The force of these laws was to make Jews forfeit slaves who were either
Christians or members of any other non-Jewish religion. These slaves
acquired freedom, hut their Jewish owners suffered no extra penalty,
and they were apparently not prohibited from owning such slaves in the
future provided they did not circumcise them. Eusebius in his
Life of Constantine speaks of this Jewish law of Constantine
and adds a fine to its provisions; the Theodosian Code thus
provides
interesting evidence for the authenticity of Eusebius source for this
edict: "He [Constantine] also passed a law to the effect that no Christian
should remain in servitude to a Jewish master, on the ground that it could
not be tight that those whom the Saviour had ransomed should be
subjected to the yoke of slavery by a people who had slain the prophets
and the Lord Himself. If any were found hereafter in these
circumstances, the slave was to be set at liberty, and the master punished
by a fine."85
Constantine also promulgated an edict which forbade the molesting of
Jewish converts to Christianity. His law is vague and unsatisfactory.
Constantius had to supplement it by further legislation to make it
effective: "The Jews are not permitted to disturb any person who, once a
Jew, has become a Christian, or inflict other injury upon him; insults are
to be punished according to the seriousness of the attack committed,
etc.."86
Constantius followed his father as ruler of the Roman Empire in 337. It is
sometimes stated that he, as an Arian, was more favorable
legislation, which is harsher in tone than that of the previous reign. In the
year following his accession he considerably strengthened the restrictions on
Jewish slave-owners:87
Parkes says that this insistence on the rights of Christian slaves at the
very beginning of the law-making power of the church is probably due
to two causes.88 For a Jew to circumcise his slave was a natural
action and one intended for the slave's benefit, since in that way he became in
some sort a member of the owner's family and shared in its religious
observances. It would, however, be easily interpreted by the church, if
the slave had previously been a Christian, as a hostile action. The second
reason was the extent to which Christianity had penetrated into the lower
strata of society. If the Jews were, as is supposed, important as slave
traders during this time, they could harm the church considerably if they
were allowed to convert their slaves to Judaism.
Another enactment in 339 by Constantius was clearer and more specific
than the earlier and brief Constantinian law prohibiting the reconversion,
of Christianized Jews:89
This law suggests that many Jews had deserted the synagogue after the
legalization of Christianity throughout the Roman Empire. With-
were attached to those who molested converts to Christianity from the synagogue.
This was more justifiable than the second part of the law which makes it a crime
to become a Jew. The anti-Jewish feeling is strong in the second sentence, for
the synagogues are called conciliabula for the first time. This word was never
used of a religious building, for it was one which at this time in Roman slang
meant a brothel. The hatred of the Christian writers who now accompanied the
Emperor in his official entourage was entering into the official parlance of the
laws.
Some fourteen years later Constantius enacted another law at tempting
to reaffirm this prohibition against Christian apostasy to Judaism:
"According to an already existing law, if any one once a Christian has
become a Jew and has associated with sacrilegious groups, we decree
that all his goods be confiscated to the imperial fisc after the accusation
has been proved."90 Since this old law had to be reissued it would
seem that backsliders were still common, and a problem to Christianity at this
period.
Constantius also promulgated the first of many imperial edicts to prohibit
intermarriage between Jews and Christians. This represents imperial recognition
of the earlier canon laws at Elvira and Nicaea and of the writings by church
fathers such as Hilary and Eusebius of Caesarea. The law provides that any Jew
who married a Christian woman employed in the imperial weaving factories was
to be put to death and the woman returned to the factory:
There is no extant legislation by Julian or Jovian concerning the Jews, but
Julian's letter to the Jewish patriarch in Palestine (Epistle 25)
implies that he had re-moved some of their taxes, although these are unspecified.
Parkes thinks that the Law of Gratian reimposing the burdens of curial office
suggests that Julian bad released the Jews from this onerous
responsibility.92 There is no indisputable evidence that Julian ever
abolished
Julian's successor, Jovian, who ruled only a few months, was not a
fanatic, and his policy of toleration toward Jews and pagans was
followed by Valens and Valentinian. The only legislation concerning the
Jews from these reigns was that of Valentinian, and it was a pro-Jewish
protest against the violation of Jewish synagogues: "Command those
who violate the synagogues of the Jewish law under the guise of lawful
billeting to depart: since it is lawful for them to occupy private homes
but not places of religious worship."94 Thus Valentinian seems to
have been friendly and tolerant to the Jews, and characteristically the only
incident of his rule which was remembered by later chroniclers
concerning the Jews was that "he gave gardens to the pagans for their
sacrifices, and the same to the Jews of Antioch for their
worship."95
Canon 29 from the Council of Laodicaea stresses the difference between the
Sabbath and the Lord's Day. It orders Christians not to "Judaize" (imitate the
Jews), but rather to work on the Sabbath and rest upon Sunday: "It is not right
that Christians should 'Judaize and be idle on Saturday; rather they should be
busy on that day. Moreover it is much more preferable for Christians who wish to
rest to do this upon the Lord's day in honor of Him. But if Christians have been
found 'Judaizing let them be anathematized by Christ."97 Canons
37 and 38 are reminiscent of Hilary and the canons of the earlier councils, since
they attempt to prohibit close contact between Christians and Jews. Canon 37
requires Christians not to accept gifts from the feasts of Jews and
heretics, and denies Christians the right to feast with these persons: "It is
not proper that Christians accept gifts which are sent by Jews or heretics,
nor celebrate feasts with them."98 Canon 38 declares that
Christians are not to accept unleavened bread from the Jews nor take part in
their festivals: "It is not proper for Christians to accept unleavened bread from
the Jews, and take part in their impieties." 99 These regulations
taken together certainly leave a strong impression that even in the fourth
century there were not only Judaic practices in the Asiatic church, but
also there was actual religious fellowship with the Jewish inhabitants.
The Apostolic Canons, which are a Syrian compilation of the
mid-fourth century, strengthen this impression. They deal in still further
detail with religious fellowship between the clergy and the Jews in that
very place where the violence of the monks was fiercest against the
Jews, Alexandria. Canon 69 repeats the prohibition against feasting or
fasting with the Jews: "If any"
bishop or other cleric fasts with the Jews or celebrates festal days with them or
accepts gifts from their festivals, such as unleavened bread or anything else
similar, he shall be excluded from the Clergy; and if a layman does these
things, he shall be segregated from the flock."100 Furthermore,
Christians are forbidden to enter a synagogue under the threat of the same
punishment: "If any cleric has gone to pray in a synagogue of the Jews or
heretics, he is to be removed from the clergy and segregated from the
flock."101 Another canon forbids Christians to tend the lamps of
heathen temples or of Jewish synagogues on the feast days: "If any Christian
brings oil into a temple of the pagans or into a synagogue of the Jews or lights
their lamps at the time of their festivals, he is to be segregated from the
flock."102 This is clearly a reference to Christian servants or
slaves who performed duties on the Sabbath which were prohibited to orthodox
Jews. The ecclesiastical legislation is in this case complementary and
supplementary to that of the Roman emperors, beginning with Constantine, who
made
such an effort to prohibit Jewish ownership of Christian slaves and servants.
A final Apostolic Canon, No. 62, seems to date part of the collection
back to the time of Julian, for it orders Christians not to deny their holy
faith from fear of the Jews and heretics; seemingly the only period to
which this order might have application in the fourth century would be
that during the brief reign of the Apostate: "If any cleric makes a denial
through natural, human fear of Jews pagans, or heretics: if he denies the
name of Christ, he is to be expelled from the Church: if he denies his
own rank, he shall be deposed from office. If he does penance, he shall
be received back [into the church] as a layman.103
The death of Valentinian marked the end of an era for the Jews in
the Roman Empire. The fifty-year era of mild repression was at an end;
the era of the degradation of Jewry was at hand. The violent bitterness
against the Jews manifested by the Christian fathers in the years just
preceding Gratian's reign presaged a dark period ahead for the people of
Israel.
The Jewish people broke out into maddening noise; the circumcised
blew their trumpets and rejoiced that Julian was a magician and a
worshipper of idols. They saw again the image of the beast on his gold
pieces; they again viewed the bull of shame and danced around it with
trumpets and timbals, for they recognized in this beast their ancient
golden calf. The heathen bull, imprinted on their hearts, he stamped on
his coins for the delectation of the Jews, who were enamored of him. The
circumcised blew their trumpets and behaved like madmen. Jerusalem
put to shame the accursed crucifiers who had dared to announce that they
would rebuild the ruins their sins had wrought. Fire broke out and
destroyed the scholars who had read in Daniel that the desolation would
endure forever. Look, Christians live in peace, free from the possessed,
free from contact with the servants of the devil.In the writings of the
pseudo-Ephraem, composed at Nisibis perhaps forty years after the real Ephraem's
death, there are more fulminations against the Jews.109 In
De
Magis it is stated: "He that eateth with the magicians shall not eat the
body of our Lord, and he that drinketh with the enchanters shall not drink the
blood of the Messiah, and he that eateth with the Jews shall not inherit life
eternal. Everyone that hath eaten and drunken and mingled with the Jews entereth
thither into the accusation that he hath become the comrade of the
crucifiers."110
The Syriac church father Aphrahat also was violently anti-Semitic, though milder
than Ephraem. In his Homilies, written ca. 345, he puts forth an
ordered exposition of the Christian faith to a questioner." In Homily
I, he bids each of his readers abstain from observing the hours,
Sabbaths, new moons, and annual festivals of the Jews. In Homily
XI
(de
circumcisione) he says that those who are circumcised in heart are
blessed, and are born again in the waters of the second circumcision. The next,
Homily XII (de paschale), concerns the
observance of
Easter and the Passover. The great Jewish festival can only be kept in Jerusalem,
says Aphrahat, though the Jews still think they can keep it in their dispersion.
They even dare to make an ark, although Jeremiah said it could never be made
again. These are typical specimens of Aphrahat's thought. On the whole he makes
little direct reference to the Judaism of his time. Yet he knew a good deal about
the Jews and their doctrines from close contact with them. He seems to have
feared lest some of his flock would be exposed to the danger of being led astray
by Jewish practices and arguments.
Athanasius, the orthodox Alexandrine bishop, has some hard things
to say of the Jews. In his Oratio de incarnatione verbi he claims
that the Jews mock the faith of the Christians and scoff at the true prophecies
of the incarnation."112 St. Basil also had little use for Jews. In his
Homily XXIV he says: "The Jews fight with the pagans, but
both combat the Christians, just as the Assyrians and others were enemies to the
ancient Israel. We Christians thus should avoid the blasphemy of the
Jews who slaughtered God's Son, fearing contamination from
them."113 In Basil's Commentary on Isaiah there
are
further anti-Jewish testimonies. The Jews tore out God's eyes when they nailed
the Savior to the cross. Furthermore the Blood of the Son is upon them and upon
their children forevermore."114 The Jews have
Gregory of Nyssa and Gregory Nazianzen continue this tradition. The
former compiled a lengthy Testimonia adversus Judaeos which
presents Biblical texts to the confusion of the Jews on the following
subjects:116
This catalogue of anti-Jewish points of argumentation has been included
here because it is very typical of material used in other works against the
Jews which were being composed at this time. There is no treatise of
similar size among the writings of Gregory of Nazianzen against the
Jews, but scattered through his five orations against Julian there are
bitter comments on their activities during his reign."117
Far more harmful to the Jews than any of the writers previously
noted was St. John Chrysostom of Antioch. A generation after Hilary
Yet this was the man who has left us the most complete picture of
the Christian attitude toward the Jews in the century of the victory of the
church."118 Only Jerome among the church fathers has contributed
a comparable body of writing about Judaism. In Chrysostom's discourses
there is no sneer too mean or gibe too bitter to fling at the Jews. No text
is too remote, no argument too caustic, or blasphemy too startling for
him to employ. The only explanation for his bitterness is the very close
fellowship between the Jews and Christians of Antioch."119 There
is no suggestion that the Jews are immoral or vicious or that Christians were
corrupted in morals or orthodoxy by contact with them. Only one
contemporary event is related, apart from general denunciations against
visiting synagogues at times of Jewish feast or fast. This is the case of
the Christian woman who took an oath in the house of a Jew, because
she believed a vow taken in the Jewish manner was more binding than
any other. To Chrysostom's eyes the crime was not only the Jewish oath,
but also the circumstance that a Christian woman had been taken into a
Jewish house.120
There is no material in these sermons for a study of contemporary
Jewish life, for events and beliefs of centuries earlier are quoted as if
contemporary. Using Psalm XCVI, 37, he states that the Jews
sacrificed their sons and daughters to devils; they outraged nature, and
overthrew from their foundations the laws of relationship. They have become
worse
than wild beasts, and for no reason at all; with their own hands they
murder their offspring to worship the avenging devils who are the foes of
our life.121 The synagogues of the Jews are the
The Jewish pretense that all their misfortunes were caused by Rome is nonsense,
for it was not the power of the Caesars, but the wrath of God which destroyed
the Jews. It is foolish for the Jews to imagine that God will ever allow the Jews
to rebuild their Temple or return to Jerusalem, for He has rejected them; their
experience with Julian should convince them of that.129 Since
God hates the Jews, it is the duty of Christians to hate them, too. He who has no
limits in his love of Christ must have no limits in his battle with those who
hate Him. "I hate the Jews," Chrysostom exclaims, "for they have the Law and
they insult it."130
From the above passages it is evident that Chrysostom's Jew was a theological
necessity rather than a living person. If he looked different from the actual
Jews living in Antioch, this was part of the malice of the Jew, one of the
snares of the devil, set to catch the unwary Christian. One of the most
influential figures in fourth century politics was Ambrose, the Christian
statesman and bishop of Milan. His attitude toward the Jews is also known in full
detail from his two letters on the subject of the burning of the synagogue of
Callinicum in Asia by a Christian rabble, and his conflict with Theodosius the
Great over this affair.131 The first trouble between Ambrose and
Theodosius was
Ambrose heard about this at Aquileia and wrote to Theodosius in Milan
demanding that he rescind his orders.135 Ambrose approached the
subject delicately with anxiety about giving offense. After a careful preface he
protests vigorously against the rebuilding of the place of worship for God's
enemies. To do this would be apostasy for the bishop; if he refused to obey the
emperor and was punished he would be a martyr. Ambrose writes that he himself
would gladly take the bishop's place and suffer martyrdom. He would himself
gladly assume responsibility for the bishop's actions: "I am present here before
you and confess my guilt. I proclaim that I set the synagogue on fire or at least
ordered others to do so, so that no building should be left where Christ is
denied. If you ask me why I have not burned the local synagogue, I answer that
the judgment of God had already begun its destruction, so my intervention was not
needed."136 Ambrose feels that even if the bishop of Callinicum
were personally excused, it would be monstrous if a Jewish synagogue were to be
restored at the expense of the Christian state or Christian citizens: "Shall a
building be erected for perfidious Jews out of the spoils of the church? Shall
the patrimony which by the favor of Christ has been acquired for Christians be
transferred to the treasury of un-
To the contention that public order must be maintained, Ambrose replied that
during Julian's reign many churches had been destroyed by Jews and heathen two
at Damascus, and others at Alexandria, Gaza, Ascalon, Berytus, and various other
cities and the crimes had not been punished. Why then should there be such a
commotion about the burning of a mean provincial synagogue, a haunt of infidels,
a house of the impious, a hiding place for madmen, a virtually heathen temple
which was under the damnation of God Himself? Theodosius should not think of
restoring stolen properties, for it is inconceivable that a squalid synagogue of
the provinces could have possessed any treasures. The perfidious Jews had
obviously trumped up the robbery charges, so that on perjured evidence
Christians could be condemned to the mines, the axe, and the fire:
When Ambrose wrote this letter, Theodosius had already decided that his sentence
had been too harsh, and had decreed that the bishop of Callinicum would not have
to rebuild the synagogue himself, but that this should be done at state or civic
expense; but he insisted that the stolen properties should be returned and the
criminals prosecuted. This compromise was not acceptable to Ambrose, who
insisted that no reparation whatsoever ought to be made to the Jews, either by
individual Christians or by the Christian community, and that no punishment
should be inflicted on the Christian rioters.140
Theodosius ignored Ambrose's letter, and when the bishop returned to Milan, he
was refused royal audience.141 Thereupon Am-
This weakness on the part of Theodosius set a bad precedent, for supporters of
the church who later destroyed synagogues could claim immunity on the basis of
this misdeed. Dudden believes that the recent arrival of Theodosius in Italy and
his desire to avoid offending the Romans made him yield grudgingly in this
affair to the exigencies of a difficult political situation. He did not feel that
he could risk a crisis with the powerful bishop Ambrose at this
time.142
The church writer "Ambrosiaster," who was perhaps
himself
a converted Jew, is not much less harsh towards the Jews than Ambrose,
with whose works Ambrosiaster's were confused until the beginning of the
seventeenth century. In his Commentary on Romans IX he
declares that the Jews are to be treated as apostates from Christianity and as
men who have known the truth but have rejected it.143 A portion
of his
Sermon VII on the Kalends of January is even more
condemnatory.
Here he states:
One more citation may suffice to show Ambrosiaster's opinion of the Jews. In
his Quaestiones Veteris et Novi Testamenti he says that in time
to come the nation of the Jews will be punished, since they have been found
faithful to God neither in the Old nor the New Testament.144
Of sinister import for the future were attacks made on the synagogues during the
middle years of the fourth century. The first recorded were made by Innocentius,
bishop of Dertona in northern Italy, who died in 355. Under his command the
Christians together with their bishop destroyed the synagogue at Dertona and
erected a church on the site.145 They seem to have confiscated all
the property of the Jews in the town. In addition Innocentius, after destroying
the synagogue of the Jews, offered all living in Dertona baptism or expulsion. At
about the same time the Christians are said to have seized the Jewish synagogue
at Tipasa in Mauritania and to have consecrated it as a church.146
This information reaches us through the Passion of St. Salsa.
