Jason Moralee-For Salvation's Sake_ Provincial Loyalty, Personal Religion, And Epigraphic Production...

AdministratorFile Attachment2000c532coverv05b.jpg

STUDIES IN CLASSICS

Edited by Dirk Obbink

Oxford University Andrew Dyck

The University of California, Los Angeles

A ROUTLEDGE SERIES

STUDIES IN CLASSICS DIRK OBBINK AND ANDREW DYCK, General Editors

SINGULAR DEDICATIONS Founders and Innovators of Private Cults in Classical Greece

Andrea L.Purvis

EMPEDOCLES An Interpretation Simon Trpanier

APHRODITE AND EROS The Development of Greek Erotic Mythology

Barbara Breitenberger

A LINGUISTIC COMMENTARY ON LIVIUS ANDRONICUS Ivy Livingston

RHETORIC IN CICEROS PRO BALBO An Interpretation

Kimberly Anne Barber

FOR SALVATIONS SAKE Provincial Loyalty, Personal Religion, and Epigraphic Production in the

Roman and Late Antique Near East

Jason Moralee

ROUTLEDGE New York & London

Published in 2004 by Routledge 29 West 35th Street New York, NY 10001

Published in Great Britain by Routledge 11 New Fetter Lane London EC4P 4EE

Copyright 2004 by Routledge

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group. This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005.

To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledges collection of thousands of eBooks please go to

http://www.ebookstore.tandf.co.uk/.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including

photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system without permission in writing from the publisher.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Moralee, Jason, 1973 For salvations sake: provincial loyalty, personal religion, and epigraphic production in the Roman and late antique Near East/Jason Moralee. p. cm.(Studies in classics)

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 0-203-48531-9 Master e-book ISBN

ISBN 0-203-57896-1 (Adobe e-Reader Format) ISBN 0-415-96778-3 (Print Edition) (hardcover: alk. paper)

1. Middle East-HistoryTo 622.2. Middle EastHistory6221517. 3. Middle EastPolitics and government. 4. Middle EastReligion. 5. Salvation. 6. Inscriptions, LatinMiddle East. 7.

Inscriptions, Greek-Middle East. I. Title. II. Series. DS62.M58 2004 939.405dc22

Contents

LIST OF FIGURES vi LIST OF TABLES vii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ix SERIES EDITORS FOREWORD xii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xiii

CHAPTER ONE Introduction 1 CHAPTER TWO The Salutary Ideology 17

CHAPTER THREE The Reception of the Salutary Ideology in the Near East 30 CHAPTER FOUR The Demise and Transformation of the Salutary Ideology 47 CHAPTER FIVE Pagan, Christian, and Jewish Dedications for Personal

Salvation 55

CHAPTER SIX Localizing Provincial Loyalty and Personal Religion: Three Case Studies

77

CONCLUSION 93

APPENDIX 98 NOTES 158 BIBLIOGRAPHY 191 INDEX 204

List of Figures

1. Personification of Salvation depicted with features reminiscent of Salus Publica. Mosaic from the Bath of Apolausis near Antioch, fifth century A.D.

52

2. Adadiabos depicted in the very moment of asking his god for the salvation of himself, his children, and his household. Relief of Aphlad Theos, from the Temple of Aphlad, Dura Europos, A.D. 54.

81

List of Tables

1. Dated Dedications for the Salvation of the Emperor by Emperor and Region 5

2. Total Number of Inscriptions by Region 8

3. Dated Inscriptions by Region 8

4. The Religious Affiliation of the Dedicators of Inscriptions for the Salvation of Emperors and for Personal Salvation, 100 B.C.-A.D. 800

9

5. Geographical Shift in Dedications for Personal Salvation 10

6. Dated Dedications for Salvation from the Near East 10

7. Dated Dedications for Salvation from Syria 11

8. Dated Dedications for Salvation from Lebanon 11

9. Dated Dedications for Salvation from Israel 11

10. Dated Dedications for Salvation from Jordan 12

11. Percentage of Roman, Greek, and Semitic Names by Region in the Dedications for the Salvation of the Emperor 33

12. Percentage of Roman and Civil Occupations in the Dedications for the Salvation of the Emperor 34

13. Gods Addressed in the Dedications for the Salvation of the Emperor 36

14. Percentage of Roman, Greek, and Semitic Names by Region in the Pagan Dedications for Personal Salvation 58

15. Gods Addressed in the Pagan Dedications for Personal Salvation 59

16. The Distribution of Christian Dedications for Personal Salvation 64

17. Percentage of Roman, Greek, Semitic, Biblical, and Anonymous Names by Media in the Christian Dedications for Personal Salvation

66

List of Abbreviations AE Lanne pigraphique AJA American Journal of Archaeology AJPh American Journal of Philology ANF The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids, MI, 197186 ANRW Aufstieg und Niedergang der rmischen Welt, Berlin,

1972

Baumann, Sptantike Stifter P.Baumann, Sptantike Stifter im Heiligen Land, Wiesbaden, 1999

BMCR Bryn Mawr Classical Review BMGS Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies BSOAS Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies CAH The Cambridge Ancient History, London, 1923 CAHL Christian Archaeology in the Holy Land, Jerusalem, 1990 CCL Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina

CIG Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum, Berlin, 182877 CIJ Corpus Inscriptionum Judaicarum, Rome, 1936 CIL Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, Berlin, 18621959 CRAI Comptes rendus des sances de lAcadmie des

inscriptions et belles-lettres DACL Dictionnaire darchologie chrtienne et de liturgie, Paris,

191353

Dijkstra, Life and Loyalty K.Dijkstra, Life and Loyalty: A Study in the Socio-Religious Culture of Syria and Mesopotamia in the Graeco-Roman Period Based on Epigraphical Evidence, Leiden, 1995

Di Segni L.Di Segni, Dated Greek Inscriptions from Palestine from the Roman and Byzantine Periods, Ph.D. diss., Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1997

DOP Dumbarton Oaks Papers Dura Report The Excavations at Dura-Europos, Preliminary Report,

New Haven, 1928

Gregg and Urman R.C.Gregg and D.Urman, Jews, Pagans, and Christians in the Golan Heights, Atlanta, 1996

IGLS Inscriptions grecques et latines de la Syrie, Paris, 1929 JRA Journal of Roman Archaeology

JRS Journal of Roman Studies Kirk and Welles (1962) G.E.Kirk and C.B.Wells, The Inscriptions, in

Excavations at Nessana (Auja Hafir, Palestine), vol. 1, London, 1962

LCL Loeb Classical Library

Lifshitz (1967) B.Lifshitz, Donateurs et fondateurs dans les synagogues juives: Rpertoire des ddicaces grecques relatives la construction et la rfection des synagogues, Paris, 1967

Littmann IIIA E.Littmann, D.Magie, Jr., and D.R.Stuart, Syria: Publications of the Princeton University Archaeological Expeditions to Syria in 19045 and 1909, Division III, Greek and Latin Inscriptions, Section A, Southern Syria, Leiden, 1921

LSJ H.G.Liddell and R.Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, rev. ed., Oxford, 1996

MAMA Monumenta Asiae Minoris Antiqua, Manchester, 1928 NPNF A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the

Christian Church, 2nd ser., NewYork, 18901900 PBSR Papers of the British School at Rome PEFQ Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly PG J.P.Migne, Patrologia Graeca, Paris, 185766 PIR Prosopographia Imperii Romani Prentice W.K.Prentice, Greek and Latin Inscriptions, Part III of the

Publications of an American Archaeological Expedition to Syria in 18991900, New York, 1908

Prentice IIIB W.K.Prentice, Syria: Publications of the Princeton University Archaeological Expeditions to Syria in 19045 and 1909, Division III, Greek and Latin Inscriptions, Section B, Northern Syria, Leiden, 1922

RB Revue biblique RE A.F.von Pauly, Paulys Realencyclopdie der classischen

Altertumswissenschaft, new ed., Stuttgart, 190373 RIG Roman Inscriptions in Britain, Oxford, 1965 SC Sources chrtiennes

SCI Scripta Classica Israelica SIG Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum, 3rd ed., Hildesheim,

1960

SEG Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum TAPA Transactions of the American Philological Association TDNT Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Grand

Rapids, MI, 196476

Wadd. P.Le Bas and W.H.Waddington, Inscriptions grecques et latines recueilles en Asie Mineure, Hildesheim, 1972

Welles C.B.Welles, Gerasa, City of the Decapolis: The Inscriptions, New Haven, 1938

Winkler, Salus L.Winkler, Salus: Vom Staatskult zur politischen Idee, Heidelberg, 1995

YCS Yale Classical Studies ZDPV Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palstina-Vereins ZPE Zeitschrift fr Papyrologie und Epigraphik

Series Editors Foreword

Studies in Classics aims to bring high-quality work by emerging scholars to the attention of a wider audience. Emphasizing the study of classical literature and history, these volumes contribute to the theoretical understanding of human culture and society over time. This series will offer an array of approaches to the study of Greek and Latin (including medieval and Neo-Latin), authors and their reception, canons, transmission of texts, ideas, religion, history of scholarship, narrative, and the nature of evidence.

