Palladium and Pentateuch

7/25/2019 Palladium and Pentateuch

1/43

Classical Association of Canadais collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Phoenix.

http://www.jstor.org

The Palladium and the Pentateuch: Towards a Sacred Topography of the Later Roman EmpireAuthor(s): Clifford AndoSource: Phoenix, Vol. 55, No. 3/4 (Autumn - Winter, 2001), pp. 369-410Published by: Classical Association of CanadaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1089127Accessed: 31-12-2015 16:08 UTC

F R N SLinked references are available on JSTOR for this article:http://www.jstor.org/stable/1089127?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of contentin a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

This content downloaded from 142.150.190.39 on Thu, 31 Dec 2015 16:08:19 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/http://www.jstor.org/publisher/cachttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1089127http://www.jstor.org/stable/1089127?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contentshttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1089127?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contentshttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1089127http://www.jstor.org/publisher/cachttp://www.jstor.org/


2/43

THE PALLADIUM

AND

THE

PENTATEUCH:TOWARDS A

SACRED TOPOGRAPHY OF THE LATER

ROMANEMPIRE

CLIFFORD

ANDO

H

ISTORIANS

OF

RELIGION

IN LATE

ANTIQUITY

tend to

adopt

one of two

perspectives.

itherwe seek o

understand

hristianization,

process

ltimately

reducible o acts

of ndividual

hoicewhose

ggregate

ffectsan be described

in

purely

emographic

erms,

r

we

investigate

he demise

f

paganism,

set

of

discrete

ituals nd

practices,

ome

of which

urvivedn

Christian

urope,

robbed

of their

eligious ignificance

hrough

ult acts and conciliar ecrees.

Understoodnthese erms,heChristianizationf the Roman mpire assed

milestone

n

the

early

ifth

entury,

he ast

ge attesting

senator ho

publicly

professedaganism.

imilarly,aganism

as either

ying

rom

hemoment

f

ts

conception,

s ts onstituent

ractices

ell

nto

beyance,

r t urvives

o

this

ay.1

The

self-understandings

f

these

eligions,

eveloped

n

fractious

ialogue

with

each

other,

hus

yield

ncompatible

arrativesnd inconsistent

eriodizations.

Assuming

atherhan

nterrogating

he

ntologicalntegrity

ftheir

axonomies,

historiographyrounded

n

these

erspectives

an

be erudite ut tcannot

xplain

anything.2

If we are now to

forge

historiesf

religious hange

n late

antiquity

hat

do morethan

countChristian

onversionsr

pagan

survivals,

e

must void

conceptualategories

erived

rom

hefailed

pologetics

nd

willfil

misconstruals

of

pagan-Christianialogue.

We

must lso shun

asy

reliance n

the

distorted

and

misleading

laims o

novelty

f

Christian

agiography,

modern

ounterpart

to the faith hat

ate-antique

cclesiastical

istorians

laced

n

Providence.We

shouldhave sked

ong go

whether

he ransfer

f

charisma rom

ne

ndividual

to another

id

in

fact

onstitute

change

n

the ocus

of

the sacred. nsofar

s

that ransferid notrequire ontemporarieso reconceptualizehe holiness f

individuals

r

thenature

f

divine

mmanence,

he

nswer

s no.

Change

n

the

religious

mentality

f

ate-antique urope

hould nstead e

charted

irst t an

epistemological

evel,

ne

prior,

s it

were,

o

religious

r

doctrinalommitment.

This

essay

dumbratesuch n

approach

y uxtaposing

nd

conjoining

wo

famous

roblems:

he

urge

n

antiquarianism

n

thewest

n

the

arly

ifth

entury

and the ontest

or

upremacy

etween

ome nd

Constantinople.

cholars

ave

tended o

assume

hatChristiansnd

pagans hought

bout

he acralization

f

landscape

n

very

ifferent

ays:

nsofar

s

paganism

onsisted

f

rites ereft

oftheologicalignificance,agans it s assumed) acralizedpace hroughitual

369

PHOENIX,

OL.

5

2001)

-4.

1

For

recentiterature

n

the

historiography

f

Roman

paganism,

ee Ando2002: Section

.

2

Cf. Smith 990:

passim,

ut

sp.

36-53.

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/43

370

PHOENIX

actions

overned

y

pontifical

nd

augural

aw.

Christians,

n the other

hand,

relied

on

sacred

narrativesnd sacred

relics,

onducting

ilgrimages

o the

lands

where

Jesus ctually

alked

r

to sites acralized

y

the

contingencies

f

martyrdoms

nd

miracles.3

hese

distinctionsre

misleading.

acred

opographies

may

havebeenmaintained

hrough

itual,

ilgrimage,

nd

liturgy;

ut

paces

were

made

holy

by

actions

f

the

gods,

their

articular

dentities

otwithstanding.

Proponents

f

particular

acred

opographies

n

late

antiquity,

herefore,

aced

two

problems,

ne

theological

nd one of

memory.

ow

was one to understand

the

actions

f

thedivine

n

thisworld?

Whattraces id t

eave,

nd

how

should

one memorializehem?

nderstood

n

these

erms,

hedifferences

etween

agan

and Christian

rguments

orRome

and

Constantinople

egin

o

dissolve,

nd

thecontemporaneousolitical ignificancefantiquarianismntheir espective

historicalnd

religious

raditions

n

the

fifthndsixth enturies

merges

ith eal

clarity.

This

approach

has ramificationsorhow we

periodize

eligious hange

n

late

antiquity. oncentrating

n the

rise

of

holy

men,

he

mportance

f relics

and

pilgrimage,

r

the

prominence

f

Constantinople

nd the

holy

and does

not,

would

argue,

llow one

successfully

o

distinguish

he classical

nd late

antique.

On

the

ontrary:

nderstood

n

philosophical

erms,

hristiannd

pagan

sacred

opographies

or

he ate Roman

mpire

an

be

shown

o rest

n

similar

theological resuppositions.

bove

ll,

they

oth ssumedheoriesf

materiality

thatbound human nd divine

o concrete

andscapes

nd endowed

wordand

action

with

ike

power

nd

equivalent

metaphysical

tatus.We

might

nce have

described

acrobian

ntiquarianism

s

nostalgic

r,

t

best,

s

a

retreat

rom

ult

and ts

topographic

oncernso

thediscursive orld f

texts;

we

might imilarly

have ccused

Hesychius

f

pedantry

r

superstition

henhe

sought

o ocate he

Palladium.We wouldhave

been

n

error.

Through

ts

ability

o

narrate

particular

acred

history,

anguage

nabled

Macrobius o establish sacred opographyor heempire o lesscogent han

those

grounded

n

a

purely

materialist

evotion o sacred

objects.

n

fact,

hese

ready

inarisms

f

wordand

object,

peech

nd

action,

erebreakdown. For

evenas

discursive

opographies

escribe he

acralization

f

space

s

a

function

of

historical

ction nd divine

mmanence,

o

sacred

bjects

erive

heir

meaning

and

continued

egitimacy

rom

heir

nscription

n

sacred

istoriesnd

utility

n

reconstitutiveitual

ctions.

Adherentsf

Athens nd

Jerusalem,

r

Rome and

Constantinople,

ll

required,

ven s

they

ssumed,

nderstandings

f

history

nd

theology

hat tand

part

rom

he

Platonizing

metaphysics

hat

havedominated

histories nd historiansf

religion,

ndtheoriesnd theoristsfmatter o this

day.

3See

Salzman

1999,

on

Rome,

nd

Fowden

1978,

on

the

astern

rovinces,

hich

argely

reat

theChristian

appropriation

f

pagan

holy

ites s

a

political

roblem.

or

rather

ifferent

ortraits

f

classical

oman

thought

n

the

acralizationf

pace,

ee

Cancik

1985-86;

Ando 2002.



4/43

THE

PALLADIUM

AND THE

PENTATEUCH

371

I.

