cult.Itisworth looking in more detail at exactly what the last pagan emperor contributed to the narrative of censorship and book-burning we have established so far as well as at the legal and psychological consequences of Julian’sreligious policy in the years following his death. Firstly, the so-called teacher edict certainlyisthe best known of Julian’s laws. It is generallyinterpreted as representingJulian’sintention to put Christian teachers out of business. The edict puts the local decurions in charge of granting teachinglicenses to regulate these standards and in reachingthe standard read- ing of it,much has been made out of Julian’sletters.For Julian, moral integrity meant that ateachers’ religious belief had to be commensurate with the peda- gogicalmaterial he used.¹³⁹ As aresult,the academic conclusion is that Julian barred Christians from teachingclassical literature, such as Homer,and that he generallyintended to exclude Christians from higher education. Nevertheless, at least one scholar suggested the alternative interpretation that the teacheredict was part of ageneral program to improvethe administrative and moral status quo of the empire rather than to discriminate against Christians.¹⁴⁰ This, Ifeel, is amore persuasive position as the edict mentions onlythe moral standing of
Cod. Theod. ... Amm. .. Cod. Theod. ..;Jul. ep. c(Bidez .:–). Klein (). 56 1The Great Persecution, the Emperor Julian and Christian Reactions teachers (grammarians and rhetoricians). It seems that because the edict was worded neutrally, it was included in the Codex Theodosianus,despite its possible anti-Christian tendency.Watts has recentlyargued that as aconsequence of this edict pagan teachers wereinturn those who had to face adversities in their pro- fession, once emperors continued to be Christians.¹⁴¹ From all the legislativeacts Julian undertook none was despised more by Greek Christian authors than his teacher edict.Wewill see in the following sec- tion that Christian authorsleave no doubt that they counted the late emperor among the persecutors,although the evidence suggests thatheavoidedreligious trials. In this context,Speyer’sremark that Julian was close to the Christian the- ologians that criticised him is intriguing.¹⁴² Afterall, had not the earlier apolo- gists insisted that Christians should avoid reading manypagan texts? Secondlyinthis context,Julian was suspicious not onlyofChristian educa- tors but alsoofcertain schools of philosophy, preferringhimself Neoplatonic philosophy. What is less known is that although he readmitted philosophers to his court he also argued for censorship. In aletterhestated that pagan priests should not read the poetical works of Archilochus,Hipponax, and the Old Com- edyaswell as the philosophicalworks of Epicurus and Pyrrho, adding that most books by the Epicurean and Pyrrhonic philosophershad perished by this time.¹⁴³ While some Neoplatonic philosopherssurely shared Julian’sview,itmust also be noted thathis reservations mayhavebeen aggravated by his Christian education, as noted above. Judging from established testimonials regarding the edict on teachers,itappears thatJulian’sreligious policy had apsychological impact on some Christians in the yearstocome, as we will see in the next section. It also appears that pagans took advantage of the changed religious climate duringJulian’sreign, goingasfar as to confiscatebooks. In Alexandria the Arian bishop George of Cappadocia, aman with the reputation of being afierceexec- utor of Constantius’ II laws against sacrifices and temples was avictim of this. George was one of the multiple replacements for the important theologian Atha- nasius (who wasmanytimes expelled from his bishop’ssee as an adversary of Arius). As aconsequence of his policy,the mob murdered George and his library was plunderedduring the ensuing riot in 361when the religious climate had changed following Julian’saccession. In reaction to this,Julian ordered Porphy- ry,Alexandria’sfinance officer (rationalis), and his staff to conduct house
Watts () –. Speyer (), –. See p. ,note below. 1.6 Christian Reactions to the Emperor Julian 57 searches and interrogations to try and recover George’sbooks, suggesting that he would destroy anyChristian books among these:¹⁴⁴
Do grant me this privatefavour,that all of George’sbooks be found out.For he owned many books on philosophy, and manyonrhetoric; manyalso on the teachingsofthe ungodlyGal- ilaeans [= Christians]. These latter Iwished to be obliterated,but for fear that alongwith them moreuseful works maybetaken away,let all those also be carefullysearched out.