While the focus is on Mediterranean cultures of the Greco-Roman era, perspectives from other areas, cultural backgrounds, and eras are to be included as important means to the reconstruction of fragmentary evidence and the exploration of models. The series will reflect upon the role classical studies has played in humanistic endeavors from antiquity to the present and explore select ways in which the discipline can bring both traditional scholarly tools and the experience of modernity to bear on questions and texts of enduring importance.

Dirk Obbink, Oxford University

Andrew Dyck, University of California, Los Angeles

Acknowledgments

What follows is a substantially revised version of my University of California, Los Angeles doctoral dissertation filed in the spring of 2002. The list of individuals who have assisted me either professionally or personally since I began this project in 1999 would be too long to read. I hope they will forgive me for my tacit recognition of their collegiality, support, and friendship. Nevertheless, there is a handful of people and institutions I must thank explicitly. The Lady Davis Fellowship Trust granted me a research fellowship from 19992000, which allowed me to work with Hannah Cotton of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. With a dissertation-year fellowship from the UCLA Department of History, I continued my research in Germany, where I benefited immensely from discussions with Angelos Chaniotis of the University of Heidelberg.

Most of the revisions and rethinking was done while I enjoyed a postdoctoral lectureship in the UCLA Department of History, during which I had access to the fine libraries and interlibrary loan services of the UC system and the Getty Research Institute. In addition, the support for faculty research in my current position has been wonderful. Tom Griffiths, Dean of Faculty at Illinois Wesleyan University, generously provided a substantial amount to offset publication costs. Above all, I warmly thank my dissertation advisor, Claudia Rapp, for her enduring patience and encouragement. I would also like to thank the other members of my doctoral committee, Ronald Mellor, Michael Morony, and Susan Downey. Susan Downeys seminars on the material culture of the Roman Near East inspired this topic. Michelle Bonnice, Claudia Rapp, Andrew Dyck, Angelos Chaniotis, and Ronald Mellor read the dissertation with a view toward its appearance in this series. Their comments have been invaluable and undoubtedly saved me much embarrassment.

Individual chapters have been read by Neil McLynn and the participants of PENATES, a biennial meeting of scholars in southern California sponsored by the Multi-Campus Research Group in Late Antiquity. Meike Gotham, Thalia Anagnostopoulos, and Srdjan Rajkovic generously offered assistance on particular points. The errors that remain are, of course, my own. Finally, I wish to express my gratitude to my parents and grandparents by dedicating this to them.

Chapter One Introduction

The task of the historian is first to recognize the seeds and to indicateacross all layers of debristhe continuity of development.1

People in the Roman world turned to the gods for salvation (stria) from a range of destructive forces, known and unknown, mundane and supernatural. With just a little prodding, a few words, and a humble sacrifice, the gods would grant the ephemeral quality of stria. Salvation did not last a lifetime, much less for eternity, for this salvation pertained to specific moments of anxiety, sickness, disorder, and dislocation. Often people asked the gods for the salvation of themselves and their families. Just as often they asked for the salvation of others, usually superiors to whom they were obligated, including patrons and especially the ultimate patron of the Roman world, the emperor. Herodian, a historian from Syria and a Roman official writing in the early third century A.D., mentions two instances. In 187, the emperor Commodus, the cruel son of Marcus Aurelius, survived yet another conspiracy. The official line must have stressed the gods role in the unraveling of the plot. Always wise in matters of state, the gods had saved their beloved Commodus, for after the conspirators had been executed, the emperor sacrificed to the goddess Hilaritas, whose festival day it happened to be, and voted a public thanksgiving. Dispelling any lingering doubt about the stability of the emperors imperium, Commodus confidently joined the procession of the goddess. With a collective sigh of relief, the people then celebrated Commodus salvation (stria).2 Naturally, many were also eager to negotiate their own salvation, for which, once received, they would offer sacrifice and thanks to the gods. In a suspiciously dramatic narrative, Herodian records that the emperor Caracalla, after killing his brother and co-emperor Geta in the arms of their mother, rushed from the scene, shouting out that he had just been saved (sthnai) from his brothers treachery. He headed straight to the Praetorian Camp, where he entered the shrine of the Roman standards, prostrated himself before the images, and gave thanks and sacrificed for his own salvation (hmologei te charistria ethue te stria).3

In both accounts, Herodian is not interested in religion for its own sake. His intent is rather to show how bad emperors cynically used religious ritualsspecifically the offering of thanks to the gods for striato dupe the masses and mask political murder. For our purposes, the particular circumstances are not as important as the off-handed mention of the practice itself, specifically the emperors duty to the gods to perform sacrifice for his own salvation, and the participation of the people of Rome in offering thanks for the salvation of the emperor during a public festival. In this way, the Roman people affirmed that the emperor had been saved by the gods and also registered their abiding loyalty to the current emperor. For Herodian and his audience, all of this was

perfunctory, the humdrum of ceremonial life at the capital. By the third century, such rituals were indeed practiced not only in Rome but also in the far corners of the Roman world. Herodians audience was of course aware of this fact and must have been sensitive to the outrageousness of the abuse of standard religious rituals.

This book is about the means by which a range of individuals and collectives secured salvation, their motivations, and those who were intended to receive the salutary benefits from the gods. Quite often, the means took the form of inscriptions that commemorated both the desire for salvation and its fulfillment through the formula hyper strias or pro salute, in Greek and Latin respectively, after which was normally written the name of the person who was to be, or had been, saved: For the salvation of so and so. What follows is a case study of the use of this epigraphic formula in the Near East. In this region, the formula hyper strias was in use for years before Rome arrived in the first century B.C. and absorbed the region in its vast, polyglot empire, and its use lasted until the middle of the eighth century A.D., when Greek was dying out as a spoken language and the region was ruled not from Rome, Constantinople, or Damascus but from Baghdad. Indeed, the formula is so common that editors, when they are confronted with yet another example of this type, shrug it off as a pious ejaculation, devoid of true religious sentiment or historical significance.4 Because of this attitude, there has been no attempt to understand the notable persistence of this formula and others like it over nearly a millennium.

Since Roman provincial boundaries shifted over the centuries, sometimes in ways that we cannot fully follow in detail, the geographical focus will be the modern states of Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Israel, rather than the equivalent Roman and early Byzantine provinces of Syria, Phoenicia, Palestine, and Mesopotamia.5 Occasionally it will be necessary to journey outside these modern borders, to gather, for example, a rare inscription from the rafters of the chapel at Mt. Sinai, deep in the wastes of the Sinai Peninsula. During the 900 years that the formula was in use, from the first century B.C. to the eighth century A.D., it was used more or less constantly in the religious koin of town, village, and countryside, among pagans, Christians, and Jews. This regional focus and chronological limit are ideal for a study of this type for two reasons. First of all, in this region, thousands of inscriptions have come to light, revealing a society that included a surprising variety of local cultures, all living with, and adapting to, the Roman military and administrative apparatus and, later, the rise of Christianity and the triumph of Islam. Second, despite the availability of evidence, the inscriptions from this region have received relatively little attention compared to those from either Asia Minor or Egypt.6

In the Greek world, dedications for stria originated as a form of payment to the gods for a vow made during periods of danger and uncertainty. Thus stria came to be part of the language used to express thanksgiving to the gods for salvation received or anticipated, tying the dedicator to the divine in a personal relationship.7 Unlike in other parts of the empire, in the Near East this mentality was not restricted to a Greek cultural milieu. There were also equivalents in the local languages that were in use among Babylonian elites in the first millennium B.C., revealing analogous religious mentalities that existed in the region for several centuries before the establishment of the Hellenistic kingdoms and the coming of Rome. Kings, for example, prayed to gods for their own life (namti) in exchange for the dedication of temples, wells, and fortresses.8 Imperial subjects also made offerings for the king and queens life. In one case, a temple magician made such a dedication on behalf of the queen.9 And some asked the gods for

For salvation's sake 2

their own and their familys life.10 A similar expression is found in Old Aramaic inscriptions from Iran (?) that date to the seventh century B.C.: CL HYY, for life. This Aramaic formula continued to be used virtually unchanged until the third century A.D. in Petra, Palmyra, Hatra, and elsewhere.11

Although native formulaic equivalents for stria existed in a variety of languages, I would not want to posit a direct Semitic influence on Greek religious practice, since votive offerings to gods for salvations sake must have developed independently in the Near East and the Greek world.12 Still, it is plausible to suggest that the Greek idiom, attested from at least the second century B.C., found fertile ground in the cultures of the Near East, since there was already an epigraphic habit of this sort. Thereafter the Greek formula fused with these native traditions and joined the Aramaic formula in constituting part of the regions religious imagination.13 It is important to keep these deep-seated traditions in mind as we consider the evidence from the Roman period. When people in the Near East began to make dedications for salvations sake in Greek and Latin, they were building upon a firmly established, older tradition, of which they may or may not have been fully aware. Moreover, this tradition and the mentality behind it might explain the density of dedications for salvations sake in the Near East, relative to the surrounding regions.

