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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

AVGGG. No title is given for Eu<strong>the</strong>rius who is only known from this <strong>in</strong>scription.<br />

As such <strong>the</strong> order could date from 367-394 or even from 402-408.<br />

Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Mommsen’s reconstruction, <strong>the</strong> law granted equal protection to<br />

all cemeteries regardless of which religion <strong>the</strong>y belonged to. The emperor ordered “<strong>the</strong><br />

eternal protection of graves, which clearly must be ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed for <strong>the</strong> benefit of all.” 167<br />

More importantly, Valent<strong>in</strong>ian expressed <strong>the</strong> op<strong>in</strong>ion that previous religious rites and<br />

customs should not be allowed disappear: “we do not reckon that any previous<br />

custom, whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> div<strong>in</strong>e rites of div<strong>in</strong>e law, or cults should perish.” 168 Valent<strong>in</strong>ian<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicated that ground set aside for burials had been <strong>the</strong> subject of “sacred services and<br />

mysteries” 169 and <strong>the</strong>refore “s<strong>in</strong>ce cont<strong>in</strong>ually and jo<strong>in</strong>tly by div<strong>in</strong>e and human laws<br />

require this [<strong>the</strong> eternal protection of cemeteries,]” 170 this order re<strong>in</strong>forced that custom<br />

so that “perennial faith and reverence should rema<strong>in</strong> defended by <strong>the</strong> eternal dignity of<br />

<strong>the</strong> rites.” 171 Evidently <strong>the</strong> law was phrased broadly enough to afford protection to all<br />

faiths and it was also written <strong>in</strong> a manner which would have been entirely appropriate<br />

for a pagan emperor. The law seems to be most characteristic of Valent<strong>in</strong>ian's<br />

religious policy, ra<strong>the</strong>r than of any of <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r candidates. If <strong>the</strong> law was <strong>in</strong>deed<br />

issued by Valent<strong>in</strong>ian <strong>the</strong>n it may be related to his attempts to pacify <strong>the</strong> city<br />

follow<strong>in</strong>g Urs<strong>in</strong>us’ disturbances. Equally, it could be an acknowledgement of <strong>the</strong><br />

pagan establishment <strong>in</strong> Rome. Difficulties of dat<strong>in</strong>g prevent a def<strong>in</strong>ite or specific<br />

explanation (if <strong>the</strong>re was even one at <strong>the</strong> time).<br />

Valent<strong>in</strong>ian and <strong>the</strong> Magic Trials<br />

Hymetius’ trial for magic was one of a number of magic trials carried out <strong>in</strong><br />

Rome between 369-375. 172 These magic trials prompted <strong>the</strong> issuance of CTh 9.16.9 of<br />

29 May 371 to <strong>the</strong> <strong>Roman</strong> Senate. Ammianus, who is <strong>the</strong> only source for <strong>the</strong> trials,<br />

167<br />

[sepulcrorum aeterna custodia, quae com m odo….] praecipuo cunctorum plane est tenenda<br />

168<br />

[neque ritui div ]<strong>in</strong>o fas ducim us v el cultibus ut ulla depereat praeroga[tiv a<br />

169<br />

m <strong>in</strong>isteriis adque m ysteriis<br />

170<br />

[quapropter] hoc iugiter div <strong>in</strong>a com m uniter adque hum ana [iura cum requirant….]<br />

171<br />

fides adque rev erentia perenn is [ut m aneat defensa sacrorum m ]aiestate perpetua<br />

133

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!