We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 November 2020
By the mid fourth century c.e., violently divergent Christian communities had developed across the Roman empire: Nicene or Homoousian (God and Jesus ‘are of the same substance’), Homoiousian (‘are of similar substance’), Homoian (Jesus is ‘like’ God), Anomoean or Heterousian (God and Jesus ‘are of different substance’) and others. The first emperor to be a strong supporter of traditional cult in more than a generation, Julian ruled over an empire of numerous religious groups that were often at variance with one another, both extra- and intra-communally, and how all of these should be treated was one of the chief problems pressing the emperor upon his accession in late 361. Julian's religious thought and action during his short sole reign (3 November 361 to 26 June 363) has long exercised scholars, its impact on Christians and Christianity in particular. To be sure, Julian tended to be hostile to Christians and Christianity, but he was by no means hostile to all, and he even favoured some Christians, some of whom he counted among his friends and officials. The emperor's Christian policy thus was complicated. One of the best examples of this complexity is Julian's epistle to the Heterousian Christian leader Aetius (Ep. 15 Wright = 46 Bidez). In a shorter note published in this journal, Pierre-Louis Malosse focussed his attention on Julian's letter to Aetius, which dates to early 362 and which is the only such epistle to this future bishop that is extant. As transmitted, Julian's missive to Aetius is critical for the light it helps to shed on the emperor's views and treatments of Christians at the outset of his sole reign, and my conclusions on this missive differ from those of Malosse.
1 E.g. Bidez, J., ‘L’évolution de la politique de l'empereur Julien en matière religieuse’, BAB 7 (1914), 406–61Google Scholar; Bowersock, G.W., Julian the Apostate (Cambridge, Mass., 1978), 79–105Google Scholar; Braun, R., ‘Julien et le Christianisme’, in Braun, R. and Richer, J. (edd.), L'Empereur Julien. De l'histoire à la légende (331–1715) (Paris, 1978), 159–88Google Scholar; Athanassiadi, P., Julian: An Intellectual Biography (New York, 1992), 89–191Google Scholar; Smith, R., Julian's Gods: Religion and Philosophy in the Thought and Action of Julian the Apostate (New York, 1995)Google Scholar; Tougher, S., Julian the Apostate (Edinburgh, 2007), 54–62Google Scholar; Elm, S., Sons of Hellenism, Fathers of the Church: Emperor Julian, Gregory of Nazianzus, and the Vision of Rome (Berkeley, 2012)Google Scholar; and Marcos, M., ‘Callidior ceteris persecutor: the Emperor Julian and his place in Christian historiography’, HSPh 110 (2019), 371–451Google Scholar.
2 See Marcos (n. 1).
3 Malosse, P.-L., ‘Galileans or Gallus? (Julian's letter to Aetius)’, CQ 60 (2010), 607–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
4 Bidez, J. (ed.), L'empereur Julien, Œuvres completes, Tome I – 2e partie, Lettres et fragments (Paris, 1924), 65–6Google Scholar.
5 My translation. See also Wright, W.C. (ed.), The Works of the Emperor Julian (Cambridge, Mass., 1923), 3.35, 3.37Google Scholar. Cf. Malosse (n. 3), 607, who translates συνήθεια as ‘link’ in place of Wright's ‘intercourse’. ‘Intimacy’ seems more precise and accurate here; cf. Bidez (n. 4), 66: ‘longue intimité’.
6 ὅτι τὴν βασίλειον ἀρχὴν ἁρπάσας ὁ Ἰουλιανός, ἅτε δὴ Ἀέτιον διὰ Γάλλον δῆθεν κινδυνεύοντα, τῆς φυγῆς ἀνακαλεῖται⋅ οὐκ αὐτὸν δὲ μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους, ὅσοι δογμάτων ἐκκλησιαστικῶν ὑπερορίαν ὑπέστησαν. The text is that of J. Bidez and F. Winkelmann (edd.), Philostorgius: Kirchengeschichte (Berlin, 19813).
7 For Aetius and Gallus, see Philostorgius, Hist. eccl. 3.27 and Sozom. Hist. eccl. 5.5.9. For Aetius and Constantius, see Philostorgius, Hist. eccl. 4.8, 4.12 and Sozom. Hist. eccl. 5.5.9.
8 Cf. Malosse (n. 3), 609. See Bidez (n. 4), 66, whose reading of τῶν Γαλιλαίων seems to be secure as the transmitted text.