THE NATURE OF THE EVIDENCE

In the Near East, dedications for salvations sake in Greek and Latin spanned the transition from the pre-Roman to the Roman period and from the Roman to the Christian period. There are two types of dedications: those made for the salvation of the emperor, and those made for personal salvation. The number and variety of stria dedications for the salvation of emperors or personal salvation recorded in the Near East is substantial, more than 400 inscriptions. Including those with dubious readings, the total number of the dedications for the salvation of emperors is 191, virtually all of them in Greek. The dedications refer to twenty-four emperors, from Tiberius (A.D. 1437) to Justinian (A.D. 52765), over a 500-year period and were commissioned by individuals widely separated in space, from the plush steppe of northern Syria to the inhospitable mountains of the Sinai peninsula. However, nearly all of these dedications can be dated to the second and third centuries, the boom period of epigraphic production throughout the empire. The number for personal salvation is 221; these span a similar expanse of territory but a much longer time period. In my sample, the first dedication for personal salvation dates to 69 B.C. and the last to A.D. 762. Not included in this tally, however, are inscriptions that contain words related to stria, such as those that thank the gods for having been saved (stheis), not an uncommon formulation;14 nor dedications in Aramaic that ask for the similar quality of life.

For the Salvation of the Emperor

Over two hundred individuals, some acting as groups, made dedications for the salvation of the emperor through the formula or its Latin equivalent pro salute. These dedications were set in a variety of contexts. In temple precincts, the pious visitor

Introduction 3

might see dedications for the salvation of emperors on stoas, statue bases, and altars. As he entered the temple, he might also see such dedications on the walls flanking the entrance or on the massive lintel that framed the door. Walking through a well-off town or village, a visitor might notice that public buildings, such as gates, arches, nymphaea, theaters, and baths, were dedicated for the salvation of emperors. In the camp, a soldier might see dedications for the salvation of emperors on the walls of military structures, such as principia and fortresses. Public works projects, such as aqueducts, bridges, and roads, also bore such inscriptions. Take as an example this dedication from a temple at Hebran, a village in southern Syria:

For the salvation of Lord Caesar Titus Aelius Hadrianus Antoninus Augustus Pius, the temple was built from the sacred (funds), in the eighteenth year of Antoninus Caesar, the commissioners of the construction being Aristeidos, son of Thaimos, Uaithelos, son of Emmegnos, Emmegan, son of Chamenos, ekdikoi, Thaimos, son of Abchoros, Enos, son of Masechos, Emmegan, son of Naros, temple-treasurers.15

It was A.D. 155 and the emperor was Antoninus Pius. The dedicators are otherwise unknown and the village insignificant. Nevertheless, this inscription, and the hundreds like it from throughout the empire, is a local affirmation of the imperial ideology.

From the first to the fourth century, the rate at which inscriptions for the salvation of the emperor were produced mirrors the epigraphic habit of the Roman empire as a whole (see Table 1 and Table 6).16 After a scattering of dedications in the first century, a sharp rise occurred during the reign of Trajan and continued throughout the second century with the exception of a significant drop during the reign of Commodus. The cluster of epigraphic activity during the Golden Age of Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, and Marcus Aurelius is hardly surprising. This was a period of explosive urban development in the Near East, despite intermittent warfare, rebellion, and a major plague that struck in the latter half of the second century.17 After the death of Septimius Severus, the dedications continued, if at drastically lower rates, until the middle of the fourth century. But the epigraphic habit alone was not the only factor that fueled the production of these inscriptions. From Trajan on, the legend SALUS AUG appeared on coins consistently until the fourth century.18 The salvation of the emperor had thus become an official slogan of sorts, coinciding, no doubt, with the increased production of dedications for the salvation of emperors.

In addition to stria, the dedications contain key words that reflect different aspects of Roman imperial ideology. These dedications ask for the salvation and victory (nik or victoria) of the emperor; salvation, victory, and safety (diamon or incolumitas); salvation, fortune (tych), and safety; salvation, safety, and concord (harmonia);


Table 1 Dated Dedications for the Salvation of the Emperor by Emperor and Region

Emperor Israel Jordan Lebanon Syria Total Tiberius 1 1

Claudius 2 2

Nero 1 1 2

Vespasian 3 3

Titus 1 1

Domitian 3 3

Trajan 1(L) 5 5 11

Hadrian 1 3, 1(L) 1, 1(L) 3 10

Antoninus Pius 1 8 1, 3(L) 3 16

Marcus Aurelius 2 5, 1(L) 13 21

Commodus 2 3 1 2, 1(L) 9

Septimius Severus 1 5, 8(L) 1(L) 2, 2(L) 19

Caracalla 3(L) 3, 2(L) 8

Severus Alexander 2, 1(L) 3

Maximinus Thrax 1 1

Gordian III 1 1, 1(L) 1 4

Philip 3 3

Valerian & Gallienus 3 3

Aurelian 2 2

Probus 1 1

Diocletian & Maximian 10 10

Maximin & Galerius 1 1

Constantine 1 1

Constantius II & Constans 2 2

Justinian 1 1

Total 10 51 13 64 138

Note: (L) denotes the Latin formula pro salute. salvation and concord; salvation, concord, and prosperity (eudaimonia); salvation and health (hygeia); and salvation and return (epanodos). Some of these formulas did not last long. For example, dedications for salvation and health flared up only in connection with the construction of an aqueduct in southern Syria under Trajan. Some arose relatively

Introduction 5

late: dedications for the salvation and safety of the emperor began to appear in the latter half of the second century and were especially prominent in the early half of the third century. And some tended to concentrate regionally: most of the dedications for the salvation and victory of the emperor were made in Syria (encompassing parts of Roman Syria and Arabia), beginning during the joint reign of Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus, at a time when Rome was at war with the Parthian king of kings, and lasting until the fourth century, when the final dedications for the salvation of the emperor were made in the Near East at a time when Rome was again at warthis time with the Sasanian king of kings.19

The decline in the stria dedications for emperors after the fourth century is dramatic: in the 204 years between A.D. 361 and 565, only one dedication survives.20 It was found at the Monastery of St. Catherine at Mt. Sinai. This obscure inscription, cut on a wooden panel used to decorate one of the ceiling beams that still support the chapels roof, pays homage to the monasterys founder, Justinian the Great (A.D. 52765):

+ For the salvation of our most pious emperor Justinian. +21

The utter physical and temporal isolation of this inscription is striking. No other dedication for the salvation of an emperor made in a church is known to me. Unlike most of the pagan dedications of this type, this dedication is virtually hidden from public view. This inscription was not meant to be read by human eyes. And unlike the earlier dedications, the dedicators in this case consciously chose to remain anonymous, an impulse that seems alien to the classical conception of the purpose of epigraphic writing. This one anomalous exception highlights the dearth of this once popular formula providing a stark contrast to the epigraphic habit in Late Antiquity: the sixth century, like the second century, was a boom period in epigraphic production, and during this time, dedications for personal salvation, as will be shown in detail shortly, continued almost without interruption.22

For the Salvation of Me and My Own

After imperial dedications, the second major type of dedication for salvation involves individuals who sought salvation for themselves, their families, and, in some cases, their patrons. Pagan dedications for personal salvation were virtually all made in religious contexts. Individuals asked the gods for salvation, often in fulfillment of vows, by dedicating altars, statues, and cult reliefs. The language is essentially the same as that used in the dedications for the emperors salvation. Take the following inscription as a representative example:


To Zeus Most High, the answerer of prayer, Iulios Eros, freedman of Gaios Iulios Bassos, erected this altar for the salvation of his son Iaeibas, in the year 490, in the month of Xandikos.23

This dedication was found displaced in a Muslim cemetery but was originally a votive altar dedicated in April A.D. 179 and left in one of the temples of Palmyra. Such inscriptions have rarely been treated as historically significant, except as examples of the awkward application of Greek among the less educated provincials. William K.Prentice, the editor of the inscription, noted: The writer of this inscription evidently had very little idea of Greek syntax, or else the stone-cutter was extremely careless.24 This fact can be interpreted in another way. For Iulios Eros, whatever his level of literacy, syntax and morphology were less important than form. By using a formulaic prayer, this freedman expected Zeus to listen and, if appeased by his gift, grant salvation to his (ailing?) son.

