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: 23 December 2013
Palladas' attitude to Christianity has been much discussed in recent years. It is not of purely academic interest whether he was a pagan or Christian, for Christianity did not remain ‘the beggars' religion’, and it is the conversion of just such a figure as Palladas, a schoolmaster steeped in the classics but scornful alike of the traditional gods and the Platonism that had taken their place for the intellectual pagan of his day, that marks a vital stage in the christianisation of the Roman Empire. For nowhere did the traces of paganism linger longer than in the University circles of Alexandria. However the arguments adduced by P. Waltz to show that it is ‘infiniment probable que Palladas était chrétien’ carry but little conviction, and it seems much more likely that Palladas was and remained a pagan. The following poem, though overlooked or misinterpreted in most recent discussions, can perhaps be made to cast a little more light on the matter:
φιλοχρίστῳ Planudes (Marcianus 481): φιλοχρήστῳ Lascaris (editio princeps, 1494), edd. plerique. ‘Here we are, Victories, the laughing maidens, bearing victories for the city that loves Christ (?). Men painted us who loved the city, carving the symbols that are proper for Victories.’
1 Waltz, P., ‘Palladas était-il Chrétien’, REG lix/lx (1946/1947) 198 f.Google Scholar; Stella, L. A., Cinque poeti dell' Antologia Palatina (1949) 337 f.Google Scholar; Lacombrade, C., ‘Palladas d'Alexandrie’, Pallas i (1953) 18 f.Google Scholar; Keydell, R., ‘Palladas und das Christentum’, Byz. Zeit. 1 (1957) 1 f.Google Scholar; Luck, G., ‘Palladas: Christian or Pagan?’ HSCPh lxiii (1958) 455 f.Google Scholar; Bowra, C. M., ‘Palladas and Christianity’, Proceedings of the British Academy xlv (1959) 255 f.Google Scholar; Irmscher, J., ‘War Palladas Christ?’ Studia Patristica iv Pt. 2 (1961) 457 f.Google Scholar, and in a paper read at the Second Spanish Congress of Classical Studies in April 1961, to be published shortly in the proceedings of the congress. I am most grateful to Professor Irmscher for letting me see this paper before publication. See also my forthcoming article ‘Palladas and Christian Polemic.’
All references, unless otherwise stated, are to poems of Palladas in the Anthologia Palatina (I follow the usual system of numbering the additional poems preserved in the anthology of Planudes as Book xvi).
2 E.g., ix 165, ix 528, x 53: though too much must not be made of this. Not even the Apostate Julian himself believed in the literal truth of the stories about the Olympian gods—though he set great store by allegorical interpretations of the myths (Bidez, J., Vie de l'empereur Julien (1930) 252 f.Google Scholar).
3 x 45, xi 305, and see also his attack on what he considered the hypocrisy of the philosopher Themistius, xi 292. ix 400, usually taken as showing that Palladas drank in philosophy at the feet of the beautiful and learned Hypatia, has been shown by Luck (op. cit. (n. 1) 462–7), in spite of the objections raised by Irmscher (Eirene-Kongress Plovdiv, 1962; not yet published), to be neither by Palladas nor about Hypatia.
4 Compare the stir caused by conversion of the schoolmaster/philosopher Marius Victorinus in Rome (Augustine, , Conf. viii 11Google Scholar): a century after Palladas the conversion of another Alexandrian grammarian, Horapollon, was regarded by his ex-fellow-pagans as desertion (Suidas s.v. 'Ώραπόλλων).
5 Simon, J., Histoire de l'école d'Alexandrie ii (1845) 586 f.Google Scholar, and see especially Maspero, J., ‘Horapollon et la Fin du paganisme égyptien’, Bulletin de l'institut français d'archéologie orientale du Caire xi (1914) 176 f.Google Scholar On the eventual conversion of these stubborn intellectuals see Praechter, K., ‘Christlich-neuplatonische Beziehungen’, Byz. Zeit. xxi (1912) 1 f.Google Scholar Cf. also Saffery, H.-D., REG lxvii (1954) 396 f.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6 Op. cit. (n. 1) 203 f.
