Death Of Julian Research Articles

John Chrysostom on the Roman-Persian Wars

The writings of St. John Chrysostom include numerous information about Persia and the Persians. Some of them relate to military history and reflect the military and military-political realities of Roman-Persian relations in the John Chrysostom’s period. The main part of the information reported by John Chrysostom about the Roman-Persian wars is connected with the Persian expedition of the emperor Julian the Apostate in 363 AD. The Saint explains the unsuccessful outcome of the campaign of 363 for the Romans by the fact that Julian organized anti-Christian persecutions. So, the death of Julian during the campaign is interpreted by John Chrysostom as a Divine punishment. The saint leaves the question of the death of the emperor open, not leaning towards any of the versions that circulated at that time. The description by John Chrysostom of the invasion of the Roman army into Persia in many details coincides with the information of our main source - the “Res Gestae” by Ammianus Marcellinus, who was not only a contemporary of the saint, but also the participant of the events of 363 AD. This indicates a high degree of reliability of the information reported by John Chrysostom. At the same time, the saint demonstrates an ambivalent attitude towards the Persians, considering them, on the one hand, barbarians and opponents of Rome, and, on the other hand, a people demonstrating high moral qualities (in particular, humanity towards the Romans). In addition, John Chrysostom reports some information about the activities of the Persian military intelligence.

The Beginning of the Last Dynasty of the Roman Empire

The article focuses on the principles and mechanisms of the supreme
 power transition from one ruler of the Roman Empire to another one and on
 Theodosius’ the Great accession to power. Hereditary monarchy principle was
 not always basic in the history of imperial Rome in spite of dynasties. Actually, throughout the era of the Empire, the army proclaimed each new emperor; also, the recognition of the legal heir required the soldiers’ approval. An attempt to create an artificial mechanism, presented by the system of tetrarchy, failed,
 therefore after Constantine the supreme power transition by hereditary principle seemed to be affirmed. However, the sudden death of Julian, who had no heirs, made the Empire return to the choice of emperor by the army. It led to the establishment of the Valentinian dynasty. After the Battle of Adrianople and the death of the eastern emperor Valens, the power succession problem was resolved in an unexpected way: Spaniard Theodosius, retired military commander was proclaimed the new emperor
 and he was the third one, because two Augusti from the Valentinian dynasty had already existed. The circumstances of his rise and accession to power are differently covered in the sources and do not allow researches to make firm conclusions
 about how it actually happened. As is often the case in history, not the only one factor could play a role, but their combination and intermingle. Theodosius had founded a dynasty, which remained in power for almost a century and which could be considered the last dynasty of the Roman Empire that reigned both in western and eastern parts of the Roman Empire.

Ælfric’s linguistic modifications of the Vita Basilii for his two works on the death of Julian the Apostate

ABSTRACT In a homily on the Assumption of the Virgin Mary, Ælfric included an account of the death of Julian the Apostate, which was derived from a portion of the Vita Basilii. Later he adapted the same Latin text more comprehensively to complete a hagiography of St Basil, in which the Julian episode appeared again. Ælfric’s first adaptation has been considered to represent a close, sometimes slavish translation of the Vita Basilii, when compared with his second adaptation, which is embellished with the rhythm and alliteration typical of his later style and tends to deviate from the language of the Latin source. Several examples support this view, but a closer examination reveals that many more points exist where Ælfric’s adaptations are similar or exactly coincide in word choice and how he transforms the Latin syntax. Interestingly, many of his linguistic modifications reflect his intention to emphasise Julian’s evil character in contrast to Basil, the pious saint. This paper will conclude that Ælfric modified the lexicon and syntax of the Vita Basilii so that the antithesis between Basil and Julian became much more striking in his two adaptations than in the Vita Basilii.

Building Community in Late Antiquity

Many chronicles of Late Antiquity, whether their authors recorded contemporary events or reflected on a recent past, are full of anguish. Ammianus Marcellinus mourns the death of Julian and the Battle of Adrianople, Zosimus decries the Empire's Christianization and crumbling institutions, John of Ephesus catalogues the horrors of the plague, Salvian finds the Huns more virtuous than his fellow citizens. It is no wonder that Edward Gibbon, Rome's first modern historian, named his account of the Roman Empire's last millennium The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire . Gibbon's frame so indelibly imprinted itself on the modern consciousness of this period that people seldom noticed its fundamental incoherence: A polity that takes 1000 years to “decline and fall” is doing neither. What weakened and collapsed, as Gibbon contemplated the years from the death of Marcus Aurelius in 180 CE to the Turkish conquest of Constantinople in 1453, was less the Roman state than Gibbon's sense that the Empire could serve as any kind of model for his own political community. And to a certain extent all the accounts I mentioned above shared that same disconnection between the values …

“Alles habt ihr mit Grabmälern angefüllt …” Kaiser Julian und die Transformation spätantiker Funeralkultur

Mediterranean funeral culture underwent a fundamental metamorphosis in late antiquity. Despite a few scholarly objections it appears that this transformation can be explained by the gradual rise of Christianity. This article provides a sort of test of this theory by asking whether the attempt to restore pagan culture under Emperor Julian (361-363) had any effect on practices concerning death and burial. Of utmost interest are, on the one hand, Julian’s objections to the Christian martyr cults which led among other things to the removal of the Babylas relics from the Temple of Apollo in Daphne, and, on the other hand, his Burial Law with a particular interest in the often-overlooked Letter 136b. Also to be considered are the burial of Constantius II, the death of Julian himself, and various associated eschatological conceptions. One notices a culture-defining difference in the way in which late antique pagans such as Julian, Libanius, and Eunapius of Sardes assume a strict division between life and death, cult and burial, purity and impurity. With late antique Christianity this could slowly be overturned through faith in the resurrection.

