The death of the Roman Emperor Julian provided Christians with the opportunity not only for the r... more The death of the Roman Emperor Julian provided Christians with the opportunity not only for the return of a line of Christian emperors, but also for the use of the emperor’s supposed last words as proof of the supremacy of Christ over all else. This article studies the different 'verba ultima' attributed to Julian by Eutychianus of Cappadocia, Philostorgius, and Theodoret and argues that Theodoret willfully edited the emperor’s last words as part of his apologetic and polemical agenda, to develop the emperor further into a character that aptly transmitted the fatalism of paganism and the triumph of Christianity.
Ammianus Marcellinus, from Soldier to Author, 2022
This chapter will outline and analyze Ammianus’ presentation of Julian’s Balkan itinerary, which ... more This chapter will outline and analyze Ammianus’ presentation of Julian’s Balkan itinerary, which scholars have not appreciated fully for the language, selection, and compression with which Ammianus produced his narrative. The historian uses singular language to describe the emperor’s movement from Augusta Rauracorum (Kaiseraugst) to Sirmium, and particularly emphasizes his entry into and reception at the latter city, which, I will argue, purposefully highlights the agency and appropriateness of the people of Sirmium in welcoming Julian and reflects Julian’s real concern with enhancing and communicating his legitimacy publicly during civil conflict by seizing Sirmium (Section II). I then discuss and explain how the historian used speed in his narrative to achieve three related goals simultaneously: to portray Julian as moving swiftly in the way an emperor should; to illustrate that Julian’s speed was one of his prime traits as a commander; and to focus on points and instances in the emperor’s journey from Gaul to Illyricum to Thrace that heighten his legitimacy while obscuring or minimizing those that could possibly threaten it (Section III). Having highlighted Ammianus’ notable emphases on Julian’s arrivals at particular cities, I will argue that cities such as Sirmium and Constantinople are best seen as narrative markers, positive signposts for Julian’s transition to sole emperor. Further, that the city of Serdica (Sofia), which scholars have tended to neglect in Julian’s journey, likely served as one of his (brief) residences during his march through the Balkans and that the historian has obscured this in his text out of regard for the emperor’s reputation. When Ammianus’ silence on Serdica is considered alongside his discussion of and explanation for the revolt against Julian at Aquileia, the only revolt at this time that we are told about, it seems that the historian viewed other cities as narrative obstacles, which were treated no less carefully than the markers (Section IV). Finally, I end by summarizing my main conclusions (Section V).
By the mid fourth century C.E., violently divergent Christian communities had developed across th... more 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 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. 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.
Studies on the representations of the fourth-century Roman Emperor Julian in Christian historiogr... more Studies on the representations of the fourth-century Roman Emperor Julian in Christian historiography have markedly increased in the last few decades. Recently, Elm (2012) has assessed, among other things, how Gregory of Nazianzus artfully renders Julian as a “criminal” in his two invectives against the emperor. And Hahn (2004) and Teitler (2013; 2014), in studies on violence under the emperor as recorded by Gregory and subsequent Christian critics, have shown that Christian portrayals of Julian as a persecutor are much exaggerated. My aim in this article is to follow these scholars in their assessments of Christian depictions of Julian by considering how fourth and fifth-century Christian writers fashioned him into a “persecutor,” with emphasis on the description of the emperor by the early fifth-century Latin church historian Rufinus of Aquileia (whose remarks have not been explored fully by scholars), and what their portrayals tell us about Julian, his Christian policy, and the historical “reality” when considered carefully alongside the emperor’s own writings. In so doing, I demonstrate that Julian consistently employed honor and not physical violence in creating new adherents and supporters. Moreover, I follow scholarship such as that of Salzman (2006) which advances the view that physical violence or coercion was not a predominant means used by Roman imperial government for converting individuals.