INTRODUCTION

In thefirst ix

decadesof

the

twentieth

century,

cholars

ouldbe

described

withsomeconfidences having eached general onsensus n theconflict

between

agans

nd

Christians

n

thefourth

entury.

ost

agreed

hat

agans

and Christians

ctively

isliked

ach

other

nd

that ach side

sought

o

do the

other

harm,

t

least

to

the

extent

ermitted

y

the

government.

f the

work

published

n

that

ra,

the

studies f

Andreas

Alf6ldi

nd

Herbert loch remain

notable

or

heir

igor

nd

nfluence. ach

scholar

ttempted

o

identifyagans

in

the

city

f

Rome

and

to

prove

heir

ommitmento

traditional

eligions

nd

their

orresponding

pposition

o

Christianity.

lf6ldi

aunched is

programme

in

1937 withhis

study

f

coins

representing

sis and

Serapis

rom

he mint f

Rome and followedt

with

olumes n the

o-called

ontorniate

edallions

nd

his

essay

n the

religious olicies

f

Constantine.

hroughout

e

attempted

o

document he

"relentless

truggle"

f

"the ast

representatives

f

the old

Roman

traditions

gainst hristianity"

in

defense

f

he

religion

f

heir

athers,"

s

well

as

the

ncreasingreligious

ntolerance"

f

he

hurch nd

tate

rom

onstantine

to

Theodosius.4

Bloch first

onducted

prosopographical

tudy

f

holders f

priesthoods

n

the ater

ourth

entury

nd

subsequentlyrgued

hat ommitted

pagans

had been

responsible

or

reading, opying,

nd

editing

lassical

exts.5

Togetherhese cholarsersuadedmany fthe xistencefa circle fcommitted

pagan

aristocratst

Rome,

whose

leader

was

undoubtedly

ettius

Agorius

Praetextatusut

which

hey

alled he

circle f

Symmachus

argely

ecause ur

knowledge

f

them omes

predominantly

rom he

preserved

etters

f

Quintus

Aurelius

ymmachus.6

inally,

he

intellectual

nd

religious

nterestsf the

circle's

members ere

documented

y

a

contemporary

itness,

acrobius,

who

made

Praetextatus,

ymmachus,

ervius,

nd their

cquaintances

nterlocutors

in

his Saturnalia.

What s

more,

Macrobius

orrowed

eavily

rom

amblichus

and

Porphyry,

nd

n

so

doing

declared

n

allegiance

o Hellenic

hilosophy

nd

religion,

ven fhe andhisfriends-thelast

pagangeneration"-"did

otdare

make

frontalttack

n

Christianity

riumphant."7

Many

of

these

trends

eceived

lassic

reatment

n

a

famous

ollection

f

lectures

elivered

t

the

Warburg

nstitute

nd edited

y

Arnaldo

Momigliano.8

Although

hat

olumewas

no

doubt

ntended

o

provoke

urther

ork,

n

many

4Alf61ldi

937;

1942-43;

1948;

1952.

5Bloch

1945

and 1963.

English-speaking

cholars

end o

ignore

loch's

debts

o

earlier

ork,

especially

Marrou1932.

Marrou's

ssay

well

llustrates

he

greater

uance hat

ontinentalcholars

brought

o the

study

f

religious

onflict

ndcultural

history

n this

eriod.

6Cf.

Robinson 915:

92,

labelling ymmachus

one of

the most

distinguished

embersf the

aristocratic

paganparty,"

hile

admitting

hat

vidence

or

he

party

is

upplied

hieflyy

heworks

of

Symmachus

imself."

7Courcelle

1969:

13-47)

provides

characteristically

ccurate

epresentation

f much arlier

work n

Macrobius,

is

aims,

nd his

ources;

he

uotation

s from

.

46.

8

Momigliano

963.



5/43

372

PHOENIX

ways

t

marked heend

of an era. For

while hat ookwas

n

production,

eter

Brown

ndAlan

Cameron

ubjected

he

oundations

f arlier

cholarship

o

what

seemed

o be

devastatingcrutiny.irst,

n

1961

Brown dvanced hatwe

might

call his

pillow-talk

heory

f

Christianization.

roceeding

rom he

observation

that he onversionf

heRoman

ristocracy

ad takenmuch

onger

han

single

generation,

rown

rgued

hat he

religious

egislationassed

by

Theodosius

n

the

ast

years

f his

reign

ould account

orneither he

scope

northe

pace

of

senatorial

onversions. is central hesis

rosefrom is observationhat

it

s

the

wives,

hemselves,

hat reoften n insoluble

roblem."'

e concluded hat

aristocratic

omen onverted

irst nd then onvertedheir

usbands

hrough

their

entle

owers

f

persuasion.

A fewyears ater,Alan Camerondisbanded he circle f Symmachusnd

assigned

Macrobius

o the

early

30s,

confirming

n

hypothesis

dvanced

y

Santo

Mazzarino hree ecades arlier.10

e then

ubjected

he ditorial ork f

fourth-

nd

fifth-century

ntellectualso

similar

crutiny.

ollowing

Marrou,

e

argued

hat othChristians

nd

pagans

ead,

opied,

ndcorrectedlassical exts:

literary

ulture as

iterary,

nd

nothing

more."1

he

consequences

or

eaders

f

Macrobius

ere tark:

he aturnalia

ad

tobe seen s the

product

f

sentimental

antiquarianism

nd

nostalgic

dealization

f the

past,"

while ts

paganism

was

"essentiallyostalgic

nd

iterary"

nd ts

participantsppeared simply

s

greatand earnedmenofan almost

ncidentally

aganpast."12

Brown

nd Cameron's

rguments

ave

haped

he

study

f

religious

onflict

in the fourth

nd fifth

enturies,

articularly

n

the

English-speaking

orld.13

Indeed,

ome

oftheir

rguments

avereceived

aluable

upport.

wo decades f

counting

hristians

ave

uggested

hat heconversionf the

ristocracy

egan

sooner,

nd

proceeded

more

regularly,

han

ate-antique

arrativesould

have

us

believe.14 nd

yet,

f

the

government

id

genuinely

avor hristiansn

the

distribution

f

honors,

e

might xpect

ublic

eclarations

f

religious

llegiance

torespond ccordingly,ndpatternsfapostasynd ndictmentsor ypocritical

conversions

argely

ear

out this

uspicion.15

thershave

subjected

hristian

historiography

o

scrutiny

nd

concluded hat t

constructedts

relationship

ith

paganism

s

one

of

atent

hostility,unctuated y persecutions

nd

periods

f

conflict:

n

other

words,

enerations

f historiansaw

religious

istory

n

late

9Brown

961: 173.

10Cameron

964;

Mazzarino1937-38:

255-258;

Cameron

966. Cameron

ersuaded

ll

but a

few-Syme

1968: 146)

hesitated,

hileFlamant

1977:

96-141)

and

Dapp

(1978)

disagreed-and

hisworkhas been onfirmed

y

Panciera

1982)."

Cameron 977;

1984;

1999.

Matthews

1967: 507-509)

anticipated

ome f

these

arguments.

12Cameron 966:

36;

1977:

23,

cf.

28.

Matthews

970: 466 was

typical

n

its

praise

nd

n its

inability

o

develop

ome

new

nterpretive

ramework

o

accommodate

he

Saturnalia.

13Notable

articipants

n

thistradition

re O'Donnell

1978; 1979;

Salzman

1990.

Cameron

(1999)

cites

omerecent oices

f

dissent

n

Europe.

14Eck

1971;

van

Haehling

978;

Barnes

987;

1995.

15Ando 996:

198-205;

1997: 88.



6/43

THE

PALLADIUM

AND THE

PENTATEUCH 373

antiquity

s

a

sequence

of

crisesbecause that

s

what

they

were ntended o

see.16

Revisiting

he

religious olitics

f the fourth nd fifth enturies

ill

require

a

return

o the

figures

ho

were

once

central o this

period

nd

who

have

been

largelygnored

y

those

tudying

thetransformation

f

the

classical

eritage."

For

whatwe have not

earned

n

the ast

quarter entury

s what

Symmachus,

Servius,

raetextatus,

nd

Macrobius

hought hey

were

doing,

f

they

were

not

engaged

n

the

preservation

f

a cultural

ystem

henunder

ssault

y

the

government

f

their

mpire.