According to the Passion, Salsa was a Christian daughter, aged
fourteen, of pagan parents. One day she accompanied her father and mother to the
festival of the dragon which was being celebrated in Tipasa's mid-town sanctuary.
During the festivities Salsa slipped
away, obtained the dragon's head, and threw it into the sea. On returning
to fetch the rest of the body she was caught, cut to pieces, and thrown into the
sea. The dragon Sanctuary she violated became a synagogue and finally was
consecrated as the Church of Salsa, according to this pious
tale.147
Thirty years later the Christians burned a synagogue in Rome, and Ambrose
considered that the cause of the usurper Maximus' downfall was that he compelled
the Christians to rebuild it and thereby he forfeited all the sympathy of the
Roman Christians.148 Ambrose's own actions when a Synagogue
at Callinicum on the eastern frontier was destroyed in 388 have already been
discussed. There is, thus, evidence from Italy, Africa, and Asia of these acts of
vandalism during the middle years of the fourth century; acts sanctioned and
encouraged by the church fathers.
While fathers such as Chrysostom, Ambrose, and Ambrosiaster were thus writing
violent anti-semitic propaganda, and synagogue destruction was getting under way
throughout the empire, Roman officialdom took an increasingly strong stand
against the Jews. The emperor Gratian, who assumed the purple in 375, was a man
of different temperament from his predecessor, the easy going Valentinian.
Gratian at the time of his accession was a boy of sixteen filled with fanatic
religious zeal. Early in his rule (383) the Jews were forced to shoulder once
again the burden of the decurionate:
This law was the first which really infringed on Judaism as a lawful religion,
for the enactment placed Judaism on a very inferior plane to Christianity, since
all Christian priests had exemption from the curial burdens. This law was
followed by one which deprived the con vert to Judaism of testamentary rights
and applied the same penalty
to the Jew who converted him. A charge might even be preferred up to five
years after the death of the accused person, and his descendants robbed of
this inheritance: 150
The sharp wording of this law shows the fanaticism of the youthful Gratian, who
wished to protect Catholicism wherever possible. Quite naturally, therefore, he
undertook to prevent the possession or purchase of Christian slaves by Jews, as
Constantine and Constantius
The punishment for Jew's apprehended in unlawful ownership of Christian slaves
is not specified by this law, and this omission seems to argue that it was
probably a fine at the discretion of the judges and not torture or execution. For
capital punishment was usually specified if required in the Theodosian Code.
The restrictions placed upon the Jews by Gratian were not lifted by his
successor, Theodosius the Great, himself famed as a champion of
orthodoxy. He continued Gratian's legislation, widening the social gulf
between Jews and Christians by the enactment of a law which made it
adultery for a Christian man or woman to marry a Jew: "Let no Jew take
a Christian woman to wife, nor any Christian seek marriage with a
Jewess. For if any one admits anything of this sort, he will be charged
with his crime just as if he has committed adultery, and furthermore
liberty for accusations of this nature has been granted to the general
public."152 Note that anyone is allowed to make the terrible
accusation;this left an opening for all the evils of delation.
The concern for orthodoxy which characterized all of Theodosius legal
enactments is also evident in his prescription for the Jews to marry
among themselves only according to Christian practices; they might not
contract two marriages at the same time and had to observe the Christian
tables of affinity: "No Jew shall retain his own marriage customs, nor
seek marriage according to the law of the Jews, nor possess several
wives at the same time."153 Theodosius also may have restricted
the building of synagogues for the first time. Juster cites a passage from the
work of Zeno, bishop of Verona (ob. 380), which makes reference to such a
law.154 Therefore there was probably some such edict in force
before Zeno's death. Zeno's statement, "If Jews or pagans were allowed, or if
they wished, they would build their
synagogues and temples more beautifully," may, as Parkes points out,
refer only to a prohibition against altering buildings which already existed;
for the church was ever jealous of beautiful synagogues.155
As befitted an able administrator, Theodosius was always on guard to preserve
internal peace, amid several times he had to repress anti-Jewish rioters and
anti-Jewish discrimination. These riots were caused partly by the ever-increasing
economic distress of the empire, which made wealthy members of a minority sect
perfect targets for violence, and partly by such attacks upon Judaism as those
of Ephraem and especially the popular anti Jewish orator, Chrysostom. In 390,
only three years after the fiery orations of Chrysostom, Theodosius was obliged
to forbid the prefect of Egypt to impose special taxes upon the Jews and
Samaritans in connection with the duties of Navicularii, who
fulfilled the burdensome and ill-paid function of supplying the two capitals with
grain:
In 392 Theodosius, in another vain effort to halt the steady attack on ancient
Jewish privileges, felt called upon to insist on the internal liberty of the
Jewish communities, which was being infringed upon by imperial officials
who canceled the excommunications of heretical by orthodox
Jews:157
A year later, in 393, this law, which must have been a relief to the leaders of
the Jewish communities all over the empire, was followed by another in which
Theodosius insisted upon the legality of the Jewish sect. This new law implies
general anti-Jewish feeling and anti-Semitic demonstration throughout the Roman
world, and thus is extremely important, since it is one of our first indications
of popular prejudice against the Jews. Thus popular feeling had at last caught
up with the fulminations of the fathers. And the content of this law presages
the continual brawls fomented by the turbulent Syrian and Egyptian monks which
were to disturb Jewry during the early fifth century: "It is evident that the
Jewish sect is not prohibited by any law. We are therefore seriously concerned
to learn that Jewish meetings have been banned in certain localities. Therefore,
your Excellency will, upon the receipt of this order, restrain with proper vigor
the excesses of those persons who, under the name of the Christian religion,
have presumed to destroy synagogues and ruin them or commit other illegal
actions."158
Before continuing this survey of the legislation concerning the Jews, it will be
profitable to note the opinions concerning the Jews of those two great church
fathers, Jerome and Augustine. For their writings were authoritative and widely
disseminated .- throughout the Roman world in the early fifth century. The
opinions of the Christian clergy concerning the Jews were certainly molded and
formed by opinions and words the clergy the weight of their authority. From and
the people they intellectually controlled proceeded to violent action against
the Jews pogroms, synagogue burnings, and the like. Of the eventual fate of the
Jews,
Jerome himself, the church father who gives more attention to Jewish matters
than any of his contemporaries, is not quite sure. He has three conjectures: at
times he believes in their final and absolute rejection.159 At other
times he holds that a remnant of them will be saved.160 Sometimes
he
even holds a third view, that all will ultimately be saved, and that after the
gathering in of the Gentiles all Israel will be redeemed.161 This
third view was the most commonly accepted one, but it created an artificial
relationship between Jews and Christians, since it expected no immediate
response from the Jew's to any appeal that might be made to them.
Jews are ranked along with the heretics by Jerome. He says that those
who do not seek God correctly cannot find peace. The Jews seek God in
an evil way, hoping to find Him without Christ. The heretics seek Him
with idle words. He concludes that all these are foolish, for they think
God can be comprehended by the senses.162 Of Jewish guilt there
is no doubt in Jerome's mind. He asks, "If Judas sinned when he betrayed the
blood of the Saviour, how much more did the Jews sin who demanded
Christ's blood, and offering a price for it, enticed Judas, the disciple, to
betray his Lord?" 163 In some of his letters Jerome also displays
strong anti-Jewish feelings, and even about Jews who had done him personal
favors. Writing in Bethlehem about his knowledge of Hebrew, Jerome makes these
slurs on his Jewish teacher: "What trouble and expense it cost to get Bar
Aninas to teach me under cover of night! For by his fear of the Jews he
presented to me in his own person a second edition of Nicodemus. . . . If it
is expedient to hate any men and to loathe any race I have a strange
dislike for those of the circumcision. For up to the present day, they
persecute our Lord Jesus Christ in the synagogues of Satan."164
Some years later when writing to Augustine, Jerome repeated these statements,
showing that none of his hatred had passed away: "But if we must take up the Jews
with orthodox Christians, then they will be able to see those things in the
churches of Christ, which they curse in the synagogues of Satan. I should say
what I think the Jews will not be made Christians, but they will make us
Jews."165
Compared with Jerome, Augustine was very mild toward the Jews. The
correspondence between these two fathers alone will demonstrate this.
The African bishop, however, feels a great sense of Christian superiority.
"The Jews," he declares, "are our attendant slaves, who carry, as it
were, our satchels and bear the manuscripts while we study them. . . .
When we argue with the heathen we adduce the predictions found in the
Bible written by the Jews."171 Commenting on
Psalm 63, he declares that the Jews seek Christ's soul in vain,
for, since they persecute or try to persecute the church, so much is certain
about them. They will not relinquish the earth and its pleasures, and thus they
crucified Christ.172
In this survey a century and a half of increasingly violent anti-Jewish
propaganda has been reviewed. This theoretical attack was often
supplemented by physical violence and active Christian persecution of
the Jews. While the Jews could not be forbidden to exist by the church
fathers or the emperors, the main purpose of both conciliar and secular
legislation proved to bc an attempt to shut the Jews within the limits of
their own community so far as religious matters were affected, and to
remove their civic liberties; but it was difficult to stop at this point. The
position of the Jews was becoming increasingly inferior to that of the
Christians. Already by 380 the epithets applied to them in the laws and
the works of the church fathers betray the desire to punish and humiliate
them. They are a "feralis secta" in a "synagoga Satanae"; the
laws speak of "turpitudo sua" and "sua flagitia"; their meetings are
"sacrilegi coetus." At the end of the fourth century to marry a Jew is
equivalent to adultery and to serve them is an "indigna servitudo." For
the Jews, however, it was not easy to accept this separation and confine
themselves within their own communities. Nor did the local Christian
churches readily break off either social relations with Jews, or
theological connections with Judaism.
The Roman officials, on their part, found that it was difficult to persuade
subordinates and fanatical bishops that the laws passed against the Jews did
not cover a tacit permission to go even farther, especially under the
constant spur of anti Jewish propaganda from the ecclesiastical writers.
Had the Jews shown any sign of accepting Christianity, legislation and
enmity against them might not have reached the point it did early in the
fifth century. In this age of pogrom and synagogue destruction (380-438) what
then was the course of canonical and imperial legislation concerning
The information from the canon laws for these years is not very satisfactory.
While there are some references to the Jews in the canons of the African church,
it is difficult to use them as reliable historical sources, since their dates
are by no means clear. The collection of African canons was made in Gaul,
perhaps during the Carolingian Age, and must be used with great caution. It is
proposed to utilize the evidence of these canons, since the material from the
Forged Nicene Canons was introduced earlier.
Canon 89 of the so called Fourth Council of Carthage, dated by Mansi
398, is entirely in line with earlier conciliar legislation concerning the
Jews.176 It prohibits, in general terms, the adoption of Jewish
superstitions and festivals: "Any one who is a slave to magical rites and
incantations is to be segregated from the fellowship of the church;
likewise any one who clings to Jewish superstitions or festivals [is to
be segregated from the fellowship of the church]."177 Two other
Carthaginian canons are peculiar to Africa and somewhat contradictory in tone.
One reminds bishops that they are by no means to prohibit Jews from attending
the services of the Church up to the mass of catechumens": "Let no bishop
forbid any pagan or heretic or Jew to enter the church and hear the word of
God as far as the Mass of the Catechumens."178 This law implies
that some Jews were certainly being converted to Christianity by this time.
In the other canon, the ecclesiastical authorities remind the judges that Jews,
being in the category of infamous persons, are not to bc allowed to give
evidence in court, except against each other: "Furthermore it is de creed
that all slaves or freedmen proper shall not be allowed to make accusations,
likewise all whom the general laws do not permit to make public criminal
accusations: Also those persons who are marked with the stain of 'infamia, to
wit: actors, and persons of evil habits, also heretics, pagans, and Jews.
Nevertheless permission to make accusations among themselves is not to be
denied to any of these persons, even though they are not permitted the
right of general accusation."179 The inclusion of this reminder
in an ecclesiastical collection is peculiar, but it is perhaps the copy of an
imperial edict which
The councils of the fifth century add but little to the evidence already
discussed. From the evidence of available secular laws, it must be suspected
that if we had more canons about the Jews from the early fifth century, it
would become clear that many customs practiced by both Jews and Christians
which were frowned upon by the councils of the fourth century were still
extant in the fifth.
Restrictions on Jewish life are no longer confined to a few categories such as
the slave trade, marriage, or the decurionate from 380 on the Jews are
regulated and placed at a disadvantage to the Christians in everything. With
the arrival of the fifth century come the disabilities which lead directly to
the medieval ghetto.The division of the empire between Honorius and Arcadius
after the death of Theodosius the Great symbolized the future disparity of
fortunes between the two parts of the empire. The barbarian invasions, the
great event of the fifth century, caused chaos in the western half of the
Roman Empire, but did not affect the legal status of Roman citizens. The edicts
of the emperors, as embodied in the Theodosian Code, including
those relative to the Jews, were carried out by the barbarian kings and the
episcopal and ecclesiastical authorities.
The legal characteristic of the first half of the fifth century is that
a right once lost by the Jews was almost never recovered. Restrictions
were continually reinforced, and lawlessness and ecclesiastical
enthusiasm from time to time made inroads on the few Jewish rights then
remaining in the Theodosian Code, but the Code almost never
enacted any law conferring new privileges upon the Jews. Juster sums
up the trend by saying: All the different systems under which they
lived ended under the influence of the church by considering the
Jews ethnically as strangers, and religiously as unbelievers, and in this
capacity persons deprived of civil rights, and subject to special
restrictions.181
In the West, Honorius began his anti-Jewish legislation in 398
with two decrees emphasizing the duty of the Jews in the decurionate.
In his need for money the young emperor turned to every available
source: All those of any sect whatsoever who are by any law needed
for the decurionate are to be held for the discharging of that
service.182 This law was accompanied by another of the same date
which shows clearly the disturbed state of affairs, Christian as well as
Jewish, that prevailed in Italy as the fourth century ended:183
We have learned that citizens of various ranks from the towns are wandering
about in Apulia and Calabria, under the delusion that they are exempt from the
necessity of undertaking civil duties because they are members of the Jewish
sect and because of a certain law about the Jews which had been decreed in the
eastern provinces. Therefore by our authority we decree that this same law, if
there is any such enactment, one obviously harmful to our provinces, is
canceled, and all persons who by law are required for the decurionate in any
way, no matter what their religion, shall be held for the carrying out of
civic duties in their respective communities.
This restrictive measure reminds us that freedom of movement was denied the
lower classes from the end of the third century, and it shows the economic
strait jacket which had already almost stifled trade throughout the empire.
In this unhappy financial situation it is little wonder that the "aurum
coronarium" was confiscated in 399. Thus Honorius boldly appropriated
the
money which was normally sent to the Jews in the Holy Land, evidently feeling
that such moneys as left the West were being paid to a foreign province. The
almost cynical wording of the decree seems to expect the Jew of Italy to
rejoice in the lifting of this burden which was really so necessary for
the preservation of the unity of Judaism.184
It is the custom of the worthless superstition of the Jews that the
Archisynagogi or elders of the Jews or those persons, directed by the
patriarch to collect gold and silver at specified times, whom they term
apostles, take back to the patriarch from the individual synagogues sums of
money which have been raised and appropriated. In this matter we order that
all the moneys which we know to have been collected within a specified period
of time shall be carefully sent to our treasury: moreover, we decree that no
more moneys of the aforesaid nature shall be dispatched. Therefore let the
Jewish people know that we have removed from them the burden of this thievery.
But if any persons have been sent by that despoiler [the patriarch] of the
[57]
Jews to carry on this duty of exacting money they shall be tried by the
judges, just as though sentence were being passed against violators of
our laws.
If the emperor really expected the Jews of the West to be happy
about being preserved from the despoiler of the Jews he was greatly
in error, for five years later, in 404, he restored them permission to
send the aurum coronarium once again:
A short while ago we commanded that the funds which, according to the custom of
these lands, were exacted by the Jewish patriarchs, should no longer be exacted.
But now we remove the first law and wish all to be aware of the Jewish
privilege, granted them by our indulgence, re-established according to the old
formula, to send their funds away.185
Honorius' laws about the aurum coronarium were roughly
contemporary with his important edicts excluding the Jews from military and court
functions. The first of these was promulgated in 404: We decree that Jews and
Samaritans, who are deluding themselves with the privileges of imperial executive
office, are to be deprived of all military and court rank.186 This
law
seems to have been operative when Jerome wrote his Commentary on Isaiah,
408-410,
for he shows clearly that Jews could not bear arms or become soldiers at that
time: Nor is it remarkable that all fighting qualities have perished among
the Jews, for they are not allowed to serve in the ranks with the sword
or bear arms.187 This first law of 404 proving both unjust and
inadequate, Honorius issued a more comprehensive one in 418, which
excluded Jews from the civil service as well as the army. Those Jews who
were already in official positions could finish their term of office and
then retire (as a special concession), but any Jew in the army was to
be degraded at once. On the other hand, Jews could become lawyers
and share in the honor of the curial responsibility:188
Entrance into the military service from any other occupation is denied
those who are living in the Jewish faith. Therefore any Jews who are
either engaged in government service or in the imperial army are
permitted the grace of completing their terms of office and of
terminating their enlistments (since such persons are really more ignorant
than unfriendly), but in the future the grace we have now granted a
few will not be continued. We decree, moreover, that those devoted
to the perversity of this Jewish nation, who are proved to have en-
[58]
tered the armed forces, shall be deprived of their honor at once, being
allowed no sufferance for past good deeds. But we do not deny to the Jews who
have been trained in liberal studies liberty to follow the law, and we permit
them to have the honor of the curial service, which they can enjoy by their
privilege of birth and nobility of family. These things ought to be enough for
them, and they ought not to take their exclusion from military service as a
disgrace.
