Subject: JUICE History 4: Era of Constantine
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 1998 21:57:10 +0000
To: "Hebraic Heritage Newsgroup"<heb_roots_chr@geocities.com>
From: JUICE Administration <juice@virtual.co.il>
To: Contemporary Jewish History <history@virtual.co.il>
Subject: JUICE History 4
==============================================================
World Zionist Organization
Jewish University in CyberspacE
juice@wzo.org.il birnbaum@wzo.org.il
http://www.wzo.org.il
==============================================================
Course: Medieval Jewish History
Lecture: 4/12
Lecturer: Prof. Howard Adelman
III. Changing Attitudes Between Judaism and Christianity in the Roman
Empire
Christian attitudes towards Judaism developed slowly over a period of
many centuries. In this lecture we will examine the period in which
Christian went from a defensive religion barely tolerated in the Roman
empire to being the dominant religion. Christian religious zeal,
however, had to be continuously modified based on the responsibilities
of maintaining an empire, an empire that was divided internally along
doctrinal lines which involved many competing interpretations of
Christianity, that was divided internally along political and military
lines with centers in the west, either Rome or Ravenna, and in the
east, Constantinople, and that was threatened by external threats of
invasion that ultimately did serious damage to the empire. The major
source of information known about this period of Jewish history
consists of the traces left in Roman law as preserved in Catholic
canon law at a much later date.
A. Defensive Christianity: The Council of Elvira
(See the text in J. R. Marcus, The Jew in the Medieval World, no. 19)
One of the most important documents that shows the nature of the early
relations between Jews and Christians was prepared in the south of
Spain in about the year 300 by the Council of Elvira, the first
national church council in Europe to legislate concerning the Jews. It
should be remembered that Elvira was a city on the periphery of the
Roman empire at a time before Christianity was tolerated. Little else
is known about Jewish life in Spain at this time. Later legends will
try to show that Jews had lived in Spain since before the time of
Christ. The following four provisions of the many Elvira canons
applied to the Jews: (Marcus, no. 19)
1. Christians cannot marry Jews or pagans unless they converted to
Christianity. The penalty was to deny the Christian communion for
five years.
2. Jews cannot bless Christian crops. A Christian who had a Jew
bless his crops would be excommunicated.
3. Christians cannot eat with Jews or the food of Jews. The penalty
called for the Christian abstaining from communion until he changed
his ways.
4. A married Christian man cannot have sexual relations with a Jewish
or pagan woman. The penalty for doing so entailed a loss of communion
for five years.
These rules show a defensive church trying to protect Christians from
social interactions with Jews. Jews and Christians had close relations
and there seems to have been little intrinsic enmity between them.
There was also little difference in the mind of the Christians between
a Jewish and a Christian blessing. The main concern of these laws was
Christian unity and the effect that the Jews had upon Christian life.
The purpose, therefore, was not to restrict Jews, only to enhance
Christian identity.
These observations about the legislation of Elvira concerning the Jews
are amplified when we examine other aspects of the legislation. About
half the canons of Elvira dealt with sexual matters and the attempt to
define Christian self-identity. In particular it attempted to assert
the power of the clergy as an elite group with stricter standards of
behavior. These edicts contained the first effort to prohibit
clerical marriage, requiring the higher clergy to divorce their wives
and regular clergy to maintain marital abstinence. Clergy who
committed fornication were denied communion. Clergy could not live in
the same building with female servants, unless they were close
relatives. There were also attempts to limit the participation of
unreformed prostitutes in communion and attempts to stop sexual
relations with young boys (See Brundage, Laws, Sex, and Christian
Society in Medieval Europe, pp. 69-73). Thus legislation concerning
Jews constituted one aspect of the process of Christian self
definition. We shall see regularly throughout this course that major
legislation concerning Jews was a frequent component of major turns in
Christian self-definition, especially provisions involving sexual
relations. The actual laws from Elvira themselves will be repeated at
many Church councils in the future. As late as 731, Pope Gregory III
will refer to one of the decisions of Elvira when dealing with a case
of adultery between a Christian man and a Jewish woman.
B. The Emperor Constantine and his Sons
The year 313 marks a turning point in the history of European
Christianity when the Emperor Constantine, who lived from 274 to 337
and who ruled from 306 to 337, began to tolerate Christianity. Often
this is referred to as his "conversion." However, he did not become a
Christian himself until his deathbed. In 312, on October 28, at the
Battle of Milvian Bridge near Rome, some of his troops went out to
battle with Christian symbols on their shields and, depending on the
account, he either had a vision of his mother who had become a
Christian or of the sign of the cross in the sky before the battle.