After

ll,

ate-antique

hristians ere

not alone

n

viewing

heir

ge

as

one

of

truggle.

ome

pagans ertainly

nderstoodhe

hreat

posedby

Christianity's

mperialistmpulse.

or Antoninus he on of

Sosipatra,

for xample,hedestructionftheSerapeum eralded he nd of hisway f ife:

after

is

death,

e

predicted,

hat

emple

wouldfall nto formless

hadow,

while

an

awesome

arkness ould

eize

power

ver

he

beautiful

hings

fthis

world.17

The

Asclepius

ould

be understoodo

depict eligioushange

n

similar

erms:

A

penalty

f o-calledawswill e aid

down

gainsteligion,iety,

nd cts

f

worship.

This most

oly

and,

hehome

f

shrinesnd

temples,

ill verflow

ith

raves

nd

corpses

...

I call

pon

ou,

most

oly

iver,

nd

predict

our

uture:

ou

will

urst

our

banks,

illed

y

torrentf

blood.'8

Again, sJulianenounced onstantines "an nnovatornddestroyerfhallowed

laws and ancient

radition,"

o

Julian's

artisans

escribed im s "the

estorerf

Roman

eligion."19

hat

s

more,

ut wodecades efore

Macrobius

ndulged

is

"literaryaganism"

n

an extended

xercise

n

nostalgicntiquarianism,

ugustine

had been drafted

y

Marcellinus

o

respond

o

the

egions

f

pagan

critics ho

blamed

Christianity

nd its

emperors

or

he fallof

Rome.20

For Servius

nd

Macrobius,

Vergil

reeminently

eserved he title

pontifex

aximus.21

hould

16Thelamon981;cf.Brown 961:166;1993:esp.95-96; 1995: 3-8.

17

unap.

V

Soph.

.9.17. The

significance

f this

vent

lingeredong

n

Christianmemories:

ee

Rufinus

ist.

Eccl.

11.23-25,

29-30:

the

Serapeum

as the

caput

dolatriae;

nce t was

overthrown,

no

temple

f

any

ther

god

couldremain

standing.

ee also

August.

iv. Daem.

1.1

written

a

407);

Socrates

.16;

Sozom. 7.15.

18Asclepius

4,

cited

n

its

extant atinversion or

he

first

ime

n

August.

De civ.

D. 8.23-24.

For useful autions bout he

dating

f

Asclepius,

ee Lane Fox 1990:

237-238. While am

tempted

to

agree

withHunink1996 that

Apuleius

ouldhave

written

his

ext,

am concerned erewith

ts

reception

n

the

aftermathf 392. Cameron

1965:

24,

n.

48)

argues rilliantly

or

dating

he text

to

391,

but

t s not

clear o

me

thathis

argument

equires

ating

he

whole

ext

o that

period;

f.

Frankfurter

998:

247,252-253,discussing

ts

nitial

eception.

19Amm.Marc.

21.10.8;

ILS

752,

from

Numidia: uliano

io

elici Aug.]

...

invicto

rincipi,

restitutoriibertatist

Romanae

eligionis

c

triumfatori

rbis.

20Marcellinust

August. p.

136.

On

pagan

and

Christian

literary

ecriminations

n the

years

following

10,

see

Courcelle

964:

56-77;

on

Augustine

n

particular,

ee

Barnes 982

and,

more

briefly,

'Daly

1999:

27-33.

21See,

e.g.,

Macrob. Sat.

1.24.16;

cf.

1.24.17,

where

lavianus inds

n

Vergil

antam cientiam

iuris

uguralis

hat t alone

wouldmake

him

famous,

ven fhe

acked

ll

other

knowledge;

.24.13



7/43

374

PHOENIX

they

ot

be

numbered

mong

he

parvuli

whose

ender oulswere ntoxicated

y

that

great

nd most

famous

oet,

who did not

see,

as

Augustine

id,

the

ruths

aboutRome's

onquered ods

that

Vergil

ad

been

forced

y

Veritaso

confess?22

About the Saturnalian

particular

e

might

sk,

whatdoes itmean that

a textonce

presumed

o

be

thoroughlyagan

dates

from

timewhen

the

Roman

ristocracyublicly

nd almost

nanimouslyrofessed

hristianity?

he

intellectual

nd

religious

nterestsf

ts nterlocutors

ere,

f

course,

many

nd

varied,

hether

measured

y

he

words

f

Macrobius

r

by

ndependent

vidence

of

heir ctivities.

thers

have

nvestigated

he

deological

ases

f

fourth-century

grammar

nd

education:

to

adapt

Gellius,

Servius nd

Macrobius

were

fully

aware

hat

humanitas

oes

not

properly

ndicate

ndiscriminate

oodwill

oward

all humanbeings,but rather"learningndtrainingn the iberal rts."23t is

eloquent

estimony

o

the

power

f

Cameron'swork

hat

ophisticated

eadings

of

Servius nd

Macrobius

s

religious

igures

ave

only ecently

egun

o

appear.

Bruggisser,

or

xample,

as

argued

hat ervius

eliberatelyresented

omulus

and

Remus so as to

deflect

hristian riticismsf the

fratricide,

ll the

while

participating

n

contemporary

olitical

debatesover the concord f

imperial

brothers,

hile

MacCormack

nd Hedrick

ave evisited

ith

enewed

igor

nd

insight

agan

and

Christian

modesof

reading

nd

interpretingergil

nd the

politics

f

editing

lassical

exts.24

The

political

nd

religious

mplications

f

antiquarian

esearchn the fifth

century

annot

merge

rom

reading

f

heSaturnaliao

ong

s

prejudice

bout

the

nature f

religious

istory

verdetermineshose

readings,

or,

n

fact,

an

they

e

elucidated

y

reading

he

Saturnalia

lone.25

Antiquarian

esearch

id

not take

place

n

ivory

owers. n

this

ssay,

examine he actions

f "the

ast

pagan generation"

nd

the role

played y

their

esearchesntothe

Roman

past

in

one arenaof

undeniable

contemporarymportance,

he

rivalry

f

Rome and

Constantinople

nd the

constructionf

a

sacred

opography

or he

ater

Roman

empire.Macrobian ntiquarianismmergesromhisinquirys a reaction othe

suppression

f

those

mechanisms

hereby

is

heroes,

hose

men who

used to

belong

o

the

circle f

Symmachus,

ad

formerly

ebated he ocus

of the

holy

(a

passage

f

unmistakeable

religious

ignificance):

ed

nos,

uos

rassaMinerva

edecet,

on

patiamur

abstrusa sse

adyta

acri

poematis,

ed

arcanorum

ensuum

investigato

ditu

doctorumultu

elebranda

praebeamus

eclusa

penetralia;

.1.18-20.

Servius:

ee

below,

ection

III.

On

Vergil's

ignificance

n

late-antique

agan

ife,

ee

Klingner

965:

527-578,

esp.

543-544;

MacCormack

998. Turk1963

s

often

escribeds

having

iscussed

ervius'

escription

f

Vergil

s

pontifex

see,

.g.,

Cameron 968:

101-102;

Hedrick 000:

85),

buthe

cites

not

single assage

rom hat

uthor.

22

August.

e civ.D. 1.3.

23Gell.

NA

13.17.1.

On

grammar

s a

marker f

class,

Kaster

978;

1980;

Uhl

1998;

Cameron

1999:

119-120.

24Bruggisser

987,

esp.

125-160;

MacCormack

998;

Hedrick

000,

esp.

171-213.

Syske

993

does notfulfillts

promise

o

discuss he

aims" f

Macrobius

2-3);

I

have

not

been ble to

acquire

Kahlos1998.

25

Cf. Hedrick

000: 210.



8/43

THE PALLADIUMAND THE

PENTATEUCH 375

in

the ater

Roman

empire.

That

Macrobiusmade

claims

n

behalf f Rome

in

language

f

mmediate

ntelligibility

nd undeniable

ontemporarymport

s

best

een

byreading

he

very

imilar

laims nd

anguage eployed

n

behalf f

Constantinople

n

the ame

period.