In the Near East, the dedications for personal salvation predate those for the Roman emperors.25 In the Hellenistic period, as discussed in the next chapter, dedications for the salvation of rulers featured in the epigraphic habit of the age, itself a tradition that is related to the use of the formula in the language of decrees since at least the fourth century B.C.26 In my sample, the first dedication for the salvation of an emperor was made in A.D. 22/23 at Gerasa in Jordan.27 By contrast, 90 years earlier, in 69/68 B.C., a certain Apollophans dedicated a column for personal salvation at a local temple near Majdal Anjar in Lebanon.28 Similarly, at Dura Europos, an isolated city on the Syrian Euphrates just within the western-most territories of the Parthian empire, eight dedications for personal salvation appear in the first century A.D., beginning in 31/32, more than 100 years before the first dedications for the salvation of the emperor appear in the city.29

What are the number and distribution of the dedications for personal salvation? It would seem natural, counting absolute numbers and momentarily ignoring differences in distribution over time, that such inscriptions would significantly outnumber the dedications for the emperors, since there were obviously more individuals than emperors in need of salvation. But that is not the case. The number of dedications for personal salvation is only slightly higher as a whole. During the first three centuries, such dedications were far less common than the dedications for the salvation of the emperor: in this period, the total number of dedications for the salvation of the emperor (excluding those with dubious readings) is 173, for personal salvation, 59. By contrast, while dedications for the salvation of the emperor died out after the fourth century, dedications for personal salvation became relatively common from the fourth through the sixth century: 147 examples survive. Broken down according to region, the number of dated and undated inscriptions is presented in Table 2 and Table 3.

Along with Table 2 and Table 3, Tables 6 through 10 show, at least in the broadest possible sense, the temporal and geographical distribution of dedications for the salvation of emperors and dedications for personal salvation in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Israel. For these tables, I had to rely on the dated inscriptions, which admittedly can be deceptive. Specifically, dated inscriptions constitute a small percentage of dedications for personal salvation. If it were possible to chart the 150-odd undated dedications, the tables would more accurately represent the pagan dedications for personal salvation, especially in Lebanon, where only two out of twenty-three pagan dedications for personal salvation

Introduction 7

are dated. Furthermore, most Christian dedications are likewise undated, obscuring the intensity of the dedicatory habit in Late Antiquity.

Table 2 Total Number of Inscriptions by Region Israel Jordan Lebanon Syria Total Emperors 10 65 25 74 174

Personal 59 30 29 92 210

Total 69 95 54 166 384

Table 3 Dated Inscriptions by Region Israel Jordan Lebanon Syria Total Emperors 10 51 13 64 138

Personal 19 12 9 55 95

Total 29 60 24 113 226 The persistence of the habit of making dedications for personal salvation in Late

Antiquity allows us to appreciate not only the conservative nature of epigraphic language and religious sentiment but also how the use of the formula shifted in subtle ways. Take as an example this dedication from a Jewish synagogue built at the end of the fourth century A.D. in Apamea, a booming provincial capital perched above the Orontes River in Syria:

Ilasios, son of Isaac, archisynagogos of Antioch, made the mosaic of the entrance for the salvation of Phtion, (his) wife, and children and for the salvation of Eustathia, (his) mother-in-law, and in memory of Isaac and Aidesios and Hsychion, (his) ancestors. Peace and mercy on all your blessed community.30

On the face of it, the impulse behind this inscription, indeed the very language used, was shared by Iulios Eros, the freedman from Palmyra who sought salvation for his son more than 200 years earlier. However, this inscription and all the other Jewish and Christian inscriptions like it work under a fundamentally different assumption. Beyond the registering of names and the fulfillment of simple religious obligations, these inscriptions asserted membership in a religious community defined by its own traditions and boundaries. Likewise, these inscriptions asserted membership, in a local sense, in a specific synagogue or church. Ilasios asks his God (here not explicitly mentioned, but to be inferred from context) for the salvation of himself and members of his family. This much is to be expected. But by including the prayer for his community in the final line,


Ilasios represents himself to God and his peers as the head of his family and the leader of an entire religious community (plthos). Moreover, for Ilasios the inscription functioned as a memorial. The addition of the formula in memory (hyper mnias) to the dedication for salvations sake signals his intent to use the inscription as a bridge between the living and the dead within his own family as well as between the dead and the community from which they departed.31

In conjunction with the founding, decoration, and refurbishing of churches and, to a lesser extent, synagogues, there was a revival of the epigraphic habit in the sixth century and an accompanying increase in the number of dedications for personal salvation throughout the Near East.32 We can imagine the change visually. Even though the tradition of making dedications for personal salvation certainly had deep roots in the Near East, as evidenced by a number of pagan dedications beginning in the first century B.C., individuals made dedications for the emperors in greater numbers during the first four centuries. Walking through a city or village in this period, one would undoubtedly see many dedications for the salvation of emperors embedded in a variety of locations, from the theater and hippodrome to the city gates to the humble altars left to collect dust in temples. By the sixth century, however, dedications for the emperor were relics of the past, at most the raw material for Christian buildings, while dedications for personal salvation were appearing in large numbers, though primarily localized in religious places, such as churches and synagogues. Indeed, Christians and Jews demanded that God grant them and their families salvation at rates far surpassing their pagan predecessors; they were responsible for about seventy percent of all such dedications (see Table 4).

Dedications for personal salvation in Late Antiquity appeared in new locations, particularly in Israel and Jordan. In the biblical Holy Land, Christian and Jewish communities flourished. They built churches, monasteries, and synagogues, decorated them with mosaic pavements, and left inscriptions to record the names of the dedicators. Tables 5 through 10 show that for many in these communities in this region, dedications for salvations sake became part of the language of public life to a degree not attested before the sixth century. Significantly, the only pagan dedication for personal salvation found in Israel, dated roughly to the third century, was initially preserved not by the careful work of archaeologists but by Late Antique Christians, who reused it in the church at Horvath Hesheq.33

Table 4 The Religious Affiliation of the Dedicators of Inscriptions for the Salvation of Emperors and for Personal Salvation, 100 B.C.-A.D. 800

Emperors Personal Total Pagan 171 62 233

Christian 1 125 126

Jewish 1 23 24

Total 173 210 383

Introduction 9

Table 5 Geographical Shift in Dedications for Personal Salvation

Israel Jordan Lebanon Syria Total Pagan 1 0 22 37 60

Christian 47 30 6 44 127

Jewish 11 0 1 11 23

Total 59 30 29 92 210 Not only did the formula for personal salvation predate the arrival of Rome and come

to flourish in Late Antiquity, it also survived the eclipse of Roman rule in the Near East. After more than a century of Muslim rule, the last dedication for salvation in this region was made in 762 at a monastic site in Jordan near Mt. Nebo, where Moses was said to have taken his first glimpse of the Holy Land. This inscription, dated according to the World Era and surrounded by a depiction of the four rivers of Eden, shows how Christian the formula had become, and marks the end of a 1,000-year tradition in the Near East.

34

Through Gods foresight, this revered monastery of the Holy Theotokos was founded under Job, bishop of Medaba, and George, recluse, for the salvation of those who have made offerings, in the fifteenth year of the indiction, year 6270.

Table 6 Dated Dedications for Salvation from the Near East (n=226)


Table 7 Dated Dedications for Salvation from Syria (n=113)

Table 8 Dated Dedications for Salvation from Lebanon (n=24)

Table 9 Dated Dedications for Salvation from Israel (n=29)

Introduction 11

Table 10 Dated Dedications for Salvation from Jordan (n=60)

The identity of the intended audience for personal inscriptions is a complicated question. On the face of it, the dedications found in a religious context address the gods or God of the sanctuary, whether pagan, Christian, or Jewish. The dedicators assumed that these divine forces were literate in either Greek or Latin and that they would be persuaded to grant salvation by votive inscriptions or satisfied with the thanks thus conveyed for salvation already granted. Mostly located in prominent places, these dedications also functioned as public documents. For example, at Gerasa three of the major entrances to the city bore dedications for the salvation of emperors.35 The Gerasenes who set up these inscriptions sought to impress those entering the city by publicly declaring their loyalty to the state. How literate a person needed to be in order to read such a dedication is of course impossible to measure. Yet, the ability to read a formulaic inscription, to make out a name and a few key words, is hardly too much to ask of an ancient viewer. For the dedicator and his audience, inscriptions were intended to be texts and monuments. In a society that was painfully self-conscious of personal status, the dedications for salvations sake functioned to profile the dedicators role as patron and benefactor of his community.36

Once read and the formula recognized, what meaning did stria (or salus) convey? Part of the answer has little to do with the word itself, since inscriptions have a purely symbolic function as a way for individuals to inscribe themselves into posterity. In this regard, the registering of names was a crucial function of all inscriptions.37 Yet, stria certainly meant something to those who referred to it in inscriptions. Werner Foerster and Georg Fohrer, in a series of articles included in the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, have produced an exhaustive survey of the meanings and uses of stria and related words.38 Taking into account the long history of the word in pagan, Jewish, and Christian texts, Foerster and Fohrer point out that stria primarily meant bodily salvation, including physical and psychological healing, safety, protection, and deliverance, which could be attained from either gods or men. This earthly understanding of stria permeated the vocabulary and religious mentality of all Greek-speakers, irrespective of their religious formation or inclination. Only rarelyin a handful of Jewish and Christian textsdoes the term refer to the eschatological event of


redemption, when the Messiah will wash away sin and grant eternal life to the believer. For the sake of uniformity, the term that is used consistently throughout this study to translate stria is salvation, since the range of meanings is rather slippery.