In Milan Constantine proclaimed equal rights for all religions and
restored the property taken from Christians. Christianity was not yet
the religion of the state or its leaders. Nevertheless, Constantine is
seen as the first emperor to issue laws limiting the rights of Jews as
citizens, rights which had been granted to them, despite the added
burden of holding curial office, in 212. It is not clear whether he
actually issued the following edicts reported in his name or whether
others did so without his knowledge, perhaps after his death. Most of
these, six out of his seven, are found in the Theodosian Code (CTh) of
Theodosius II from 438 (see below) and the dating and formulation of
many of them is still subject to much scholarly discussion.
1. In 325 it was ruled that Easter was now to be celebrated on a
Sunday and not to coincide or to be determined by Passover. " . . .
it appeared an unworthy thing that in the celebration of this most
holy feast we should follow the practice of the Jews, who have
impiously defiled their hands with enormous sin, and are, therefore,
deservedly afflicted with blindness of soul. . . . Let us have
nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd; for we have
received from our Savior a different way. . . . " (Marcus, no. 20)
3. In 329 and 335 it was ruled that Jews would be punished with death
by burning if they attacked a person who converted to Christianity.
[(CTh 16:8:1; CJ 1:9:3)] (Marcus, no. 1)
4. Beginning in 335, Jews could not convert slaves to Judaism, but
they could still own them. The penalty for converting a slave was the
loss of the slave. (335: CTh 16:8:5)
These laws show that Jews were converting from Judaism to
Christianity, perhaps due to the victory of Christianity. The
difference now was that Christianity had the power of the state to
protect its converts and to stop conversion to Judaism. The polemical
relationship between two competing sects had now been altered with the
assumption of the power of the state by the church. The church still
saw Judaism as a threat, used harsh language against it, such as
"nefarious sect," and with political power, acted against it,
enacting and enforcing laws against Judaism. These laws show that the
Jews had not yet submitted and were actively fighting against
Christianity.
In 325 the Council of Nicea was the first ecumenical council of the
Church. It was called by Constantine after he assumed control over the
east as well as the west primarily to deal with questions about the
nature of Jesus' divinity and to respond to the Arian heresy of Arius,
an Alexandrian who denied that Jesus was divine. With every attempt
to define Christianity comes a distancing from Judaism and at Nicea
the concern was focused on separating the celebration of Easter from
the observance of Passover. This means that until this time the
Christians still relied upon the Jewish calendar, further evidence of
the lack of separation between Judaism and Christianity.
A continued exemption provided to rabbis and Jewish religious leaders
from the curial offices showed respect to rabbis, synagogues, and
perhaps even the members of the Sanhedrin in Palestine. In a period
when the Romans were trying to limit the exemptions of Christian
clergymen, the continued recognition of the rights of Jewish religious
leaders shows that the motivation for the Roman policy was mixed.
A review of subsequent legislation shows the gradual development of
specific features of legislation concerning the Jews. Several
historians have recently argued that this legislation shows the
considerable power that Jews continued to wield well after the rise of
Christianity and the threats that Christianity saw Judaism offering.
These rules do not come out of bad relations between Jews and
Christians (what we would now be called, erroneously, antisemitism)
but rather were enacted because relations were good and the
authorities wanted to separate the two peoples.
After the death of Constantine in 337, his three sons, Constantinus,
Constantius, and Constans, ruled variously--and with much confusion in
the history books because of the similarities in their names-- in the
east and the west from 337 to 361. Two edicts concerning the Jews are
attributed to one or the other of them from around the year 339. The
key features of this policy towards the Jews included: (CTh 16:8:6 and
16:9:2; Cod. Just. 1:10:1)
1. Relations, including but not limited to marriage, were forbidden
between Jewish men and Christian women. The penalty for doing so was
death, a major disincentive (16:8:6). It is clear from the text of the
law, that Christian women were marrying Jewish men. (Marcus, no. 1)
2. Jewish slaveholding was also forbidden in order to prevent Jews
from converting slaves to Judaism. If the slave purchased was a
pagan, the Jew would lose the slave; if it was Christian the Jew would
lose all property; if the slave were circumcised, the owner would be
killed. This was a major economic blow to the Jews as well as the
expansion of Judaism. ( 16:9:1 ) (Marcus, no. 1)
In 341 at the Council of Antioch it was ruled that Christians could
not celebrate Passover with Jews or take unleavened bread from Jews.