The economic distress which prompted the promulgation of the
edicts demanding Jewish participation in the decurionate was not the
real active force behind this edict of Honorius, which stripped the
Jews of court and military functions. Both Parkes and Lucas believe
that the Jewish connection with the Donatists in the early years of
the fifth century was the real reason for this active persecution.189
Lucas states that the legal exclusion of Jews from the army and official
duties is contemporaneous with their connection with the Donatists;
as these heretics were opposed to close ties between state and church
and insisted on absolute clerical purity. Augustine attacked them as
heretics, starting in 397. The publication of Augustine's anti-Donatist
writings only a few years before the exclusion of Jews from the army
and civil service is to Lucas an indication that the Jews were dragged
down in the defeat of this Christian heresy.190 Using, the
evidence at hand from the church fathers and the laws, it would seem, however,
that the anti-Jewish trend was well under way before the Donatists
helped destroy the last vestiges of Jewish freedom. If the Donatists
had not been involved, Judaism would probably have suffered similar
reversals from its connection with some other heresy.
The seat of the Donatist sect was in North Africa, where Augustine fought them a
score of years, and where they rivaled the eastern monks in violence. The Jews
were only incidentally involved in the imperial attempts to suppress this
heresy, but the laws indicate that Jews took some part, however small, in
Donatist attacks on Christian churches and services. The silence of Augustine
on any Jewish part In this violence seems to indicate that their share was very
small. A law of 408 states that Jews and heretics must not disturb the
Christian sacraments:
The new and unusual audacity of the Donatists and Jews has revealed that they
desire to disturb the sacraments of the
[59]
Catholic faith. These deeds of pestilence and contagion grow ever
more frequent and spread. Therefore we decree that just punishments
be inflicted on those who have tried to do anything of harm or
disadvantage to the Catholic sect.191
When this law was not equal to the task of curbing religious rioting in the
North African provinces, Honorius promulgated another decree in the next year,
409, which reinforced his previous commands:192
Lest the Donatists or other heretics of such nature, who cannot be
persuaded to join the Catholic faith, and who are called pagans in
common parlance, both Jews and Gentiles, should think that the law
previously passed against them had become inoperative, let the judges
all know that they must carry out their instructions in regard to the
Jews and heretics with faithful devotion and that they must not
hesitate, as a duty among the most important of their responsibilities, to
put into execution whatever we have decreed against the Jews and
heretics. But if any judge through court error does not carry out the
present law, he shall know, when his office is taken away from him
that he will suffer from a still greater disturbance of our normal
clemency; for, after the punishment of the three curators, his office,
too, which was sadly in need of proper attention when he ignored our
imperial order, shall be fined twenty pounds of gold. Also if men of
the curial rank hide any like crime committed in their towns or
territories for the benefit of Jews or heretics, let them know that they
will suffer the penalty of deportation and the deserved confiscation
of their property.
Together with the Donatists, the Caelicolae appeared in Africa
about the end of the fourth century. They were somehow connected
with the Jews, but, since they are hardly mentioned elsewhere than
in the Theodosian Code, we are almost completely ignorant of their
customs and beliefs. From the Code they appear to have been a
Judaizing sect, for they are reported trying to force certain
Christians to adopt the foul and degrading name of Jew:193
The name Caelicolae has served to protect an almost unheard-of
new type of criminal superstition. Let those Caelicolae know that
if they have not been converted to faith in God and Christian
reverence within the space of a year, they themselves will be held
responsible under those laws by which we have decreed the punishment of
heretics. For it is certain that whatever deviates from the faith of
Christians is contrary to Christian law. And certain persons even now
[60]
dare thus to tamper with the law unmindful of their souls and the
statutes, since these evil proselyters try to force certain Christians to
adopt the foul and degrading name of Jew. And although the persons
who have admitted these crimes have been condemned in court
according to the laws of the earlier emperors, nevertheless it will not
hurt to remind you frequently that those persons who are conversant
with the Christian mysteries must not be forced to adopt the Jewish
superstition or any other such sect adverse to the Roman rule after
once accepting Christianity. And if anyone has tried to do this we
decree that the authors of the deed with their accomplices shall be
apprehended and punished by the penalty prescribed by the former
laws, seeing that it is a worse thing than death and more awful than
destruction fur any Christian to be infected by the contagion of
Jewish belief. And therefore lest we sanction something harmful to
the churches or permit the loss of any person to the faithful and
beloved of God, under the following precise definition, we decree
that, if any one attempts to break this law, he will be held for the
crime of lèse-majesté
The banning of the Caelicolae seems to have been successful, and the
summons to take only one year to cease to exist was evidently
obeyed; the sect is never heard of again except as part of the title of
the chapter of the Theodosian Code dealing with Jews, Samaritans,
and Caelicolae.
Although most of Honorius' legislation concerning the Jews which
has thus far been discussed is of a repressive nature, when we consider
the age he lived in, he can be considered relatively friendly to the
Jews. There is much less virulence in his attitude toward the Jews
than in that of his co-emperor, Arcadius. This clemency may have
been due to his desire for domestic peace in order to deal with the
barbarian hordes, and also his wish to strengthen the unraveling economic
structure of the western empire by conserving Jewish industry.
This reasonable attitude of Honorius toward his Jewish subjects
can be seen in his legislation on the question of sanctuary, the
violation of which in normal times considered a crime of
lèse-majesté.194 The reign of Honorius was, of
course,
far from normal, but he allowed Jews who had fled to sanctuary, even when
converted to Christianity, to return without any penalty to Judaism, an almost
[61]
heretical position in the early years of the fifth century, as seen in the light
of conciliar and other secular legislation:195
It is enacted in ancient and our own penal clauses that when we have discovered
persons of the Jewish faith, for criminal evasion and various pretexts, wishing
to associate themselves with the Christian church, this was not done from
devotion to the faith but was craftily simulated. Therefore the judges of the
provinces, in which such acts were discovered, are so aware of the necessity of
obeying our statutes that they will permit those persons to return to Judaism
whom they discover neither able to remain in the steadfastness of religious
persuasion in this same Christian cult nor imbued with the faith and mystery of
holy baptism, since this is of greater advantage to the Christian faith.
In addition to this law, which must have eased the conscience of many baptized
Jews, Honorius took the unique step of revoking the consistent policy of
Christian imperial legislation about slaves. He permitted Jews to own Christian
slaves provided that the master did not interfere with the slaves' religion, and
any interference with the Jewish possession of such slaves was to be severely
punished:196
We decree that Jewish masters may possess Christian slaves without reproach, but
only on condition that they permit these slaves to follow their own religion.
Moreover the judges of the provinces are to know, when the amount of their
public confiscation has been inspected, that the insolence of those men who have
thought to deceive them with timely prayers is to be reproved; and we decree that
all possessions fraudulently elicited or to be elicited from Jewish masters are
to be given back to them. If anyone breaks this law, he is to be punished as if
he had committed sacrilege.
Honorius was very conscious of the danger of Christian animosity toward the
Jews.
Though the western monks did not equal their eastern brethren in fierceness and
lawlessness, Honorius felt called upon to issue two edicts to protect the
sanctity of the Sabbath and the security of the synagogues:197
We decree that on the Sabbath day and during the periods in which the Jews
celebrate the rites of their cult, no one ought either to molest the Jews or
assemble from any section of the city (with malicious intent), since it is
agreed that the rest of the week is sufficient for the trade and business
transactions of private citizens." [To this the
[62]
Codex Justinianus adds: Likewise we decree that the Jews
should not have
permission to assemble on the same day when orthodox Christians congregate, lest
by chance the Christians be harmed through Jewish disturbance of the
aforementioned holy days.]
This law was followed by another in 412, which again demanded that the sanctity
of the synagogues be respected; obviously the desecrations of synagogues were
continuing:198
Let no one dare to desecrate or, forcibly entering, prohibit the customs of the
Jews in their assemblies, or disturb the readings of their prayers in the
synagogues, since they should be allowed to retain all their customs in peace
according to their law without outside interference of their religion and cult.
And since ancient custom and practice has preserved the sacred day of the
Sabbath for the aforementioned Jewish people we decree that this also is to be
prohibited, to wit: that, lest any privilege be violated, any Sabbath gathering
should interfere with a Jew under the pretext of public business or private
memorial service, when all the other days of the week are deemed sufficient for
business in the public laws and should be most ample considering the moderation
of our age. We decree this, albeit it seems that enough has been stated about
this matter in the laws promulgated by past emperors.
Honorius' successor in the West, Valentinian III, displays in his legislation
little of the conciliatory and protective tone manifested in these decrees of
Honorius. As the last legal expressions of the attitude toward the Jews in the
Western Roman Empire, the two laws of Valentinian III which exclude Jews from
government service and rob them of their rights of inheritance, show that the
night of bigotry and intolerance had fallen upon the West about the same time as
the Jews were robbed of their last privileges in the eastern part of the Roman
Empire. Valentinian III repeats the law by which Jews were deprived of all
governmental offices, adding the reason that he did not wish Christians to serve
such persons:
We deny to Jews as well as pagans the right to try cases of law or serve in the
army: we deny those following the Christian way of life the right to serve such
persons, lest by using their opportunity as masters these Jews might
find occasion to corrupt the venerable Christian faith. We command that all
persons of this foul error be excluded from these offices,
unless a
[63]
complete betterment [i.e. conversion] shall come to their aid."199
In addition he enacted one further law which completed Gratian's enactment of
383 about the intestability of apostates to Judaism. This law, providing for the
rights of inheritance of converted Jewish children, is of considerable
importance, since it is evidence that even when a purely political or social
right is in question, by the third decade of the fifth century the influence
affecting it is almost entirely religious:200
If the son or daughter or grandchild, one or several, of a Jew or Samaritan,
shall after mature consideration leave the shadows of his superstition for the
light of the Christian religion, it shall not be lawful for his parents or
grandparents to disinherit him or to pass him over in their will, or to leave
him less than he would have received if they had died intestate. If they do so,
we order that he succeed to the inheritance as though it were a case of
intestacy, and the will shall be null and void, except for the manumissions to
the legal maximum which it may contain, which shall retain their validity.
If it be proved that these children or grandchildren have committed great crimes
against their parents or grandparents, the parents or grandparents have legal
means of revenge, if they bring the accusation to trial. Furthermore they shall
put believable and clear documentary evidence in their wills regarding these
crimes, and shall leave these children only the Falcidian quarter of the legacy
which should have been theirs, since this seems to be only fitting for such
children or grandchildren, in honor of their chosen religion; but, as we have
said, the children will be punished if any charge is proved against
them.201
It seems evident from this law that Jews were trying to stop conversion to
Christianity by denying their Christianized children any inheritance.
Valentinian III and his pious advisers naturally could not allow any such
anti-Christian activity, and therefore this interference with the free will of
Jewish testators was proposed.
Part 9
While Honorius and Valentinian III enacted legislation in the West which was
certainly repressive to the Jews and excluded them from most of the normal paths
of life, this legislation was gentle and
[64]
kind compared to the virulence, scorn, and vituperation which Arcadius and
Theodosius II poured upon the heads of those Jews who lived in the eastern half
of the Roman Empire during the early years of the fifth century. Arcadius, who
succeeded to the eastern portions of the domains of Theodosius the Great in
January, 395, was an inexperienced boy of seventeen. Power lay with a succession
of favorites, and it is against a troubled background of internal disorder that
his Jewish legislation was passed. The misfortunes of the age of the barbarian
invasions had their severe effects on the situation of the Jews.
The evidence of the laws gives us our best picture of Jewish-Christian relations
during the reign of Arcadius. This evidence shows that the fiery preaching of
Chrysostom at Antioch and Cyril at Jerusalem was inflaming the populace, already
anti-Jewish and eager to despoil the Jews if opportunity arose. Jews now
suffered from the attacks of officials, ecclesiastics, and fanatical mobs. A
petty vexation which was forbidden by a law of 396 was the interference with the
Jewish slave markets: "Let no one outside the Jewish faith establish prices
for the Jews, when they offer goods for sale. For it is only right for them to
establish these prices for themselves. Furthermore the officials of the province
shall not force upon you any overseer or director. But if any one dares to make
this matter his concern in disregard of yourselves and your chief men, then let
the authorities hasten him off to punishment just as they would do to those who
have despoiled the property of others."202 This law shows that
minor officials were being officious to the Jewish minority and were imposing on
their trade privileges as citizens of the Roman Empire. One doubts if the law
corrected the abuse, for even more direct attacks upon Judaism were being
successful. By 396 the character and dignity of the patriarch of the Jews were
being slandered despite his very high rank and official nobility: "If any one
should dare to speak slanderously in public about the illustrious patriarchs, let
him be subjected to punishment."203 But mere verbal abuse of the
patriarch was not enough. He was openly insulted, his rights were questioned, and
his officials challenged, as another law shows: "All the privileges which my
father of blessed memory and past emperors have granted to the honorable
patriarchs or to those
[65]
whom the patriarchs have appointed as officials, we command to be lastingly
preserved."204 At some time during the period 396-404 the
patriarch lost his title of "illustrious" (inlustris) and became merely
"honorable" (spectabilis). This was the first step on the path to his degradation
which took place in 415 under Theodosius II.
The Christians in the eastern portions of the Roman Empire went far beyond petty
vexations and verbal insults as the reign of Arcadius progressed. They were
often engaged in attacking and destroying synagogues and assaulting their Jewish
occupants with even more violence than their fellow citizens in the West. This
is disclosed by an edict addressed specifically to the governor of Illyricum in
397. Parkes believes it probable that this edict was due to the disorder in
the province of Illyricum which accompanied the raids of Alaric and the
Visigoths on the region: "By virtue of the authority vested in you, Your
Excellency will command your officials to meet in order to get clearly in mind
the idea that Jews must be protected from the depredations of looters, and that
their synagogues must remain in their usual quiet."205 It is typical
of the harsh treatment of Jews in the Eastern Roman Empire that some twenty
years before Honorius in the West allowed Jews to return to Judaism if they had
fled to the church for economic reasons (CTh., 16, 7, 23),
Arcadius
in the East had permitted the violation of sanctuary, and had ordered the
expulsion of Jews from the churches until their debts were paid: "Those Jews,
who, harassed for debt or some other crime, pretend they wish to be joined to the
Christian law, so they can avoid their crimes or payment of debts by taking
refuge in the churches, should be prohibited entry into the church; nor should
they be accepted as Christians before they have paid their debts in full or have
been cleared of accusations against them by proving their
innocence."206 This edict shows the suspicion with which forced
conversions were viewed in the East; and the permission for violation of
sanctuary is an indication of the lawlessness which was rampant everywhere at the
close of the fourth century.
The problem of Jewish service in the decurionate was one upon which Arcadius
legislated as did his co-emperor. At first he gave Jews
[66]
a very broad immunity from the curial duties: Jewish clergy are to have the same
privileges as Christian clergy:207
The Jews should be confined to their own observances: meanwhile in protecting
their privileges we emulate earlier emperors, by whose decrees it has been
established that the Jews retain the privileges granted to those who are subject
to the overlordship of the illustrious patriarchs, and to those high priests and
patriarchs and elders and the rest who perform the holy rites of this religion;
and we decree by the permission of our sacred will that the Jews retain in
perpetuity the same privileges which have been granted to the foremost priests
of the venerable Christian law because of their holiness. For in their divine
wisdom not only the holy Constantine and Constantius but also Valentinian and
Valens decreed this. Let the priests of the Jews, therefore, be free from the
curial responsibility, and let them carry on their offices according to their own
laws.
Such a liberal decree had little chance for long survival in the last years of
the fourth century, troubled as they were with religious strife. This was
probably the law which disturbed Honorius in 398 and called forth
CTh., 12, 1, 158 (q.v., p. 57). The western emperor felt that this
immunity of the Jews would lead to the economic ruin of his provinces, and so he
enacted his own law to counteract the effects of Arcadius' pronouncement in the
East. Unhappily for the Jews, Arcadius in two and one-half years seems to have
become convinced that his brother was right after all, and he revised his
liberal policy. By 399 all Jews in the East as well as the West were obliged
to take their full share in the decurionate: "Those Jews who are proved liable to
the curia shall shoulder their full responsibility in the
decurionate."208
It is probable that some of Arcadius' laws have been lost, for among the decrees
of his successor, Theodosius II, are several which point to a strengthening of
earlier enactments restricting the freedom of the Jews.209 In 398
Arcadius decreed a law which greatly reduced Jewish judicial autonomy, for he
made it necessary for Jews to follow Roman law except on purely religious
questions:210
Let the Jews who live according to the Roman and common law bring in their
cases for trial in solemn manner and decide all their legal actions according to
the Roman laws in those eases which appertain more to the forum and the laws
and
decrees than to their
[67]
own religion; in conclusion let them live according to our laws But persons are
not to be denied the judgment of arbiters according to the public law, if,
after agreeing among themselves as citizens to abide by the award of an arbiter,
they decide to try a civil suit before arbiters chosen from among the Jews or
patriarchs. Moreover, the judges of the provinces shall carry out the judgments
of these men, just as if the arbiters were officially assigned their positions
upon the advice of a juris-consult.