The

ancient

astemerges

rom

heirworks

as more

han

guide

o

theconstitution

f

the

present.

ather,

yconcretizing

presuppositions

bout elations

etween

orporeal

nddivine

eality,

arratives

f

the

past egitimatedarticular

isions f

the acralizationf

pace

nd took heir

place

beside

hilosophy,

olitics,

nd aw

among

he

ools f

ate-antiqueolitical

life.

II.

THE

TOPOGRAPHY OF THE

ROMAN

EMPIRE IN

THE

FOURTH CENTURY

Until

Constantine oundedhis new

capital

on

the

Bosporus,

no

one had

questioned

nd

certainly

o one

had threatenedhe

centrality

f

Rome. Neither

titulature

or

conographyistinguishes

he

Tetrarchicoundationsr

residences

in this

way,

nor s it

possible

o

detect

n

literature

f

the

early

ourth

entury

any

ense hat hesedetracted

rom

he

deological

nd

religious reeminence

f

Rome.26

Constantinople

as

clearly

ifferent,

nd

this

was true

lready

t its

dedication.

s

early

s

324,

Porfyrius

escribedhat

ity

s

"another

ome,"

nd

a decade aterConstantinellowed hathe

called

his

city

n

urbs eterna t

the

behest fhisGod.27

The foundation

f

Constantinople

ltered he

topography

f

the

empire

n

several

ways.

The

new

capital

n

the

Bosporus

apidly

ssumed n

iconographic

status

oughlyquivalent

o

that

f

Rome.28

y

themiddle

f

he

ourth

entury

hierarchy

ad

developed

hat

ccorded

reeminence

o Rome

nd

Constantinople

and secondrank

o

Antioch nd

Alexandria,

arthage

nd

Trier;

within

ach

rank,

artisans

dvanced he

claims

f

their

ity

nd

contestedhose

f

others.29

Writers

n

both ast and west

ooknoteof

the

competition

etween ome

and

Constantinople,

nd

very

oon

after

onstantine'soundationt

was

commonlyunderstoodhathe had ntended henew

capital

orival he

old.30

We cantrace

26Brehier

915:

241,

247,

249-250;

Lathoud1924:

294;

Alfdldi

947:

12;

contra

ango

1985:

24.

27

Porfyrius

arm.

.5-6;

for

tsdate f

omposition,

eeBarnes

975:

179,

184-185. Constantine:

Cod.

Theod.

3.5.7:

pro

commoditate

rbis,

uam

eterno omine

ubente

eo

donavimus

...

Cf.

Cod.

lust.1.17.1.10: Romam

utem

ntellegendum

stnon

olum

eterem,

ed tiam

regiam

ostram,

uae

deo

propitio

um

melioribusonditast

auguriis.

hemistius

rote is

fourth

ration

thirty-three

ears

ater,

but

referring

pecifically

o

November

24

he

called

Constantinople

rt6kt;

i

ti

pacTIXCtL;efi

ikttKcu

;

(Or. 4.58b).

On "thenames f

Constantinople,"

ee

Georgacas 947;

cf.

Dagron

1984b:48-60.

Too

muchhas been madeof the

third anonof the

Council f

Constantinople

n

381,

the

firstofficial"

document o

style onstantinople

New

Rome."

28Toynbee

947; 1953;

cf.

Salzman

990:

27-28.

29Auson.Ordonob.urb.

XXIV Green)

1-27

presents

somewhat

idiosyncratic,

estern iew.

More

typical

ormulations

reLib.

Or.

15.59 and 33.24.

30Lib.

Or.

19.19;

cf.

20.24, 30.37;

Origo

Constantini

.30;

Eutr.

10.8.1;

Festus19.4.

See also

Claud.

Ruf.

2.54;

Gild.

61-63;

Zos. 2.30.1.

Our

picture

might

e dearer fwe

had the etters f



9/43

376

PHOENIX

the

nstitutional

nd

ideological rivalry

f

the cities n a number f

ways,

but most

easily-and

perhaps

most

eceptively-through

he

privileges

ndranks

ccorded

to

their

espective

enates nd senators.31

n

379,

for

xample, hemistius

ed

an

embassy

rom

he Senate

of

Constantinople

o

Gratian.

Although

e

styled

Constantinople

he

equivalent

f

Rome-they

were he two

metropoleis

f

the

world,

he

cities f Romulus

nd Constantine-he

id so

in

order o

ustify

he

request

with

which

he

closed:

Gratian hould

lorify

heSenate ftheeast

with

honors,

o

that

t

would

ruly

e

his

city,

second

Rome.32

nd f he

rganization

of

Constantinople

round even

hills nd

fourteen

egions

an

ndeed

be traced

to

Constantine,

is

ntentions

ecome ven learer.33

The

religious olitics

f the

age

lent the

rivalry

etween he

two

capitals

additionalmport nd complexity.We can notnow knowwhatConstantine

did or did

not

do

at

the

limitatio,

onsecratio,

nauguratio,

nd dedicatio

f

his

city.34

What

is clear s that Christians lmost

mmediately

nderstood

nd

represented

onstantine's

oundations a

religious

ct and his

city

s the

new,

Christian

apital

f

a Christian

mpire.

mmediately

fter onstantine's

eath,

Eusebius

nsisted

hat

he

had "celebratedis

eponymous

ity

ydedicating

here

magnificent

artyria

nd

spectacularuildings"

nd had "consecrated

is

city

o

the

god

of

he

martyrs,"

hile

urging

tof

ll

traces

f

dolatry

nd

uperstition.35

To

display

he

power

f his

triumphantod,

Constantine

ikewise

tripped

he

idolsfrom

emple recinctshroughout

heeast

and

displayed

hem s

spolia

n

his

new

city.36

ome of these

dols,

we

are

told,

he tore rom heir

edestals y

heaping

hem

with

opes

nd

pulling

hem

long

he

ground,

s

though

hey

ere

captives.

e also ordered

gents

o

scrape

he

gold

and

silver

eaf

rom

ny

dols

they

id

not

onfiscatend

to

pluck

way

heir ecorative

ems.37

n

diosyncratic

eighth-century

uidebook

o the

public

monuments

f

Constantinople

nsists,

quite plausibly,

hatConstantine lso took statues

rom

Rome,

ncluding

ne

of

Augustus.38

t

may

be that

t was

precisely

is

paganism

hat ed

Julian

o

Constantine

n whichhe

justified

he

privileges

e

granted

o

Constantinople's

ood

upply

nd

grain

dole,

but

we know f hisestablishment

nly

hrough

eferences

n

ater

legislatione.g.,

Cod.

Theod.

14.16.2,

12).

31Dagron

984b:

119-210;

Vanderspoel

995: 53-66.

32Them.Or.

14.182a,

183a-184a.

33Janin

964:

4-7,

24,

43-58.

34

ee

Cracco

Ruggini

980 and

below,

ection

v.

35Euseb.

Vit.

Const.

.48.

36Euseb. Vit. Const. .54.2-4; cf. Eunap. VS 6.1.5. Libanius Or. 30.6, 37) complains f

expenditures

n

Constantinople

nd hints hat

his

nvolved

stealing eligious

rt;

osimus

2.31-32)

writes

n similar

erms;

ohn

Malalas

13.7)

mentions

n

passing

tatues aken

romlium nd

Rome

butdoes not

suggest

hat hese

were

part

f

systematic

ransfer.

37

useb.

Vit.Const.

.54.1-2,

5-7. Eusebius

signally

ails o understand

opular

ttitudeso

religious

tatuary.

n

Gaza,

even he

Christiansefused

o walkon

pavements

adefrom

mashed

idols

Mark

Vita

orph.

6);

cf.

Mango

1963.

38

arastaseis

yntomoihronikai

0.



10/43

THE

PALLADIUM

AND THE PENTATEUCH

377

disparage onstantinople,

he

city

f

his

birth,

y

nsisting

hat t

surpassed

ll

other ities

y

s much s it fell

hort

f

Rome,

while

noting

hat

eing

econd

o

Romewas a

greater

onor han

reeminence

ver

ll

other

ities.39

Later Christians ound his

picture

f

Constantine

nd this

mage

of Con-

stantinople

seful.