It is highly significant that also in Antioch the Church father John
Chrysostum also preached against Christians, including women, who
attended the synagogue for oaths, cures, and the celebration of
Passover. Chrysostum singled out women and slaves as being
particularly susceptible to Judaizing. Thus, as in Elvira, it is clear
that Judaism continued to attract Christians in Antioch, either as
converts or as Judaizing Christians. Chrysostum's sermons, delivered
in the church, were aimed at creating distance between Jews and
Christians. "Many I know, respect the Jews and think that their
present way of life is a venerable one. This is why I hasten to
uproot and tear out this deadly opinion." The mirror image of
Christian views such as these are seen in rabbinic literature from
this period. The Palestinian Talmud, Berakhot 8, contains an
extensive discussion about whether Jews should respond with amen to
the blessings of non-Israelites who use the name of the Lord. Clearly
Jews were aware of high level of non-Jewish interest in Judaism such
that the prayers of non-Jews may have been sufficiently similar to
those of the Jews. Christian Councils would repeat the admonitions
against Christians celebrating festivals and the sabbath with Jews at
least well into the seventh century, for example, in 465 at Wannes,
they ruled against Christians eating at Jewish meals; in 506 they
ruled similarly at Agde especially because Jews would not eat the food
of Christians; in 538 at Orleans they ruled against Christians
celebrating the sabbath and festivals with Jews; a prohibition
repeated also in 583 at Macon and 626 at Clichy.
In 361 edicts attributed to the Council of Laodicea, in Asia Minor,
ruled that Christians must work and study the Gospels on Saturday,
they cannot take gifts of food from Jews, or celebrate feasts with
them, especially eating unleavened bread. Again it seems that the
greatest concern with Judaism on the part of Christian leaders was the
attraction that it held for Christians.
C. Julian the Apostate
In 361, the emperor, Julian, the apostate, a nephew of Constantine,
tried to turn the empire back from Christianity to paganism. Julian
sided with the Jews, seeing them as an ally both against Christianity
and Persia. He lightened their curial burdens, stopped the fiscus
judaicus taxes on the Jews in the diaspora, and apparently tried to
have the Temple rebuilt in Jerusalem. According to the Palestinian
Christian historian Salamanius Hermias Sozomenus who wrote about a
century later, after the workmen had removed the ruins of the Temple
destroyed in 70 and dug the ground for the foundation, there was a
violent earthquake. When the workmen returned to their task, a
massive fire arose from the ground. When the workmen again returned
to their work, they saw in the sky overhead the sign of the cross,
proving to some, at least according to the historian, that the project
was not pleasing to God because Christ had prophesied its destruction.
Julian was soon assassinated and thus construction stopped on the
third Temple in Jerusalem. Afterwards the unconfirmed report was
circulated by Ambrose of Milan that during Julian's reign the Jews had
burned churches in Damascus, Ashkelon, Beirut, Gaza, and Alexandria
(Marcus, no. 2).
This episode shows that the Jews still wielded considerable power in
the Christian world. They were perceived as the natural ally of any
enemy of Christianity. The greatest fear seems to have been that the
Temple would be rebuilt, both falsifying the prophecies of Christ and
empowering the Jews religiously, politically, and socially. Marcel
Simon (Verus Israel, p. 229) wrote that the reign of Julian was a
turning point in the rise of anti-Jewishness in minds of some
Christian writers who reacted hostiley to the gains made by the Jews
under Julian.
D. The Jews and the Christian Roman Emperors until the end of the
Empire
Julian's Christian successors in the West, Jovian, Valentinian I, and
Valens, extended the toleration of Jews for at least another 20 years.
In particular in 368 synagogues were protected from the imposition of
"hospitality duty" for soldiers and officials. However, in 383 the
emperor Gratian repealed the exemption that rabbis--or perhaps some
Jewish men-- had enjoyed from the curial offices. This edict was
issued in Milan and may have been influenced either by the bishop
Ambrose's negative attitude toward the Jews (see below) or a general
desire to strengthen the curial offices for financial reasons, a
provision which also applied to Christian clerics who had to provide
substitutes to fulfill curial duties. Gratian also passed a law
prohibiting Christians from participating in pagan, Jewish, and
Manichaean worship and, in 384 along with Theodosius in the east,
attempted to limit Jews from owning Christian slaves or from
converting slaves or themselves. Such slaves, however, had to be
redeemed by Christians before they could go free.
In the East, Theodosius I was the emperor from 379 to 395 and,
although he is often credited with establishing Nicene Christianity as
the official Roman religion, he demonstrated a fair approach toward
Judaism in two decrees:
1. In 388, in the name of law and order, he ordered a synagogue that
had been destroyed by Christians in Callinicium on the Euphrates in
Mesopotamia to be rebuilt with Christian money. Ambrose, the Bishop
of Milan, in the name of faith, protested against this justifying the
burning because synagogues are "a home of unbelief, a house of
impiety, a receptacle of folly, which God himself has condemned. . ."