Besides confining Jewish legislation to matters of cult, Arcadius may have taken
away from them the right of giving evidence in a Christian court, Ferrandus, a
Carthaginian deacon of the early sixth century, has included in his
Breviatio Canonum a law to this effect which probably dates
from the reign of Arcadius: "It is decreed that all slaves, or those freed
permanently, or all those whom the general laws do not permit to make public
accusations, actors, heretics, pagans, and Jews shall not be allowed to make
accusations in court."211 Parkes believes that this canon would
hardly
be included in an ecclesiastical collection unless it were supported by imperial
approval, and therefore by the existence of a parallel imperial
prohibition.212 This weakening of the legal position of the Jews in
the eastern half of the empire laid the foundation for the legislation of
Theodosius II, which degraded the patriarch and left the Jews strangers in an
alien world, tolerated only as the symbol of a past dispensation.
The Jewish legislation of Theodosius II, who became Roman emperor in 408 when
only seven years old, and who was in the power of his chamberlains for many
years, discloses a new note of petulance and open dislike for the Jews. In the
eastern half of the Mediterranean the Jewish colonies were much larger than
those in the West, and when the violence of religious strife overflowed, there
was great bloodshed. The breakdown of society from the weakness of the
imperial administration, the raids of the barbarians, and economic
strangulation had its manifestation in an increasing lawlessness and
violence.The monks of Syria were particularly ferocious in their
anti-Jewish activity, stimulating by their atrocities and accusations the first
laws of the new boy emperor about the Jews.
The initial Theodosian legislation concerning specifically Jewish
[68]
problems was a complaint about the Jewish method of celebrating Purim, the
feast celebrating the deliverance of the Jews from Haman. Riots and wild
behavior were common at this festival, and it is possible that real Jewish
guilt provoked this decree:
Let the governors of the provinces prohibit the Jews from burning the
effigy of Haman and maliciously setting afire images of the sacred
cross fabricated in contempt of the Christian faith, in the special
celebration of their festival to the memory of the punishment of Haman
in bygone times; do this lest the Jews pollute the symbol of our faith
with their jests, and look down upon the Christian law as inferior to
their own rites, for they are in danger of losing what have so far been
lawful privileges, unless they refrain from these unlawful
activities.213
The church historian, Socrates, tells us that some eight years after
this decree an actual case of Jewish murder occurred at the celebration
of the Haman festival at Inmestar, not far from Antioch.214 This
Inmestar incident has already been described. There was a great outcry
among the Christians at this outrage, and the Roman authorities heavily
punished the guilty. Juster doubts the authenticity of this narrative
without adequate basis, and attempts to absolve the Jews from all
charges of ritual murder.215 But the murder itself appears to have
been an accident and certainly does not come under the heading of "ritual
murder." Parkes believes that the authenticity of the narrative is
vouched for by the absence of miracles and the factual not fanciful
nature of the story, and this reasoning seems cogent.216 It is
certainly a black mark on the Jewish record.
It is perhaps significant that Agapius, a later chronicler, also
reports rioting in Alexandria on the part of the Jews which
occurred at about the same time as the Inmestar incident. Some Jews,
who had been forcibly baptized, took a statue of Christ and crucified
it in the year 411, according to this story, mocking the Christians and
crying out, "That is your Messiah!" A riot naturally ensued in which
many Jews and Christians lost their lives.217 This event, disastrous
to the Jews because it aroused anti-Semitic feeling, was followed by the
Alexandrine riots of 414 which proved much more serious, and resulted
in the expulsion of all Jews from Alexandria by the bishop Cyril. Since
the Jewish community of Alex-
69
andria had been very large, and there is no record of its return to the city,
this was a severe blow to Judaism.218
In 418 the forced conversion of all the Jews on Minorca was accomplished by the
bishop Severus.219 We have the account of this atrocity on the
authority of the bishop himself. The pious Severus states that he had for a
long time been sorely distressed that the Jews should be so numerous and
wealthy in the two largest towns of Minorca, particularly in Magona. He had
long desired to engage in a holy war against them, and was at last encouraged
to hope for victory by the arrival of the relics of St. Stephen, the martyr,
which were left on Minorca by the celebrated Orosius. In a short time
the conflict began, and lengthy disputations took place. The Christians
were led by their bishop, the Jews by a certain Theodorus, a man of
rabbinical learning who had once held the office of defender of the
city of Magona. After lengthy debate and a street fight Theodorus was
bribed to accept Christianity, and when the rabbi yielded all the other
Jews on the island were converted. Severus concludes his letter by
strongly recommending his brethren to follow the example of his own
zeal and success. That this advice was eagerly accepted, the laws of
the Theodosian Code clearly demonstrate; the evil of forced
conversion (as this mass conversion on Minorca certainly was) became
common in the later fifth century.
Perhaps there were also other riots against the Jews in the widely
separated portions of the empire at this time. In the year 420 we
have a law of Theodosius addressed to Philip, Governor of Illyricum.
which protects Jews from attack and prohibits the burning of
synagogues, while at the same time warning the Jews not to outrage
Christianity. This may reflect a state of active hostility lasting well
over a decade:220
And further, no Jew if he be innocent, shall be oppressed nor may any religion
make him the victim of evil slander. The synagogues and meeting places of the
Jews are nowhere to be burned nor falsely and without reason damaged, since in
general, even if someone is caught in crime, for all that the power of the
courts and the protection of the public law have been constituted for such
matters, providing that no private person is allowed to take private vengeance
on his enemies. But while we wish this law to be decreed for the legal
protection of their persons, we also decree that they are to be warned
as follows:
[70]
Let the Jews not grow insolent in any way and, puffed up with
confidence in their own security, commit any rash act against the
sanctity of the Christian religion.
The most unfortunate result of these many Jewish-Christian
encounters, specially the Inmestar incident, and the two Alexandrine
riots, was that they tended to crystallize the anti-Jewish
feeling which had been grow up for a century. This mass hysteria, then,
fomented by religious fanaticism and the desire for plunder, had an
effect upon the rulers of the empire, and in 415 Theodosius delivered
the Jews the most serious blow they had suffered in a century of Roman
legislation. This was the degradation of the patriarch Gamaliel:
221
Since the more exalted the office to which he has been raised, the
more Gamaliel has presumed to disobey our commands with
impunity, may Your Excellence in your power know that our clemency
has issued certain commands to the illustrious magister
officiorum:
to wit, that the badges of the patriarch's honorable prefecture be
stripped from him, likewise that he be reduced to that rank he
held before he was granted the prefecture; furthermore he may erect no
more synagogues, and if any are abandoned, he must destroy those
if they can be torn down without rioting, and no Jews shall have the
right to judge Christians: and if any dispute arises between Jews
and Christians, it is to be settled by the governors of the province.
If the patriarch or any other Jew attempts to befoul any Christian or
freeman or slave of any sect with the mark of a Jew [circumcision],
let him and the Jew be subject to the penalty of the laws. Also if any
Jew keeps Christian slaves, the slaves are to be freed and placed
in the custody of the church, according to the law of Constantine.
This degradation of Gamaliel, which was the same as the abolition of
his office, was perhaps partly due to his own lack of caution.
The law just quoted seems to imply that he had been assuming
powers which were not allowed him, such as building new synagogues,
judging cases in which Christians were involved, and possessing
Christian slaves. The temper of the times, however, was such that other
excuses for his degradation would doubtless have been brought forward
if the ones actually used had not been available. The words of Jerome
in his Commentary on Isaiah indicate that as early as 408 or 410
the power of the patriarch and that of his judges had been seriously
cur-
[71]
tailed; therefore it may even be that the official degradation of
the patriarch in 415 was only the imperial recognition of a fait
accompli:
But the Jews are not even to have their own judges, and are to be subject to
Roman courts; moreover the Roman princes judge the Jewish leaders, who only
seem to be leaders among their own people. But this, too, is to be noted, that
the Jews have no champion in law who is a qualified judge, but all their
affairs are idle and collapsing and full of folly.222
Thus all the centuries-old anti-Semitic feelings were now having their
outlet through religious and governmental sanction, and the degradation
of the patriarch was at this time a necessary step in the process of
making Jews outcasts in a Christian world.
Despite his degradation, the patriarch's funds were still paid by
the Jews to their Palestinian leaders until this practice, too,
was abolished by Theodosius II in 429:223
The leaders of the Jews, who are nominated in the assemblies of
either part of Palestine or spend their time in other provinces,
must pay up whatever funds they have collected under the pretense of
pension money after the dissolution of the patriarchate. In the
future, under threat of punishment, their ordinary tribute from all
their synagogues, which the patriarchs at one time demanded under the
name of the aurum coronarium, is to be collected by our Palatini.
Whatever sum this amounts to you are to confiscate after a
diligent investigation; and those moneys which used to be given
regularly to the patriarchs from the western provinces are to be
confiscated to our charity fund.
The abolition of all these taxes made it extremely difficult for any
centralized organization of Judaism to continue functioning. The
degradation of Gamaliel and the abolition of the Jewish system of
taxation ended organized Jewry in the Roman Empire. The
disorganization of this smaller group within the disorganized Roman Empire
proved disastrous to the Jews. During the Middle Ages the church
and pope formed a connecting link between the smaller economic
and political units which made up western Europe in place of the
sprawling Roman Empire. The Jews lost their economic ties and
their patriarch in the reign of Theodosius II. Helpless and
isolated from society they had no centralized organization through the
medieval centuries.
[72]
The slave laws of the earlier emperors were re-enacted by Theodosius II.
A Jew was not to buy a Christian slave or acquire one as a gift. If the Jew
became the master of a Christian slave by inheritance or was appointed his
trustee, he might keep him if he did not convert him to Judaism. Confiscation
of property and capital punishment were the penalties imposed on violators of
this decree:224
Jews must not purchase Christian slaves nor acquire them as gifts.
Let Jews who have impudently disobeyed this decree stop acquiring Christian
slaves, and let the slaves themselves be granted freedom if the Jews
voluntarily confess what they have done. But under this law we permit this
Jewish sect to possess other slaves whom this evil superstition chooses to
consider members of the true faith according to its own opinion, or others who
follow this faith because of oath or legacy. Let the Jews do this so long as
they do not misuse those slaves who are either willing to become Jews or those
wishing to remain in the filth of their own sect; but only on the condition
that, if these privileges have been violated, .the Jews who are authors of
such great crimes shall be punished with capital punishment and also loss of
all their property.
Although measures like this concerning the possession of Christian
slaves by Jews had been enacted over a century of legislation, they
bad proved futile and almost impossible of enforcement This was
the most difficult of all the enactments against the Jews to carry into
execution, and the last protest, registered in 423, was probably
no more successful than its predecessors: "After other matters: Let
no Jew dare to purchase Christian slaves. For we consider it a crime
for devout slaves to be polluted from being owned by impious masters.
But if any Jew has done this, then he will at once be found guilty
and condemned according to the established punishment.."225
This evident official hostility was equaled by the violence of the
mobs in the Eastern Roman Empire. It has been seen that, as early
as 412, CTh., 16, 8, 21, the emperor had to refer to the burning
of Synagogues and houses and the assaults on Jews. He even had to
remind his subjects that there were law courts in which Jewish
criminals could be punished. The effect of this law is not certain,
but it probably failed to deter the more fanatical Christian brethren
very long. In 413 a marauding monk named Barsauma appeared for his
[73]
second raid in Palestine, this time accompanied by forty monks.
His first incursion had been made about 400. For three years Barsauma
destroyed Palestinian temples and synagogues unchecked.226 His
activity was quite that of a religious fanatic. Others with more
practical bent seized synagogues and consecrated them as churches.
This happened at Edessa under Rabbulas, who was bishop there in 411.
In 423 Theodosius II made his last attempt to save the Jews from
the social, economic, and religious ruin which was threatening
them. This eleventh-hour stand, according to Nan, was the result of the
marriage in January, 423, of the emperor to Eudoxia, who had been
a pagan and whose uncle was prefect of the eastern provinces.228 His
first law of 423 avoids the use of all offensive language in
ordering that in the future no synagogue in any district is to be
pulled down or burnt. Furthermore, if any synagogue had been
confiscated to Christianity, it was to be returned to the
Jews:229
It is decreed that in the future no synagogues of the Jews anywhere
are to be pulled down or burned down, and if, after this decree,
any synagogues are seized or consecrated as churches or devoted
somehow to the holy mysteries by a new attack, sites of sufficient extent
for these places where they can build new synagogues are to be
furnished for the Jews. Furthermore, if furniture has also been stolen
let it be returned to the Jews unless it has been dedicated to the holy
mysteries; but if the holy consecration [of the furniture] does not
permit its restitution, then a fair price for this furniture is to
be paid. Moreover no further synagogues are to be constructed, and the
old ones are to remain in their present state of repair.
Two months after this law was promulgated, the Jews demanded
more adequate protection from those molesting them. This was
granted by Theodosius II, but in language which shows a return to
the abusive tone of many of his earlier laws. The respite for the
Jews was of short duration:230
Our decrees and those of our ancestors in which we have repressed
the audacity and zeal of evil pagans, Jews, and heretics have been
known and made plain to all. Nevertheless we wish the Jews to be
gratified that this instance of their appeal to our laws has met
with approval, and that we grant the following to their wretched
pleading: that those who continue to act illegally under the cloak of
Christianity must cease their outrages and assaults against the Jews,
and that both
[74]
now and in the future, no one is to seize or burn down Jewish
synagogues. Nevertheless the Jews themselves are to be condemned to
perpetual exile and their goods confiscated if it is found that
Jews have circumcised a man of our faith or have ordered one to be
circumsized.
There is no penalty attached to Christians who attack or burn synagogues,
whereas the penalties for Jewish misdemeanor at the end of the law are
extremely severe. Theodosius is using a gloved hand on his Christian subjects
in this law; perhaps he was afraid to assert his control over them, since the
turbulent condition of his empire made that control so insecure at this time.
This weakness of the imperial control is well demonstrated by the issuance two
months later of very similar legislation: "Let those decrees be valid which we
formerly announced concerning the Jews and their synagogues: let it be known
that neither are the Jews permitted to build new synagogues anywhere, nor are
they to expand their old ones. Let the Jews know, moreover, that in the future
they must refrain from doing other forbidden things, just as the provisions
of the published law establish."231 On the same day, in an edict
which begins by denouncing the Manichaeans, the Pepyzites, and the
Quarto-decimans, Theodosius II earnestly requests Christians, real or
pretended, not to defy religious authority and attack quiet and peaceable Jews.
If riotous Christians seize the goods of such Jews, they are to pay
compensation to the extent of three or four times the value of the articles
stolen:232 After other matters: If they remain steadfast in their
madness the following persons will be punished by the same confiscation of goods
and exile: the Manichaeans and those who call themselves Pepyzites, and even
those who are worse than all other heretics, since they are under this single
delusion of dissenting from all men in the celebrating of the holy Easter day.
But we specially demand this boon from those who are either good Christians or
say they are, that they not presume to harm, under the pretense of religious
sanction, Jews and pagans living in quiet and making no disturbance or breach
in the laws. For if they have made disturbances against peaceful Jews or
stolen their goods, then they will be forced to repay not only those
goods which they stole, but also three or four times the amount of the
agreed value of the goods. Furthermore let the governors and officials
[75]
and dignitaries of the provinces be aware, if they have allowed the
perpetration of these acts, that those who did them must be punished.
These laws of 423 constitute Theodosius' final effort to protect the
Jews in the Roman Empire. His two remaining laws about the Jews in the
*Codex Theodosianus show that after 423 he abandoned any further
hope
of repressing anti-Jewish activity. Literary sources demonstrate that
the violation of synagogues continued, and many were changed to
Christian churches. When Theodosius, late in 423, made an attempt to
restore to the Jewish community at Antioch the synagogues which the
Christians had stolen from them, the denunciation of Simeon Stylites
made the emperor retract his command. Simeon rebuked Theodosius II for
his sinful indulgence to the enemies of Heaven, and the emperor was not
proof against a reprimand from so eminent a saint. Theodosius humbly
apologized to the orthodox for his action and left the citizens of
Antioch their stolen property. Furthermore he removed the prefect who
had pleaded the cause of the Jews.233
In 432, some nine years after the trouble at Antioch, another
Jewish-Christian incident occurred. This time it was on Crete.<234>
Among the numerous and wealthy Jews who inhabited that island a
fanatic stranger appeared, who either bore or assumed the name of
Moses. He announced himself as the successor of the great Lawgiver,
and for a whole year traveled about Crete persuading the credulous
countrymen to abandon their possessions and their farms to follow
his guidance. They listened to him and neglected their labor in
the hope of speedily obtaining possession of a more fertile land, one
of milk and honey. The great day came, and at Moses' call the Jews
crowded forth by thousands; for he had proclaimed that the
Mediterranean would be turned to land before them, like the Red Sea of
old. At dawn they followed him to the top of a lofty promontory, from
which eminence Moses commanded them to throw themselves. The
foremost obeyed; they were dashed against the rocks or drowned.
