A COMMENTARY ON JEROME’S CONTRA VIGILANTIUM BY AMY HYE OH DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Classical Philology with a concentration in Medieval Studies in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2013 Urbana, Illinois Doctoral Committee: Professor Danuta Shanzer Professor Ralph Mathisen Professor Jon Solomon Professor Stephan Heilan, University of Osnabrück ABSTRACT Innkeepers inspired this dissertation. After working on ‘innkeepers’ as a topic for a research seminar paper, I soon discovered that the term caupo counted as an insult according to several church fathers, including Jerome. In the Contra Vigilantium, Jerome mocked his enemy, Vigilantius, by calling him a caupo who mixed water with wine; I wondered whether the title was true and the insult was deserved. What remained was to figure out who this man was and why he mattered. The dissertation is comprised of four parts: introductory chapters, a text with an en face translation, a philological/historical commentary, and appendices. The first chapter introduces Vigilantius, discusses why a commentary of the Contra Vigilantium is needed, and provides a biography, supported by literary and historical evidence in response to the bolder and more fanciful account of W.S. Gilly.1 The second chapter treats Vigilantius as an exegete. From a sample of his exegesis preserved in Jerome’s Ep. 61, I determine that Jerome dismissed Vigilantius’ exegesis because he wanted to protect his own orthodoxy. The third chapter situates Vigilantius in the debate on relic worship. His position is valuable because he opposed most of his contemporaries, decrying relics instead of supporting their translation and veneration. The Latin text and format are taken from Jean-Louis Feiertag’s Corpus Christianorum Series Latina volume published in 2005.2 Verbatim citations of Vigilantius are fully capitalized and biblical citations are italicized. The present text is not a new critical edition, but aims to improve some of Feiertag’s editorial choices, which, although representative of the manuscript 1 Gilly, W. 1844. Vigilantius and his times. London: Seeley, Burnside and Seeley. 2 Feiertag, J.-L. 2005a. Hieronymus: Adversus Vigilantium. Corpus Christianorum Series Latina 79C. Turnhout: Brepols. ii tradition, render the text more difficult to read. Each sentence of the Latin text is numbered and directs the reader to the corresponding sentence in the commentary. The commentary follows the model of the Gröningen commentaries on Apuleius.3 The text and translation are provided in smaller units and immediately precede the commentary for ease of reference. I also provide in the appendix a translation of Epp. 61 and 109, the text taken from Hilberg’s Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum edition, as it is referenced and commented upon at various points throughout the dissertation. Following the letters is a short discussion on the genre of the Contra Vigilantium. All translations, unless otherwise stated, are my own. 3 Hijmans, B.L. et al., eds. 1995. Gröningen Commentaries on Apuleius. Groningen: Egbert Forsten. iii To Daniel, as promised: sine quo non. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS In writing this dissertation, I have accumulated a great deal of debt. The first debt of gratitude is owed to my adviser, Danuta Shanzer. Her expertise and generosity exemplify the kind of scholar and mentor I hope to be. I would also like to thank Ralph Mathisen, who guided me through late antique history and suggested new approaches, and my committee members, Stephan Heilen and Jon Solomon, for providing insightful comments and criticism. I am very grateful to the faculty of the Department of the Classics. Their support and encouragement were instrumental in keeping me motivated throughout my graduate career. To the wonderful group of graduate students, I would like to give special thanks for teaching me so much with their friendship and scholarship. I am indebted to the Graduate Women’s Group: this outcome would have looked completely different without the amazing women who helped me in the process. For his critical eye and for sharing a special relationship with Jerome, I would like to thank Philip Polcar. I would also like to thank Isabella Kim on the other side of the country and Angela Kinney on the other side of the world for traveling this journey with me as friends, advisers, and women whom I greatly admire. Lastly, I would like to thank Daniel Abosso for being my family for the past ten years. His patience, good humor, resourcefulness, and unceasing support have been invaluable and I remain happily in his debt. v ABBREVIATIONS AB Anchor Bible AJ Adversus Jovinianum BLE Bulletin de Littérature Ecclésiastique CCSL Corpus Christianorum Series Latina CH Church History