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.

loyalty to Theodosius. It would be justifiable to view this law <strong>in</strong> conjunction with <strong>the</strong><br />

statues; both served to enhance Alb<strong>in</strong>us’ reputation with Theodosius. 106<br />

CTh. 9.35.5 of 6 September 389 to Tatianus, Praetorian Prefect of <strong>the</strong> east was<br />

also issued by Theodosius’ adm<strong>in</strong>istration whilst he was <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> west. 107 As it survives,<br />

<strong>the</strong> law is short and <strong>in</strong> full ordered: “On <strong>the</strong> consecrated days of <strong>the</strong> Quadragesima,<br />

dur<strong>in</strong>g which time <strong>the</strong> absolution of souls is awaited, <strong>the</strong>re shall be no corporal<br />

punishment.” 108 Evidently, <strong>the</strong>re was a significant Christian element <strong>in</strong> this law issued<br />

to Tatianus, a pagan, less than a month after <strong>the</strong> religiously neutral language of CTh.<br />

2.8.19. 109 As can be seen, <strong>the</strong> law did not, even <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> slightest, <strong>in</strong>dulge <strong>in</strong> any extremes<br />

of religious rhetoric; but never<strong>the</strong>less <strong>the</strong> references to <strong>the</strong> “absolution of souls” was<br />

unnecessary and was (probably quiet deliberately) bl<strong>in</strong>d to Tatianus’ own religious<br />

<strong>in</strong>cl<strong>in</strong>ations, which (as will be shown below <strong>in</strong> relation to CTh. 16.2.28 and 29) were<br />

often anti-Christian. It appears that Theodosius did not feel obliged to be as<br />

conciliatory or as sensitive <strong>in</strong> his language towards his pagan eastern officials as he was<br />

towards his western pagan officials. The reasons for such appear to have been purely<br />

practical; <strong>the</strong>re were no threats to <strong>the</strong> east, for <strong>the</strong> moment. An Ostrogothic <strong>in</strong>cursion<br />

(of 386-7) had been defeated and <strong>the</strong> survivors settled <strong>in</strong> Phrygia; after long<br />

negotiations (384-387) a settlement with Persia over Armenia had been reached.<br />

Therefore with <strong>the</strong> east secure Theodosius appears to have been able to be <strong>in</strong>sensitive<br />

to Tatianus’ religion.<br />

At <strong>the</strong> same time, <strong>the</strong> Christian language of this law should give cause for<br />

caution when consider<strong>in</strong>g Honoré’s <strong>in</strong>terpretation of <strong>the</strong> role of quaestor <strong>in</strong> draft<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>the</strong> laws; i.e. it seems unlikely that a pagan quaestor (Flavianus) would have used<br />

Christian language and allusions <strong>in</strong> a law addressed to ano<strong>the</strong>r pagan. The <strong>in</strong>fluence of<br />

106<br />

Statues: Mat<strong>the</strong>ws (1975) 227<br />

107<br />

Flavius Eutolmius Tatianus 5 PLRE 1.876-878; also attributed by Honoré to his quaestor E9, i.e.<br />

Flavianus<br />

108<br />

Sacratis quadragesim ae diebus nulla supplicia s<strong>in</strong>t corporis, quibus absolutio expectatur anim arum<br />

109<br />

For evidence of Tatianus’ paganism see Lib. Epp. 855, 899, Or 30.53 and 56.16<br />

190

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!