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.

In order for <strong>the</strong> “greatest harmony” 76 to be secured for <strong>the</strong> Church,<br />

“moderation and reverence” 77 were demanded. Valent<strong>in</strong>ian also admitted that he had<br />

“compassion, both because of our nature’s leniency and on account of consideration<br />

for religion itself and for <strong>the</strong> law.” 78 Therefore Praetextatus was ordered to allow “all<br />

who are of that condition and guilt” to return home. Valent<strong>in</strong>ian's concern for<br />

“religion” and for church harmony may <strong>in</strong>dicate that Damasus’ <strong>in</strong>fluence over <strong>the</strong><br />

emperor’s policy was still a factor, at least <strong>in</strong> rhetoric, but by now apparently a<br />

dim<strong>in</strong>ish<strong>in</strong>g factor. The only condition Valent<strong>in</strong>ian imposed was that if <strong>the</strong> Urs<strong>in</strong>ians<br />

reverted to <strong>the</strong>ir former ways and created trouble, <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong>y should receive <strong>the</strong><br />

“severest sentence” 79 s<strong>in</strong>ce “<strong>the</strong>y who cease not to s<strong>in</strong> after pardon can deserve no<br />

pardon.” 80<br />

Correspondence between <strong>the</strong> emperor and his officials at Rome on <strong>the</strong><br />

Urs<strong>in</strong>ians cont<strong>in</strong>ued under Praetextatus’ successor Olybrius. 81 The next three letters<br />

on <strong>the</strong> Urs<strong>in</strong>ian affair are, aga<strong>in</strong>, not dated and <strong>the</strong>ir exact sequence is difficult to<br />

determ<strong>in</strong>e, but <strong>the</strong> first seems likely to have been a reply from Valent<strong>in</strong>ian (CSEL<br />

35.10) to a letter, now lost, which Olybrius had probably written at <strong>the</strong> beg<strong>in</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g of<br />

his tenure. It seems reasonable to ascribe <strong>the</strong> letter to <strong>the</strong> beg<strong>in</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g of Olybrius’ term<br />

because Valent<strong>in</strong>ian spent more than half of <strong>the</strong> letter assur<strong>in</strong>g Olybrius of <strong>the</strong> faith<br />

that he had <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> new prefect. More importantly for <strong>the</strong> purposes of dat<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

Valent<strong>in</strong>ian laid out some ‘ground rules’ that should apply to <strong>the</strong>ir correspondence.<br />

Valent<strong>in</strong>ian told Olybrius that it was not necessary for him to refer every case to<br />

Valent<strong>in</strong>ian for judgement, but ra<strong>the</strong>r that Olybrius should apply some of his own<br />

judgement to cases and to take some responsibility for himself.<br />

76<br />

m axim a…concordia<br />

77<br />

m odestiam …et cultum<br />

78<br />

et propriae lenitate naturae et ipsius religionis ac legis contem platione m iserem ur<br />

79<br />

sev erissim a…sententia<br />

80<br />

nullam enim possunt v eniam prom ereri, qui non des<strong>in</strong>unt peccare post v eniam<br />

81 st<br />

Olybrius PLRE 1.640-642: his prefecture lasted from 1 January 369 to Autumn 370<br />

113

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!