1 Acknowledgements This Thesis is by far the longest and most dense paper I have ever written, and I would not have been able to complete it without the support, enthusiasm, and inspiration of many individuals. I want to first thank my high school Latin and history teacher, Mr. David Jackson, for instilling in me a love of Classical antiquity. Without his influence, I would have never majored in history and Classics at this awesome University, and would have never had the chance to write this paper. I would also like to extend my thanks to my friends and family, especially my older brother McCabe. His enthusiasm for the ancient world matches my own, and his interest in my research has kept me engaged. In addition, I must give praise to my fellow honors students. I had the pleasure of seeing several of your presentations, and I was blown away by how thorough and interesting your research was. You guys make history interesting for those who might find it boring. I want to think Mr. Jonathan Scholl and Dr. Andrea Sterk for keeping us all afloat the last eight months. The constant emails, reminders, advice, and assistance were crucial in helping us to stay organized and alert. And finally, I want to thank Dr. Andrea Sterk again as my thesis advisor. She has been so patient and supportive from day one, and her suggestions and attention to detail helped me to continuously improve this work each time I sent her a new chapter or draft. I fear what this paper might look like without her mentorship. - Connor Harrison, April 23rd, 2014 2 Table of Contents Introduction: How Christianity would Flourish in the Rome’s Darkest Time 3 Chapter I: Analysis of a Conflicted Historiography and the Decentralized 8 Model of Religion in the Pre-Barracks Age Chapter II: Philip the Arab, The First Christian Emperor? 15 Chapter III: Decius, Christian Villain or Pagan Champion? 23 Chapter VI: Valerian, The True Villain and Gallienus, The True Ally 35 Conclusion: How Structural Unification Set the Stage for Christian Prosperity 46 Bibliography 49 3 Introduction: How Christianity would Flourish in the Rome’s Darkest Time The Church as the vehicle of salvation must exhibit unity as well as purity, as a mark of its true and enduring transcendental character, uncontaminated by the world’s corruption that is a sign of its metaphysical disorder awaiting renewal.1 – Allen Brent The history of Christianity and its rise to prominence over the course of the Roman Empire is to this day shrouded in mystery. There are many different historical perspectives on how and why Christianity was able to take a foothold in the Roman Empire and finally be championed by Constantine, Theodosius, and other late rulers. While Christianity did not become publically accepted by the centralized government until those rulers in the fourth century A.D., it nonetheless had been spreading throughout the Mediterranean world since the crucifixion of Jesus Christ circa 33 A.D. during the reign of Rome’s second emperor, Tiberius. From that point, there were many significant figures, emperors among them, who influenced the development of Christianity. This paper will focus on four emperors of the barracks period of the mid-third century—Marcus Junius Philippus (Philip the Arab), Trajan Decius, Licinius Valerianus (Valerian) and Licinius Gallienus--and explore how their policies and attitudes towards Christianity shaped the church during this period. The barracks period, from 235 A.D. to 284 A.D., was a tumultuous period in the history of Imperial Rome, a period during which much territory was lost. It saw the quick succession of military rulers with several coups and uprisings by both Romans and non-Romans occurring in many different parts of the empire. Due to lack of sources and considerable ambiguity with regard to territory and succession, this period is quite complicated for historians to navigate compared to the Augustan age, the era of the five-good emperors, or the tetrarchy and later 1 Allen, Brent, A Political History of Early Christianity (London: T & T Clark, 2009), 263. 4 emperors. However, these four rulers, while mysterious and perhaps less significant in the overall scope of Roman imperial history, were crucially significant when examined through the lens of Christianity. Each had his own unique perspective on the religion, and their consequent actions would indirectly cause Christianity to prosper in this time. My overall argument in this thesis is that the imperial polices of each of these emperors enabled Christianity to spread and to become structurally unified during this period. These emperors’ policies were heavily influenced by two different factors. First, a decentralized, unregulated religious situation throughout the empire prevailed at the beginning of this period2; hundreds of religions, including Christianity, were free to exist throughout the empire without much fear of persecution. Second, this was a period of