31.12.2012 Views

Religious Intolerance in the Later Roman Empire - Bad request ...

Religious Intolerance in the Later Roman Empire - Bad request ...

Religious Intolerance in the Later Roman Empire - Bad request ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Urs<strong>in</strong>ian dispute which survive outside <strong>the</strong> code. Only one law dealt with Christian-<br />

pagan relations, 23 and ano<strong>the</strong>r drew a l<strong>in</strong>e of demarcation between legitimate<br />

div<strong>in</strong>ation and harmful div<strong>in</strong>ation. 24 Only two laws were concerned with heretics. 25<br />

There is one law that tangentially touches on relations with <strong>the</strong> Jewish religious<br />

authorities, 26 but no laws have survived that may have dealt exclusively with paganism<br />

or Judaism as religions <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>mselves. There is also a restored <strong>in</strong>scription which has<br />

not survived textually, but orders <strong>the</strong> protection of all graves. 27<br />

Valent<strong>in</strong>ian and <strong>the</strong> Church<br />

I am but on e of <strong>the</strong> laity, an d hav e <strong>the</strong>refore n o right to <strong>in</strong> terfere <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>se<br />

tran saction s: let <strong>the</strong> bishops, to w hom such m atters apperta<strong>in</strong> , assem ble<br />

w here <strong>the</strong>y please. (Soz. 6.7) Valent<strong>in</strong>ian's response to a petition of<br />

Arian Bishops ask<strong>in</strong>g for his permission to call a council <strong>in</strong> 363. 28<br />

CTh 16.2.17 of 10 September 364 was Valent<strong>in</strong>ian's first law on religious<br />

affairs; it was a short sentence forbidd<strong>in</strong>g wealthy plebeians from be<strong>in</strong>g “absorbed”<br />

<strong>in</strong>to <strong>the</strong> Church. 29 It was issued from Aquileia <strong>in</strong> September 364 as Valent<strong>in</strong>ian was<br />

journey<strong>in</strong>g to <strong>the</strong> west after he had bidden farewell to his bro<strong>the</strong>r <strong>in</strong> Sirmium. It was<br />

addressed to <strong>the</strong> “<strong>in</strong>habitants of Byzacium” <strong>in</strong> North Africa. The law reflects long<br />

stand<strong>in</strong>g official concern of a loss of manpower and <strong>the</strong>refore f<strong>in</strong>ancial resources from<br />

<strong>the</strong> councils <strong>in</strong>to <strong>the</strong> Church. Constant<strong>in</strong>e had addressed <strong>the</strong> problem at least twice <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> 320’s (CTh 16.2.3 and 16.2.6). In terms of social status <strong>the</strong> Constant<strong>in</strong>ian<br />

legislation had only mentioned decurions or <strong>the</strong>ir descendants although CTh. 16.2.3<br />

of 8 July 369; 13.10.4 of 22 November 368; 16.2.18 of 17 February 370; 13.10.6 of 30 March 370; 9.38.4<br />

of 6 June 370; 16.2.20 of 30 July 370; 16.2.21 of 17 May 371; 16.2.22 of 1 December 372<br />

23<br />

CTh 16.1.1 of 17 November 364<br />

24<br />

CTh 9.16.9 of 29 May 371<br />

25<br />

16.5.3 of 2 March 372 and 16.6.1 of 20 February 373<br />

26<br />

CTh 7.8.2 of 6 May of 368/370/373<br />

27<br />

CIL 6.31982 = ILCV 1.14<br />

28<br />

A sentiment echoed by Ambrose Ep. 21.5 to Valent<strong>in</strong>ian II<br />

29<br />

In full <strong>the</strong> law reads: Plebeios div ites ab ecclesia suscipi penitus arcem us<br />

98

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!