7 See especially Luck, op. cit. (n. 1) 457 f.
8 And Cod. Brit. Add. 16409, a direct apograph of the Marcianus, and written only a few months after it (Young, Douglas, Parola del Passato x (1955) 197 f.Google Scholar).
9 Cf. Beckby, H., Anthologia Graeca i (1957) 75Google Scholar: ‘Merkwürdigerweise stimmt aber diese editio princeps keineswegs mit dem Marcianus völlig überein. Es sind nicht nur in der Anordnung der Gedichte, sondern auch in der Textgestaltung gewisse Unterschiede vorhanden, die den Marcianus als direkte Quelle ausschliessen’.
10 E.g., Luck, op. cit. (n. 1) 458 and n. 21. Since any occurrence of a word like φιλόχριστος will inevitably be in a Christian context, it is hard to understand or justify the decision of LSJ to exclude Christian writers but include Christian inscriptions, thereby giving the quite false impression that the word is not found at all before the age of Justinian.
11 A number of examples are cited by Irmscher, J., Studien zum Neuen Testament und Patristik: Erich Klosterman zum 90 Geburstag dargebracht (Berlin, 1961) 323 f.Google Scholar Doubtless when the new Patristic Lexicon reaches the letter φ it will reveal many more instances, but for the moment add to Irmscher's list Nazianzen, Gregorycontra Julianum i 24Google Scholar (PG lv 552), and nine occurrences in the probably fifth-century life of St. Porphyry of Gaza by Marcus Diaconus (69.2; 70.12; 75.3; 75.8; 76.14; 79.4; 84.6; 93.13; 103.6). Many instances from papyri collected by Preisigke, , Wörterb. d. griech. Pap. p. 202Google Scholar; see also below, p. 56.
12 Op. cit. (n. 11) 328 f.
13 Keydell, op. cit. (n. 1) 1.
14 A fairly complete list of Palladas', puns is to be found at RE xviii 3.167Google Scholar (W. Peek), and Zerwes, W., Palladas von Alexandrie, Diss. Tübingen, 1956 (typescript) 368–9.Google Scholar On reading aloud see Balogh, J., Philologus lxxxii (1927) 84 f., 202 f.Google Scholar
15 As noted by Irmscher, , Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift d. Humboldt-Universität, Gesellsch. u. sprachwiss. Reihe vi (1956/1957) 165.Google Scholar
16 Suggested by Bonanno, Teresa, Orpheus v (1958) 140 n. 66.Google Scholar
17 Tertullian Apol. 3, Ad Nat. i 3, Lactantius, Div. Inst. iv 7.4.Google Scholar
18 Blass, F., Hermes xxx (1895) 465 f.Google Scholar, Fuchs, H., Vigiliae Christianae iv (1950) 71 n. 7, 74 n. 13.Google Scholar
19 Calder, W. M., ‘Philadelphia and Montanism’, Bulletin of the John Rylands Library vii (1923) 351–2.Google Scholar At p. 340 no. 9 he cites an instance of φιλοχρήστωρ written incorrectly for φιλοχρίστωρ (an alternative form of φιλόχριατος).
20 Libanius, for example studiously avoids the words Χριστός and Χριστιανός throughout eleven fat Teubner volumes, calling Christ himself 
(or. xviii 178). Themistius quotes the Old Testament as λόγος τῶν Ἀσσνρίων (Downey, G., Studia Patristica v pt. m (1962) 480 f.Google Scholar). Even classicizing Christian writers like Procopius and Agathias tend to avoid specifically Christian terminology: see Alan, and Cameron, Averil, ‘Christianity and Tradition in the Historiography of the Late Empire,’ CQ xiv 2 (1964).Google Scholar