THE PRESENT WORK AND PREVIOUS SCHOLARSHIP

To my knowledge, there is no previous study of the regional scope of the epigraphic formula hyper strias. The most insightful scrutiny of the formula has been in the scholarship concerning the development, iconography, and significance of the cult of Salus at Rome, which emerged in the late fourth century B.C. This goddess personified the enduring salvation of the Roman state from sedition and warfare. Early on, she was worshipped as Salus Publica. By the end of the first century A.D., her name changed: Salus Publica became Salus Augusta and, later, Salus Augusti. The specifically imperial connotation of her designation as the Augustan Salvation corresponded to a ruling ideology that proclaimed the emperor to be the savior of the kosmos. In order to affirm the emperors special role as savior of the world, imperial subjects, including senators, were expected to make sacrifices and consecrate vows annually or on special occasions for the salvation of the emperor and the state. As a handy gloss, I have dubbed this set of ideas the salutary ideology, since the notion was promulgated actively by the state as part of Romes justification for empire.39 This term does not mark the discovery of new territory; rather, it is a new name for what has become familiar in other terms. Lorenz Winkler, for example, has used the terms Salusvorstellung and Heilsvorstellung interchangeably to describe the ideological basis for the propagation of the official cult of Salus on coins throughout the empire.40 In Chapter 2, I provide a brief overview of the salutary ideology from the first to the fourth century A.D. It will be argued that dedications that ask the gods for the salvation of the emperor (hyper strias Sebastou or pro salute imperatoris) are, like the numismatic and literary evidence, manifestations of the salutary ideology.

Scholars have long noted that dedications pro salute imperatoris/hyper strias Sebastou are expressions of imperial ideology. Seen against this back-drop, dedications for the emperors salvation become evidence for the local acceptance of Roman rule. For example, these dedications have been seen as traces of the imperial cult in regions such as Germany and Asia Minor.41 Others see them, quite generically, as an affirmation of loyalty to the state.42 The significance of the present study is its regional and chronological scope. This allows us to see dedications for salvations sake in specific contexts and also in the long term. From this height, we can see not only beyond the disappointment that the epigrapher feels upon considering yet another example of the vacuous language of isolated and decontextualized votive texts but also beyond the generic significance usually ascribed to these inscriptions as attestations of the imperial cult and provincial loyalty. In Chapter 3, we consider why people affirmed the salutary ideology in the form of inscriptions, the terms they used, the contexts of the inscriptions, and the identity of the dedicators. Exploring these issues will reveal the complex ways in which affirmation of imperial ideology in this form intersected with the political, social, and religious concerns of a broad spectrum of elites and collectives. The aggregate of the inscriptions, in other words, allows us to analyze the ways in which dedications for the

Introduction 13

emperors salvation became embedded in city, village, and countryside. Chapter 4 considers the demise of the salutary ideology as affirmed through inscriptions and the transformation and survival of this ideology in other spheres.

In probing the significance of the dedications for the emperors, we must also consider the dedications for personal salvation. I argue that both types of dedications should be treated together. People made dedications for the salvation of the emperor and dedications for personal salvation simultaneously, and both types persisted in the physical spaces that people in the Near East inhabited in the first three centuries. Indeed, there is some evidence that individuals made dedications both for the salvation of the emperor and for the salvation of themselves and family members on the same objects. What is the connection, if any, between the two types of dedication? Does the use of the one shed light on the use of the other? In Chapter 5, I suggest that those who made dedications for the salvation of the emperor were tapping the deeply rooted tradition of making dedications for personal salvation, a tradition that in this region stretches back hundreds of years. To ask the gods for the emperors salvation was not only to affirm the ideological claims of the state but also to seek for him what they might seek for their own children. In this sense, loyalty to the state was cast in the most intimate of terms.

Dedications for personal salvation have received little attention, except for Christian examples dated to the sixth century, which are sometimes claimed, misleadingly, to have been inspired by those for the emperor, or as exempla for pagan notions of salvation. A.D.Nock, for example, understood the desire for stria as rooted in primitive religion, which seeks to satisfy a number of natural needs. To make provision for attaining salvation was therefore a rational way of living in a world full of inexplicable troubles: Soteria and kindred words carried no theological implications; they applied to deliverance from perils by sea and land and disease and darkness and false opinions, all perils of which men were fully aware.43 This mundane desire for salvation, as Richard Reitzenstein revealed long ago, was the ultimate goal for initiates into the mysteries, not salvation in the eschatological sense. Walter Burkert has echoed these views in his recent study of the mysteries.44 In addition to going through costly initiations or sending up prayers along with burnt sacrifices to the gods, people purchased magical amulets inscribed with prayers to receive salvation from terrible chthonic gods.45 This earthly sense of stria persisted in the dedicatory inscriptions of synagogues, churches, and monasteries, though a few argue that the formula was charged with new significance under the influence of a particularly Christian notion of stria. To ask for salvation in a church through the formula hyper strias was to ask for the eternal salvation granted only by Christ.46

The epigraphers, who have done the spadework of bringing the inscriptions to lightthrough cleaning, restoring, editing, and publishing editions of, and commentaries on, the inscriptionshave had surprisingly little to say about hyper strias. The initial discussions focused on formulas discovered in Christian inscriptions from the early Byzantine period. Two French epigraphers working in Jerusalem in the late nineteenth century, Paul Sjourn and E.Germer-Durand, provided some of the earliest comments on the formula. In the first issue of the journal Revue biblique, published in 1892, Sjourn translated an inscription as asking for the salvation (stria) of Sophronias soul and for the repose (anapausis) of Barich. The word soul, however, is nowhere to be found in the actual inscription. By referring to Sophronias soul in his translation, Sjourn


introduced a blatantly Christian reading of the text that invoked the future salvation brought through Christs forgiveness of sin. Later, in the same volume of the journal, Germer-Durand implicitly contested the assumption that stria referred to the Christian salvation of the soul. While, according to Germer-Durand, the formula did have a specifically Christian coloring, he noted that the use of the formula is ultimately derived from the pagan sense of stria as a quality referring to affairs of this world and not the next: Cette formule, qui ne sappliquait chez les paens quau salut du corps, cest--dire, la sant, a, dans la langue chrtienne, un sens plus tendu. Salutem mentis et corporis, disons-nous dans la prire liturgique. This insight laid the foundation for the current view of the formula as rooted in a pagan mentality.47

In 1902, William K.Prentice, an American epigrapher, put further emphasis on the pagan roots of the Christian use of hyper strias. In a discussion on the possible Christian liturgical source for hyper strias, Prentice suggested that the formula may have been derived from dedications for the salvation and victory of the emperor, a stereotyped formulawhich occurs frequently in the inscriptions of Syria.48 This view was followed some years later by Peter Thomsen, a German epigrapher responsible for publishing all the known Greek and Latin inscriptions from Jerusalem.49 It was surely correct to root the Christian formula in the pagan past, but Prentice and Thomsen failed to highlight the influence of pagan dedications for personal salvation, which had a longer history in the Near East than the dedications for the emperors. Even though 100 years have passed since Prentices article appeared, his privileging of the dedications for the emperors has remained unshaken. Peter Baumann, in his recent study of the images and inscriptions found in Late Antique synagogues and churches from the Holy Land, began his discussion of the Christian epigraphic formulas with hyper strias. Baumann correctly insists, as Germer-Durand, Prentice, and Thomsen did, that the Christian formula shows a continuity of a pagan religious mentality in Late Antiquity. The example that Baumann provides, however, is a long dedication from Gerasa for the salvation of the emperor, which he then compares to a Christian dedication for personal salvation, thus ignoring the rich evidence at hand for more comparable data: the pagan dedications for personal salvation.50 How can we explain this undue favoring of the dedications for the emperors as the model for Christian dedications for personal salvation, when this genealogy is false? After all, Christians and Jews after the fourth century did not make dedications for the salvation of the emperor!

The reason for the scholarly emphasis on dedications for the salvation of the emperor is twofold. First, these dedications do indeed tell us about the spread of imperial ideology in the provinces and perhaps also provide information concerning changes in the self-representation of the emperor.51 The other part of the reason is less historically based, having to do with an intellectual bias that the art historian Thomas Mathews calls the Emperor Mystique. Mathews points out, quite convincingly, that scholars of early Christian art have labored under the false assumption that Christians adopted official, imperial models to build a Christian elite culture after the conversion of the emperor Constantine to Christianity in 312. In this scheme, it becomes self-evident to argue that Christ was depicted as the super-emperor and Christian liturgical service simply adapted imperial court ceremonial. In short, all Christian culture must have imperial precedent or be derived from imperial ideology. This, according to Mathews, creates a self-confirming system which pretends to accommodate all the evidence while actually

Introduction 15

practicing a radical exclusion.52 Though it was not his subject, Mathews might have mentioned Christian epigraphy in his critique of the Emperor Mystique. When the epigraphers began publishing the Christian hyper strias inscriptions, rather than going back to pre-Roman, not to mention Aramaic, evidence for the use of the formula for personal salvation, this evidence was excluded. They became mesmerized, as it were, by the glow of those inscriptions that include the emperors name.53 This is problematic. Beyond drawing an inaccurate line of descent, this genealogy obscures the significance of the pagan dedications for personal salvation for what they can tell us about religious attitudes and the role of these inscriptions in daily life. This bias also keeps us from asking how the two types of dedicationsthose for the emperor and those for personal salvationmight have informed the meanings associated with each one.