Many perished and more would have shared their fate but for some
fishing craft and merchant vessels belonging to the Christians who
saved many Jews from the sea, and by holding up the bodies of the
drowned prevented the rest from following their example. The Jews
[76]
turned to revenge themselves on their leader, but he had prudently
disappeared. Socrates concludes that Moses was really a devil who had assumed
human form in order to lure the unhappy Cretan Jews to destruction. He is
pleased to record, however, that many of the surviving Jews, ashamed of their
own credulity, and struck by the kindness of the Christians, adopted
Christianity. Was this another forced conversion? The evidence does not seem
to support such an assumption. but the unhappy incident was evidently used as
a fine opportunity for Christians to make Jewish converts.
The religious zeal of Theodosius II, or his subservience to
ecclesiastical. advisers, can further be seen in his edict of 425. This law,
couched in almost mystic terms, commanded the Jews to observe the
Christian seasons of fast and feast:235
On the Lord's day, which is the first day of every week, and on
Christmas and the sixth of January, and also on Pentecost and Easter,
during the times when vestments portraying the new light of holy baptism give
proof of the glory of the sacred font, and at the time
when the Apostle's Passion is commemorated according to law by all of
Mistress Christianity, then, since the pleasures of the theaters
and circuses throughout all the cities are denied their citizens, let
the mind of every Christian and pious man be occupied by thoughts of
Cod's cult. But if even yet some are blinded by the madness of the
Jewish evil or by the error and insanity of stupid paganism, let
them know that there is one time for prayer and another for pleasure.
And lest someone think himself compelled to honor our majesty as a
great and necessary official duty, and imagine that the grace of our
favor would be taken from him if he did not prefer the magnificence of
our shows and spurn the holy religion, or if, perchance, he showed
less loyalty than usual toward us, let this person not err concerning
that divine favor which is not attributed by most of the human race to
our clemency, since actually the homage of the whole world must be
offered to the grace and good works of Almighty God.
Between CTh., 15, 5, 5, and Novella IIIthere
is an interval of
almost fifteen years during which Jewish affairs seem to have
sunk to a very low state. In the Novella III of 438 Theodosius II
reverts to the most violent denunciation and contempt for his Jewish
subjects. Here the exclusion of Jews from all the privileges of public
office is made more definite than in any previous legislation we
possess. Pos-
[77]
sibly earlier laws have been lost, for in the anonymous Altercation
between
the Church and the Synagogue which is incorrectly included among
Augustine's works, we find this gibe addressed to the Synagogue: "You pay me
tribute and cannot obtain authority; you may not possess the prefecture; a Jew
may not be a count; you may not enter the public services; you may not attain
to the tables of the rich. You have lost the right to the title of
Clarissimus."236 The dates of these restrictions and their
application to the eastern and western provinces is unknown, but Parkes
believes that they probably preceded the publication of the third
Novella.237
The pretense that laws concerning the Jews are made necessary by Jewish
rowdiness is abandoned in Novella III; indeed only one case of
such
violence is mentioned in the last thirty years of Theodosius II's reign.
John of Antioch reports that the Jews of Laodicaea took a saintly archdeacon
and "punished" him in the theater.238 This incident is related in
one of a collection of letters dealing with the Nestorians, and Parkes thinks
it possible that this account has nothing to do with real Jews, but with
Nestorians, who were often referred to by their enemies simply as
Jews.239 Novella III itself opens with a long
theological
exordium confusing orthodoxy and monotheism.
This prefaces a recapitulation of much of the Jewish legislation of the last
century and a final harshening of all laws dealing with Jews and
heretics:240
Among the other cares which love of the people forces us to consider with
constant attention we see that the most important function of the imperial power
is the inquiry into the nature of the true faith; for if we can hold the practice
of true religion steady, we will find the path of prosperity opened up for
mortals. But by virtue of the experience derived from age-old custom and the
opinion of a pious mind, we establish the ceremonies of the holy faith for our
posterity on a basis of everlasting law. For who is so deluded, who is so
condemned to the barbarity of his own wildness, that, when he sees heaven
rule the changes of seasons within its vastness with amazing swiftness, by
the regulation of divine art; when he sees the motion of the stars, regulating
the things necessary for life; the earth producing crops; the liquid ocean; and
the vastness of the immense work enclosed by the boundaries of nature, he does
not seek the author of such a secret, of such a construction? Yet this is what we
know the Jews, Samaritans,
[78]
pagans< and other types of blind, evil heretics dare to question. If we
attempt to recall these people by a healing law to reason and sanity,
they themselves are answerable for the amount of our severity,
who, by the obstinate sin of stubborn opposition, do not leave us room
for forgiveness. Therefore since, according to long-standing opinion,
there can be no possible cure for desperate sicknesses, at least, to
prevent wild sects from freely wandering about as it were in some wild
confusion, unmindful of this our Christian age, we decree by this
eternal law that no Jew or Samaritan, no matter what law he brings
forward, shall accede to dignities and honors, or perform the duties of any
civil post, or even enjoy the position of an advocate.
For we certainly consider it criminal that those who are enemies of the highest
power and of the Roman laws should be considered the prosecutors of our laws by
obtaining stolen jurisdiction, and armed with the authority of office acquired
against Christians and especially the bishops of holy religion, and these people,
while insulting our faith, should have the power of trying cases and of deciding
suits as they wish: and furthermore we prohibit with equal caution and
consideration the construction of any new synagogue, though permission is given
for repairing old ones which are threatened with immediate ruin. To these orders
we add that whoever has converted a slave or freedman, willingly or against his
will, from the Christian cult to any evil sect or rite, is to be executed and his
fortune confiscated; furthermore if any one has seized the badges of office, he
will not be able to enjoy his acquired honors, or if he has constructed a
synagogue, he shall know that he labored for the benefit of the Catholic church.
Moreover if any Jew or the like has stolen into a position of honor, let him be
held liable for the extreme penalty as before noted, even if he has received
decorations; and let one who has begun to build a synagogue without the intent of
repairing it, be fined fifty pounds of gold as penalty for his daring. Moreover
let the person who has destroyed the faith of another with a perverse doctrine
know that he is to suffer confiscation of his goods and the swift punishment of
death. And since it is proper for the imperial power to embrace all matters in
this provision, so that the public interest is in no respect harmed, we decree
that the Curiales of all cities and also the assistants of the provincial
governors, even indeed those who are obligated by personal responsibilities and
the duties of various offices and the burdens of the army, should remain at their
posts, no matter what their religious beliefs, lest we seem to grant the favor of
immunity because of insolent bribery by those execrable persons, whom we wish
to
condemn by the authority of this law. But let this exception be made,
[79]
namely that the members of the aforementioned sects may follow< at least in
private suits, opinions from their own judges; but they must not superintend the
public jail, lest Christians, as is wont to occur, sometimes suffer another
imprisonment because of the odiousness of these guards, being uncertain whether
they may lawfully be imprisoned under Jews. Hence our clemency sees the
vigilance we must keep over both the pagans and their monstrous kinsmen, who,
with natural madness and pertinacious scorn, practice both the nefarious rites of
sacrifice and the errors of fatal superstition in certain hidden solitudes, if
their crimes are not made known by public confession through their injury to
heavenly authority and their contempt of our age. These persons the thousand
terrors of the published laws do not restrain, and threatened exiles do not hold
back; therefore, if they cannot be changed, they may at least know that they must
abstain from monstrous crimes and the abominations of sacrifice. But
our patience is so offended by the audacity of their madness and so disturbed by
these provocations of wicked men, that if any wretch wished to be overlooked, he
could not dissemble. Therefore, although love of the true religion never can be
secure, and although the pagan madness calls for the extreme penalty,
nevertheless by a firm command and remembering our natural clemency, we
decree that our ire shall rise against whosoever is apprehended sacrificing
anywhere with polluted and contaminated ideas and we shall confiscate his fortune
and end his life. For it is necessary that we punish this man as a fitting
sacrifice, so that the altar of Christianity may be preserved intact. Or should
we longer endure the confounding of the seasons of the year, since the serenity
of the heavens has been disturbed, which, angered at the perfidy of the pagans,
no longer cares to serve the delicate balance of nature? Why then does spring
abjure its wonted loveliness? Why does summer rob the laboring farmer of his
hope
of good crops by a meager harvest? `Why does the intemperate ferocity of winter
destroy the fertility of the land by penetrating cold and the misfortune of
sterility? Why unless it be that nature transgresses her own laws in the
punishing of impiety? But even if we have to sustain the law after this by the
aforementioned gentle punishment, the majesty of Almighty God is to be
venerated and adored in piety. It remains to be said that the laws which were
decreed in innumerable measures concerning the Manichaeans (always offensive
to
God) and concerning the Montanists, Frygians, Fatinists, Priscillianists,
Ascodrogians, Hydroparastatistans, Borborites, and Ofites, Florentius, my dearest
and kindest friend, should be carried into swift execution and without further
delay. Therefore, through virtue of the authority
[80]
vested in you, Your Excellency, who have always been minded to
obey the commands of God and your emperor, should cause notice to
be taken everywhere, by means of edicts solemnly proposed by Your
Excellency, of the laws we have decreed to the unending glory of
the Catholic faith, and also you should take care to make known to the
judges of the provinces that they zealously inform all the cities
and provinces of these necessary laws which we have made.
Thus the Theodosian legislation concerning the Jews ends in verbiage and
bombast.
The period from the first Jewish edict of Constantine to Novella
III of Theodosius II spans 123 years. During this century the peace of
the church, coupled with the rising political influence of the clergy, introduced
a new phase of Jewish life. The anti-Jewish protagonist was the imperial or
ecclesiastical legislator, and no longer the theologian or the Biblical
commentator as had been the case in the first three Christian centuries. The
mantle passed from the preacher to the legislator, but we have seen that the
laws themselves were clothed in language of clerical vituperation, and varied
in intensity with the piety and orthodoxy of the emperors. Even the bitterest
edicts of the Middle Ages lacked the abuse showered upon the Jews by these
fanatical fourth and fifth century rulers of the Roman Empire. Few of the laws
passed against the Jews before the fall of the western empire were the result of
any political, economic, or constitutional necessity. The laws of the pagan
second century had dealt with the menace of the Jews, under Bar-Cocheba, as a
rebel nation. The laws of the Christian fourth and fifth centuries were designed
to crush a hated religious sect. Even if a legitimate Christian interest was
served in the repeated legislation for the protection or removal of Christian
slaves from their Jewish masters, nothing but hatred and malicious spite forbade
the adequate repair, the rebuilding, or adornment of Jewish synagogues, or
ordered the exclusion of Jews from the privileges or honors which accompanied
such official positions as they were allowed to hold.
The hostile laws of the later empire did not perish with its fall, as did those
insuring only the minimum civic rights to the Jewish population. The Middle Ages
forgot the statement of Theodosius the
[81]
Great, "It is quite clear that no law forbids the existence of the Jewish
Sect." In some places the legislation against the adornment of synagogues was
still enforced in the eighteenth century.
Many of these laws were embodied in canons by the ecclesiastical
contemporaries of the imperial legislators and so passed naturally
into the tradition of western Europe by way of the Church in the
great collections of canons which were a feature of the Carolingian
Age. Others were repeated in the shortened editions of the
Theodosian Code which were prepared for the various barbarian states
that succeeded the Roman Empire.
Nothing could be clearer than the incriminating record of
Christian oppression of the Jews during the fourth century both in word
and deed. That the violence of this century was mostly on the
Christian side is obvious not only from the literature but also from
the imperial and canon laws of the fourth century. There was a great
difference between the really protective legislation issued by
Valentinian and Theodosius the Great, and the weak edicts issued by their
fifth century successors. The earlier legislation is direct, and
contains no countercharges of Jewish unrighteousness. In fact none of the
fourth century laws can be said to refer to actual Jewish
misdeeds. It is only in the fifth century that theological excuses and
atrocity stories are adduced as pretexts to explain the government's inability
to protect the Jews.
On the whole, the period 315-438 is one of battle between Jews and Christians,
the former clinging to the laws of their fathers, the latter eager to crush all
opposition in the floodtide of new-found victory. This struggle put its stamp on
the whole age, and so influenced the minds of the Christian aggressors that they
were firmly convinced of the necessity of removing the Jews as a menace to
Christianity. The Jews fought back manfully and held fast to their religion.
The Code has shown how they were protected from time to time by high Roman
officials from the more fanatical mobs and monks. Even bishops and emperors
were sometimes filled with pity at their misfortunes and tried to help them.
Finally, however, as we have seen, the Jews were so ringed by popular hatred
and repressive imperial and canonical ordinances that it became impossible for
them ever
[82]
to regain their lost privileges and possessions. They had fought
hard and lost; it was to be their last struggle against oppression for
many centuries. By 438 church and state guaranteed the Jews possession
of their own laws only among themselves, since the Christian
church desired in most cases to preserve the status quo once it had
built itself into the Roman governmental bureaucracy. The church classed the
Jews as apostates and would not let them join the Christian faith
except under severe tests and waiting periods. It would not let
the Jews perish, however, for they were the everlasting witnesses for
the Old Dispensation which had passed away.
Thus excluded from society, Jewry changed its aspect to the
outside world; it donned special clothes and retired to the ghetto,
and this had disastrous results on its subsequent history. All the
evidence from the church fathers, canon and imperial law's, and
anti-Semitic popular violence indicates that Christianity took
advantage of a favorable political position to disarm an ancient foe by a
century of persecution. The later sad history of the Jews in western Europe
is largely a consequence of the misfortunes which befell them in the
fourth century.
[83]
CONCLUSION
From the study just concluded it should be apparent that the Jews in
the Roman Empire experienced a series of misfortunes during the fourth
century which reduced them from privileged citizenship to oppressed
exile. These misfortunes occurred mainly as the result of Christian
animosity, propaganda, and persecution.
The fourth century was the age of the great conflict between the
church and the synagogue. The church fathers from Eusebius to
Augustine tried to show that the Jews were wicked and depraved
monsters, fit only to be an evil and eternal example to pious Christians.
"The Jew" became a fearsome theological abstraction to suit the
propaganda purposes of the victorious church. The anti-Semitic
propaganda of the church leaders gradually spread to their flocks, and
the Christian record was marred by atrocities against the Jews from the
middle of the fourth century on: typical acts of violence were the forced
conversions on Minorca, the destruction of the synagogue at Callinicum,
the massacre at Edessa, and the expulsion of the Jews from Alexandria.
Under pressure from Christian zealots, the imperial administration
gradually succumbed to the rising tide of anti-Jewish feeling. The
Theodosian Code shows us that a series of Roman laws gradually
stripped away the privileges of the Jews during the late fourth and early
fifth centuries finally assuring the persecuted race only the minimum
civic rights. The Jews were forbidden to own Christian slaves. The
building or repairing of synagogues was banned. Constantine forced the
Jews to accept the burden of the decurionate, and Constantius confiscated the
property of converts to Judaism. Gratian later deprived converts of testamentary
rights. Theodosius the Great equated marrying a Jew or Jewess with adultery, and
further allowed the Jews themselves to marry only according to the Christian
Table of Affinity. Honorius then excluded Jesus from military and political
functions. His co-emperor, Arcadius, degraded the Jewish patriarch, Gamaliel, on
a flimsy pretext, and confiscated his tax, the aurum coronarium, thus disrupting
forever the empire-wide organization of Jewry. Finally Theodosius II summed up
all this anti-Jewish legisla-
[84]
tion in his Novella III, crystallizing in bombast and elaborate
verbiage
all the orthodox sentiments of the pious Roman emperors of the late fourth
and early fifth centuries.
Many of these laws were embodied in canons by the ecclesiastical
contemporaries of the imperial legislators and later passed into the
tradition of western Europe by way of the church in the great collections
of canons which were made during the Carolingian Age. The canons of
the church councils of the fourth century helped make anti-Jewish
sentiments traditional in the Christian church. The Spanish Council of
Elvira early in the fourth century forbade intermarriage between Jews
and Christians. It also provided that neither cleric nor layman should
accept Jewish hospitality. The Forged Canons of Nicaea deal
with the same matters as those of Elvira, adding only a prohibition against
Jewish circumcision of Christians. The Councils of Antioch and Laodicaea
forbade "Judaizing," and the Apostolic Canons ordered Christians not to deny
their faith from fear of Jews and heretics. The effect of this body of
religious legislation coupled with the Theodosian laws was disastrous to
Jewry. The church canons and the Theodosian laws together officially
stamped the mark of Cain on the Jews, and permanently separated them
socially and economically from their fellow Roman citizens.
When Rome gave way to the Germanic kingdoms of the West the
anti-Jewish laws of the Theodosian Code were embodied in the
barbarian codes, and the Jews remained outcasts in an unfriendly world
throughout western Europe. As the cities decayed many of them became
wandering traders, and others migrated eastward to seek new and happier
homes. A haven of refuge in Spain and Africa was created for the Jews
by the Moslems in the seventh and eighth centuries. There the Jews
prospered as merchants and scholars under the protection of Islam. Ibn
Gebirol, Jehuda Halevi, and Moses Maimonides produced some of
Judaism's greatest works. As the cities began to revive in western
Europe during the eleventh and twelfth centuries Jewish communities
formed in them, but with the Jews always separate and inferior to the
Christians, and really outside the protection of the Christian law. When
the passions of the First Crusade were aroused in 1095 the Jews were
among the first to feel
[85]
the fury, and community after community of Jewish merchants, artisans,
and traders was robbed and massacred by the Frankish knights and their
hordes of followers as they passed down the Rhine and Danube on their
way to Constantinople. Again the Jews suffered when the crusaders
under Conrad marched east on the Second Crusade in i 146. All the old
sophistries were once more employed. Peter of Cluny wrote, "Do not
slay them, God does not want to annihilate them. . . . They are dependent,
miserable, and terror-stricken, and must remain in that state until they are
converted to the Saviour. You ought not to kill them but to afflict them
in a manner befitting their baseness."241 Here is Augustine's
theory of the position of the Jew repeated to justify pillage in the twelfth
century! Early in the thirteenth century the Jews of Italy and France were
involved in the downfall of the Cathari during the Albigensian Crusade.