The letter shows that destruction of specific books could cause larger, coinciden- tal losses of books because the officials in charge of the searches wereprobably well-educated and mayhavekept some of the books. Following their initiation, searches for forbidden booksand their destruction begin to take place with in- creasingfrequency from this point onwards through the next centuries. Ishall argueinthe following section that clerical exhortations not to read certain pagan books weresometimes linked to Julian’sreligious policy.
1.6 Christian Reactionstothe Emperor Julian
Julian’sworks and religious policy provoked similar polemics as the Great Perse- cution had done. While these polemicaldiscourses have not directlyaffected im- perial censorship legislation, they maytosome extent account for clericalinter- ests with regard to the banning of books. Gregory of Nazianzus composed two orations against Julian (or.4and 5) in 363orshortlyafter,that immediatelyreacted to Julian’sreligious policy and death. Gregory heavilyattacksJulian for attemptingtodeprive Christians of lit- erature (lógoi)and education through the teacher edict (4.101). As another edu- cated Christian who, like his fellow student Basil, was aconnoisseur of classical literature, he argued in his speech that Julian was wrong to claim that pagan lit- erature and religion are connected. He suggested that Christians could endorse pagan culture but dismiss sacrifices (4.5). Yetinhis polemical attacks on Julian, Gregory defended onlyselected as- pects of pagan literature and education and deprecated others. He regarded as morallyinferior the kind of pagan education thatJulian wanted to be taught
Jul. ep. :A–B(Bidez .:): ταύτην οὖν ἰδιωτικήνμοι δὸςτὴνχάριν, ὅπως ἀνευ- ρεθῇ πάντα τὰ Γεωργίου βιβλία. πολλὰ μὲνγὰρἦνφιλόσοφα παρ’ αὐτῷ, πολλὰ δὲῥητορικά, πολλὰ δὲἦνκαὶτῆςτῶνδυσσεβῶνΓαλιλαίων διδασκαλίας· ἃ βουλοίμην μὲν ἠφανίσθαι πάντη, τοῦ δὲ μὴ σὺντούτοις ὑφαιρεθῆναι τὰ χρησιμώτερα, ζητείσθω κἀκεῖνα μετ’ ἀκριβείας ἅπαντα.For the context, Jul. ep. , – (Bidez .:–, –); Amm. ..–. 58 1The Great Persecution, the Emperor Julian and Christian Reactions in schools (4.124): “the education of this world was walking in darkness,and falling away far from the light of truth”,¹⁴⁵ something he suggested was being dis- seminatedbydemons (4.55). As with other Christian authors, Gregory wasinclu- sive as he defended the rhetorical use of the Greek languagefrom Julian’salleged argument thatthis too wasthe domainofHellenism, arguing that Christians should make use of rhetoric if it was to disseminate faith (4.100 –107). Similarly to other Christian authors, Gregory did not dismiss poetry as such – he himself composed Christian classicizing poems – but he did criticise its pagan content (4.108), such as the myths of the Olympic gods, as being sexuallyoffensive (4.70, 116–23). He regarded the gods of pagan poetry as dragons (5.31–2).On the subject of philosophyand philosophers, he execratedthe philosophers from the various ancient schools who had persuaded Julian to turn away from Christianity(4.43,72; 5.5, 38, 41), as opposed to the Christian “true” philosophers (such as monks). He linked the learning associated with these pagan philoso- phers to astrology and divination (4.31,43) and explicitlycounted geometry as superstition (4.109;cf. 4.43) – aderogatory Christian term for pagan belonging. As farasmagic books are concerned, Gregory,likeJulian, did approveofthe unity of pagan religion and overlypagan literature:¹⁴⁶
Put away your books of sorcery and divination, let onlythose of the Prophets and Apostles be opened […]Throwdown your Triptolemuses,and your Eleusis,and your foolish dragons: shame yourself of the books of your oracular Orpheus!