Augustine

umbered

he foundationf

Constantinople

ne

of

the

blessings ranted y

the Christian od to its

pious champion:

to

him

God

granted

hathe shouldfound

city,

n aid to the Roman

empire

nd

the

daughter,

s

it

were,

of

Rome

tself,

ut

without

ny

temple

r

image

of

demons."40

ocrates

cknowledged

is

debt

to

Eusebiusbut adds detailsnot

present

n

that

uthor's

Life:

Constantine ade

his

city qual

to

"ruling

ome,"

named

t

Constantinople,

nd ordered

y

aw

that t shouldbe

called

Second

Rome."41Accordingo Socrates,his aw was inscribed n a pillarnearCon-

stantine's

questrian

tatue.He also followed usebius

n

seeing

onstantinople

as a Christian

oundation,

onnecting

onstantine'sedication fchurcheshere

withhis

prohibitions

gainst

aganism

nd

his humiliationf dols. We will

return

o Sozomen'smuch fuller

arrative;

et it suffice ow to

observe

hat

he, too,

attributedo

Constantine

he desire hathis

city

should ule

equally

withRome and should harewithher

n

the

empire." eeking

o found

city

"equal

in

honorto

Rome,"

Constantine as directed

y

God to

Byzantium,

which

ity

he

renamed

New

Rome"

and

"Constantinople"

nd

designated

s

the

capitol

or he eastern alf

f the

empire.

What s

more,

God

revealed is

power

n

the fervor ithwhich

he nhabitantsf the

city

ookto the faith f

its

founder.42

hilostorgius

ikewise

eports

hatConstantine

amedhis

city

alma

Roma,

which

n

the

Roman

tongue

means

honored',"

nd so

established

its

government

nd

buildings

hat ts

fame

began

to

rival

hat

of

"the earlier

Rome."43

Christianntellectuals

husvalorized

onstantinople

or

ts ack of

dols and

idolatrous

ult.

In

this

they

eveal

n

understanding

f

the sacred nd of its

immanencen thematerial orldseeminglyundamentallyifferenthan hat

loosely

hared

y

their

agan

opponents.

hristianslmost

niversallyegarded

idols

nd cult tatues s the

proper

nd exclusive

ecipients

f

pagan

worship,

nd

their

nderstanding

f the

mechanics f conversion

eveloped

rom his

imple

fact.

So,

writing

f

Constantine's

ppropriation

f

religious

rt,

usebius

wrote

that those

uffering

rom

uperstition

hen

at last earned o

think

roperly,

when the

emperor

eld

up

their

baubles

to the

laughter

nd

mockery

f all

beholders."44

imilarly,

hen

n

early

uly

99 Arcadius nd Honorius

rdered

39Julian

r. 1.6

8b-c).

40August.

e

civ.

D.

5.25.

41

ocrates

.16.1.

42

ozom.

2.3.1,

2,

5.

43

Philostorgius.9;

cf.Hsch. Patria

1,

naming

ome

i

nprpucTpa

Pcipl1

nd

Constantinople

fl

vca

'Poi1j

and

arguing

hatConstantine ade he atter

qual

to theformer.

44Euseb.Vit.Const. .54.3.



11/43

378 PHOENIX

thedestruction

f

pagan emples

n

the

ountryside,hey

laimed

hat heir

ction

would

destroy

thematerial

asis

of

all

superstition"

his

nim

eiectis

tque

ublatis

omnis

superstitioni

ateria

onsumetur,

od.

Theod. 6.10.16).

Yet

progress

on

by

methods ased

on

these

premises

as slow.This is true

n

spite

f

Eusebius,

who

tended

o

magnify

oththe

scope

and

effectsf

mperial

egislationgainst

paganism.46

s

emperors

new etter

han

ishops,

sudden

hanges

rehard n

subjects."

n

idolatrous

ity

hat

onsistentlyaid

ts axes ad to be

subjected

o

gradual ressure:

et civichonors

e available

nly

o Christiansnd

the

emples

shut,

and

the

people

will

eventually

cknowledge

he

truth.47

A

pragmatic

toleration

r,

perhaps, pragmatic

estraintrom

eligious

oercion,

lossed y

intolerant

hetoricrom

ulpits

nd rostra nd

nterruptedy

ccasional

ursts f

localviolence,husgovernedeligious olitics etween onstantinendthe ast

decade

of

the

fourth

entury.48

Between

the

foundation

f

Constantinople,

hen,

and

the

outpouring

f

Catholic

egislation

n

the

390s,

how did

pagans

articulate

he

unique

status

of Rome?

Through

ult.49

Symmachus rovides

oth a

positive

nd

negative

formulation

f this

position.

On theone

hand,

he

goodwill

f the

gods,

f

not

retained

hrough

ult,

s

lost.50On the

birthday

f Rome

n

401,

the tatewas

disturbed

y

several

mens,

most

particularly

he crash

f

the

suffectonsul's

chariot.

ecoratedwith he

nsignia

f his

office,

he

magistrate

ad

broken is

leg.

"Even

narrating

t causesme

concern-doing

o is

unlucky-and

o inthis

telling

will

be

brief."51

n

omen at

Spoleto

worried

im,

s a citizen

with

duty

o the

publicgood:

it should

have

been

expiated

ublico

omine. s it

was,

eight

victims

mproperly

acrificed ad failed o

satisfy

upiter.52ymmachus

changed

he

tinerary

fhis

travelso take ction

n behalf fhis

iling

omeland,

"since

my

ecurity

eemed o me

quite

worthless

n

comparison

o the llsof the

commonwealth."

e,

therefore,

ielded

o the demands

f

pontifical

ffice.53

Famine, ikewise,

ould

be averted

y

the

gods,

as

it couldbe caused

by

their

displeasure. Gods ofmyfatherland,ardon heneglect fyour ites Stave

46Cf.

Bradbury

994;

Drake2000:

360-367,402,

419.

47

Mark Vita

Porph.

1.

48

Barnes

982:

68.

49

Verbal

xpressions

f

patriotism

y

Greek

nd Latin authors

n

ate

antiquity

ave

received

great

deal of careful

ttention,

ut fewhave

concentrated

n the

religious

spects

nd non-verbal

expressions

f

patriotic

entiment.

Among

vast iteratureee

D6lger

937;

Klingner

965:

645-666;

Paschoud

967;

Klein

1986;

Brodka 998.

50

ymm. p.

1.46.2:

benignitas

nim

superiorum,

isi

ultu

enatur,

mittitur.

51

Symm. p.

6.40.1.

52

Symm. p.

1.49;

the

phrase

t

ivis

d

bonum

ommune

genitus

s

actually

pplied

y

Symmachus

to Praetextatus.

53

ymm.

p.

1.51; cf.

1.47.1:

me

impeditpontificalis

fficii

ura;

.59:

Symmachus

as

staying

t

his suburban illa

long

the via

Appia,

whencehe

returned

o Rome for hefestivalf

Vesta;2.34,

writing

o his son: adornare e

reditum,

uod

acraDeumMatris

adpeterent,

rbitrabar.

t

1.71 he

praises

aecilianus

o Celsinus

itianus,

writing

hat e oves hatmanbecause

e s

religiosae

ivitatis

commodis

obsequentem.



12/43

THE PALLADIUMAND

THE

PENTATEUCH

379

off his

pitiless

amine."54

othing

llustrateshe seriousnessf

Symmachus'

commitment

o the

customs

nd

nstitutionsfthe

maiores

ore

learly

hanhis

determination

o

punish

rrant estals:

he

duty

f

a

pontiff

nd the

oyalty

f a

senator

emanded o less. As he wrotewhenone

Primigenia

as

proven

uilty

of

breaking

er

vows,

it

remains

nly

o enforcehe

everity

f the aws

against

those

whohave

polluted

herites f

the tate

y

n

unspeakable

rime."55

is son

listed

n his

epitaph

o

religious

fficeave he

pontificate:

he

eremoniesf

the

gods

and

therites emanded

ydivinity

ere

known

o

him.56

Symmachus

lso

argued

hat

roper

orship

arned hefavor f

the

gods.