Innocent III called the famous Fourth Lateran Council in 1215, and by
canon law the Jews were forbidden all honors or offices, forced to dwell
in restricted areas the ghettos of the cities, and compelled to wear the
degrading Jew badge which set them apart from all their neighbors and
caused a general loss of self-respect among the Jews of western Europe.
As the national monarchies grew in power the kings who ruled them
turned greedy eyes upon the wealth of this unprotected class, just as the
crusaders had done in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Edward I of
England was the first to despoil them of their property and expel them
from England. This was done in 1287 on theological grounds, and Philip
IV, the Fair, of France followed his lead in 1306.
Then in 1348 the calamity of the Black Death fell upon Europe, and
the Swiss, Germans, and others looked for a scapegoat for their terror.
The hapless Jews were the logical suspects, and it was asserted that they
had poisoned the wells of Europe and thus had caused the plague.
Thousands were tortured and slain in hideous massacres all over Europe.
In view of the brutal treatment that the Jews had received in
Christian lands during medieval times, it was no wonder that the
Spanish Jews had usually sided with Islam in the great wars which
Moslem and Christian had waged in the Iberian peninsula, 1000-1492.
[86]
As the Christians gradually won out they exerted more and more
pressure on the Spanish Jews to turn Christian. This resulted in horrible
massacres of the Jews and mass conversions in 1391. Even this did not
satisfy Spanish fanaticism, and the Jews were expelled from Spain in
1492, an expulsion which led to the decline in Spanish prosperity. Soon
afterward followed the Jewish expulsion from Portugal and Navarre.
Thus excluded from many of the countries of western Europe, the Jews
crowded into Poland, Germany, and Bohemia, and many of the eastern
European lands, making new homes for themselves. Although they
suffered horribly in the Thirty Years War they found relative security
and prosperity in Germany and especially Holland from the sixteenth
through the nineteenth centuries; and in the intervening years
enlightenment forced England and France to reopen their doors to Jewish
immigration.
Then, commencing with the Russian pogroms of the nineteenth
century, a new wave of anti-Semitism and persecution began about 1850.
It has culminated so far in the butchery of the Nazis, doubtless the most
brutal and extensive persecution the Jews have ever known; and this
most recent persecution, though not the only one with strong economic
motivation in Jewish history, is unique in owing so little, on the surface
at least, to Christian influence, probably because of the rapid weakening
of Christianity in the last century before the onslaughts of science and
materialism in various forms.
Though times and symbols change with the passing of centuries the
Jews of the medieval ghetto and the Jews of Buchenwald have the
common heritage of Christian persecution. This religious persecution of
the Jews had its origins in the fourth Christian century; it is sad to think
that an end to this ancient problem is not yet in sight.
[87]
INDEX OF ABBREVIATIONS
For bibliographical details of the works listed here see the bibliographies at
the end of the essay.
AASS Acta Sanctorum quotquot toto urbe coluntur
collegit . .
. Joan. Bollandus.
BKV Die Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller, der
ersten
drei Jahrhunderte, herausgegeben von der Kirchenlichter-commission der
Konigl. Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
CJ Codex Justinianus.
CIL Corpus inscriptionum latinarum.
CSEL Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum
latinorum.
CTh. Codex Theodosianus.
Graetz Graetz, I-i., Geschichte der Juden.
JQR The Jewish Quarterly Review (London,
1888-1908). New Series (New York and Philadelphia, 1910 ff.).
Juster Juster, J., Les Juifs dans l'empire romain.
Krauss Krauss, S., "The Jews in the 'Works of the Church Fathers,"
JQT (189 3-1894).
Mansi Mansi, J. D., Sacrorum conciliorum amplissima
collectio.
MGH Monumenta Germaniae historica.
Parkes Parkes, J., The Conflict of the Church and the
Synagogue.
PG Migne, J. P., Patrologiae cursus completus, series
graeca.
PL Migne, J. P., Patrologiae cursus completus, series
latina.
PO Patrologia Orientalis
(Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium).
p. p. pretorian praefect.
REJ Revue des Etudes Juives (Paris, 1880
ff.).
Williams Williams, A. L., Adversus Judaeos.
[88]
1. Lucas, Leopold, Zur Geschichte der Juden im vierten
Jahrhundert
(Berlin, 1910).
2. Krauss, Salomon, "The Jews in the Works of the Church Fathers,"
JQR,
V
(1893) and VI (1894).
3. Parkes, James, The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue
(London,
1934).
4. Williams, Arthur L., Adversus Judaeos (Cambridge, 5935).
Simon,
Marcel, Verus Israel, ètude sur les relations entre
chrêtiens et
juifs dans l'empire romain 235-425 (Paris, 1948).
5. Juster, Jean, Les Juifs dans l'Empire Romain, 2 vols. (Paris,
1914),
II, pp. 1-27. Juster is the standard authority on Jewish institutions in the
early centuries of the Christian era. These immunities were guaranteed as late
as Honorius' reign, A.D. 397; CTh., 2, 1, 10.
6. The religious fanatic Aurelian, a devotee of the Sol Invictus, in his
attempts to solidify the religious fiber of the Roman Empire in the chaotic days
of the third century, ca. 275, persecuted Jews and Christians alike. See the
Historia Augusta for details. The material lies outside the scope
of this
survey.
7. Juster, II, passim.
8. A flagrant example of this misuse of sources is to be found in the violently
anti-Semitic pamphlet of Lentz, H. K., Der Kirchenväter
Ansichten und
Lehren über die Juden (Münster, 1894).
9. AASS, Jan. 1; the important sections are quoted by Caplan,
Harry,
Materials for a History of the Jews in the Province of Africa, a
thesis
(Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, 1921), p. 77.
10. Monceaux, P., Histoire Litteraire, III, p. 156.
11. AASS, March 7.
12. AASS, April 20. Parkes, p. 134.
13. Eusebius, The Martyrs of Palestine, VIII;
PC, XX, 1489.
14. Parkes, p. 135.
15. Synogogium Constantinopolitanum, July 16, in Parkes, p.
135.
16. Jerome, In Amos, I, 11 ff.; PL, XXV,
1001. Cf. Gaudentius,
Sermo IV, CSEL, 68.
17. AASS, Nov. 1.
18. AASS, April 3.
19. AASS, March 15. Several versions of the same story.
20. AASS, May 21.
21. AASS, Nov. 9.
22. AASS, Jan. 9.
23. Acts of St. Victor of Caesarea, c. 8, Catal.
Cod. Hagiogr. Lat. Antiquam saec. XVI, qui asserv. in Bibl., n. 3, pp.
504 ff. (Cf. Analecta Bollandiana, XXIV 1905], p. 257.) quoted
in
Caplan, op. cit., p. 77.
24. AASS, Sept. 12, Martyrdom of
Theodorus; and AASS, Sept.
53, Martyrdom of Philip.
25. Martyrs of Edessa in Euphemia the Goth, by F. C. Burkitt;
quoted in Parkes, p. 145.
26. AASS, May 30.
27. AASS, Feb. 1.
28. AASS, Nov. 4.
29. AASS, Jan. 4.
30. AASS, Jan. 22.
31. Chrysostom, John, Adversus Judaeos, V;
PC, XLVIII, 900.
32. Milman, Henry Hart, The History of the Jews (New York,
1871); Graetz, II, pp. 500 ff.
33. CTh., 16, 8, 1; 13/8/339.
34. Jerome, Chronicon, ad ann. 352; ed. by Helm in
BKV, VII (1913),
i, p. 238: 'Gallus Judaeos, qui, interfectis per noctem militibus, arma ad
rebellandum invaserant, oppressit, caesis multis hominum millibus usque ad
innoxiam aetatem, et civitates eorum Diocaesaream, Tiberiadem, et Diospolim,
plurimaque oppida igni tradidit." The Migne ed., PL, XXVII,
501 f., gives the date as 355 but Helm gives 352 as does Seeck, Otto,
Geschichte des Untergangs der Antiken Welt (Berlin,
1897-1920), p.
225; and IV Anhang, p. 440, cites also Sozomen, IV, 7, 5; Theophanes,
Chron., 5843; Augustine, Sermo V, 5
(PL, XXXVIII, 56f.). He also dates the event in 352.
35. Socrates, Hist. Eccl., II, 33; PC, LXVII,
296, tr. in Bohn
Library (1888), p. 131.
36. Victor, Sextus Aurelius, Liber de Caesaribus, 42; ed. by
Francis Pichlmayr (Leipzig, 1911), p. 128: "Et interea Judacorum seditio, qui
Patricium nefarie in regni specie sustulerant, oppressa."
37. AASS, Oct. 16.
38. AASS, Oct. 8.
[89]
39. AASS, Aug. 21.
40. Bidez, I., La Vie de l'empereur Julian (Paris, 1930), pp. 305
ff.; Vogt, Joseph, Kaiser Julian und das Judentum (Leipzig,
1939);
etc.
41. Theodoret, Hist. Eccl., IV, 210-221.
42. Agapius, third year of reign of Theodosius II; P0, VIII, 408
ff.
43. Socrates, Hist. Eccl., VII, 13; PC,
LXXXII, 759 ff., tr. in Bohn Library (London, 1888), pp. 345 ff.; dated by
Socrates 412; but Juster, II, p. 176, has plausibly argued that it could not have
happened before 414.
44. CTh., 16, 8, 21. The dates of the law and Inmestar incident
do not correspond, but the activities mentioned have a startling resemblance. An
early confusion in dating either event may account for the discrepancy.
45. Socrates, Hist. Eccl., VII, 16; tr. in Bohn Library, pp. 349
f.
46. Theophanes, Chronographia; PC, CVIII,
227. The account of Cassiodorus, PL, LXIX, 1195, is an
adaptation
of Socrates' story.
47. Nau, F., "Life of Barsauma," Revue de l'orient chrêtienne
(1913).
48. Parkes, p. 158. Cf. Trachtenberg, Joshua, The Devil and the
Jews (New Haven, 1943), for amplification of the Jewish "monster" or
"devil."
49. Williams; Maurawski, Bp., Die Juden bei den Kirchenvätern
und
Skolastikern (Berlin, 1925).
50. Lactantius, Div. Inst., VII, 26.
51. Commodianus, Instructiones, ed. by B. Lombart in
CSEL, XV (1887); tr. in vol. III of The Writings of
Tertullian by R. E. Wallis (Edinburgh, 1870), pp. 452 ff.
52. Fortunatus, Venantius, Vita Sancti Hilarii, III;
MCH, Auctores antiquissimi, IV, 2, p. 2. Cf. Amolo, Lib.
contra ludaeos, III; PL, CXVI, 180 ff.
53. Hilary of Poitiers, Comm. in Matt., XII, 22;
PL, IX, 992 ff.
54. Ibid.; Tract. in Ps. LI, 6;
CSEL, 22, pp. 100 ff.
55. Eusebius of Caesarea, PC, XXI and XXII. See the fine
edition and translation of the Praeparatio Evangelica by E. H.
Gifford in 5 vols., 4 tomes (Oxford, 1903). The Demonstratio
Evangelica is now published in BKV,
VI, ed.
by I. Heikel (Leipzig, 1913).
56. Eusebius, Praep. Evang., VII and X; Dem.
Evang., I.
57. Eusebius, Praep. Evang., V and Xl.
58. Eusebius, Dem. Evang., I and VI.
59. Eusebius, Praep. Evang., VIII; Dem.
Evang., I, II, and III.
60. Eusebius, Dem. Evang., I and III, passim.
The prophets are never called Jews. Only the law is Jewish.
61. Eusebins, Praep. Evang., VII.
62. Discussion of St. Sylvester in Cedreneus, Ceorge, Synopsis
Historion; PC, CXXI, 521-540. Cf. Ep. of Pope
Hadrian to
Charlemagne in 791; Mansi, II, p. 551; also published in full by Mombritius in
Sanctuarum seu vitae Sanctorum (1490), II, pp. 508.529,
republished
in Paris (5910). MGH, Epist.Carolini aevi, V, 3, p. 39. This
discussion is of doubtful historical value.It is part of the pseudoepigraphical
material later attributed to Sylvester, much of it belonging to the
Pseudo-Isidorian literature.
63. Nestorian History, XIX; PO, IV, 281.
64. Athanasius, Ep. Encyc., III; PC, XXV,
228. For the later riots see Theodoret, Hist. Eccl., IV, 18 f;
BKV (Leipzig, 1911), pp. 239 ff.
65. Graetz, II, p. 575.
66. Parkes, Appendix I, believes this council was ca. AD. 300. Mansi, II, p. 1
dates the council 305.
67. Council of Elvira, Canon XVI; Mansi, II, p. 8.
68. Council of Elvira, Canon LXXVIII; Mansi, II, p. ?s8.
69. Ambrosius, Epistola XIX; PL, XVI, 1025
f.
70. Council of Elvira, Canon L; Mansi, II, p. 14.
71. Council of Elvira, Canon XLIX; Mansi, II, p. 14.
72. Parkes, p. 275.
73. See note 52.
74. Council of Nicaea Canon XXI; Mansi, II, p. 1048.
75. Parkes, Appendix I.
76. Forged Canons of Nicaea, Canon II, Arabian Collection;
Mansi, II, p. 982.
77. Forged Canons of Nicaea, Canon XIII, Arabian Collection;
Mansi, II, p. 969.
78. Forged Canons of Nicaea, Canon LII, Arabian Collection;
Mansi, II, p. 969.
79. Dill, Samuel, Roman Society in the Last Century of the Western
Empire (London, 1905), pp. 250 ff.
80. Constantine to the Officials at Cologne,
CTh., 16, 8, 3 11/12/321. The dating of all laws is according to
Seeck, Otto, Regesten der Kaiser und Päpste AD. 311-476
(Stuttgart, 1919).
[90]
81. Constantine to Ablavius, pp., CTh., 16, 8,
2; 29/11/330.
82. Constantine to the Jewish Priests, Rabbis, Elders, and Other
Authorities,CTh., 16, 8,
83. Constantine to Felix, pp., CTh., 16, 9, 1;
21/10/335.
84. Constantine to Felix, pp., Constitutio
Sirmondianis No. 4; 21/10/335.
85. Eusebius Pamphilius, Vita Constantini, IV, 27;
PL, VIII, 77.
86. Constantine to Felix, pp., CTh., 16, 8, 5;
21/10/335.
87. Constantius to Evagrius, CTIL, 16, 9, 2;
13/8/339.
88. Parkes, p. 180.
89. Constantius to Evagrius, CTh., 16, 8, 1;
13/8/339.
90. Constantius to Thalassius, pp. CTh., 16, 8,
7; 3/7/353.
91. Constantius to Evagrius, CTh., 16, 8, 6;
13/8/339.
92. Parkes, p. 180.
93. Gratian to Hypatius, p.p., CTh., 12, 1, 99;
18/4/383.
94. Valentinian to Remigius, Magister officiorum,
CTh., 7, 8, 2; 6/5/368.
95. Michael the Syrian, VII, 7.
96. Council of Antioch, Canon I; Mansi, II, p. 1336.
97. Council of Laodicaea, Canon XXIX; Mansi, II, p. 580.
98. Council of Laodicaea, Canon XXXVII; Mansi, II, p.
590.
99. Council of Laodicaea, Canon XXXVIII; Mansi, II, pp. 580
f.
100. Apostolic Canons, Canon LXIX; Funk, F. X.,
Didascalia et Constitutiones Apostolorum (Paderborn, 1906), p.
585.
101. Apostolic Canons, Canon LXV; Funk, op.
cit., p. 585
102. Apostolic Canons, Canon LXXI; Funk, op.
cit., p. 587.
103. Apostolic Canons, Canon LXII; Funk, op.
cit., p. 583.
104. Ephraem Syrus, In II Reg. XIX, I (Opera
Syriaca, I, 558); quoted in Krauss (1894), p. 91. Ephraem Syri
Opera omnia, rec. P. Benedictus (Rome, 1732-1746), 6 vols.
105. Ephraem Syrus, Op. Syr., II, 469.
106. Ephraem Syrus, In Cen, XLIX; Op. Syr.,
I, 523.
107. Ephraem Syrus, In II Reg., II, ad finem.
108. These quotations are from Krauss (1894), pp. 90 ff.
109. Pseudo-Ephraem, in Lamy, S. Ep. Syri Hymni et Sermones, II
and III; cf. Krauss (1894), pp. 90 ff.
110. Lamy, op. cit., II, 399 and 411; quoted in Krauss (1894),
pp. 90 ff.
111. Aphrahat, XXIlI Homilies in Patrologia
Syriaca, I, 1 and 2 (1894); cf. Afrahat, Homilien, tr.
into
German by C. Bertin, Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der
Altchristlichen Literatur (1888). III; Homilies, I, 19, XI, and XII.
112. Athanasius, Oratio de incarnatione Verbi, I;
PC, XXV, 97. The tone of the Pseudo-Athanasius De
Passione et
Cruce Domini is also violently anti-Jewish, No. 33 and 34;
PG. XXVIII, 245 ff.
113. Basil, Homilia XXIV, I; PC, XXXI,
600.
