Historia Augusta

As we know, the Historia Augusta is one of the most enigmatic literary sources of Late Antiquity. Manuscripts tend to attribute the authorship of this collection of emperors’ biographies from Hadrian to Carinus (with a lacuna from Philip the Arab to Valerian) to six authors who would have reportedly composed this work during the reign of Diocletian or Constantine the Great. At the present time, there is almost a general consensus in historiography on the view that this work, so abundant in fantastic and curious information, was written by one author who would have lived many decades later than he would seem to suggest himself (the composition is now most frequently
dated to between 395 and 406). While the Historia Augusta and its author’s perception of religions (primarily, Judaism and Christianity) have continued to enjoy enduring popularity among scholars for more than a century, there has not appeared, to date, any relevant synthetic-oriented publication dealing with the author’s knowledge of religions. Th ere are many in-depth studies focused on analyzing each passage of the HA in great detail, but they would tend to pay too much attention to apparently absorbing excerpts, oft en taken
out of context. Th is practice would result in reaching many far-fetched conclusions, which, when confronted with some other fragments of the Historia Augusta, seemed to lose their appeal. For instance, the author could emphasize the good emperor’s generous gift s to the temples (Alex. Sev. 51, 1–3), yet elsewhere in the text he would stress the need for restraint in providing
lavish donations to religious shrines (Alex. Sev. 44, 9; Max. Balb. 1, 2–4). At one point, he would highlight the auspicious role of pagan rites in averting natural disasters (Gord. 26, 1–2), only to complain of their ineff ectiveness in a different passage of his work (Gal. 5, 2-6). Making off erings to the gods is represented as a warrant of their benevolence, and consequently ensure military victory over the external enemy (Ca. 9, 1-3), whereas in a different passage such sacrifi ces would not help at all (Gord. 27, 6). In eff ect, some authors would seek references and trends in the HA, which were at least controversial. For this reason, I believe that referring only to the author’s comments on religious matters, as featured throughout the Historia Augusta, shall allow us to gain a better insight into his view of religions. Moreover, I would see it as the key to understand the author’s views and, by extension, to determine the approximate time frame of the composition of his work. I have been concerned with discussing the author’s own knowledge of religions (traditional Greco-Roman religion, Judaism, Christianity) as well as with showing how he perceived the religious knowledge of his audience. My monograph contains 10 chapters and 2 appendixes. Chapter 1 deals with the questions of the dating of the Historia Augusta and the sources
used by the author. Th e next fi ve chapters are devoted to discussing the place of Roman religion in the Historia Augusta: gods and off erings, colleges of priests, temples, feast days, and home worship. Th e second part of the monograph is dedicated to the perception of Judaism (Ch. 7) and Christianity (chapters 8-10 on the role of Christianity, allusions to that religion, citations
from the Bible, and Biblical fi gures) in the HA. It is followed by two annexes which are concerned with the issues of the authorship of this collection of biographies and the history of the manuscripts that preserve the work. While the author of the Historia Augusta affi rms his commitment to pagan world-view, his declarations would not correspond with his actual knowledge of Roman religion. Although in all the cases where he would copy his sources with accuracy (e.g., those of Marius Maximus and Ignotus), no major errors could be found, he oft en fails to avoid stating incorrect information in further sections of his composition (where he would fairly freely draw on or refer to the works by Herodian, Dexippus, the Kaisergeschichte,
Aurelius Victor, Eutropius, Nicomachus Flavianus the Elder), and some of his statements are questionable. Among other things, he delivers inaccurate information on colleges of priests (for instance, the author misrepresents the actual competence of pontifi ces and augurs, oblivious of the fact that the emperors continued to hold the title pontifex maximus until the reign
of Gratian) and, perhaps most notably, the fundamental principles of paganworship: offerings and calendar. In the author’s opinion, the emperors would make sacrifices of lions (Max. Balb. 11, 1–4), which would point to his inadequate knowledge of sacrificial rites. In addition, he portrays Severus
Alexander, whom he considers as the ideal of a ruler, visiting the temple on the Capitoline Hill on every seventh day (Alex. Sev. 43, 5), even though attending religious ceremonies on every seventh day was a Christian (and Jewish) custom. It would have emerged among the (crypto-)pagan circles at a much later time, apparently on the influence of Christian observance
(a similar practice of celebrating Jupiter’s feast day is mentioned in Caesarius of Arles’ sermons; of course, it should not be seen as an indication of such a late period of the composition of the Historia Augusta). He feels obliged to explain to the reader the meaning of the hecatomb, taking the clues from the Iliad, not the practice. In a similar fashion, he shows his utter ignorance of the principles of ritual purity in his dubious account of the birth of Severus Alexander at the temple of Alexander the Great (Alex. Sev. 5, 1–2; 13, 1). On the other hand, while the author of the Historia Augusta offers a negative picture of Christianity at times, he is relatively well-acquainted with the Bible. Even though in two passages he would state incorrect information
drawn from the Bible (one of these excerpts refers to the eating habits of Heliogabalus, who would reputedly eat ostrich meat in accordance with the Jewish precepts: Hel. 28, 4, and the other one speaks of the maximum length of a human lifetime allegedly attained by Moses, namely 125 years of age: Claud. 2, 4), but he is familiar with some Biblical figures never mentioned
by any other pagan author and he may have quoted from the Bible or referred to it in several passages. He might also have known the writings of Jerome and entered into polemics with them. Signifi cantly, in his account of the maximum length of a human age (Claud. 2, 4) or Vituriga’s physical strength (Quad. Tyr. 12, 3), he would draw comparisons with the Bible, not
the world of Greco-Roman mythology and history. Not only is he familiar with the fi gure of Samson, but he also assumes that his readers would have no difficulty understanding an allusion to that Biblical protagonist. Likewise, in his account on the length of a human lifetime, he makes reference to a Biblical
fi gure (Moses), not the renowned Greeks or Romans known for their longevity. In his depiction of Severus Alexander’s strictness and justice (Alex. Sev. 36, 1–3), he paraphrases the quote from the Gospel that says “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.” At this point, we are once again confronted with the question of when the author adhering to the pagan worldview
could have been writing his work, considering the fact that he may not have felt obliged to clarify the fi gure of Samson to the reader, while feeling it was necessary to explain the matters such as the meaning of hecatomb, the origin of the worship of Venus Calva, and how oft en a good practising pagan should visit temples. As he may have been most probably affi liated
with the families of Symmachii and Nicomachii Flavii, who continued their devotion to Roman tradition, and at the same time directed his writings at the Roman senatorial class, many of whom had converted to Christianity in the late 4th century (following the Battle on the Frigidus), it is not very likely
that the author of the Historia Augusta would have belonged to the generation of Symmachus the Elder and Nicomachus Flavianus the Elder or that of Nicomachus Flavianus the Younger. As a matter of fact, it would not have
been necessary at all to explain to them the meaning of hecatomb or tell the pagans how oft en they should go to temples. On the other hand, it would be difficult to expect them to be able to recognize the citations and fi gures from
the Bible, despite the presence of Christians in the Senate and their family connections with the pagan aristocracy. Th is would lead us to the conclusion that the author of the Historia Augusta must have been growing up in the times when the practising of pagan religion had already been forbidden,
pagan temples were desecrated or demolished, colleges of priests ceased to exist, and a majority of the Roman elites would have been not only baptized but also brought up and educated in Christianity, and would think along
the lines of the Christian faith. It was in this particular environment that the ignorance of pagan practices combined with attitudes sympathetic with traditional Roman culture was definitely something very natural