9 Ἀέτιον δὲ τὸν ἀρχηγὸν τῆς Εὐνομίου αἱρέσεως, ὡς ὑπὸ Κωνσταντίου ὑπερορίαν φυγὴν καταδικασθέντα καὶ ἄλλως ὕποπτον διὰ τὴν πρὸς Γάλλον ὁμιλίαν, εὐμενῶς μάλα γράψας μετεκαλέσατο πρὸς αὐτόν, δημόσια ὑποζύγια δεδωκώς. The text is that of Bidez, J. and Hansen, G.C. (edd.), Sozomenus: Kirchengeschichte (Berlin, 1960)Google Scholar.
10 See Malosse (n. 3), 607, who sees this phrase as ‘a sort of quasi simile, an ersatz of philia and hetairia’ and comprising ‘terms, one could say, that express a lesser degree of friendship’; cf. Philostorgius, Hist. eccl. 3.27, 9.4.
11 See Julian, Ep. 39 Wright (= 54 Bidez), Ep. 36 Wright (= 61c Bidez) 423D, Ep. 19 Wright (= 79 Bidez), Ep. 37 Wright (= 83 Bidez), Ep. 20 Wright (= 89a Bidez) 454B, Ep. 23 Wright (= 107 Bidez) 378B, Ep. 24 Wright (= 110 Bidez), Ep. 47 Wright (= 111 Bidez), Ep. 41 Wright (= 114 Bidez), Ep. 40 Wright (= 115 Bidez) 424C, Mis. 357C, 363A and Contra Galilaeos. On Julian's use of the term ‘Galileans’, see Scicolone, S., ‘Le accezioni dell'appellativo “Galilei” in Giuliano’, Aevum 56 (1982), 71–80Google Scholar.
12 See Marcos (n. 1).
13 Elm (n. 1), 54–7, 280–1.
14 PLRE 1.461, Fl. Iovianus 3; Marcos (n. 1), 418–19 n. 102.
15 PLRE 1.169–70, Caesarius 2; Elm (n. 1), 68 and 337 n. 5; Marcos (n. 1), 407–9.
16 For Julian's positive treatment of dissident African Christians, see Shaw, B.D., Sacred Violence: African Christians and Sectarian Hatred in the Age of Augustine (Cambridge, 2011), 149–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For the Novatians and Valentinians, see Marcos (n. 1), 410.
17 Julian, Ep. 24 Wright (= 110 Bidez); Bidez, J. and Cumont, F. (edd.), Imp. Caesaris Flavii Claudii Iuliani, Epistulae, leges, poemata, fragmenta varia (Paris, 1922), 51–2Google Scholar (ELF 45).
18 See Elm (n. 1), 235–8.
19 See Beckwith, C.L., ‘The condemnation and exile of Hilary of Poitiers at the Synod of Béziers (356 c.e.)’, JECS 13 (2005), 21–38Google Scholar, at 31–4, for Julian's involvement.
20 Julian uses ἡ ἀπόνοια elsewhere to describe the unbearable religious attitude and behaviour of some Christians and Jews: Julian, Ep. 20 Wright (= 89a Bidez) 454B (Jews in general), Ep. 24 Wright (= 110 Bidez) (Athanasius), Ep. 41 Wright (= 114 Bidez) 436B (some recently recalled Christian leaders in general); cf. Or. 2 67A, for the ‘boldness and madness’ of Shapur II, and Or. 7 209A, 210B, for ‘madness’ in Heracleios’ conception of Cynicism and the physical ‘madness’ of robbers respectively.
21 See Scicolone (n. 11).
22 See Julian, Ep. 40 Wright (= 115 Bidez) and Ep. 41 Wright (= 114 Bidez); Marcos (n. 1), 426–9.
23 See Elm (n. 1), 300–27; Hunt, D., ‘The Christian context of Julian's Against the Galileans’, in Baker-Brian, N. and Tougher, S. (edd.), Emperor and Author: The Writings of Julian the Apostate (Swansea, 2012), 251–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
24 Amm. Marc. 22.5.3: dissidentes Christianorum antistites cum plebe discissa in palatium intromissos monebat ciuilius, ut discordiis consopitis quisque nullo uetante religioni suae seruiret intrepidus.
25 E.g. see Bidez (n. 4), 66 n. 1, who briefly noted a connection between Julian's epistle to Aetius and his summoning of bishops and others to the Sacred Palace of Constantinople at Amm. Marc. 22.5.3; and Elm (n. 1), 65, who quotes Ammianus’ passage at 22.5.3 and connects it with Julian's edicts of toleration, but goes no further. See also den Boeft, J., Drijvers, J.W., den Hengst, D. and Teitler, H.C. (edd.), Philological and Historical Commentary on Ammianus Marcellinus XXII (Groningen, 1995), 58–60Google Scholar.
26 See Marcos (n. 1), 414–17, with references to earlier scholarship.
27 For more on this, see Elm (n. 1) and Marcos (n. 1).