114. Basil, Comm. in Es., I; PC, XXX,
192.
115. Ibid., V; PC, XXX, 345.
116. Gregory of Nyssa, Testimonia aduersus Iudaeos;
PC, XLVI, 193-234. The Pseudo-Gregory of Nyssa's
Selected
Testimonies from the Old Testament against the Jews, cited in Williams,
p. 130, has no claim to independent merit. Nowhere does it rise beyond naive
interpretations, or attempt independent reasoning. Williams says it is hard to
think that it could ever have been in use for practical controversy with the
Jews, of whom the author seems to have no personal knowledge.
117. Gregory Nazianzen, Oratio V contra Julianum, II, 3-4;
PC, XXXV, 667-670.
118. Chrysostom, John, VIII Sermons against the Jews;
PC, XLVIII.
119. For a full account of Jewish-Christian relations in Antioch, see
Kräling, C. H., "The Jewish Community at Antioch up to AD. 600,"
Journal of Biblical Literature, LI; cf. Krauss, "Antioche,"
REJ, XLV (1902), pp. 27-49.
120. Chrysostom, VIII Sermons against the Jews;
PC, XLVIII, Sermo 1, 3.
121. Ibid.; PC, XLVIII, Sermo
I, 6.
122. Ibid.; PC, XLVIII, Sermo
I. 3 and II, 3.
123. Ibid.; PC, XLVIII, Sermo
I, 3.
124. Ibid.; PC, XLVIII, Sermo
III, 5 and Sermo VI, 8.
125. Ibid.; PC, XLVIII, Sermo
I, 5, and Sermo VI, 6.
126. Ibid.; PC, XLVIII, Sermo
I, 3 and 6.
127. Ibid.; PC, XLVIII, Sermo
VI, 1.
128. Ibid.; PC, XLVIII, Sermo
IV, 6.
129. Ibid.; PC, XLVIII, Sermo
VI, 3 and V, passim.
[91]
130. Ibid.; PC, XLVIII, Sermo
VII, a. Cf. Chrysostom, Ep. I ad Innocentium;
PG, LII, 533 ff.; where he writes in a rather friendly vein about
Jews who sympathized with the Christian martyrs in an Alexandrine riot of A.D.
404.
131. Ambrose, Epistolae XL and XLI; PL,
XVI, 1148-1171.
132. This is the opinion of Dudden, Holmes, Saint Ambrose, 2
vols. (Oxford, 1935), II, pp. 371 ff.
133. Ammianus Marcellinus, History, ed. and tr. by Rolfe in
Loeb Classics, 3 vols. (London, 1929); XXIII, 3, 7.
134. Cf. the destruction of a synagogue in Rome; Ambrose, Ep.
XL, 20; PL, XVI, 1155ff.
135. Ambrose, Ep. XL; PL, XVI, 1148 ff.
136. Ambrose, Ep. XL, 8; PL, XVI, 1151
ff.
137. Ambrose, Ep. XL, 10; PL, XVI, 1152.
138. Ambrose, Ep. XL, 18 and 19; PL, XVI,
1555.
139. Ambrose, Ep. XL, 33; PL, XVI, 1160.
140. Ambrose, Ep. XLII, passim; PL, XVI,
1572-1177.
141. Paulinos of Nola, Epistola XXIII; PL,
LXI, 256 ff.
142. Dudden, op. cit., II, pp. 371 ff.
143. Ambrosiaster, Comm. in Rom. IX, 27;
PL, XVII, 146.
144. Ambrosiaster, Quaestiones Veteris et Novi Testamenti, ed.
by Souter, CSEL, I (1908). This is from O.T.,
XLIV
ff.
145. Vita Innocentii, ed. from fragments of his life written by
his deacon Celsus; in AA.SS, April 2, p. 483. 146.
Passio S.
Salsae, RET, XLIV, p. 8; cf. Caplan, op.
cit.
Monceaux, Histoire Littéraire, III, pp. 163 ff., dates this
in the reign of Constantine; Parkes, p. 187, gives it as ca. 355.
147. Of the two sanctuaries of Salsa mentioned in this recital, one, a funerary
chapel, has been unearthed. (See Gsell, Récherches arch, en
Algérie, pp. 1 ff.; CIL, VIII, 20913 and 20915,
for
inscriptions found there.) The sarcophagus found in the center of the chapel
has the name Fabia Salsa, age 63, and is pagan in appearance. Monceaux,
Histoire Litt&aire, III, pp. 166 ff., who regards the passion as
genuine, thinks this may be the parent of the martyr or the martyr herself who
was made young in the passion. Dessau, however, discredits the whole legend as a
growth from misinterpreting the inscription (Dessau, H., Archaelog.
Anz. [1900), p. 153; cf. Caplan, op. cit.).
148. Ambrose, Ep. XL, 23; PL, XVI, 1156.
149. Gratian to Hypatius, p.p., CTh., 12, 1,
99; 18/4/383.
150. Gratian to Hypatius, p.p., CTh., 16, 7, 3;
21/5/383.
151. Gratian to Cynegius, p.p., CTh., 3, 1, 5;
22/9/384.
152. Theodosius the Great to Cynegius, pp.,
CTh., 3,
7, 2 or 9, 7, 5; 14/3/388.
153. The text of this law is not to be found in the Codex
Theodosianus, but is preserved in the Codex
Justinianus, 1,
9, 7; Theodosius the Great to Infantius, Governor of the Eastern
Provinces; 30/12/393.
154. Juster, I, p. 469.
155. Parkes, p. 182.
156. Theodosius the Great to Alexander, prefect of Egypt,
CTh., 13, 5, 18; 18/2/390.
157. Theodosius the Great to Tatianus, p.p.,
CTh., 16, 8, 8; 17/4/392.
158. Theodosius the Great to Addeus, Commander in Chief of the
Eastern Command, CTh., 16, 8, 9; 29/9/393.
159. Jerome, Comm. in Es., III, 9 f.; VIII, XXVI, 11; XVIII,
XVIII, 13; PL, XXIV, 100, 307 , 665.
160. Jerome, Comm. in Es., XIII, XLVIII, 22; XIII, XLIX, 1;
and XVII, XLIX, 19; PL, XXIV, 480, 482, 608.
161. Jerome, On Jeremiah, V, 2; CSEL, 59,
pp. 296 ff. For a collection of passages from different authors dealing with the
ultimate destination of the Jews, see PL.
162. Jerome, Comm. in Ep. ad Titum, I, II ff.; PL, XXVI,
594.
163. Jerome, Comm. in Evang. Matt., IV, 27, 1-5;
PL, XXVI, 212.
164. Jerome, Ep. LXXXIV, 3; CSEL, 55, p.
123. It is
interesting to note that one hundred years before, Origen consorted openly with
Jewish scholars.
165. Jerome, Ep. CXII to Augustine, 13; CSEL,
55, p.
382
166. Jerome, Comm. in Epist. ad Galat., III, VI, 12;
PL, XXVI, 464.
167. Jerome, Comm. in Osee, I, II, 2; PL,
XXV, 830.
168. Jerome, Comm. in Ep. ad Galat., I, I, 1;
PL, XXVI, 335 ff.
169. Jerome, Comm. in Es., II, V, 18, and 19;
PL,
XXIV, 86 ff. So also in his Tractatus de Psalmo CVIII (ed. by C.
Mono, Anecdota Maredsolana, III, II,
195, 13-14, commenting: "Maledicent illi, et tu benedicet. Usque hodie hoc fit:
illi malodicunt in synagoga, et Dominus benedicit in Ecclesia."
[92]
170. Jerome, Comm. in Es., XIII, XLIX, 7; PL, XXIV, 484; cf.
Comm. in Es., XIV, LII, 4; PL, XXIV, 517.
171. Augustine, Enarratio in Psalmum XL, 14;
PL, XXXVI, 463.
172. Ibid.; PL, XXXVI, 760 ff.
173. Augustine, De fide rerum quae non videntur, I, VII;
PL, XL, 579; cf. Sermo CCI, III;
PL,
XXXVIII, 1032.
174. Cf. Jerome, Tractatus de Psalmo CVIII, Anecdota
Maredsolana, III, II, p. 191, 12- 55): "Ita igitur et isti, quoniam
crucifixerunt Deum et Dominum Suum, nutantes transferuntur (cf. Ps. 108
A.F. [109], 10). Non enim sunt in suis locis, sed in toto orbe divisi sunt.
Mendicitatem hic dicit divitiarum spiritalium. Non enim habent prophetas, non
habent legem, non habent sacerdotium, non habent sacrificium, sed vere mendici
facti sunt."
175. Augustine, Tractatus adversus Iudaeos;
PL, XLII, 51-64. The two Pseudo-Augustinian treatises,
Adversus Quinque Haereses (fifth century);
PL, XLII,
1099 ff., and Contra Iudaeos, Paganos, et Arianos Sermo de
Symbolo
(fifth century); PL, XLII, 1117-1130, contain only
stereotyped material borrowed from earlier authors. For details see Williams, pp.
321 ff. They have both been attributed to Quodvultdeus (ob. c.
453); cf. Bardenhewer, Otto, Geschichte der altkirchlichcn
Literatur, 5 vols. (Freiburg i/B, 1953-1934), IV, p. 522.
176. Mansi, III, Syllabus, p. vi and 945 ff.
177. Council of Carthage IV, Canon LXXXIX; Mansi, III, p.
958.
178. Council of Carthage IV, Canon LXXXIV; Mansi, III, p.
958.
179. Council of Carthage, VI (or VII), Canon II; Mansi, IV, p.
437 (AD. 419).
180. Parkes, p. 177. Cf. 1, 5, 21, prohibits Jews and pagans from giving
testimony against Christians, etc. (dated 530).
181. Juster, II, p. 27.
182. Honorius to Theodorus, p.p., CTh., 12, 1,
157; 13/9/398.
183. Honorius to Theodorus, p.p., CTh., 12, 1,
58; 13/9/398.
184. Honorius to Messala, p.p., CTh., 16, 8,
14; 11/4/399.
185. Honorius to Hadrian, p.p., CTh., 16, 8,
17; 2 5/7/404.
186. Honorius to Romulianus, p.p., CTh., 16,
8, 16; 22/4/404.
187. Cavallera, Ferdinand, Saint Jerome (Paris, 1922),
première partie, tome 2, p. 164, for the dating of the Isaiah Commentary.
Jerome, Comm. in Es., II, 3; PL, XXIV, 59.
188. Honorius to Palladius, p.p., CTh., 16, 8,
24; 10/3/418.
189. Parkes, p. 202, and Lucas, Leopold, Zur Geschichte der Juden
im Vierten Jahrhundert (Berlin, 1910), p. 93
190. Lucas, op. cit., p. 93. Lucas' belief that Augustine's
De Civitate Dei was an anti-Donatist writing, and as such
contributory to the downfall of the Jewish Patriarchate, has not won wide
acceptance among scholars.
191. Honorius to Donatus in Africa, CTh., 16,
5, 44; 24/11/408.
192. Honorius to Theodore, p.p., CTh., 16, 5,
46; 15/1/409.
193. Honorius to Jovius, p.p., CTh., 16, 8, 19;
1/4/409.
194. Cf. 1, 12, 2.
195. Honorius to Annatus Didascalus and the Elders of the Jews,
CTh., 16, 8, 23; 24/9/416; cf. the story of the Jew who, promised
money if he would abandon Judaism and accept Christianity, was baptized and
apostasized many times and made a handsome profit of the business; in Socrates,
Eccl. Hist., VII, 17.
196. Honorius to Annatus Didascalus and the Elders of the
Jews, CTh., 16, 9, 3; 6/11/415.
197. Honorius to Johannes, p.p., CTh., 8, 8, 8,
or 2, 8, 16; 26/7/412.
198. Honorius to Johannes, p.p., CTh., 16, 8,
20; 26/7/412.
199. Valentinian to Amatius, Governor of Gaul,
Constitutio Sirmondianis, No. 6, ad finem; 9/7 /425.
200. Valentinian III to Bassus, p.p., CTh., 16,
8, 28; 7/4/96.
201. For Lex Falcidia, which forbade the bequest in legacies of
more than three-quarters of the estate (at least one-quarter remained for the
heirs), see Osius, Institutes, II, 227 (Poste's ed. [4th ed.,
Oxford, 1904]), p. 238.
202. Arcadius to the Jews, CTh., 16, 8, 10;
28/2/396.
203. Arcadius to Claudianus, Governor of the Eastern Provinces,
CTh., 16, 8, 11; 24/4/ 396.
204. Arcadius to Entychianus, p.p., CTh., 16,
8, 15; 3/2/404.
205. Parkes, pp. 231-233. Arcadius to Anatolius, Prefect of Illyricum,
CTh., 16, 8, 12; 17/6/397.
206. Arcadius to Archelaus, Prefect of Egypt,
CTh., 9, 45, 2; 17/6/397.
207. Arcadius to Caesarius, p.p., CTh., 16, 8,
13; a/7/397.
208. Arcadius to Eutychianus, p.p., CTh., 12,
1, 16; 28/12/399.
209. CTh., 16, 8, 22, makes it appear probable that Arcadius
prohibited the building of new synagogues, for such a law was in force in 415 at
the time of the degradation of the
[93]
patriarch. Furthermore the sermons of Chrysostom at Antioch make one suspect
that the building of synagogues was banned during his patriarchate (398-404).
210. Arcadius to Eutachianus, p.p., CTh, 2, 1,
20; 3/2/398.
211. Ferrandus, Brevatio Canonum, Title 196;
PL,
LXVII, 959.
212. Parkes, p. 233.
213. Theodosius II to Anthemius, p.p., CTh.,
16, 8, 18; 29/5/408.
214. Socrates, Hist. Eccl., VII, 26; PG,
LXVII, 769 ff. For further details see pp. 16 f.
215. Juster. II, p. 204.
216. Parkes, p. 233.
217. Agapius, third year of reign of Theodosius II; P0, VIII, 408
ff.; for further details see pp. 15 f.
218. Socrates, Hist. Eccl., VII, 13; PG,
LXVII, 760. See pp. 15 f. for full details of this incident.
219. Severus, Epistola ad omnem Ecclesiam de virtutibus ad
Judaeorum conversionem in Minorcensi insula factis in praesentia reliquarum
Sancti Stephani; PL, XX, 731-746.
220. Theodosius II to Philip, Governor of Illyricum,
CTh., 16, 8, 21; 6/8/420.
221. Theodosius II to Aurelian, p.p., CTh.,
16, 8, 22; 2/10/415.
222. Jerome, Comm. in Es., III, 2; PL, XXIV,
58 f.
223. Theodosius II to John, Count of the Sacred Largesse,
CTh., 16, 8, 29; 30/5/429.
224. Theodosius II to Manaxius, p.p., CTh.,
16, 9, 4; 10/4/417.
225. Theodosius II to Asclepiodotus, p.p.,
CTh., 16,
9, 5; 9/4/423.
226. Nan, F., article on Barsauma in REJ, LXXXIII, p. 184.
227. Chronicon Edessae, III, ss., IV, pt. I of Corpus
Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium; cf. Michael the Syrian, bk. VI,
10,
228. Nan, F., article on Barsauma in REJ, LXXXIII, p. 184.
229. Theodosius II to Asclepiodotus, p.p.,
CTh., 16,
8, 25; 15/2/423.
230. Theodosius II to Asclepiodotus, p.p.,
CTh., 16,
8, 26; 9/4/423.
231. Theodosius II to Asclepiodotus, pp., CTh.,
16,
8, 27; 8/6/423.
232. Theodosius II to Asclepiodotus, p.p.,
CTh., 16,
10, 24; 8/6/423.
233. Evagrius, Historia Ecclesiastica, I, 13; PC,
LXXXVI, Pt. 2, 2456; also Metaphraster, Life of Simeon
Stylites;
PC, CXIV, 381.
234. Socrates, Hist. Eccl., VII, 38; PG,
LXVII, 826 ff.; cf.
Nicephorus, XIV, 40; PG, CXLVI, 1199 ff.
235. Theodosius II to Asclepiodotus, p.p.,
CTh., 15, 5, 5;
1/2/425.
236. Altercatio Synagogae et Ecclesiae; PL,
XLII, 1133 (cf. Juster,
II, p. 245, n. 4).
237. Parkes, p. 239.
238. Epistle of John of Antioch to Proclus of Constantinople in
Variorum
Episcoporum Epistolae, ed. in Chron. Lupus (Louvain,
1682). I have
not
seen this volume. It is quoted in Parkes, p. 238.
239. Parkes, p. 238.
240. Theodosins II to Florentius, p.p., Novella
III; 31/1/438.
241. Graetz, III, p. 350.
[94]
SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHIES
1. Sources
Ammianus Marcellinus, History, ed. and tr. by Rolfe in Loeb
Classics, 3 vols. (London, 1929).
Benedictus, P., Ephraem Syri opera omnia (Rome,
1732-1746).
Bertin, C., Texte und Untersuchungen, Afrahat Homilien
(Berlin, 1888).
Bollandus, Joan., Acta Sanctorum quotquot toto urbe coluntur
collegit Joan. Bollandus 53 vols. (Antwerp, 1643-1794: Paris, 1865 ff.).
Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, 15 vols. in 39 tomes (Berlin,
1833 ff.).
Corpus Iuris Civilis, vol. 1, Institutiones, ed.
by P. Krueger;
Digesta, ed. by Tb. Mommsen and P.