21 See Dudden, F. Homes, Life and Times of St. Ambrose ii (1935) 404–8Google Scholar and below p. 57.
22 Op. cit. (n. 1).
23 Op. cit. (n. 1) 3.
24 See his note on Constantine Porphyrogenitus De Caer. i (ii p. 4 Bonn).
25 Op. cit. (n. 11) 328.
26 See the discussion of the poem by Bowra, op. cit. (n. 1) 259 f.
27 Constantinopolis Christiana ii (1680) 174 f.
28 Jacobs, , Animadv. in Anth. Graec. ii 3 (1801) 244.Google Scholar
29 Cited from Calderini, A., Dizionario dei nomi geografici e topografici dell' Egitto greco-romano i (1935) 60.Google Scholar
29a Byz. Zeit. liii (1960) 2 f. Irmscher defends the lemma (see next note) but without successfully tackling the point that the motif of statues being melted down fits better into the context of late fourth century Alexandria (see p. 57 below) than fifth century Constantinople: cf. Demongeot, E., De l'unité à la division de l'empire romain, 395–410 (1950) 78Google Scholar, ‘ces troubles sont inconnus à Constantinople, ville récente et dépourvue de temples vénérables'.
30 As propounded by Bowra, op. cit. (n. 1) 266–7: challenged, in my opinion unsuccessfully, by Irmscher, , Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift d. Universität Rostock, Gesellsch. u. sprachwiss. Reihe xii (1963) 235 f.Google Scholar
31 x 90.1, 91.1 and ix 175.5, discussed in my article cited in n. 1.
32 Zerwes, op. cit. (n. 14) 269 f., shares my opinion that Palladas is referring to the Tychaion of Alexandria. It is perhaps worth noticing that according to Ps. Libanius (l.c.) the statue of Alexander that surmounted the Tychaion was flanked by Nikai. Palladas' Nikai? But ἐντυποῦντες, as Mr. P. M. Fraser has pointed out to me, suggests that Palladas' Nikai were bas-reliefs (cf. Plotinus v 8.6).
33 See Bowra, , Palladas, on Tyche, , CQ. x 2 (1960) 118 f.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34 Ammianus Marcellinus 22.11.7, a reference to be added, together with Scholasticus, Zacharias, Life of Sevens ed. Kügener, , Patrol. Orient, ii (1907) 33Google Scholar to Calderini's entry, op. cit. (n. 29) s.v. ‘Tychaion’.
35 Cod. Theod. xvi 10.10 and 11: even the Christian Socrates (Hist Eccl. v 16) says that Theophilus 
36 I am glad to note that Zerwes, op. cit. (n. 14) 203 f., shares this opinion as well: I was not able to consult his dissertation till my article was virtually complete.
37 Eunapius, Vit Soph. 472Google Scholar, Libanius, or. xxx 8Google Scholar, Förster iii 91–2.
38 EP. 47.3; cf. also Diaconus, Marcus, Life of St Porphyry § 65.Google Scholar
39 The διβέρσιον (diversium), another technical term of chariot racing, explained by Porphyrogenitus, ConstantineDe Caer, i 69 f.Google Scholar, i p. 336 Bonn, is alluded to, but not named at xvi 337: cf. Friedlaender ii8 525 f.
40 My interpretation entails the rejection of a scholion printed in the editio princeps according to which Patricius was an astrologer whose floruit fell under Jovian (363–4). It does not seem to have been noticed that this scholion was taken from Suidas' entry s.v. ‘Πατρίκιος’', and its application to the Patricius of our poem is, therefore, no more than at earliest a tenth-century guess (the date of Suidas), and more likely due to Lascaris himself. Although Chalcondyles' editio princeps of Suidas was not published till 1499, five years after Lascaris' edition of the Anthology, there is no reason to doubt that Lascaris had access to Suidas before then, for he actually owned one if not two manuscripts of the Lexicon himself (Suidas ed. Adler v (1938) 223, 261). Similarly the seemingly authoritative scholion on the eight poems dealing with Gessius (vii 681–8) is lifted from Suidas' entry s.v. ‘Γέσιος’ (with one sigma), and chronological considerations alone show that he is quite certainly the wrong Gessius (see RE vii 1324).