Gregory alsodiscussed the legal background of book offences.Hepolemically said thatthe treason law – which ruled the death penalty on personal insult of the emperor – was suitable to ban pagan poetry as it was sexuallyoffensive. Moreover,pagan poetry insulted not onlyone god – the emperor – but many gods:¹⁴⁷
If death is the penalty assigned by the laws for all whoblaspheme against asingle one of their gods – even privatelyand slightly – what should be the punishmentfor those wholet
Gr.Naz. or. . (SC :): τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου … παίδευσις ἐνσκότει διαπορευομένη καὶ τοῦ τῆς ἀληθείας φωτὸςπόρρω πίπτουσα. Gr.Naz. or. . (SC :–): παῦσόνσου τὰςγοητικὰςκαὶμαντικὰςβίβλους· αἱ προ- φητικαὶ δὲ καὶἀποστολικαὶ μόναι ἀνελιττέσθωσαν. … κατάβαλε τοὺςΤριπτολέμους σου, καὶ τοὺς Κελεοὺς, καὶ τοὺςμυστικοὺςδράκοντας· αἰσχύνθητί ποτε ταῖςτοῦΘεολόγου σου βίβλοις Ὀρφέως. Gr.Naz. or. . (SC :): εἰ γὰρτοῖςεἰςἕνα θεὸναὐτῶνκαὶἰδίᾳ καὶ μικρὰ βλασφη- μήσασι θάνατος ἢ ζημίαπαρὰ τῶννόμων, τί πάσχειν ἔδει τοὺςπᾶσιν ὁμοῦ καὶ δημοσίᾳ καὶἐπὶ τοῖςαἰσχίστοις ἐπαφιέντας τὴνποίησιν, καὶ μακρῷ χρόνῳ παραδόντας τὴνκωμῳδίαν; 1.6 Christian Reactions to the Emperor Julian 59
loose their poetry against all gods altogether,publicly, and in the most abusive terms, and for those whohavehanded down this comedy for along time?
Gregory here borrows from Clement of Alexandria, who gave alist of authors that insulted the gods (Menander,Antisthenes, Homer and Euripides).¹⁴⁸ He goes as far as condemning Julian for his school buildingprogram (4.111). He is perhaps right to describe certain philosophers –“those who strayed, who worshipped the creaturerather than the creator”¹⁴⁹ – as (currently) giving up their previous error, from fear of coercion (5.28): after all, we will see that there is some evidence that Julian’ssuccessor Jovian acted against philosophers. Gregory also was the first to criticise Julian’santi-Christian writings, partic- ularlyhis Contra Galilaeos (4.74; 5.41), whereJulian posited the link between pa- ganism and classical culture. Gregory ranked these writingsalongside Porphy- ry’swhich Constantine ordered to be burnt. Both, he argued, contained the same lies (5.41). Gregory’sposition is that of aChristian author who aligned Ju- lian’santi-Christian policy with the influenceofthosepagan philosophers who advised Julian. As with thoseChristian authorswho wroteagainst philosophers like Porphyry in the aftermath of the Great Persecution, Gregory’sspeeches un- derpinnedthe division between acceptable and unacceptable aspectsofpagan learning,indicating that pagan philosophical views disagreeing with the Chris- tian world view weredetrimental to the well-beingofChristians, going as far as to compareJulian’sreligious policy with earlier persecutions of Christians. Greg- ory’sposition here certainlyhas to be seen within the context of the atmosphere soon after Julian’sdeath and the specific expectations of his audience. Julian’sreligious policy and his works,particularlyhis treatise Contra Gali- laeos (that is Christians), frequentlyprovoked Christian criticism even long after his death. Fragments of this work by Julian (361–363) are extant largely be- cause of quotations in alater refutation by the Christian author Cyril, patriarch of Alexandria (412–444). Julian’swork is thus among the very few surviving phil- osophical texts of Antiquitywhich undertakeacomprehensive refutation of Christianity, arguing,for example, against the biblical concept of creation. ACoptic Church history has provided an account of the reasons whyCyril wrotehis refutation, indicating that Julian’swork was actively suppressed. It notes that agroup of philosophers talked with Cyril about Julian’swork. In reac- tion, Cyril conducted asearch for Julian’swritingsand,after along time had