In 361 C.E., the Roman Emperor Julian engaged in a civil war with his cousin and Augustan superio... more In 361 C.E., the Roman Emperor Julian engaged in a civil war with his cousin and Augustan superior, Constantius II. It is well-known that Julian at this time focused, in part, on managing his public image in the Balkans by disseminating an open letter to the community at Athens, among others, which he wrote at Naissus (Niš) in a bid to seek public support against Constantius. However, Roman cities themselves could also play a role in managing an emperor’s image, such as by erecting 'miliaria' or milestones dedicated to him, which, I will argue, served as a public, practical, and prominent means for promoting Julian’s post-Constantius imperial profile in Illyricum and Thrace in late 361/early 362. My focus here is on a series of nine (fragmentary) columns dedicated to Julian from the municipal territory of Serdica (Sofia) that have hitherto not been identified as belonging to the same series and studied as such. Consequently, I consider the function of these milestones with their Latin inscriptions and what they contribute to our understanding of Julian as sole emperor and his relationship with Serdica after civil war.
It is my purpose here to support Dillon’s and Polleichtner’s suggestion, made in their English tr... more It is my purpose here to support Dillon’s and Polleichtner’s suggestion, made in their English translation and commentary, that Iamblichus’ letters had been collected into a volume, and published as such, and in the process to draw attention to the role that this philosophical correspondence played in social, political and scholastic settings in and after Iamblichus’ time. Furthermore, I argue that Iamblichus’ letters, in their original form before Stobaeus’ excerpting, perhaps were meant collectively to form a kind of Neoplatonic philosophical and political manual, since some addressees were former students turned imperial officeholders (under the Emperor Licinius) whom Iamblichus instructed on the ‘civic’ or ‘political virtues’, as transmitted from Plotinus through Porphyry. And if this is correct, then it would further support O’Meara’s conception of Neoplatonic political philosophy, that it was active, and the currently evolving image of Iamblichus, who was once simply considered a Neoplatonist magician or quack but who is now seen as more of a serious philosopher in his own right. Moreover, it has gone unnoticed that Iamblichus’ epistles became so influential that they were evidently being used for Platonic textual exegesis in the sixth-century Neoplatonic curricula at Athens and Alexandria under Damascius and Olympiodorus the Younger respectively.
Ammianus Marcellinus is a careful manipulator of language and narrative structure. This article s... more Ammianus Marcellinus is a careful manipulator of language and narrative structure. This article seeks to show through literary analysis that his description of the Emperor Constantius II (ut cunctator et cautus, 14.10.14) is not meant to be a positive evaluation but a negative one, especially when compared with how Ammianus renders the Caesar Julian (bellicosus ductor, 16.12.18), with consequences for how we should read Ammianus. Despite his failure to elaborate on Constantius’ second campaign in Raetia in 356 C.E. (16.12.15–16), or the possible loss of an earlier telling of the campaign via corruption of the textual transmission (Barnes 1998, 138), Ammianus’ is the fullest account available; and, in fact, there is enough in what we do know about the campaigning seasons of 354–59 on the northern frontiers to be able to discern Constantius and Julian’s strategies, and thus what each considered to be “achievement.”
My intention here is to reassess the early life of Dalmatius and propose a possible birthdate; th... more My intention here is to reassess the early life of Dalmatius and propose a possible birthdate; then explore his promotion to Caesar, and the reasons for it, in order to provide a somewhat fuller image of the young man whose star had risen in the last years of his uncle’s reign and yet met an ignominious end in the summer of A.D. 337; and finally, to revisit the consequences of that end, particularly the turbulent atmosphere and its bearing on an alleged Sarmatian campaign that summer by Constantius and his handling of military revolts in the East.
Studies of the Persian policy of Constantius II in the last years of his reign have looked at an ... more Studies of the Persian policy of Constantius II in the last years of his reign have looked at an interesting episode in the communications of Strategius Musonianus, Constantius’ praetorian prefect of the East, with Tamshapur, a key satrap of Shapur II. The historian Ammianus Marcellinus does not explicitly tell us that Constantius approved of Musonianus’ activities, and so some scholars have assumed that the prefect acted independently. However, a reappraisal of Ammianus’ text supports the alternative view that Musonianus actually acted with Constantius’ full knowledge and approval.
