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.

conviction to Claudius and appeal<strong>in</strong>g a just conviction was unlawful and so <strong>the</strong>refore<br />

he was f<strong>in</strong>ed for mak<strong>in</strong>g that appeal. This law <strong>in</strong>dicates that although decisions of<br />

synods were f<strong>in</strong>al, <strong>the</strong> secular authorities had to deal with situations that went beyond<br />

such f<strong>in</strong>ality.<br />

CTh. 13.10.4 of 22 November 368 or 370 was addressed to <strong>the</strong> same Viventius<br />

who had received CTh. 9.38.3; he received this law as Praetorian Prefect of Gaul. (As<br />

with CTh. 8.8.1 <strong>the</strong> date is only determ<strong>in</strong>able from <strong>the</strong> named consuls, Valent<strong>in</strong>ian<br />

and Valens, and from <strong>the</strong> known date of Viventius’ Prefecture. The text does not give<br />

<strong>the</strong> place of issue.) This law exempted from <strong>the</strong> plebeian capitation tax male pupils<br />

under twenty, unmarried women, widows who were of such age that it was deemed<br />

unlikely that <strong>the</strong>y would remarry and also “women who live <strong>in</strong> perpetual virg<strong>in</strong>ity.” 43<br />

Like his earlier law grant<strong>in</strong>g an Easter amnesty (CTh. 9.38.3), <strong>the</strong> beneficiaries of this<br />

law could potentially have come from any religious group (as <strong>in</strong> Jovian’s CTh. 9.25.2).<br />

Christians were necessarily <strong>the</strong> ma<strong>in</strong> beneficiaries of <strong>the</strong> provision that women who<br />

were <strong>in</strong> a state of “perpetual virg<strong>in</strong>ity” should be exempt simply because such a<br />

phenomena was more common <strong>in</strong> Christianity than <strong>in</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r religious communities.<br />

Of course, <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r groups exempt from <strong>the</strong> capitation were not disproportionately<br />

represented <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Christian community. No punishment was prescribed aga<strong>in</strong>st<br />

anyone who might have sought to force <strong>the</strong> exemptees of this act to pay <strong>the</strong> capitation.<br />

CTh. 13.10.6 of 30 March 370 was slightly more explicit <strong>in</strong> its references to<br />

Christianity, it was also <strong>the</strong> last law addressed to Viventius. It repeated <strong>the</strong> provisions<br />

of <strong>the</strong> previous act that widows and school-age pupils should not pay <strong>the</strong> capitation tax<br />

and also ordered that “any women who have dedicated <strong>the</strong>mselves to <strong>the</strong> perpetual<br />

service of <strong>the</strong> sacred law shall also be held exempt from such public service.” 44<br />

43 <strong>in</strong> v irg<strong>in</strong>itate perpetua v iv entes<br />

44 sim ili autem dev otione habeantur im m unes et si quae se sacrae legis obsequio perpetuo dedicarunt<br />

104

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!