Clem. prot. .. Gr.Naz. or. . (SC :): ἐμακρύνθησαν καὶ “ἐλάτρευσαν τῇ κτίσει παρὰ τὸνκτί- σαντα”,referringtoRom. :. 60 1The Great Persecution, the Emperor Julian and Christian Reactions passed, eventuallyfound copies.The difficulties Cyril experiencedinthis search suggests that the work had been suppressed probablybecause of Christian re- strictions: it is named alongsidethe booksofOrigen(at that time heretical) and of Porphyry,whose work Against the Christians had been ordered to be de- stroyed in imperial legislation.¹⁵⁰ Outwith of its character as an anti-Christian work, there is evidence to sug- gest thatecclesiastical authorities criticised Julian’s Contra Galilaeos for its con- flation of Neoplatonic and Epicurean concepts. To Julian’sassertion “that the na- ture of earthlybodies is produced from the clash of the elements” in his refutation Contra Julianum Cyril replies that the emperor was influenced by those who informed him, in particular by Empedocles, whom he quotes from areferenceinPlotinus.¹⁵¹ To Cyril, such tenets are “laughter” and “sophistries” and they detract from truth,¹⁵² as they had been shownbefore to be childish talk proposingthe most extreme absurdness.¹⁵³ This shows that Julian produced atomistic arguments to challengethe biblical creation account.
1.7 Conclusion
In sum, Ihaveargued in this chapter that two pagan emperors introduced cen- sorship legislation as atool to establish agreater degreeofstate control. Chris- tian authors responded to bothkey events, arguing that their philosophical back- ground, education or advice by contemporary philosophershad caused Diocletian and Julian to legislate in this way. In consequencethey came up with anumber of strategies to arguethat pagan philosophies are demonical, ri- diculous, sinful and arrogant curiosity,thatphilosophyitself had persecuted Christians. While there is evidence that some Roman emperors of the first century AD occasionallybanned astrologers (and even philosophers) from Rome and Italy, there is no firm evidence thatbooks wereburnt in these contextsbefore the late-imperial period. On the contrary,pagan emperors wereoften advised by phi- losophers. Indeed, prominent philosophers wroteanti-Christian treatises at the occasion of the Great Persecution in the earlyfourth century.Contemporary and laterChristian polemicaltexts and Martyr Acts blamed the Great Persecution and the burning of scripture not onlyonapagan empire, but also on philoso-
Historia ecclesiae Alexandrinae (Orlandi :–). Cyr. Juln. . (= PG :B). Cyr. Juln. . (= PG :C): γέλως … τερθρεία. Cyr. Juln. . (= PG :B). 1.7 Conclusion 61 phers, notablyPorphyry.These Christian authors constructed their discourse on book-burning against the backdrop of the Great Persecution. At that time Chris- tian authors had also agreed on adiscourse of condemningnatural philosophy based on its contradictions of the biblical creation account.¹⁵⁴ It is likelythat Christian apologists such as Lactantius and Eusebius influ- enced the emperor Constantine who ordered further book-searches soon after the Great Persecution, including searches for booksbyPorphyry and an unspe- cified rangeofforbidden arts. It is also likelythat the clergy endorsed Constan- tine’sreligious policy.Inthe next chapter Ishallargue that the Roman admin- istration tried to negotiate between these positions.Indoing so, the emperors continued to be interested in implementing agreater degree of state control.
See Schmid (), .