As

proof

e offeredhe vidence

f

history:

Do not

orget

he

rgument

rom

dvantage,

hichmore han

nything

evealshe

odsto mankind.s all reasonies n thedark,rom hat ource

might

ebetterraw ur

knowledge

f he ivinehan rom

emory

nd he videncef

past

enefactions.

In

a

prosopopeia

oments ater Rome confirmedhe

sentiment: Hic cultus

subjected

he

world o

my

aws."57

n the

same decade on the other

ide

of

the

empire,

ibanius dvanced n almost dentical et

of

arguments

n

defense

of

pagan

temples

nd therituals

racticed

n

them.Like

Symmachus,

ibanius

insisted hat

he

history

f the

empire roved

he

efficacy

nd

truthfulness

f

traditional

orms f

worship:

And twaswith

hese

ods

o

id hemhat heRomans sed omarch

gainst

heir

oes,

engage

hemn

battle,

onquer

hem

nd,

s

conquerors,

rant

he

anquished

condition

of

ife

etterhan hat

hich

hey

ad

eforeheir

efeat,

emoving

heir

ears

nd llowed

them share

n

theirwn

ivil

ife.58

In

fact,

ibanius

ookthis

rgument

step

further,

escribing

he evolution f

religious

ractices

s

part

nd

parcel

fthe

ncreasingomplexity

f

ocieties nd

development

f

technology.59

Libaniuswas

not o

foolish s to believe

hat he xtension

f

hefranchise

nd

expansion

fthe

mpire

ad

correspondingly

iluted he

gods'

nterestnRome.

On the

ontrary:

If

the

ecurity

f he

mpire

ests n the

acrifices

erformed

here,

hen emust

elieve

sacrifice

verywhere

obe

profitable.

ndeed,

ust

s the

ods

n

Rome

ive

reaterhings,

so

thosenthe ieldsnd he ther

illagesive

esser

hings.60

54Symm. p.

2.7.3;

see also

Rel.

3.15-16:

depriving

heVestals f

support

ranted

hem

by

ex

parentum

ad

brought

bout famine. he

landwas not t

fault,

orwas thewind:

sacrilegio

nnus

exaruit.

55

ymm.

p.

9.108,

147-148.

561LS

2946;

Symm.

p.

2.53,

writing

o his brother:

otae

obis unt

aerimoniaeeorum

tfesta

divinitatis

mperata.

57

Symm.

el.

3.8-9.

58

ib.

Or.30.5

tr.Norman);

f. 0.31.

59

ib.

Or.30.4.

60Lib.

Or.

30.33

tr.

fter

orman).



13/43

380

PHOENIX

The

theological

asis

of

this

position

eserves

areful

crutiny.

t was not that

the

gods

could not or did not

receive

worship

n

multiple

ocations,

or even

that he

Capitoline

riadwas

resident

n the

Capitol.

By

the fourth

entury,

Capitolia xistedncities hroughoutheempire,rompainto Africa oEgypt

and

throughout

he Danubian

provinces.61

ut

if

the

gods

of Rome

werenot

Platonic

gods,

whose nterest

n

sacrificesnd

whose

figural

epresentation

e-

quired

laborate nd somewhat

llogical

efense,

either

id

they

ecome he

objects

f

complex heological

radition.62

hen Cicero

ontrastedersian

ult

and

its

theological

asis withthat

of

the

Greeks nd

Romans,

he

provided

s

careful

n articulation

f

the ssue s

now

urvives:

I

propose

hat herehould e shrines

n

cities.

n this

ssue do not

ollowhe

magi

f

Persia,nwhose uthorityerxesssaid o have urnedhe emplesfGreece,ecause

the

Greeksonfinedhe

ods

within

alls,

lthough

ll

places

hould

e

open

nd ree o

them s

this ntire orld

s

their ome

nd

emple.

he better

osition

s that

dopted

by

heGreeksnd

by

s,

whodesireo

ncrease

iety

oward

he

ods

nd o have

wanted

them o

ive

n

the ame ities hat e nhabit.

Men will ct more

haste,

icero

oncludes,

ollowing

hales,

when

hey

elieve

that

ll

things

re

full

f

gods.63

Symmachus

hus

subscribed o the

theology

f a

Cicero and

spoke

to the

concernsf Libaniuswhenhe wrote fthe ltar fVictory:

Where

hallwe swear o

obey our

aws nddecrees?

y

what

cruple

ill

he eceitful

mind e

terrified,

est t

perjure

tselfnderath? o

be

sure,

ll

hings

re

ull

f

god,

or

is

any

lace

afe or

erjurers.

evertheless,

he

resence

f

god

s

a

powerful

nducement

to fear f

wrong-doing.64

It is

insufficiento

say

hat

ymmachus

as elided

hedistinction

etween

mage

and

prototype,

ecausemore s at stake han

philosophy

f

representation.

e

presupposed

notion f

divinity,

nd a

theory

f

materiality,undamentally

t

oddswith hose fPlatonic rChristianmetaphysics;ndwithin he heologyf

Symmachus

r

Libanius,

he

gods

have nterests

n,

ndattachments

o,

particular

landscapes,

fwhichhumans ake ccount

hrough

he

performance

f

ritual,

nd

it

was

through

itual hathumans

might

ffect

r alter he

gods'

attachments.65

If the

theological nderpinnings

f these

rguments

n

behalf

f Rome

did not

then

require

rticulationnd

thereforelude

satisfactoryxplication

oday,

we

can

grasp

heir

mplications

ore

learly y studying

he

place

of Rome

n

the

religious

andscapemapped

nd nhabited

y

Ammianus

Marcellinus.66

riting

61Ando

2000: 208.

62

ee,

e.g.,

Sallustius 5-16.

63

Cic.

Leg.

2.26.

64

Symm.

el.

3.5.

65The

theological

asis of Roman

ritual,

articularly

n

its

understanding

f

topography

nd

materiality,

equires

muchmore areful ttention

han t has received.

or

now,

ee the

suggestive

comments

n

MacCormack

982:

290-291;

see also

Ando 2002.

66

Camus

1967: 133-269

s far hebest reatmentfAmmianus'

eligious

hought.



14/43

THE PALLADIUMAND THE

PENTATEUCH

381

in

the

early

90s of events omethree ecades

arlier,

mmianus

escribed

he

famine t Rome

n

359,

during

he

prefecture

f

Tertullus.

he

eternal

ity

was

gripped yfear

f

a coming hortagefgrain:harsher torms hanusual and

unpredictablequalls

isturbedhe

eas.But

the

fears f he

opulace

were

apidly

allayed:

Soon,

y

he

will f hat

ivine umenhat

urtured

ome

rom

ts

nfancy

nd

promised

that twould ast

orever,

hile ertullushe

refect

as

acrificing

t Ostia eforehe

temple

fthe

Dioscuri,

ranquillity

almed

he

ea,

he

wind

ecame

gentle

outhern

breeze,

nd

hips

ull f

grain

nteredhe

ort

nd efilledhe tores

f

rain.67

Ammianus

ighlights

he

place

of

Rome

n

the sacred

opography

f the

ater

empiremostpointedly henhe uxtaposesvents t Romeand elsewhereo as

to reveal he

centrality

f

the

apital.

o,

for

xample,

ustprior

o the

successful

assassination

f

Silvanus n

Gaul

in

355,

"the

people

at Rome in the

Circus

Maximus houted

n

a loud

voice,

Silvanus

s

conquered,'-whether

he

populace

was aroused

y

ome

eport

r

by presentiment

s

unknown."68

mmianusmore

clearly

ttributed

o divine

auses

knowledge

t Rome

f

vents round he

mpire

when he narratedhe election f Valentiniann

364: the

emperor-elect

ad to

travel

rom is

post

at

Ancyra

o the

army

nd so for en

days

no

one held

the

helm fthe

mpire.

Thisfact he

haruspex

arcus

eported

o have

happened

t

thetime,whenhe nspectedntrailstRome."69

Ammianus

eported

n

religious

matterst no timemore

ensely

han

uring

Julian's

arthian

ampaign.

