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.

extremes, sentiments or punishments. As such, it would probably be safer to draw <strong>the</strong><br />

conclusion that <strong>the</strong>re were <strong>in</strong>deed Eunomian eunuchs whom this law was specifically<br />

target<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

The law itself substantially consists of only one long (seventy two word)<br />

sentence, but with an open<strong>in</strong>g sentence of n<strong>in</strong>e words that effectively summed it up:<br />

“<strong>the</strong> Eunomian eunuchs shall not have <strong>the</strong> liberty ei<strong>the</strong>r to make a testament or to<br />

take under a testament.” Moreover, <strong>the</strong> law was to be retrospective; it was to <strong>in</strong>clude<br />

all those “still liv<strong>in</strong>g and no person shall be protected by <strong>the</strong> privilege of any past will.”<br />

It also implied that Eunomian eunuchs were not even allowed to possess property:<br />

<strong>the</strong>y “shall not have <strong>the</strong> liberty to possess property or to petition for <strong>the</strong> possession of<br />

such property.” Pharr <strong>in</strong>dicates that <strong>the</strong> end of this clause should also read “as heirs;”<br />

perhaps that is <strong>the</strong> sense of <strong>the</strong> law, but it does not actually say that. He says <strong>the</strong> same<br />

when at <strong>the</strong> end of <strong>the</strong> law which orders: “all property which may appear to belong or<br />

to be about to belong to such persons shall be v<strong>in</strong>dicated as caducous to <strong>the</strong> resources<br />

of our fisc.” The use of caducous (caduca) appears to imply that Pharr is right.<br />

Although it has survived as quite a short law, it was quite thorough and named <strong>the</strong><br />

types of <strong>in</strong>heritors who would be <strong>in</strong>eligible: “as a beneficiary of a trust, as a legatee, as<br />

beneficiary of a secret trust fund, or under any name which <strong>the</strong> order of <strong>the</strong> law has<br />

established <strong>in</strong> such matters.” F<strong>in</strong>ally <strong>the</strong> law stated that “<strong>the</strong> aforesaid persons shall<br />

have noth<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> common with <strong>the</strong> rest of mank<strong>in</strong>d.” 225 No punishments were given<br />

for any <strong>in</strong>fractions of this law.<br />

So <strong>the</strong> Eunomian eunuchs were to be treated even worse than <strong>the</strong><br />

Manicheans (CTh. 16.5.7) with regard to <strong>the</strong>ir ability to <strong>in</strong>herit and bequeath<br />

225 eunom iani spadon es nec faciendi n ec adipiscendi habeant licentiam testam enti. quod circa om nes, quos<br />

v iv os lex <strong>in</strong>v enerit, v olum us custodiri nec quem quam praeteritae cuiuspiam v oluntatis priv ilegio defensari,<br />

cum , seu facta prius testam enta seu <strong>in</strong>fecta doceantur, post han c nostri oraculi sanctionem non habeant<br />

possidendi licentiam , non petendi, non etiam rel<strong>in</strong>quendi heredem nom <strong>in</strong>e pr<strong>in</strong> cipali, non fideicom m issario,<br />

non legatario, non tacito fideicom m isso v el quam cum que <strong>in</strong> huiuscem odi negotiis nuncupationem iuris ordo<br />

constituit: sed om nia, quae talium esse v el futura esse constiterit, ut caduca fisci nostri v iribus v <strong>in</strong>dicentur.<br />

nihil ad sum m um habeant com m une cum reliquis<br />

239

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!