The themes of this studythe local use and significance of dedications for the salvation of the emperor and dedications for personal salvation, the transformation of the salutary ideology, and the persistence of the desire for salvation in the epigraphy of Late Antiquitycome together in Chapter 6. Turning from the general conclusions drawn in the preceding chapters to the particular use of these dedications in certain locations, I consider the use and reuse of dedications for salvations sake in Heliopolis and the villages and cult sites of the Bekaa Valley, in Dura Europos, and in Gerasa. In each case, one senses the importance of formulas in general and key words, such as stria, in particular for the articulation of fundamental values. Far from being just innocuous ejaculations, formulas provided people with the means of communicating complicated ideas and emotions across vast distances of time and space: loyalty to the distant emperor and to local patrons, piety to the gods, protectiveness of the family, and rememberance in the history of a place, whether a shrine, a city, or a village.


Chapter Two The Salutary Ideology

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SALUTARY IDEOLOGY

Before analyzing the dedications for the emperors, we must provide an overview of the origin and development of what is referred to here as the salutary ideology.1 Then we turn to a scattering of literary sources to indicate how the salutary ideology was promulgated in the provinces, for a sense of how it was received, whether enthusiastically, with reservation, or, in rare cases, with hostility. This literary evidence provides the background and interpretive framework needed for understanding isolated individual inscriptions as well as the concentrations of inscriptions under discussion here, while careful consideration of the epigraphic material adds contour to the image that can be pieced together from the literary sources. As will become apparent in the following pages, mentions of the salutary ideology in literary sources do not reveal why individuals and communities displayed loyalty to the state by making dedications for the salvation of the emperor. These sources do, however, establish that such an ideology was promulgated and that it had an impact on the lives of those living under Roman rule. The epigraphic material, which will be discussed in the chapters to come, does show the provincial perspective on this ideology, however.

By the death of Augustus, a specifically Roman imperial ideology was established around symbols and slogans that advertised the emperors role in saving the state from its enemies. This salutary ideology came together in the fractious days of the Late Republic from the fusion of the native Roman cult of Salus Publica and the Hellenistic veneration of saviors (stres). Beginning in the fourth century B.C., Romans venerated the Italian goddess Salus Publica as the guarantor of the salvation (salus) of the state (Livy 9.43.25, 10.1.9), rather than attributing victory to the individual Romans who fought in battle.2 It was taboo to honor individual Romans in this way due to Romes traditional hatred of kings. The Roman conception of who was ultimately responsible for Romes military success and the safety of her people placed that responsibility on the goddess Salus, not on generals. This attitude would change. In the Late Republic, Romes generals, as they became enmeshed in the politics of the Hellenistic world, encountered a culture that publicly celebrated saviors, both human and divine, in festivals called Stria.3 The earliest Stria festivals were held in Priene (297 B.C.) and Delphi (279 B.C.). These festivals commemorated historical acts of salvation and venerated both the heroes and the gods who had saved the cities in which the festivals were held. In the case of Delphi, the Stria celebrated the salvation of the city from the advance of Brennos, a Celt who planned to sack the shrine and carry off its vast treasure as plunder. Delphi was an international cult-site that attracted Greeks from throughout the Mediterranean world. During the Stria, therefore, sacrifices were made for the salvation of the shrine itself and of all Greeks. Other Stria festivals were soon established, drawing crowds with the

promise of gymnastic, equestrian, and musical competitions. Less dramatic acts of salvation might also be celebrated: Anne Bielman has recently assembled a corpus of inscriptions from the Greek world that commemorate the salvation of captives. Those who provided money to pay ransoms were hailed as liberators for securing the stria of those taken as prisoners of war or abducted by pirates.4

In addition to such celebrations, Romes generals encountered a culture that honored living rulers as saviors (stres) and asked the gods for the rulers salvation.5 Dedications for the salvation of Hellenistic kings appeared in the East at the beginning of the second century B.C. in response to the ruling ideology, promulgated by the successors of Alexander, that the king was the savior of his people.6 For example, five slave manumissions from Susa (modern Iran), mostly broken away after the preambles, illustrate this ideological claim and show how it was reflected at the local level. Dated from 200 to 142/141 B.C., the inscriptions involve the transfer of slaves to the Temple of Nanaa, a local goddess associated with Artemis. The slaves would serve the goddess for a specified number of years and then be released. To add solemnity to the manumissions, the slave owners asked the goddess for the salvation of the Seleucid kings and their wives.7 In addition to showing veneration for the ruler, hyper strias was used symbolically in Hellenistic diplomacy. A series of inscriptions from the walls of the Temple of Cybele at Pessinus in Asia Minor preserves the correspondence between Attalus II, the king of Pergamon, and Attis, the temple priest (163156 B.C.). In one letter, Attalus writes to acknowledge that the priest, an indispensable political ally in the region, had made sacrifices to the gods for our salvation

8To ask the gods for the salvation of the king was the priests way of ritually affirming his loyalty to his Pergamene ally. Hellenistic imperial ideology deeply influenced Roman ideas of rulership in the Late Republic. In the second century B.C., during the conquest of the East, Roman commanders received cultic honors as saviors (stres). Statues of famous Greeks and Romans stood on inscribed bases that honored the men depicted above them as saviors.9 The first Roman to take such a title was T.Quinctius Flamininus, who in 196 B.C. was celebrated as a savior at the Isthmia for having liberated the Greeks from Philip V and was later voted divine honors (Plut. Flam. 10; Polyb. 18.46.10ff).

Though such accolades were unheard of in the past, Romans began to honor their own citizens as saviors by awarding them the corona civica, an oak crown that had been bestowed until the last century of the Republic on only those who had saved the life of another citizen, not on those who had saved the state from danger. Thus Cicero, for his role in thwarting the Catilinarian conspiracy, received the corona civica (Pis. 6), and Caesar received the same crown after the civil wars had left him the sole guarantor of the salus publica. Octavian inherited his uncles role as savior; even Cicero praises the young man for restoring the salus rei publicae (Phil 3.27). After defeating Antony and taking the name Augustus, the first Roman emperor received the corona civica for delivering the state and its citizens from grave danger, ob cives servatos (RG 34.2), just as Cicero and Caesar had. Now the ruler of Rome was the savior of his people, like the Hellenistic monarchs defeated by Romes generals.10

During his 40-year reign, Augustus gradually established the idea that the emperor was the savior of Rome as a ruling ideology through the revival of religious ritual, the institutionalization of vows for the salvation of the empire and the emperor, and the


dissemination of state religious observances to the far corners of the empire in the form of festival calendars. This is a large topic,11 but a few examples will have to suffice. A key element in the development of this ideology was Augustus interest in the archaic priesthood of the Arval Brothers. Their duties included the provision of costly sacrifices for the salvation of the reigning emperor.12 This was a solemn duty, for, as one of their inscriptions states, the salvation of all depends on the safety of the emperor: ex cuius incolumitate omnium salus constat.13 The Arval Brothers did not bear this responsibility alone. Augustus, it would seem, ensured that such ceremonies would be celebrated from high to low, in Rome and in all the cities of the empire. In his own proud words:

The senate decreed that vows should be undertaken every fifth year by the consuls and priests for my health [vota pro valetudine mea]. In fulfillment of these vows games have frequently been celebrated in my lifetime, sometimes by the four most distinguished colleges of priests, sometimes by the consuls. Moreover, all the citizens, individually and on behalf of their towns, have unanimously and continuously offered prayers at all the pulvinaria for my health.14

In the Greek copy of this document found inscribed on the Temple of Rome and Augustus at Ankara, vota pro valetudine mea is rendered

showing that the meaning of valetudo, at least in this period, was equated with that of stria, or salvation. Thus when vota were offered on behalf of the emperor in the eastern provinces, they were expressed by the formula hyper strias. It should be recalled, moreover, that this was language typical in the veneration of living Hellenistic kings.15

By A.D. 38, the prayers for the salvation of state and emperor were fixed. On 1 January, prayers were offered for the salvation of the empire. Two days later, on 3 January, prayers were offered for the emperors salvation by priesthoods, such as the quindecimviri sacris faciundis and the Arval Brothers.16 Such vota, extraordinary in the past, now became institutionalized as part of the official calendar of the Roman state. More than 200 years after the death of Augustus, the Arval Brothers were still climbing the Capitoline Hill on 3 January to ask the chief gods of the state for the emperors salvation. Soldiers stationed at Dura Europos followed the same calendar, more or less, established by Augustus, and they, like the Arval Brothers worlds away in the capital, offered vota ob salutem domini nostri Augusti on 3 January.17 These vows likewise became a test of loyalty for individuals in Rome and in the provinces. In A.D. 37, an embassy from Assos, a city on the western coast of Asia Minor, arrived in Rome to swear an oath of loyalty to the emperor on behalf of their city. Before departing, they climbed the Capitoline Hill and sacrificed to Jupiter Capitolinus for the salvation of the emperor.18 A dramatic example of the formulas use as a loyalty test is highlighted by the fate of Thrasea Paetus. A senator opposed to Neros flamboyant disregard for Roman tradition, Paetus was condemned for disloyalty. His detractors pointed out before the senate that Paetus had failed to take the loyalty oath (ius iurandum), neglected the New Year vows, and refused to offer the customary sacrifices both for the emperors salvation and, in this case, for the emperors divine voice. Rather than face Neros justice, Paetus took his own life.19