At

its start

e

provided

list of

the

omens

that

presaged

ll

for hat

undertaking.

losing

he

ist,

n

a

position

f

priority,

s

a

report

rom he

Sibylline

ooks at

Rome:

in

clear

anguage

hey

orbade he

emperor

rom

eaving

is own

borders hat

year.70

oon after

eaving

Antioch,

Julian

as disturbed

y

dreams.

Whenhe woke

up,

he orderedhat

areful

atch

should e taken

or

mens

hroughout

he

day,

9 March

63.

As itwasafterwardsearned,nthat amenight,ntheprefecturefApronianus,he

temple

f alatine

pollo

n

he ternal

ity

urned;

ad id

f

very

ind

ot een

rought

to

bear,

he

magnitude

f he ires

ould ave onsumed

ven he

ongs

f

he

Cumaean

Sibyl.71

Other events

n the

campaign

re

merely

ated

by

the ritual

alendar f

the

eternal

ity,

nd

Julian

imself

ttempted

o

establish

temporal

nd sacramental

connection

ith

Rome

through

ult:

Six

days

eforehe

kalends f

April,

n

the

day

when

he nnual

rocessions

or

he

Motherf heGods reperformedtRomend he artnwhich ermages carrieds

67Amm.

Marc. 19.10.4.

68Amm.

Marc. 15.5.34.

69Amm.

Marc. 26.1.5.

In

hernote

on this

passage,

Mari6

1984:

205,

n.

12)

cites15.5.34 and

compares

ellius15.18.

See

also

Camus

1967:

209,

writing

fdivination

ithout

oncern or

where

it takes

lace.

70Amm.

Marc.23.1.7.

71Amm.

Marc.23.3.3.



15/43

382

PHOENIX

said o

be

washed

nthewatersf

he

Almo,

he

olemnity

f he ites as

performed

n

hallowed

ashion,

nd

Julian

lept

ell,

assing

he

night

n

happy

onfidence.72

Julianimselfestifiedo his nterestnCybelenthehymneaddressedo

her. ike

ymmachus

riting

f

Victory,

ulian's

arrativefher

rrival

n

Rome

elides he istinction

etween

mage

ndGoddess.

lthough

t

was most

oly

image

Ti;g Eo

Z6

dyutZoatov

yaotXgaot)

f

the

goddess

hat

ailed

o

Rome,

the

goddess

erself

evealed

hat

he

hip ransported

o ifeless

dol

(6aovov

\Lwuxov);

ather,

he

bject

aken romhe

hrygians

eld ome

reater

nd

more

divine

ower.73

f

course,

ulian

idnot oubt hat ne

ould onor

heGreat

Mother

t hrines

ocated utsidef

Rome. e

himselfisiteder

ncient

emple

at

Pessinus.74

ut

t

s

equally

lear hat he

was

present

t

Rome,

nd

Rome

wasthus

rivileged,hrough

nd

by

he

ontingentresence

fhermostacred

image

n

that

ity.

nyone

ho

doubted is

narrative,

ulian

dded,

ould ead

itsdetailss

preserved

n

bronze

tatues

n

themost

owerful

nd

god-beloved

city

f

Rome.75

Ammianus

owheressertedhe

entrality

fRome

n

the

acred

opography

ofhisworld

more

igorously

han

when e described

he rrival

n

Rome f

giant

belisk

aken

rom

he

emple

f he un tThebes.

ugustus,

e

argued,

had

hought

f

moving

his

beliskut ad

efrained,

ot

ecausehe belisk as

toobig,butbecausethadbeendedicateds a special ifto the un ndhad

been

laced

ithin

he

hrinef ts

lorious

emple.

ut

Constantine,

mmianus

continued,

ightlyhought

hat

e was

committing

o

sacrilege

f,

having

orn

the

obelisk rom ne

temple,

e

should

ededicate

t

at

Rome,

hat

s,

n

the

templum

otius

undi,

he

emple

f

he ntire

orld.76

smuch

s

this emark

reveals

bout mmianus

ndhis

feelings

or

ome,

t

also eveals

is

gnorance.

In

point

f

fact,

onstantinead

ntendedhe

belisks

anotherecoration

or

Constantinople,

nd

t

was

Constantiusho

misunderstoodhe

ignificance

f

that esire nd

ent he

belisk n

to

Rome,

o

celebrateis

apture

f he

ityand

victory

verhe

surper agnentius.77

At

he

nigmatic

enter

fmodern

ssays

nRoman

eligious

ife

tands

ettius

Agorius

raetextatus,

ugur,ontifex

f

Vesta,

ontifex

f he

un,

uindecemvir,

curialis

f

Hercules,

devoteef

Liber nd he

leusinian

ysteries,

ierophant,

overseerf

emples,

nd

nitiatef

he

aurobolium.78

raetextatus

ndhiswife

Fabia

Aconia

aulina

ived

ogether

or

orty

ears,

arked

y

piety

nd

mutual

72Amm.

Marc.

23.3.7. Cf.

Prudent.

Peristephanon

0.151-160.

73Julian

r. 8.2

(5.159c-160a).

74Amm.Marc.

22.9.5.

75Julian

r. 8.2

(5.161b).

76Amm.

Marc.

17.4.12-13.

771LS

736,

esp.

lines 1-6:

patris

opus

munusqu[e

uum]

ibi,

Roma,

dicavit

Augustus

toto

Constan]tius

rbe

ecepto,

et

quod

nulla

ulit

ellus

ec

ideratetas

condidit,

t

claris

xa[equ]et

ona

triumfis.

oc

decus

rnatum

enitor

ognominis

rbis sse

olens,

aesa

hebis e

rupe

evellit.

781LS

1259,

front,

ines -7.

On the

centrality"

f

Praetextatus,

ee

Cameron

999: 111-115.



16/43

THE

PALLADIUMAND THE PENTATEUCH

383

devotion.

While

nitiationn

allthe

mysteries

ade

Paulina he riendf he

gods,

Praetextatusconcealed

n

the

recesses f his mind ecrets

iscovered

n

sacred

rites nd,being earned, orshippedhemanifoldnddivine umen."79corning

those fficesnd

dignities

ought y

other

men,

raetextatus

ished

o

be

known

only

s

a

priest

fthe

gods.80

or

Praetextatus,hen,

s for

ymmachus,

eligious

devotion

was

properlyxpressed hrough

itual,

nd it

was

through

itual hat

men nteractedr unitedwith

he

divine.81

ike

Symmachus,

raetextatusnd

Paulinahonored esta nd the

Vestals:

edicating

statue

f

Caelia

Concordia,

they poke

of her

outstanding

odesty

nd

noteworthyiety

oward he

cult

of

the

gods.82

Nothing ypifies

he form f

piety

xhibited

y

Praetextatusetter hanhis

restorationfthe mages fthediconsentes.n thefirstentury.C. heir olden

images

had stood around he

forum,

ix male

and

six

female,

nd

scattered

inscriptions

ttest heir

worship

n

Dacia, Moesia,

and in

Italy

at

Picenum,

Ocriculi,

nd Reate.83

During

his

prefecture

f the

city

n

367/8,

Praetextatus

repaired

nd

replaced

heir

acred

tatues,

ecorated heir

ite

with

ll

possible

care, nd,

most

articularly,

estoredheir

ult

o

ts ncient

orm.84

his nterest

in

performing

ites

ccording

o their

ncient orm n

a

particular,

allowed

locationmirrorshe attention

aid by

Julian,

ibanius,

nd

Symmachus

o the

evidences

f

history;

t

formed

hebasisof

Julian's

riticismf

Constantine;nd

it

will

be theclarion all of

the

ast

generation

f

pagans

n the

West:

"Verily

o

I

promise

hat

will

maintain

nd

preserve,

o

long

s

I

am

able,

hatwhich

has

been

handed own

nd

sanctioned

y ntiquity."85

III.

WITHOUT

CULT,

WHITHER

ROME?