The death of the Roman Emperor Julian provided Christians with the opportunity not only for the r... more The death of the Roman Emperor Julian provided Christians with the opportunity not only for the return of a line of Christian emperors, but also for the use of the emperor’s supposed last words as proof of the supremacy of Christ over all else. This article studies the different 'verba ultima' attributed to Julian by Eutychianus of Cappadocia, Philostorgius, and Theodoret and argues that Theodoret willfully edited the emperor’s last words as part of his apologetic and polemical agenda, to develop the emperor further into a character that aptly transmitted the fatalism of paganism and the triumph of Christianity.
Ammianus Marcellinus, from Soldier to Author, 2022
This chapter will outline and analyze Ammianus’ presentation of Julian’s Balkan itinerary, which ... more This chapter will outline and analyze Ammianus’ presentation of Julian’s Balkan itinerary, which scholars have not appreciated fully for the language, selection, and compression with which Ammianus produced his narrative. The historian uses singular language to describe the emperor’s movement from Augusta Rauracorum (Kaiseraugst) to Sirmium, and particularly emphasizes his entry into and reception at the latter city, which, I will argue, purposefully highlights the agency and appropriateness of the people of Sirmium in welcoming Julian and reflects Julian’s real concern with enhancing and communicating his legitimacy publicly during civil conflict by seizing Sirmium (Section II). I then discuss and explain how the historian used speed in his narrative to achieve three related goals simultaneously: to portray Julian as moving swiftly in the way an emperor should; to illustrate that Julian’s speed was one of his prime traits as a commander; and to focus on points and instances in the emperor’s journey from Gaul to Illyricum to Thrace that heighten his legitimacy while obscuring or minimizing those that could possibly threaten it (Section III). Having highlighted Ammianus’ notable emphases on Julian’s arrivals at particular cities, I will argue that cities such as Sirmium and Constantinople are best seen as narrative markers, positive signposts for Julian’s transition to sole emperor. Further, that the city of Serdica (Sofia), which scholars have tended to neglect in Julian’s journey, likely served as one of his (brief) residences during his march through the Balkans and that the historian has obscured this in his text out of regard for the emperor’s reputation. When Ammianus’ silence on Serdica is considered alongside his discussion of and explanation for the revolt against Julian at Aquileia, the only revolt at this time that we are told about, it seems that the historian viewed other cities as narrative obstacles, which were treated no less carefully than the markers (Section IV). Finally, I end by summarizing my main conclusions (Section V).
By the mid fourth century C.E., violently divergent Christian communities had developed across th... more 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 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. 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.
Studies on the representations of the fourth-century Roman Emperor Julian in Christian historiogr... more Studies on the representations of the fourth-century Roman Emperor Julian in Christian historiography have markedly increased in the last few decades. Recently, Elm (2012) has assessed, among other things, how Gregory of Nazianzus artfully renders Julian as a “criminal” in his two invectives against the emperor. And Hahn (2004) and Teitler (2013; 2014), in studies on violence under the emperor as recorded by Gregory and subsequent Christian critics, have shown that Christian portrayals of Julian as a persecutor are much exaggerated. My aim in this article is to follow these scholars in their assessments of Christian depictions of Julian by considering how fourth and fifth-century Christian writers fashioned him into a “persecutor,” with emphasis on the description of the emperor by the early fifth-century Latin church historian Rufinus of Aquileia (whose remarks have not been explored fully by scholars), and what their portrayals tell us about Julian, his Christian policy, and the historical “reality” when considered carefully alongside the emperor’s own writings. In so doing, I demonstrate that Julian consistently employed honor and not physical violence in creating new adherents and supporters. Moreover, I follow scholarship such as that of Salzman (2006) which advances the view that physical violence or coercion was not a predominant means used by Roman imperial government for converting individuals.