Krueger, 9th
ed. (Berlin, 1922). Vol. II; Codex Justinianus, ed. by P. Krueger,
9th ed. (Berlin, 1915). Vol. III; Novellae, ed. by R. Scholl and
W.
Kroll, 5th ed. (Berlin, 1928).
Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, ed. by
Concilio et Impensis Academiae Litterarum Caesareae Vindobonensis (Vienna,
1866
ff.).
Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium, ed. by K. de
Luigi (Rome, 1904 ff.).
Dalton, O. N., The History of the Franks by Gregory of Tours, 2
vols. (Oxford, 1927), Vol. I, Introduction, Vol. II, Translation and Commentary.
-Eusebius, Church History, Life and Oration on
Constantine, in A Select Library of Nicene and Post Nicene
Fathers, ed. by P. Schaif and H. Wace (New York, 1890).
Funk, F. X., Didascalia et Constitutiones Apostolorum, vols. I
and II (Paderborn, 1906).
Gothofredus, Jacobi, Codex Theodosianus cum Perpetuis
Commentariis (Leipzig, 1741).
Jerome, De Viris Inlustribus, tr. by E. C. Richardson in vol. III,
A Select Library of Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers, ed. by P.
Schaif and H. Wace (New York, 1892).
Principal Works, tr. by W. H. Freemantle, C. Lewis, and
W. G. Marttey, vol. VI in the second series of A Select Library of
Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers, ed. by P. Schaif and H. Wace (New
York,
1893).
Lactantius, Opera Omnia, tr. by William Fletcher (Edinburgh,
1871).
Lamy, P. S., Ephraem Syri Hymni et Sermones (Paris, nd.).
Mansi, Gian Domenico, Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima
collectio, 50 vols. in 53 tomes (Paris, 1903-1927).
Migne, J. P., Patrologiae cursus completus, series Graeca, 166
vols. (Paris, 1837-1866).
Patrologiae cursus completus, series Latina, 221 vols. (Paris,
1844-1864).
Monumenta Germaniae Historica, ed. by C. H. Pertz, 25 vols.
(Hanover, 1826-1874); ed. by Societas aperiendis fontibus rerum germanicarum
medii aevi (Berlin and Hanover, 1877 ff.).
Socrates, Church History, tr. in Bohn Library (London,
1888).
Theodoret, Historical Writings, etc., vol. III in A
Select Library of Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers, ed. by P. Schaif and
H.
Wace (New York, 1892).
Theodosiani Libri XVI cum constitutionibus Sirmondianis et leges
Novellae ad
[95]
Theodosianum pertinentes, ed. by Th. Mommsen and P. M.
Meyer, 2 vols. in 3 tomes (Berlin, 1905).
Venanti Fortunati Opera poetica, ed. by Fred. Leo, MGH,
Auctores Antiquissimi, IV, 1 (Berlin, 1881).
Sextus Aurelius Victor, Liber de Caesaribus, ed. by Francis
Pichimayr (Leipzig, 1911).
2. Secondary Works
Bardenhewer, Otto, Geschichte der altkirchlichen Literatur, 5
vols. (Freiburg i/B, 1913-1934).
Bidez, I., La vie de l'empereur Julien (Paris, 1930).
Caplan, Harry, Materials for a History of the Jews in the Roman
Province of Africa, a thesis (Cornell University, Ithaca, New York,
1921).
Cavallera, Ferdinand, Saint Jérme, sa vie et son oeuvre,
première partie, tomes I and II (Louvain and Paris, 1922).
Dill, Samuel, Roman Society in the Last Century of the Western
Empire (New York, 1905).
Dudden, Homes, Saint Ambrose His Life and Times, vols. I and
II (Oxford, 1935).
Graetz, Heinrich, Geschichte der Juden von den Ältesten
Zeiten bis auf die Gegenwart, 4th ed., 11 vols. (Leipzig, 1906-1909).
Juster, Jean, Les Juifs dans l'Empire Romain, 2 vols. (Paris,
1914).
Kraling, C. H., "The Jewish Community at Antioch up to A.D. 600,"
Journal of Biblical Literature, LI.
Krauss, Salomon, "Antioche," REJ, XLV (1902), pp. 27-49.
----, "The Jews in the Works of the Church Fathers," JQR, V
(1893) and VI (1894).
Lentz, H. K., Der Kirchenväter Ansichten und Lehren
über die Juden (Munster, 1894).
Lucas, Leopold, Zur Geschichte der Juden im vierten
Jahrhundert (Berlin, 1910).
Milman, Henry Hart, The History of the Jews, 3 vols. (New
York, 1871).
Murawski, Bishop, Die Juden bei den Kirchenvätern und
Skolastikern (Berlin, 1925).
Nau, F., "Barsauma," REJ, LXXXIII, pp. 184 ff. "Life of
Barsauma," Revue de l'orient chretienne (1913).
Parkes, James, The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue
(London, 1934).
-----, A History of Palestine (New York, 1949).
Seeck, Otto, Geschichte des Untergangs der Antiken Welt
(Berlin, 1897-1920). Regesten der Kaiser und Päpste, A.D.
311-476 (Stuttgart, 1919).
Simon, Marcel, Verus Israel, étude sur les relations entre
Chrétiens et Juifs dans l'empire romain 135-425 (Paris,
1948).
Souter, Alexander, The Earliest Latin Commentaries on the Epistles
of St. Paul (Oxford, 1927).
----, A Study of Ambrosiaster (Cambridge, 1905).
Strack, H. L., The Jew and Human Sacrifice (London,
1909).
Trachtenherg, Joshua, The Devil and the Jews (New Haven,
1943).
Vogt, Joseph, Kaiser Julian und das Judentum (Leipzig,
1939).
Williams, Arthur Lukyn, Adversus Judaeos (Cambridge,
1935).
[96]
The following is a convenient index of translations for the
Theodosian Code. The code number of
the lawappears on the left< and the page where the law is translated appears on
theright:
The Theodosian Code
| 2, 1, 10 |
67f. |
| 2, 8, 26 |
62 |
| 3, 1, 5 |
46 |
| 3, 7, 2 |
48 |
| 7, 8, 2 |
34 |
| 8, 8, 8 |
62 |
| 9, 7, 5 |
48 |
| 9, 45, 2 |
66 |
| 12, 1, 99 |
46 |
| 12, 1, 157 |
57 |
| 12, 1, 158 |
57 |
| 12, 1, 165 |
67 |
| 13, 5, 18 |
49 |
| 15, 5, 5 |
77 |
| 16, 5, 44 |
59f. |
| 16, 5, 46 |
60 |
| 16, 7, 3 |
47 |
| 16, 8, 1 |
32 |
| 16, 8, 2 |
30 |
| 16, 8, 3 |
29 |
| 16, 8, 4 |
31 |
| 16, 8, 5 |
31 |
| 16, 8, 6 |
33 |
| 16, 8, 7 |
33 |
| 16, 8, 8 |
49 |
| 16, 8, 9, |
50 |
| 16, 8, 10 |
65 |
| 1, 8, 11 |
65 |
| 16, 8, 12 |
66 |
| 16, 8, 13 |
67 |
| 16, 8, 14 |
57 |
| 16, 8, 16 |
58 |
| 16, 8, 17 |
58 |
| 16, 8, 18 |
69 |
| 16, 8, 19 |
60 ff. |
| 16, 8, 20 |
63 |
| 16, 8, 21 |
70 ff. |
| 16, 8, 22 |
67, 72 |
| 16, 8, 23 |
62 |
| 16, 8, 24 |
58 |
| 16, 8, 25 |
74 |
| 16, 8, 26 |
74 ff. |
| 16, 8, 27 |
75 |
| 16, 8, 28 |
64 |
| 16, 8, 29 |
72 |
| 16, 9, 1 |
30 |
| 16, 9, 2 |
32 |
| 16, 9, 3 |
62 |
| 16, 9, 4 |
73 |
| 16, 9, 5 |
73 |
| 16, 10, 24 |
75 f. |
| Novella III |
78 ff. |
Other Imperial Laws Cited
| CODEX JUSTINIANUS, 1, 9, 7 |
48 |
| CONSTITUTIO SIRMONDIANIS No.
4 |
30 |
| CONSTITUTIO SIRMONDIANIS No.
6 |
63 ff. |
|
|
[98]
Index of Canons
| COUNCIL OF ELVIRA |
|
| ANTIOCH, Mansi, II, 1, 8 |
25 |
| LAODICAEA 29 Mansi II, 14 |
26 |
| LAODICIAEA 38 - Mansi, II, 1,
14 |
26 |
| APOSTOLIC |
| APOSTOLIC 62 - Mansi II, 982 |
28 |
| APOSTOLIC 65 - Mansi II, 969 |
28 |
| APOSTOLIC 69 - Mansi, II, 969 |
28 |
| APOSTOLIC 71 - Mansi, II,
1048 |
27 |
| Canon 16 - Mansi, II, 1336 |
34 |
| Canon 49 - Mansi, II, 580 |
35 |
| Canon 50 - Mansi, II, 580 |
35 |
| Canon 78 - Mansi, II, 580f. |
35 |
| NICENE 2 - Funk, 583 |
36 |
| NICENE 13 - Funk 585 |
35 |
| NICENE 52 - Funk 585 |
35 |
| NICAEA 21 - Funk 587 |
35ff. |
| CARTHAGE COUNCIL IV, 84 - Mansi
III, 958 |
55 |
| CARTHAGE COUNCIL IV, 89 - Mansi
III, 958 |
55 |
| CARTHAGE COUNCIL VI, 2 - Mansi
IV, 437 |
55 |
[98]
General Index
Abraham, 23
Acta Sanctorum, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13
Adamantius, 16
Africa, 11, 27
African Canons, 55, 56
Agapius, 15, 69
Agatha, 11
Aggaeus, 12
Agricola, 11, 12
Alaric, 66
Albigensian Crusade, 86
Alexander of Macedon, 16
Alexandria, 11, 14, 15, 17, 24, 35, 43, 69, 70, 84
Altercation between the Church and the Synagogue, 78
Ambrose, 4, 21, 26, 41, 42, 43, 44, 46
Ambrosiaster, 44, 45, 46
Antherius, 8
Antioch, 14, 17, 34, 40, 69, 76
Antioch, Council of, 34, 85
Aphrahat, 38
Apostoli, 6
Apostolic Canons, 35, 36, 85
Apulia, 57
Arcadius, 56, 65, 66, 67, 68, 84
Archisynagogi, 30, 57
Arians, 11, 24, 31
Ascalon, 43
Ascodrogians, 80
Athanasius, 11, 24, 38
Augustine, 21, 50, 51, 52, 86
Aurelian, 95
Aurelius, Victor, 13, 91
Aurum Coronarium, 6, 57, 58, 72
Austremonius, 10
Bar Aninas, 51
Bar-Cocheba, 81
Barsauma, 18, 73, 74
Basil, 8, 38
Benedicta, 13, 14
Berytus, 43
Black Death, 86
Bohemia, 87
Bonosus, 14
Borhorites, 80
Buchenwald, 87
Caelicolae, 60, 61
Caius, 12
Calabria, 57
Callinicum (Al-Rakka), 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 53, 54, 59, 78, 84, 46, 84
Caplan, Harry, 11, 94
Carolingian Age, 55, 82, 85
Carthage, Council of, 55, 56
Cassiodorus, 17
Cathari, 86
Cedrenus, George, 92
Chersonese, 8
Chosroes, 11
Chromnatus, 42
Chrysostom, 12, 34, 39, 40, 41, 46, 49, 65
Circumcision, 28, 30, 31, 32, 37, 38, 39, 51, 75, 85
Clermont, 50
Codex Justinianus, 56
Collegia, 5
Commodian, 21
Conciliabula, 33
Conrad III, 86
Constantine, 6, 10, 12, 18, 24, 27, 29, 30, 31, 36, 47, 67, 84
Constantius 12, 13, 18, 31, 32, 33, 47, 67, 84
Constitutio Sirmondianis, 30
Crete, 76
Cyril, 55, 17, 65, 69
Dacia 12
Damascus, 43
De Admonitione, 37
De Magis, 37
Decurionate, 29, 56, 57, 58, 59, 66, 67, 79
Demonstratio Evangelica, 23
Dertona, 45
Diana of Caesarea, 8
Diocaesarea, 8, 13, 24
Diocletian, 8
Diospolis, 13
Divine Institutes, 21
Donatists, 59, 60, 61
Dubuow, 3
Dudden, Homes, 44
Easter, 34, 38, 75, 77
Edessa, 24, 74, 84
Edward I, 86
Eliphius, 13
Elvira, 25, 26, 27, 33
England, 86, 87
Ephraem Syrus, 36, 37,
Eudoxia, 74
Euphrates, 42
Eusebius of Caesarea, 9, 22, 23, 24, 25, 31, 33, 40, 84
Faleidian Quarter, 64
Fatinists, 80
Felix, 31
Fermilian, 9
Ferrandus, 68
First Crusade, 85
Fiscus Judaicus, 5, 34, 38, 49
[99]
Florentius, 80
Forced Conversion, 8, 70, 76, 87
Fourth Lateran Council, 86
Frygians, 80
Gallus, 12, 13
Gamaliel, 18, 71, 72
Gaul, 55
Gaza, 43
Gebirol Ib, 19, 85
Germans, 86, 87
Graetz, 3, 12
Gratian, 33, 34, 36, 46, 47, 48, 64, 84
Gregory Nazianzen, 39
Gregory of Nyssa, 39, 93
Habib, 11
Hadrian, 12
Halevi, Jehuda, 85
Haman, 17, 69
Helena, 24
Hermes, 12
Hierax, 16
Hilary of Poitiers, 22, 25, 27, 28, 33, 35, 39
Holland, 87
Homilies of Aphrahat, 38
Honorius, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 66, 67, 84
Hydroparastatistans, 80
lllyricum, 66, 70
Inmestar Incident, 17, 18, 69, 71
Innocent III, 86
Innocentius of Dertona, 45
Isbozetes, 11
Islam, 86
Italy, 86
Jeremiah, 38
Jerome, 4, 9, 52, 17, 21, 40, 71, 72
Jerusalem, 12, 53
John of Antioch, 78
Jost, 3
Jovian, 33, 34
Judaizers, 21, 34, 35, 8;
Julian the Apostate, 13, 14, 18, 33, 34, 36, 37, 41, 43
Juster, 6, 7, 48, 56, 69
Justin, 36, 50, 51, 52, 58, 71, 72
Krauss, Salomon, 3
Lactantius, 21
Laodicaea, Council of, 34, 35, 38
Lentz, H. K., 91
Lucas, Leopold, 3, 59
Lucius, 10
Lyons, 13
Magister Officiorum, 71
Magona, 70
Magus, 11
Maimonides, Moses, 85
Mancius, 50, 11
Manichaeans, 47, 75, *So
Mansi, 55
Marciana, 8, 11
Matrona, 10
Mauretania, 8, 11, 45, 46
Maximilianus, 14
Maximus, 46
Milan, 12, 42, 43, 44
Milman, Henry Hart, 12
Minorca, 70, 84
Mouceaux, P., 8
Montanists, 80
Moses, 24
Moses of Crete, 76
Munera, 5
Murawski, Bishop, 20
Nasi, 6
Nan, F., 74
Navarre, 87
Navicularil, 49
Nazarenes, 9, 52
Nazis, 87
Nestorians, 78
Nicene Canons (Arabian collection), 28, 33, 34, 55, 85
Novella III, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 85
Ofites, 80
Orantius, 12
Orestes, 15, 16
Origen, 36
Orosius, 70
Parkes, James, 3, 7, 32, 33, 49, 59, 66, 69, 78
Passover, 34, 38, 41, 53
Patres Synagogarum, 30, 57, 67
Patriarch, 6, 8, 18, 30, 33, 65, 66, 67, 71, 72
Paul, 8, 9
Pentecost, 77
Pepyzites, 75
Peter of Alexandria, 14
Peter of Cluny, 86
Pharisees, 24
Philip, 70
Philip IV, 86
Poland, 87
Portugal, 10, 87
Praeparatio Evangelica, 23
Presbyters, 30
Priscillianiast, 80
Pseudo-Ephraem of Nisibis, 37
Purim, 69
Quarto-decimans, 75
Rabbulas, 74
Sabbath, 39, 61, 63
[100
Salonica, 10
Salsa, 45, 46
Samaritans, 60, 61, 78, 79
Sanhedrin, 6
Second Crusade, 86
Seeck, Otto, 91, 92
Severus of Minorca, 70
Simeon Stylites 76
Simon, Marcel, 3
Socrates, 12, 13 15, 16, 17, 69
Spain, 11, 12, 25, 86, 87
Silvester, 24
Synagogues, 5, 30, 32, 35, 36, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 57,63,66,
70, 74, 75, 78. 79, 82, 84
Thea, 8, 9
Theodoret, 14
Theodorus, 70
Theodosius the Great, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 48, 49, 50, 65, 82, 84
Theodosius II, 65, 66, 67, 68. 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79,
80,81,
82, 83, 84
Theophanes, 17
Toberias, 13
Timasius, 44
Tipasa, 45, 46
Urbicus, 20
Valens, 34, 67
Valentia, 8, 9
Valentinian 34, 36, 47, 67, 82
Valentinian III, 63, 64
Valentinians, 42
Valerian, 42
Venantius Fortunatus of Arles 11, 22, 27
Victor, 11
Vincent 12,
Visigoths, 66
Vita Constantini, 31
Vitalis, 12
Williams, Arthur L. 3, 7, 20
Zeno of Verona, 48
Return to Carrie Home Page