economic and militaristic upheaval. These emperors implemented persecutions or policies of toleration because they believed that action or inaction towards the Christians could pacify the empire along the borders and secure a more stable reign for themselves. Thus, while this was the darkest period for the Roman Empire before its eventual fall with regard to land, wealth, and political stability, this upheaval would end up being a blessing in disguise for the Christians. I will attempt to provide evidence for this claim by examining the four emperors’ reigns in turn, followed by a conclusion. In the first chapter, I will discuss the various sources that form the basis of my analysis and offer an analysis of the historiography itself. This is especially important because the sources for this particular period of Roman history are scant, incomplete, biased, and in some cases contradictory; additionally, most were written significantly later than the events they describe. While these factors pose obvious obstacles for the historian, the conflicting nature of these 2 J.B. Rives, Religion and Authority in Roman Carthage from Augustus and Constantine (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), 113. 5 sources actually provides for some interesting analysis allowing scholars to view these emperors from multiple perspectives. In the second part of the first section, I will explain in more detail the de-centralized environment of religion that existed in the empire before the barracks period. In order to fully understand the policies of the four emperors and their effects on Christianity, it is important to understand the kind of religious model that had permeated the empire up until their time. The second chapter will focus on Philip the Arab. Philip, who ruled from 244- to 249 A.D., was known to be tolerant of the Christians, but some historians suggest he was himself actually a full Christian. The source for this belief is Eusebius of Caesarea, who claimed that at one point during his rule, Philip attended Easter Mass and repented of his sins.3 However, during Rome’s 1000th anniversary celebration, which occurred in 247 A.D., Philip was said to have held lavish pagan games.4 I will analyze Philip’s motivations for being either a Christian, or a dual Christian and pagan, how his unique beliefs reflect a continuation of the decentralized religious model, and how those beliefs may have provoked the hostility of his successor, Emperor Decius, towards Christianity. The third chapter will focus on the reign of Decius. Decius, who ruled from 249 to 251 A.D., is known as the first emperor to conduct systematic, empire-wide persecutions of the Christians. He achieved this through his edicts forcing all Roman citizens to carry around libelli, or documents which pledged that they would sacrifice to the pagan Gods.5 I will analyze Decius’ motivations for his edicts. Here the decentralized religious environment is especially important 3 Eusebius, and Paul L. Maier, Eusebius--The Church History: A New Translation with Commentary. (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1999), 231. 4 Zosimus, James. J, Buchanan, and Harold T., Davis, Zosimus: Historia Nova; The Decline of Rome (San Antonio: Trinity University Press, 1999), 15-16. 5 Brent, Early Christianity, 258. 6 to understand because Decius wished to recentralize religion to create unity across the empire. While Decius did persecute Christians, it may not have been that he hated Christians but rather that he championed paganism. I will discuss why he ultimately failed in this goal of recentralizing religion, and how his policies actually strengthened Christianity by spearheading a movement led by Cyprian to unify the Christians under the authority of the bishop.6 I will also suggest that regardless of Decius’ impact on the church, the vitriolic reactions of post- Constantinian Christian commentators such as Eusebius and Orosius were overblown. The fourth section will focus on Valerian and Gallienus, father and son, who ruled from 253 to 260 A.D., and 253 to 268 A.D. respectively. Unlike Decius, who seemed concerned with simply unifying the empire under pagan worship, Valerian aimed his edicts directly at the church, even persecuting Christian nobles and political figures in Rome herself in a top-down attack on the religion in which he may have hoped to destroy it completely. However, when Valerian was abruptly captured by the Persians in 260 A.D., his son Gallienus quickly abolished his fathers’ laws and actually established a period of peace for Christians which lasted until the persecutions of the tetrarchy.7 I will analyze Valerian’s motivations for his edicts, to what extent he was successful, and why Gallienus all of a sudden abandoned his father’s policies and established toleration; I will also assess how that toleration allowed the Christians to further prosper before the later persecutions of the tetrarchy.