In 361 C.E., the Roman Emperor Julian engaged in a civil war with his cousin and Augustan superio... more In 361 C.E., the Roman Emperor Julian engaged in a civil war with his cousin and Augustan superior, Constantius II. It is well-known that Julian at this time focused, in part, on managing his public image in the Balkans by disseminating an open letter to the community at Athens, among others, which he wrote at Naissus (Niš) in a bid to seek public support against Constantius. However, Roman cities themselves could also play a role in managing an emperor’s image, such as by erecting 'miliaria' or milestones dedicated to him, which, I will argue, served as a public, practical, and prominent means for promoting Julian’s post-Constantius imperial profile in Illyricum and Thrace in late 361/early 362. My focus here is on a series of nine (fragmentary) columns dedicated to Julian from the municipal territory of Serdica (Sofia) that have hitherto not been identified as belonging to the same series and studied as such. Consequently, I consider the function of these milestones with their Latin inscriptions and what they contribute to our understanding of Julian as sole emperor and his relationship with Serdica after civil war.
It is my purpose here to support Dillon’s and Polleichtner’s suggestion, made in their English tr... more It is my purpose here to support Dillon’s and Polleichtner’s suggestion, made in their English translation and commentary, that Iamblichus’ letters had been collected into a volume, and published as such, and in the process to draw attention to the role that this philosophical correspondence played in social, political and scholastic settings in and after Iamblichus’ time. Furthermore, I argue that Iamblichus’ letters, in their original form before Stobaeus’ excerpting, perhaps were meant collectively to form a kind of Neoplatonic philosophical and political manual, since some addressees were former students turned imperial officeholders (under the Emperor Licinius) whom Iamblichus instructed on the ‘civic’ or ‘political virtues’, as transmitted from Plotinus through Porphyry. And if this is correct, then it would further support O’Meara’s conception of Neoplatonic political philosophy, that it was active, and the currently evolving image of Iamblichus, who was once simply considered a Neoplatonist magician or quack but who is now seen as more of a serious philosopher in his own right. Moreover, it has gone unnoticed that Iamblichus’ epistles became so influential that they were evidently being used for Platonic textual exegesis in the sixth-century Neoplatonic curricula at Athens and Alexandria under Damascius and Olympiodorus the Younger respectively.
Ammianus Marcellinus is a careful manipulator of language and narrative structure. This article s... more Ammianus Marcellinus is a careful manipulator of language and narrative structure. This article seeks to show through literary analysis that his description of the Emperor Constantius II (ut cunctator et cautus, 14.10.14) is not meant to be a positive evaluation but a negative one, especially when compared with how Ammianus renders the Caesar Julian (bellicosus ductor, 16.12.18), with consequences for how we should read Ammianus. Despite his failure to elaborate on Constantius’ second campaign in Raetia in 356 C.E. (16.12.15–16), or the possible loss of an earlier telling of the campaign via corruption of the textual transmission (Barnes 1998, 138), Ammianus’ is the fullest account available; and, in fact, there is enough in what we do know about the campaigning seasons of 354–59 on the northern frontiers to be able to discern Constantius and Julian’s strategies, and thus what each considered to be “achievement.”
My intention here is to reassess the early life of Dalmatius and propose a possible birthdate; th... more My intention here is to reassess the early life of Dalmatius and propose a possible birthdate; then explore his promotion to Caesar, and the reasons for it, in order to provide a somewhat fuller image of the young man whose star had risen in the last years of his uncle’s reign and yet met an ignominious end in the summer of A.D. 337; and finally, to revisit the consequences of that end, particularly the turbulent atmosphere and its bearing on an alleged Sarmatian campaign that summer by Constantius and his handling of military revolts in the East.
Studies of the Persian policy of Constantius II in the last years of his reign have looked at an ... more Studies of the Persian policy of Constantius II in the last years of his reign have looked at an interesting episode in the communications of Strategius Musonianus, Constantius’ praetorian prefect of the East, with Tamshapur, a key satrap of Shapur II. The historian Ammianus Marcellinus does not explicitly tell us that Constantius approved of Musonianus’ activities, and so some scholars have assumed that the prefect acted independently. However, a reappraisal of Ammianus’ text supports the alternative view that Musonianus actually acted with Constantius’ full knowledge and approval.
Uploads
Papers by Moysés Marcos
Book Reviews by Moysés Marcos
Books by Moysés Marcos