Review of Lee, From Rome to Byzantium

Doug Lee is a veteran scholar who has already delivered major contributions to the studies of frontiers, warfare, and Christianity in Late Antiquity. For the multi-authored Edinburgh series, however, he probably drew the short straw. In merely 300 pages Lee is forced to cover two centuries from the death of Julian to the death of Justinian (AD 363-565). The late fourth century and early sixth century, respectively, are exceptionally well documented, at least according to the standards of ancient history, thanks to the rich histories of Ammianus Marcellinus and Procopius, the legal codes, and a plethora of chronicles, letters, panegyrics and other writings. There would have been rich pickings for at least two separate volumes. This is all the more remarkable when comparing this volume in this series with Clifford Ando's Imperial Rome AD 193-284, where equal space is given to one of the most poorly documented single centuries in Rome's history. Furthermore, the choice to start the final volume with the death of Julian is a rather unusual one as Lee himself concedes (p. xiii), given that the major turbulent changes setting both halves of the Empire on fundamentally different courses would only come to full fruition with the death of Theodosius I in 395 (a terminal point more widely used, as noticed in the aforementioned works of Bury, Cameron and Moorhead). Lee's choice to end the volume with the death of Justinian is certainly more orthodox, though it could have helped to take the volume up to the death of Heraclius (641) which saw the advent of Islam and the final eclipse of the Ancient World.

A Byzantine Carol in Honour of St. Basil

In Chapter II of his Folklore Studies, ancient and modern, Sir William Halliday gave a translation of a Byzantine carol in honour of St. Basil the Great, and with this a full discussion of the legend celebrated in the carol. This is a story of a contact between the emperor Julian the Apostate in his last campaign against Persia and St. Basil, and how Julian's death was brought about by the agency of St. Mercurius, a soldier who was martyred in the Decian persecutions. The legend is recorded in the life of St. Basil attributed to St. Amphilochius, Bishop of Iconium, and in this life it appears we may see the start of the whole story. The supposed author was a contemporary of St. Basil, but the document is rejected as apocryphal, and appears to be of the eighth or ninth century, a date which allows plenty of time for the accumulation of legend about a name so well known in Asia Minor as that of the great bishop of Caesarea. Sir William Halliday has translated the relevant passages: for convenience I here give a very brief summary of the parts of the story which most closely touch the carol.The emperor Julian on his way to his campaign in Persia met Basil somewhere in the neighbourhood of Caesarea. Basil offered the emperor three loaves; angry at the smallness of the gift, the emperor sent him some hay in return; further angered by the fact that this gift gave the saint the right of pasturage on a certain meadow, he threatened on his return to destroy the city. Basil gathered his flock together, and they went to pray in the church of the Virgin on ‘Mount Didymus.’ The Virgin appeared, and called for the warrior Mercurius, who should go to Persia and slay Julian. Basil then went to the shrine of St. Mercurius, and found that the body was not there. This he announced to the people, and in seven days came the news of the death of Julian. Such very briefly is the legend as recorded in the Amphilochian life.

The Death of Julian the Apostate in a Christian Legend

The Emperor Julian stood to the Roman world of the fourth century as the personification of the older faith, and with him died the hopes of a pagan restoration. His death came at a critical moment, and both pagan and Christian felt that it could have been no human hand which dealt the fatal blow. To Kallistos Julian was the victim of a demon : Κάλλιστος δέ, writes Socrates, ὁ ἐν τοῖς οἰϰείοις τοῦ βασιλέως στρατευόμενος (i.e. as one of the imperial domestici), ἱστορήσας τὰ ϰατ᾿ αὐτὸν ἐν ἡρωιϰῷ μέτρῳ, τὸν τότε πόλεμον διηγούμενος ὑπὸ δαίμονος βληθέντα τελευτῆσαι ϕηαίν. The comment of the Christian historian is interesting : ὅπερ τυχὸν μὲν ὡς ποιητὴς ἔπλασε, τυχὸν δὲ ϰαί οὕτως ἔχει· πολλοὺσς γὰρ ἐριννύες μετῆλθον. Libanius pictures the blessings which men anticipated under Julian's rule and adds ταῦτα ϰαὶ ἔτι πλείω προσδοϰώμενα χορὸς φθονερῶν ἀφείλετο δαιμόνων. To the Christian similarly it was the saints who had fulfilled the will of Heaven in removing the Apostate persecutor of the Church, though a human assassin could hardly have been condemned—σχολῇ γε ἄν τις ϰαὶ αὐτῷ μέμψαιτο διὰ Θεόν ϰαὶ θρησϰείαν ἣν ἐπῄνεσεν ἀνδρείῳ γενομένῳ.