The salutary ideology 19

In the decades following Augustus death, the connection between the salus of the state and the salus of the emperor grew stronger. Salus Publica became venerated as Salus Augusta, further associating the goddess to the person of the emperor. By the reign of Vespasian, Salus Augusta began to be identified as Salus Augusti (Salvation of the Emperor)the genitive, Winkler argues, signifying that the personification of salus was no longer a divinity independent of the emperors person.20 This assimilation surely coincided with the diffusion in the provinces of the notion that the emperors salvation guaranteed the salvation of the entire empire and all its inhabitants. According to slogans publicized in the second century, the emperor claimed universal authority and propagated the notion that he was the savior of the world.21 The emperors representatives abroad, particularly provincial governors and military officials, could therefore demand public recognition of the emperors role as savior. In response, the provincials offered vows for the salvation of the emperor (pro salute Augusti or hyper strias Sebastou).22 In this way, provincial loyalty was expressed through the fulfillment of a simple obligation; the salvation of the state and its inhabitants depended on the salvation of the emperor, both of which could be secured through offering vota pro salute Augusti.23

By the beginning of the second century, vota for the salvation of the emperor were a regular part of everyday life in the provinces. At least until the middle of the fourth century, they accompanied not only the New Year celebrations, but also other events, such as anniversaries of the emperors accession and religious festivals. Threats against the emperor, including sickness in the imperial household, declarations of war, trips outside Rome, political unrest, and plots against the emperor, also demanded such dedications.24 Petitions (libelli) to the emperor himself sometimes began with a prayer for the emperors salvation or an acknowledgment of the emperors salutary power. A village now in Bulgaria wrote to Gordian III in the first half of the third century A.D. to ask for help against marauding soldiers. They began their petition by stating that the emperors policy of maintaining the prosperity of villages is long-standing. This policy, they continue, is both salvation (stria) to the people and profitable to your most sacred fisc.25 To understand how the salutary ideology took root in such places, let us now turn to the letters that Pliny the Younger wrote to Trajan while Pliny was governor of Bithynia. His reports provide evidence for the promulgation and enthusiastic reception of the salutary ideology in the provinces.

PLINY THE YOUNGER AND THE PROMULGATION OF IMPERIAL IDEOLOGY

The correspondence between Trajan and Pliny the Younger supplies a wealth of information about the administration of the empire. Pliny painstakingly documented the problems that he encountered, often consulting the emperor for solutions. The best-known letter exchange is that regarding the status of Christians in his province.26 He reports that Christians were being accused of forming illegal associations. To restore order and defuse tensions, Pliny organized interrogations in which accused Christians were asked to sacrifice before a statue of the emperor. The episode reveals that the imperial governor was in charge of maintaining order, proper religious observance, and loyalty to the state, all of which were interrelated in the eyes of the emperor.27


A handful of letters show that Pliny was similarly responsible for leading public sacrifices for the salvation of the emperor on festival days such as 3 January, when people throughout the empire were making vows for the salvation of the emperor. Reporting on this festive occasion as it was celebrated in Nicomedia, Pliny writes:

We have made our annual vows, Sir, to ensure your safety [incolumitas] and thereby the salvation [salus] of the State, and discharged our vows for the past year, with prayers to the gods to grant that those vows may always thus be discharged and confirmed.28

The emperor Trajan answers:

I was glad to hear from your letter, my dear Pliny, that you and the provincials have discharged your vows to the immortal gods on behalf of my salvation and safety [pro mea salute et incolumitate], and have renewed them for the coming year.29

Here the emperor expects Pliny to play two roles. First, Pliny is the chief representative of the state from the perspective of the locals (provinciales). At state-sponsored religious functions, Pliny leads them in their collective display of loyalty to the emperor. Second, Pliny represents the provinciales from the perspective of the emperor. Under Plinys guiding hand, the stretch of empire along the southern shore of the Black Sea was running smoothly, a status affirmed by vows for the salvation of the emperor. This letter exchange also suggests that these vows were typical of provincial life. Led by imperial officials, these vows were not only expected but also to be anticipated at regular intervals, thus marking time in the provinces. When accompanied by a festival, they also required long-term planning. Each occasion furnished Pliny with an opportunity to announce to the emperor that public vows and thanksgiving (vota publica et gaudia) had been renewed. In return, the emperor duly registered his dear (carissimus) Plinys watchful efforts and offered mild words of encouragement.30

Even though orchestrated by Pliny, the festivals for the emperors salvation could become tense, for they set the stage for competing elements within the community to struggle with each other for prestige. On 3 January of the following year, Pliny tells us, the locals split into two groups, the soldiers (commilitones) and the provincials (provinciales), that competed in their enthusiastic displays of loyalty to the emperor. The potential for a large, bloody riot was very real. In his report, Pliny sought to reassure the emperor that the security of the region had not been compromised. He claimed that the demonstrators displayed loyalty (pietate); in addition, they all prayed that the gods preserve (servarent) the emperor and the state as flourishing and safe (florentem et incolumen). In the midst of the incident, Trajans imperial virtues, including his sanctity, reverence, and piety (sanctitate obsequio deorum honore), were celebrated. Trajan was of course glad (libenter) to hear about it.31

Trajans day of accession was 28 January, and the occasion was an annual public holiday in the provinces. Pliny, addressing Trajan, describes it as the day by which you, Lord, saved the empire (diem, domine, quo servasti imperium), perhaps reflecting the


way in which the holiday was presented to the provinciales. Configured in this way, the celebration had to be grand:

We have celebrated with appropriate rejoicingand have offered prayers to the gods to keep you in health and prosperity [incolumen florentemque] on behalf of the human race, whose security and happiness depend on your salvation [saluti tuae]. We have also administered the oath of allegiance to your fellow-soldiers in the usual form and found the provincials eager to take it, too, as a proof of their loyalty.32

Trajan was again glad (libenter) to hear the news, especially, it seems, because the occasion again brought together the soldiers and provinciales in a collective display of loyalty:

I was glad to hear from your letter, my dear Pliny, of the rejoicing and devotion [religione] with which under your guidance [te praeeunte], my fellow-soldiers and the provincials have celebrated the anniversary [diem imperii] of my accession.33

Roman generals since the Late Republic were regularly hailed as saviors in the provinces. Trajans father, for example, was greeted by the people of Tiberias as savior and benefactor during the Jewish War.34 But Plinys characterization of Trajan as the savior of the human race differs from such spontaneous acclamations. Coins issued in about 111 with the legend salus generis humani confirm that Plinys statement was officially sanctioned ideology. According to this ideology, Trajan, like Augustus before him, is, by virtue of his position as emperor, the savior of the empire and its inhabitants.35 The emperors salvation (saluti tuae), as Pliny puts it in the letter under consideration, is thus necessary for the security (securitas) of the human race (genus humanum).36 Pliny was therefore mouthing the official slogans of the regime. It was at festivals for the salvation of the emperor that consensus was created in the provinces, intimately tying the fate of individuals to that of the emperor through the drama of the rituals. In this case, an imperial official dictated the formula (te praeeunte) for the soldiers to repeat. The provincials followed their example and swore a similar oath as a proof of their loyalty (certatim pietate).

It is important not to overlook how Trajans short responses emphasize Plinys own role in organizing the event: the celebrations took place under the legates guidance. To inaugurate public works, imperial legates also sponsored dedications for the salvation of the emperor. As we shall see in Chapter 3, from A.D. 75 to 262, a dozen imperial legati appear in dedications for the salvation of the emperor as directors of public works, including gates, walls, aqueducts, and temples.37 To give an example from Trajans reign, Cornelius Palma, Trajans imperial legate in Syria, was particularly active in southern Syria, thus appearing in a guiding role in a number of dedications for the salvation of the emperor.38 As judges, patrons, and military commanders, imperial legates were thus instrumental in the dissemination of the states ruling ideology. But how successful was the program? As noted above, the salutary ideology became a regular feature of provincial life, affirmed on fixed days and special occasions. Surely not everyone wanted


to participate in these festivals and such persons could quietly excuse themselves, since there was no decree that all should celebrate for the emperors salvation.39 Some, however, were more conspicuous in their refusal to participate in such festivals.