It was at this point that he felt it necessary to charge that during
the reign of Julian Jews had burned down Churches. It seems that his
call for the burning of synagogues might not have stood on its own.
His concern, in addition to the threat posed by the synagogue, and
perhaps its attraction to Christians, was the victory that the Jews
would feel over Christianity by having the synagogue rebuilt with
Christian funds. Ambrose was not successful in his written plea and in
person tried to persuade Theodosius by not offering the mass in his
presence until the emperor would change his mind. Theodosius finally
yielded (Marcus, no. 21).
2. Again in 393, Theodosius asserted that Judaism was not prohibited
by any law and opposed any attempts that had been made to destroy
synagogues.
Nevertheless, Theodosius issued other decrees concerning Jews, often
in conjunction with the emperors of the West, Valentinian II and
Arcadius, that indicate a deeper interference on the part of Christian
emperors into the workings of the Jewish community.
1. First, in 388, he promulgated an interdiction against mixed
marriages between Christians and Jews. This included both marriages
between Jewish men and Christian women and between Christian men and
Jewish women. The penalty was the same as for those who committed
adultery, which at this time was not only expropriation of property
but death. It is important to note that mixed-marriage was now seen as
a crime against the state.
2. In 392 Theodosius was asked by the Jews to intervene in an
internecine quarrel between Jewish judges and Jewish Primates,
probably leaders such as Archisynagogue and Patersynagogue who were
under the authority of the Patriarch in the land of Israel. He upheld
the right of the Jewish Primates to excommunicate Jews and he rejected
the authority of Jewish judges to readmit the rejected Jews into the
community against the wishes of the Primates. While seeming to assert
the authority of Jewish leaders to excommunicate, this edict
undermined the authority of Jewish judges and Jewish communal legal
autonomy because ultimately internal matters of self-rule were
resolved by the Roman emperor.
3. In 393 Theodosius meddled in Jewish marital law by imposing Roman
imperial legislation that ruled that Jews could not follow their own
customs and laws in marriage, singling out in particular Jewish
polygynous unions. Other aspects of Jewish marriage practice affected
by this ruling must have included Jewish levirate unions (a childless
widow with her late husband's brother) and the less restrictive
degrees of consanguinity followed by the Jews. It remains to be seen
to what extent this decree influenced the marital practices of the
Jews.
In the year 395, on the death of Theodosius, the Roman empire was
divided between his sons Arcadius, who from 396-408 ruled the East
from Constantinople, and Honorius, who from 396-423 ruled the West
from Ravenna in Italy. Both emperors issued decrees that protected
Jews, even expanding their rights and privileges, but also indicating
that there were pressures among the people mounting against the Jews.
Honorius allowed Jewish converts to Christianity to return to Judaism
and Jews to own Christian slaves; he protected synagogues and
permitted Jewish celebration of the sabbath. At the same time, he did
try for a while, from 399-404, to limit the ability of the Jews to
support the Patriarch in Jerusalem but this was more a result of
East-West tensions and his desire to keep funds from the West from
supporting the East. He also tried to enforce all laws against the
Jews, especially those connected with the curial offices, and limited
their ability to perform other imperial governmental services. In some
of Honorius' laws Jews were associated with proselytizing Christians
to Judaism and influencing Christian heresies, demonstrating the
abiding image of influence that the Jews maintained in the Christian
world.
Arcadius passed laws defending the Jewish Patriarch in Jerusalem from
insult, preventing Jews from converting to Christianity for economic
reasons, protecting synagogues, and giving Jewish clergy the same
rights as Christian clergy. He also tried to make Jews subject to
Roman civil law.
In 408 Theodosius II (b. 401), became the emperor of the east on the
death of his father Arcadius. He ruled until 450 and during his rule,
in 410, Rome was briefly captured by the Goths, German tribes, led by
Alaric, a Visigoth. Theodosius II issued several decrees concerning
the Jews.
-In 415 he ruled against new synagogues being built. He also forbade
Christians from destroying old synagogues and allowed them to be
replaced if they were destroyed. If the Church instigated the attack,
it had to provide a new building.