The lasttwo

decades fthe

fourth

entury

awthe

government

fthe

mpire

move

with

ncreasingeverity

gainst

he

nstitutionsnd

practices

hat

rdered

791LS

259,

ight

ide

ine

;back,

ines

3-15,

5;

n

aulina's

nitiations,

ee

lso

LS

1260. n

the ivum

ultiplex

umen,

ee

Nock 972:

7-41;

f.

amus967: 34-138.

801LS259, ack,

ines 8-21.

81Cf.

Sallustius

:

tnp6inouo tCOv

1600v

oi

v

0ooyutcot

4tnXoa6oti,

oi

4u6ot6rot

KLti

YuXUrot

otcraiC,

i

6

tKTol

EELeraig,

'nU6

Kai

eou

l

uphy

v

60pov

lCt;

ai

b6

TobiM

oiS

auvdnT6ttv

60.sct;

see

also

Lib.

Or.

24.36;

Nock

1926:

xcviii-ci.

82

ILS

1261.

83Varro

ust. 1.1.4

(Jupiter

nd

Tellus,

Sol and

Luna,

Ceres and

Liber,

Robigus

nd

Flora,

Minerva nd

Venus,

nd

Lympha

nd

Bonus

Eventus); f.

Enn.

Ann. 240-241

[Skutsch]

luno,

Vesta,Minerva, eres, Diana, Venus,Mars,Mercurius,ovis,Neptunus, olcanus,

nd

Apollo),

almost

definitelyisting

he twelve

gods

honored

n

the first

ectisternium,

hose

nspiration

nd

performance

s

describedt

Livy

2.10.9,

but

he

entencemust e read

with

he

whole

paragraph

n

mind.On these

gods,

ee

Wissowa

1912:

61,

n.

6;

Latte

1967:

253,

334.

Dacia: ILS

4004-6;

Moesia:

IGRR

1.664;

Picenum:

LS

4001;

Ocriculi:LS

4002;

Reate:

LS

4007.

841LS

4003:

[deorum]onsentium

acrosancta

imulacraum

mni

o[ci

otius

dornatio]ne,

ultu n

[formam

ntiquam

estituto,V]ettiusraetextatus

.c.

ra

efectus]rbi

reposuit]...

85

onginianus t

August.

p.

234.2;

on

their

orrespondence,

eeAndo

1996:

192-193.



17/43

384

PHOENIX

the

religious

ives f

contemporaryagans.

The

stakes

weredear. As Ambrose

pointed

ut

n his

first

etter o

Valentinian

n the

ltar f

Victory,

he

presence

of the altar

n

the Senatewould

force

Christian

enators o

practicedolatry.

Valentinian

ad to choosebetween

wo

religions,

nd thechoice or Christian

emperor

as

clear.86

he

general

enor f he onversation

merges

rom hristian

reactions

o thedeath fPraetextatus.

contemporary

nvective

n verse rowed

that

is

divine

nowledge,

scension

f he

Capitol,

ndthree-month

urification

of

the

city

had availed

him

naught:

he

had

reached he

limits

f his

life,

suffering

adness

f

souland

nsanity

f

mind.87

Writing

letter

f consolation

immediately

fter he

event,

erome

ompared

he fate

of a

recently-deceased

Christian o that

of

Praetextatus,

hat

acrilegious

evotee

f

idols,

who had

recentlyeendraggedo Tartarus.n doing o,he alludedwith avage ronyo

the

pitaph

aulina

wrote or

er

husband:

How

great

he

hange

n

affairshat

man,

hom

ut

ays go

he

eights

f ll

honors

preceded,

ho limbed

he itadels

fthe

Capitol

s

thoughriumphing

ver

efeated

enemies,

hom

heRoman

eople

eceived

ith

pplause

nd vations:t hisdeath he

whole

ity

s

disturbed.

ow

he

s

abandoned,

aked,

ot

na

milky

alace

n

heaven,

s

his

pathetic

ife

elieves;

ather,

e

s

mprisoned

n

he

qualid

hadows.88

The events

hat ed from he confrontationver he altar f

Victory

o

the

revolt nd subsequent efeat f Eugenius ie buried n thepagesofpartisan

historiography.89

hatever he motivationf

Eugenius' upporters,

he

final

battle

t the

Frigidus

ook

place

under he watchful

yes

of

opposing

ods.90

According

o

Ambrose,

fter is

victory

heodosius

put way

he

mages

of

the

gentiles;

his faith

put

away

all

worship

f the

idols;

he laid waste all

their eremonies."91

n

fact,

heodosius

had

begun

ssuing

ncreasingly

evere

legislation gainst aganism

n

391,

taking

ction irst

gainst

ublic

nd

then

against

rivate

orms f

worship.

e did not

order

agans

o

convert,

ut

imply

outlawed

ll

public

nd

private

ehaviors

ntended o

express

evotion.

No one

could

perform

sacrifice,

isit

temple,

r

revere

n

altar;

honors o the

gods

of

hearth, ome,

nd ndividual ere

orbidden,

hether

aid

n

ncense,

lame,

light,

r

garlands.92lthough

arlier

egislation

ad threatened

agans

with ire

punishments,

hose

aws had

rarely

een enforced.Now Theodosius truck t

the nstitutional

nd

social

supports

f

paganpractice:

he

property

f

anyone

86Ambrose

p.

17.9;

cf.

Ep.

18.31.

87

Carmen

ontra

aganos

5-30;

cf.

Cracco

Ruggini

979: 84-89.

88Jerome

p.

23.2-3,

nterpretingILS

259,back,

ines

9,

38-41

as

alluding

o

an

afterlifef

the

sort nvisionedt Macrob. n Somn.

.4.4-5,

1.15.1;

f.

Jer.

ontra

oann.

Hieros. .

89

On

the

history

nd

historiography

fthese

ears,

ee Hedrick

000:

37-88,

esp.

39-58;

Cracco

Ruggini

979 s

characteristically

conoclastic,

nsightful,

ndwell-documented.

9 August.

e civ.D.

5.26;

cf.

Ambrose e

obitu

heodosiani

0;

Rufinus

ist.

Eccl.

1.33;

Socrates

5.25;

Sozom.

7.24.3-7;

Theodoret ist.

Eccl.

.24.3-17.

91Ambrose e

obitu heodosiani

.

92

Cod.

Theod.

6.10.10-12,

n

which

ee

Matthews

975: 231-237.



18/43

THE

PALLADIUM

AND

THE

PENTATEUCH

385

engaging

n

pagan

rites

wouldbe

confiscated,

s would

he and and

buildings

n

which uch ctivitiesook

place.

All

privileges

nd

exemptions

or

aganpriests

of

anydescription

erenow revoked.

ive

years ater,

Arcadius nd Honorius

granted

wo

concessions,

nthe nterestf

public

rder:

ublic

holidays

ere o

continue,

o

long

as

they

weredevoidof

religious

ontent,

nd

pagan temples

empty

f

llicit

hings

erenot o be

destroyed.93

According

o

Augustine,

heodosius

pared

the

sons of his

slain

enemies

because

he

wanted hem o take this

opportunity

o

convert.94

n

the

iterary

tradition,

heodosius ntered

ome n

triumph

nd addressed

he Senate.

The

occasion,

nce

nvented,

as

too

delicious o

impugn.

Prudentius

epicted

he

arrival f

Theodosius

n

Rome as a

watershed.

Theodosius

addressedRome

itself nd chastised t for tsworship f the monstrousmagesof decaying

gods.

Rome

silently

nd

mmediately

onverted:Then

for

hefirst

ime,

n

its

old

age,

did Rome blush nd

become

docile;

t was

ashamed f its

past,

and

hated he

years

pent

n

foul

uperstition."95

hen,

having

named everal

reat

families hat onvertedn that

day,

Prudentius

onfessed imself

nable o list

them

ll,96

ffering

he

caveat

hat ll

did not

convert,

nd

indeed vidence f

publicly rofessingagans

urvivesor

nother

orty

ears.

n

sum,

rebuke rom

Theodosius

roduced

mmediatessent

nd

silent

ontrition,

nd thus

were he

remnants

f

the

pagan ristocracy

onverted.

WhatPrudentiusoesnot

provide,

ndeed,

whathe

Documents

Palladium and Pentateuch