TERTULLIAN AND ORIGEN: THE LIMITS OF IDEOLOGY

Tertullian, the Christian apologist born in the territory of Carthage in the middle of the second century, provides a starkly different view of such civic duties and festivals.40 In about 197, Tertullian wrote his Apologeticum, a work that set out to prove in the Christian apologetic tradition that Christianity was justifiable in pagan terms and more desirable for its truth. The date is important. Septimius Severus had just conquered the last of his rivals, the civil wars were over, and dynastic succession was assured. Tertullians description of the victory celebrations at Carthage is vivid. The celebrations transformed the city, in the churchmans opinion, into a gigantic tavern or, worse, a brothel. The streets were blocked with bonfires, couches, and feasting merrymakers. Danger loomed from gangs on the prowl. The victory laurel hung from the doors of private houses. But not everyone participated. There was a noticeable lack of enthusiasm in the Christian community.41 This invited criticism: Were Christians partisans of the emperors enemies? Even though Severus had vanquished his rivals, it was still a tense time. The remnants of the opposition were being hunted down throughout the empire; soldiers were out in force; and there were denunciations of traitors. In fact, not long before, Christians had been arrested and brutally interrogated at the office of the proconsul.42

To allay such suspicions, Tertullian addressed his Apologeticum to a broad audience consisting of magistrates, learned pagans, and Christians.43 In this context, accusations against Christians of refusing to perform their duties to insure the salvation of the emperor took on a dangerous significance, thus impelling Tertullian to justify the Christians apparent disloyalty. First he argues against compulsive religious observance from a pagan point of view. Next he shows that Christian Scripture obliges Christians to honor their earthly rulers. And finally Tertullian attacks the notion of sacrifice, arguing that prayer to God for the emperors salvation is more efficacious.

Tertullian presupposes a situation in which Christians were being forced to make sacrifices for the emperors salvation. Compulsion, even within pagan worship, he parries, is absurd. The pious seek favor from the gods voluntarily. Furthermore, it is blasphemous to honor a living beingthe emperormore than Jupiter himself. Sacrifices for the emperor thus challenge the primacy of the Olympian gods.44 Then Tertullian dismisses the power of these gods to grant salvation to the emperor. Like Caesars guards, the gods are dependent on the good will of the emperor. He, after all, maintains the beauty of their temples and provides them with fine statues:

How shall they [the gods] who are thus in Caesars power, who belong entirely to him, have Caesars salvation [salus] in their hands, so that you can imagine them able to give to Caesar what they more readily get from him?45


Thus, Tertullian concludes, it is foolish to search for salvation from false gods while ignoring the one divinity that has the power to grant salvation to the emperor. Knowing that the salvation of the emperor is not in the leaden hands of the statues of gods, the Christians invoke the eternal, the true, the living God for the salvation of the emperor [pro salute imperatorum invocamus].46

To Christians, the emperor is thus utterly dependent on God. For Caesar cannot wage war on heaven, cannot send troops or levy taxes there. Since God alone is the source of the emperors worldly authority, Christians look toward heaven with arms outstretched and offer ceaseless prayers (precantes) for all the emperors. Further, they pray for the emperors longevity, a secure empire and imperial house, strong armies, a faithful senate, a virtuous people, and a calm worldall the things, in short, that Caesar desires from his false gods.47

Clearly, some were aware that Christians prayed for the empire in the way that Tertullian describes but dismissed such prayers as disingenuous displays meant only to convince the authorities to leave the Christian community in peace. In response to this criticism, Tertullian enjoins those who think that we care nothing for the salvation of the emperors [de salute Caesarum], to read Christian texts, where Christians are obliged to love their enemies and to honor their rulers.48 The Roman emperor is central to Gods plan, since a strong empire provides security to Christian communities.49 What God has willed, says Tertullian, we all also desire: safety [saluum].50 Since God, working behind the scenes, actually appoints the emperor, it can rightly be said that Christians are more responsible for the salvation of the emperor than the pagans, for Christians ask it of the God who can provide it. And by subordinating the emperor with respect to God, as is appropriate, Christians put the emperor in Gods favor.51

Tertullian thus establishes that Christians were among the most loyal subjects of the emperor. Yet, a problem lingered. Traditional displays of loyalty to the emperor demanded sacrifice to pagan deities. These sacrifices involved, Tertullian reports, grains of incense, tears of an Arabian tree, drops of wine, the blood of a tired ox, and, worst of all, a polluted (pagan) conscience.52 He points out that a mere sacrifice for the salvation of the emperor is no guarantee of genuine loyalty. All the rebels and murderers of emperors in recent memory, on the very eve of their traitorous outbreak, offered sacrifices for the salvation of the emperor [et sacra faciebant pro salute imperatoris], and swore by his genius, one thing in profession, and another in the heart.53 Christians, by contrast, refuse to offer sacrifices but offer instead prayer sent forth from a chaste body, an unstained soul, and a sanctified spirit.54

In principle, Tertullian was thus willing to perform religious rites for the salvation of the emperor, but in a specifically Christian way: through prayer and leading a chaste life. Tertullian then discusses the foolishness of worshipping the genius of the emperor. By sacrificing to the genius of the emperor, one was paying homage to the emperors spiritual double. Oaths taken by the genius (or tych) of the emperor became part of everyday life, as in matters involving taxes and the sale of goods,55 as well as in judicial proceedings, such as those against the Christians. To give one example, in the trial of Polycarp, one senses the proconsuls frustration as he presses the old man to mumble a few banal words: Have regard for thine age. Swear by the genius of Caesar, repent and say, Away with the Atheists.56 To Tertullian, this practice, however much a part of everyday life, was pure devil worship. His reasoning is that the genii are nothing more


than daimones. They should be exorcised, not worshipped. Nevertheless, and here it is important to pay attention to Tertullians own words, the Christian was prepared to offer a compromise. Though we, he says, decline to swear by the genii of the emperors, we do swear for their salvation [ita per salutem eorum], which is more reverential than all the genii.57

Tertullian reinterpreted the imperial ideology of sal vation in light of Christian belief. In doing so, he opened the door for Christians to participate in the rituals of the state. He agreed with his critics that individuals should pray to a divine power for the emperors salvation. Thus in the pagan and Christian imagination, the emperors welfare is held in the balance by the divine, on the one hand, and by the piety (which easily stands for political loyalty) of his subjects, on the other. Like pagans, Tertullian prays for the emperor, imperial house, armies, senate, and Roman people to maintain peace and prosperity for all. Revealing a detailed knowledge of the standard means by which loyalty was expressed in the provinces, Tertullians list of benefactors (the emperor, imperial house, etc.) parallels that used in several dedications for the emperors salvation from the Near East. Two inscriptions dated to 150, one from Philadelphia and the other Gerasa, explicitly mention the involvement of the imperial legate L.Attidius Cornelianus in massive building projects: the theater at Philadelphia and Temple of Artemis at Gerasa. The inscriptions ask for the salvation of the emperor, his children, and his entire household, and for his strength, and that of the sacred senate and Roman people.58 To the north, a dedication was made at Apamea for the salvation and victory of the emperor, the sacred armies, sacred senate, and (Roman) people.59

Writing in Palestine some 50 years later, on the eve of the Decian persecution, Origen composed his own apologetic work, the Contra Celsum, to address lingering pagan accusations similar to those Tertullian had dealt with earlier. Like Tertullian, Origen supports the state partly for practical and partly for religious reasons. Christians, he states, do not want to call down the wrath of the imperial authorities on their communities without reason. Further, according to Pauls letter to the Romans (Rom. 13:12), the powers of the earth are ordained by God. Those who resist kings and princes do so against the will of God.60 However, Origen, in agreement with Tertullian, draws the line at oaths taken by the genius of the emperor. His words are resolute: We shall not swear by the tych of the emperor, nor by anything else that is considered a god. If the tych of the emperor is a demon (Origen is not sure), then such an oath would be blasphemous. Even if the tych is nothing but fortune, that is, an abstract concept, Origen asks, why swear an oath according to a force with no real existence?61

More than disregarding the genius of the emperor, Origen rejects the view that the emperor is the source of earthly prosperity, here departing from Tertullians more accommodating view. Pliny the Younger, as quoted above, declared that the security (securitas) of the human race (genus humanum) was dependent on the salvation of the emperor, thus providing an ideological basis for dedications for his salvation. Plinys view is also echoed in one of Celsus reproaches:

If you are commanded to swear by a human emperor, there is nothing wrong in that. For to him has been given whatever there is upon earth; and whatever you receive in this life, you receive from him.62


Origens reply:

We deny, however, that all things which are on the earth have been given to the emperor, or that whatever we receive in this life we receive from him. For whatever we receive rightly and honourably we receive from God, and by His providence, as ripe fruits, and corn which strengtheneth mans heart, and the pleasant vine, and wine which rejoiceth the heart of man. And moreover, the fruit of the olive-tree, to make his face to shine, we have from the providence of God (Ps. 103:15).63

With a paraphrase from the Psalms, Origen thus dismisses the claim that the emperor is the source of life. Even though Origen was willing to concede that the emperors and the empire were part of Gods plan, and that to them a certain measure of honor wa

Jason Moralee-For Salvation's Sake_ Provincial Loyalty, Personal Religion, And Epigraphic Production...

Documents

Transcript of Jason Moralee-For Salvation's Sake_ Provincial Loyalty, Personal Religion, And Epigraphic Production...