CIL Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum CJ Contra Iohannem CQ Classical Quarterly CP Classical Philology CPG Corpus Patrologia Graca CSEL Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum CSHB Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae CTh Codex Theodosianus CV Contra Vigilantium CW Classical World DACL Dictionnaire d’Archéologie chrétienne et de Liturgie EME Early Medieval Europe GCS Die griechische christlichen Schriftsteller HThR Harvard Theological Review JECS Journal of Early Christian Studies JEH Journal of Ecclesiastical History JLA Journal of Late Antiquity JML Journal of Medieval Latin JRS Journal of Roman Studies JThS Journal of Theological Studies LHS Leumann-Hofmann-Szantyr LIMC Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae PCBE Prosopographie chrétienne du bas-empire PGM Papyri Graecae Magicae PL Patrologia Latina PLRE Prosopography of the LaterRoman Empire PG Patrologia Graeca REA Revue des études augustiniennes SBL Society of Biblical Literature SC Sources chrétiennes StPatr Studia patristica TAPA Transactions of the American Philological Association ThSt Theological Studies TLL Thesaurus Linguae Latinae VigChr Vigiliae Christianae vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction: Context and Scholarship……………………………………….….. 1 Chapter One: Vigilantius in His Historical Context……………………………... 6 Chapter Two: Vigilantius as Exegete and Enemy of Jerome….………………... 19 Chapter Three: Relics and Resurrection……………………………………….... 37 Text and Translation …………………………………………………................. 57 Commentary.......………………………………………………………………... 75 Chapter I…………………………………………………………………. 75 Chapter II………………………………………………………………... 91 Chapter III……………………………………………………………….. 99 Chapter IV……………………………………………………………….. 105 Chapter V………………………………………………………………... 114 Chapter VI……………………………………………………………...... 123 Chapter VII………………………………………………………………. 136 Chapter VIII……………………………………………………………... 141 Chapter IX……………………………………………………………….. 148 Chapter X………………………………………………………………… 152 Chapter XI……………………………………………………………….. 157 Chapter XII………………………………………………………………. 159 Chapter XIII……………………………………………………………… 163 Chapter XIV……………………………………………………………… 167 Chapter XV………………………………………………………………. 172 Chapter XVI……………………………………………………………… 177 Chapter XVII…………………………………………………………….. 182 Appendix A: Letter 61, written to Vigilantius in 396............................................ 184 Appendix B: Letter 109, written to Riparius in 404……………........................... 190 Appendix C: The Genre of the Contra Vigilantium …………………………...... 195 Bibliography……………………………………………………………………... 197 vii Introduction: Context and Scholarship Vigilantius of Calagurris, a man with little learning and even less eloquence who was born of low and disgraceful parents,1 might seem an unlikely adversary for a scholar like Jerome of Bethlehem, one of the four great doctors of the Roman Catholic church; yet he earned Jerome’s ire, for he had the gall to declare that celibacy was unnecessary, and relics were no more than specks of dust. Spreading his controversial views, this Gallic native caught the attention of fellow presbyters who grew anxious about his growing influence. These men looked to Jerome for help,2 and Vigilantius consequently bore the brunt of scathing attacks in Jerome’s Ep. 61 and 109 (written in 396 and 404) and in his Contra Vigilantium (406). Vigilantius’ Adversary As a prolific scholar, exegete, politician, and personality, Jerome is one of the best- known men of letters of the late antique period.3 He was born in Stridon, near Dalmatia, in the 340s.4 His parents, of whom little is known, were Christians and relatively well-to-do. He had a younger sister, whose name is unknown, and a younger brother named Paulinian. Under the tutelage of the famous grammarian Aelius Donatus, he was educated at Rome before going to 1 Hier. CV 3 (CCSL 79C, 9) and CV 1 (CCSL 79C, 5). 2 Hier. CV 3 (CCSL 79C, 8-9). 3 The scope of this project is to look more closely at the specific time in Jerome’s life that involved Vigilantius; detailed information about Jerome’s life and career may be sought in several excellent biographies. The standard English biography on Jerome is Kelly, J.N.D. 1975. Jerome. His Life, Writings, and Controversies. London; other important works include Grützmacher, G. 1901-8. Hieronymus. Eine biographische Studie zur alten Korchengeschichte. 3 vols. Leipzig; Cavallera, F. 1922. Saint Jérôme. Sa vie et son oeuvre. 2 vols., Louvain/Paris; and Rebenich, S. 1992. Hieronymus und sein Kreis. Prosopographische und sozialgeschichtliche Untersuchungen. Stuttgart. 4 For the problems with dating, see Booth, A.D. 1979. “The Date of Jerome’s Birth.” Phoenix 33: 346-52, and Kelly, Jerome, 337-9. Kelly argues that Jerome was born in 331, which would have made Jerome