Les Gesta apud Zenophilum et la "Paix de Maxence" (Gesta fº 22b)

Abstract

The date of Silvanus's election as bishop of Cirta is indicated in three sources: the "protocol of Cirta" (erroneously dated to March 4th, 303, which Augustine corrected to March 5th, 305: c. Cresc., III, 27.30). a restored passage in the Acts of Silvanus's trial in 320, and allusions in the first book of Optatus of Milevis. According to this author (1,14-17), Silvanus's ordination came after the great persecution (i.e. at the end of 304) ; however it was contemporary with Mensurius's departure from Carthage, not with the election of his two successors which alone is linked to the peace of Maxentius (I, 18). The election at Carthage, which Optatus places after the indulgentia of Maxentius, is not related to that at Cirta except for a phrase in the Gesta which, in its corrected form, seemingly refers to... the peace of Maxentius. In the trial of 320, which gives an account of Silvanus's election, his contender is alluded to as the people's candidate (de quo clamavit populus biduo post pare(m) : 'exaudi deus, civem n(o)s(tru)m volumus'). The expression biduo post pare(m), amended post pacem by M. Deutsch in 1875, caused Silvanus's election to be placed "two days after the peace", and according to Lancel, two days after the promulgation of Maxentius's indulgentia at Cirta. However such an indirect and allusive dating seems questionable, due both to the circumstances of the election (would two days have been enough ?) and to the internal dynamics of the trial in 320 (reference to the people's cheers is intended to magnify his contender, not to provide a surreptitious date for the election ). One should perhaps retain the expression biduo post pare(m) and infer from the phrase that "for two days" (biduo) the people shouted the name of "the preferred fellow-citizen" (de quo) "after that of his opponent" (post parem, a term applying to the protagonists in a two-man contest, especially regarding a pair of gladiators). The insistence on the length of the debates and the two competitors' equal chances agrees with the logic of the indictment. Those two days apply either to the final phase of the election campaign, or to the "conclave" which was imposed on the people shut (inclusus) in the casa major (as reported by witnesses in 320), because he was resisting the pressures of Silvanus's supporters. In conclusion, 1) for reasons of content rather than mere formal expression, biduo does not provide a date, but a suitable argument for strengthening the indictment of 320, i.e. the length of the debates during the election. 2) If need be, the amended phrase post pacem can be accepted if it refers to the end of the persecutions, but not the peace of Maxentius, since no source indicates a simultaneity between the double election at Carthage and at Cirta. 3) Regarding the later, I would rather retain the date of 305, the only one provided by an ancient source (Augustine), since none of the other dates proposed by historians, between 305 and 312, is convincing. [Author, translated by D. Parrish]