41 Cf. Pearce, J. W. E., Roman Imperial Coinage ix: Valentinian I–Theodosius I (1951) xliGoogle Scholar: ‘the die-cutter of a Theodosian Virtus Romanorum TRPS in my possession has inserted a cross in the body of the little Victory’.
42 Palladas, like most of his pagan, and not a few of his Christian, contemporaries, did not entertain a very high opinion of the monks: cf. xi 384 
Libanius complained that they ate ‘more than elephants’ (or. xxx 8), and Eunapius likened them to pigs (Vit. Soph. 472).
43 Petit, P., Libanius et la Vie Municipale à Antioche (1955) 192 f.CrossRefGoogle Scholar, with many references.
44 Naville, H.-A., Julien l'Apostat et sa philosophie du polythéisme (1877) 65 f.Google Scholar, and Bidez, , Vie de l'empereur Julien (1930) 307 f.Google Scholar The favours Julian showed to the Jews were inspired by the fact that he, like Gibbon, thought that ‘the Jews were a people which followed, the Christians a sect which deserted, the religion of their fathers’.
45 On belief in Athene Poliouchos in Palladas' day see the pagan Zosimus' story that it was she who dissuaded Alaric from sacking Athens (Hist Nov. v 6): charming, but false—the Goths did sack Athens.
46 Lacombrade, Chr., Synésios de Cyrène, Hellène et Chrétien (1951) 100Google Scholar n. 3, and see Harnack's remarks on the arch-pagan Porphyry, , Hibbert Journal x (1911) 68.Google Scholar
47 J. Maspero, op. cit. (n. 5) 188. It is often claimed that Egyptian Nationalism asserted itself in the form of Christianity, against all the evidence: see Maspero op. cit. 188 f., and especially Jones, A. H. M., ‘Were ancient heresies national or social movements in disguise?’ JTS x 2 (1959) 286 f.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
48 Theoph. ad Autol. i 9, Justin Apol. i 9, Sib. Or. viii 47, Clement Protr. iii 45.5, Eusebius, Praep. Ev. ii 5–6. I deal with this topic more fully in my article cited in n. 1.
49 Op. cit. (n. 1) 2, Reall, f. Ant. u. Christ, v (1962) 547.
50 Ausgang d. griech.-röm. Heidentums 2 (1929) 175.
51 Zacharias Scholasticus, Life of Severus, ed. Kügener, , Patrol. Orient. ii (1907) 18 f.Google Scholar, 22, 29, vi 60, ascribed by both the Palatinus and Planudes to Palladas, is a dedication to Isis: but I have given reasons for doubting the attribution in an article to appear in Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. n.s. x (1964).
52 Cf. ix 378.12, where Sarapis, having saved a murderer's life, warns him in a dream that he is being reserved for the cross 
The poem was probably written between the destruction of the Sarapeum and the erection of the church on its site (Rubenssohn, M., Phil Woch. xxxiii/iv [1903] 1028–9Google Scholar). Might not Sarapis be alluding by σταυρῷ to the church rising on the site of his temple, and warning the murderer that he cannot expect such lenient treatment now that the ‘tenant’ has changed? The play on the two meanings of σταυρός would be exactly in character for Palladas: Bowra indeed, CR x2 (1960) 93, has conjectured that he does in fact employ this very pun at vii 685.4.
53 Relatio iii 3, Seeck p. 281.8, and for the πολιοῦχος motif, cf. p. 281.36 ‘varios custodes urbibus cultus mens divina distribuit’, and the words of his friend Macrobius, ‘constat omnes urbes in alicuius dei esse tutela’ (Sat. iii 9).
54 Civ. Dei iv 14, 17. See Pearce, op. cit. (n. 41) for the survival of Victoria as a coin type: ‘accepted by both sides, by the pagans as the goddess to whom Rome owed her greatness, by the Christians as an angel from God’. Cf. also Baudrillart, A., Les Divinités de la Victoire en Grèce et en Italie d'après les textes et les monument-figurés (1898) 61–6.Google Scholar
I am grateful to Mr P. M. Fraser and Mr E. C. Yorke for reading an earlier draft of this article.