-In 415 or 425 or 429, depending on the historian, the authority of
the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, at the time Gamaliel VI or VII, came
to an end. Eliminating a major source of both symbolic authority and
political power among the Jews. This period, when the Palestinian
Talmud was redacted, is conventionally depicted as one of deprivation
in Palestine. Such a dismal characterization, however, has been
questioned by historians such as Jeremy Cohen in light of the
flourishing of rabbinic courts at this time, the spectacular
synagogues that were built in Tiberias, Beth Alpha, Beth Shaan,
Meiron, Khirbet Shema, and Capernaum, and the continuation of rabbinic
creativity seen in works such as Leviticus Rabba and Pesikta de Rav
Kahana. The Jews, hardly submissive, also burned Jesus, instead of the
usual Haman, in effigy during Purim, a practice which Theodosius II
prohibited.
-In 438 Theodosius II issued what became known as the Theodosian code,
the earliest collection of Roman laws. It, and subsequent additions
called Novellae, was promulgated both in the East and in the West,
staying in force until the sixth century when it was replaced by the
Justinian Code in the East and Brevium in the West. Some of it,
however, was preserved as part of Canon Law.
-In 439 Theodosius II forbade Jews from holding offices of honor,
ruled again against synagogue building; threatened death for
converting slaves to Judaism; and forced Jews to take the curial
offices. His tone, more hostile than his predecessors, reflects the
power and influence of the Jews who still had the power to
excommunicate and, as members of a tolerated and protected religion,
enjoyed a position in society much better than that of heretics, who
were persecuted (Marcus, no. 1).
In 455 the Vandals took Rome, and 476 marked the final sack of Rome
and the end of the Western Roman Empire. Then in 493 Theoderic, an
Arian Visigoth, conquered Italy, Provence, and northern Spain, and
became the emperor of the Western Roman Empire. At this time there
were Jews on the Italian peninsula in Naples, Genoa, Milan, Ravenna,
and Rome, as well as in North Africa, Spain, and Gaul. Theoderic
allowed the Jews their own laws and judges, ownership of slaves,
remodeling of synagogues, and the carrying of arms. He protected the
Jews against forced conversions, destruction of synagogues by mobs,
including in Rome, Ravenna, Milan, and Genoa, showing the rise of mob
violence against the Jews and the protection afforded them by the
emperor. The violence, however, may not have been the result of a
differential between the Jews and the Christians but a situation in
which the Jews still felt that they could insult Christians, in one
case by mocking the rite of baptism by pushing each other in a river.
Because Jews enjoyed the protection of the emperor, the Christians had
to pay to rebuild destroyed synagogues. The reasons for the good
treatment of the Jews by the Visigoths in the West are unclear. But
the may include the fact that in the West, where there were no Greek
merchants to compete with the Jews, the ruling Arian minority needed
Jewish support.
>From 527 to 565 the emperor Justinian produced another major code of
Roman law, primarily for the East, which tried to reduce the legal
protection of Jews and the independence of Judaism. Jews could not be
witnesses against Christians unless their testimony was corroborated
by a Christian. In 553, at the instigation of Jews, Justinian issued
Novella 146. Some Jews had been quarreling whether the sacred books
should be studied only in Hebrew or also in a Greek translation. He
meddled in Jewish internal affairs and ruled on the side of those who
wanted Greek or Latin translations, compelling the Jews to use the
biblical translations of the Septuagint or Aquila in the synagogue. He
ruled against the "Deuterosis" of the Jews, probably either midrash or
the Mishnah, in his serious attempt to fight rabbinic Judaism.
Piyyut, the extensive religious poetry of the traditional prayerbook
was considered by some later medieval rabbis, wrongly, as an
innovative way adopted for Jews to continue the study of rabbinic
interpretations after their study had been banned by the Romans. One
of the flaws in this persecution hypothesis is that piyyut existed
before the edict of Justinian. It seems that some rabbis advanced the
persecution hypothesis because they were intent on removing these
piyyutim from the service. Justinian like some of his predecessors
also meddled in Jewish internal matters by demanding that Jews believe
in angels and in resurrection and against Jewish polygyny, a liberty
available to Jewish men but not Christians (See Marcus, no. 1).
>From 602-610 Phocas tried to forcibly convert the Jews of Byzantium,
as did his successor, Heraclius from 610-641. During the latter's reign, the
Persians conquered parts of the Eastern Roman Empire. In 614
Jerusalem fell, perhaps with Jewish help and Christians may have been
harassed with Jewish assistance. In 629 Heraclius retook Jerusalem,
perhaps also with Jewish support. Finally, in 636 the Muslims took
Jerusalem till 1099, lost the city for about a century and then held
it until 1917.
For Further Reading:
J. Parkes, The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogues
B. Bachrach, Early Medieval Jewish Policy in Western Europe
**********************************************************************