Talk:Christianization/Archive 1

In an effort to remove the tag from this article, I am going to attempt to address its issues. I would like to begin by moving the introductory paragraph concerning the Interpretatio Christiana to its appropriate chronological location. As an introductory comment, it appears to describe all the eras that follow - including the centuries before it existed. It therefore reads like an agenda - something that this article is trying to prove - and is not NPOV. Syncretism also deserves a much longer and more detailed discussion. I would appreciate any and all comments. Jenhawk777 (talk) 05:05, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

If I don't get any input in a couple more days, I will go ahead and do this.

In the ante-Nicene period, I would like to add to the discussion of syncretism as beginning in the second century, while not using the term "syncretism" itself, because it is a power word and should therefore be avoided.^[1] Christianization was always a parallel process of absorbing aspects of indigenous religion at the same time indigenous religion absorbed Christianity. My goal is to add specific examples of this "exchange" in each of the categories (if I don't tire of this before finishing).

This section describes Christianity of this period as inclusive, but it was also highly exclusive. That needs adding because both of those concepts are inherent in Christianity and both impacted Christianization throughout history. Picking one aspect to focus on will skew everything with a POV.

As the foundational period, this section is too short. Christianization begins here.

I do understand this is a controversial topic - though it needn't be really - but there is strong feeling associated with it. Those feelings are clear from the article itself, and that needs some adjusting as well. I will come back with an actual rewrite and post it here, with sources, before inserting anything in this article in an effort to minimize conflict.

References

Jenhawk777 (talk) 16:17, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Okay, here is what I want to insert. I changed the section title, because "Ancient" is the term most commonly used in scholarship of the period, but I am not hard-over on that if anyone objects. It is longer than what is there, but that is fitting for the foundation period. I believe it covers the pertinent aspects of Christianization in a balanced neutral manner, but if anyone has any objections - with source support - I am happy to do all possible to accommodate other views. If I don't get any objections, I will go ahead and insert in a couple days. The Bold is there only on this talk page.

Ancient (Ante-Nicaean) Christianity

Christianization began slowly, amidst opposition in the Roman Empire, in the province of Judaea, in the region of Palestine, around 30–40 AD. There is agreement among twenty-first century scholars that Christianization of the Roman Empire did not happen by imposition from rulers to the ruled in the centuries preceding Constantine (315). Instead, it was acquired by one person from another, through imitation, and learning what constituted Christian self-identification.^[1] Christianization of the early Roman Empire was the cumulative result of multiple individual behaviors.^[2] This emergence was 'self-organized', distributed away from any central authority, and was based on common causes.^[3] Christianity reached critical mass, (when there were enough adopters for it to be self-sustaining and able to generate further growth), in the hundred years between 150 to 250 when it moved from less than 50,000 adherents to over a million.^[4][5][6][7] Scholars agree there was a significant rise thereafter in the absolute number of Christians in the third century.^[8]

The Council of Jerusalem (around 50 AD) agreed the lack of circumcision could not be a basis for excluding Gentile believers from membership in the Jesus community. They instructed converts to avoid "pollution of idols, fornication, things strangled, and blood" (KJV, Acts 15:20–21).^[9] These were put into writing, distributed (KJV Acts 16:4–5) by messengers present at the Council, and were received as an encouragement.^[9]: 257 The Apostolic Decree helped to establish Ancient Christianity as unhindered by either ethnic or geographical ties. Christianity was experienced as a new start, and was open to both men and women, rich and poor. Baptism was free. There were no fees, and it was intellectually egalitarian, making philosophy and ethics available to ordinary people including those who might have lacked literacy.^[10] Early Christian communities were highly inclusive in terms of social stratification and other social categories.^[11]: 79 Heterogeneity characterized the groups formed by Paul the Apostle, and the role of women was much greater than in either of the forms of Judaism or paganism in existence at the time.^[11]: 81 Early Christians were told to love others, even enemies, and Christians of all classes and sorts called each other "brother" and "sister". Recent research has shown it was the formal unconditional altruism of early Christianity that accounts for much of its otherwise surprising degree of success.^[12]

Ante-Nicaean Christianity was also highly exclusive.^[13] Believing was the crucial and defining characteristic that set a "high boundary" that strongly excluded the "unbeliever".^[13] Keith Hopkins asserts: "It is this exclusivism, idealized or practiced, which marks Christianity off from most other religious groups in the ancient world".^[14] In the eyes of many non-believers, Christianity was an unacceptable form of superstitio; its founder had been executed by Roman authority, it was seen as having fallen away from the faith of the Jews, and could, therefore, claim no legitimate authority.^[15] In response, some second-century apologists took the approach of referring to Christians as another genos or race, with their own history, and legitimate religious practices. This 'third race' concept may have originated in accusations from outsiders such as Suetonius, (Nero 16.2.), who described Christians in a derogatory manner as ‘a genus of people' who held a 'new and mischievous superstitio’.^[16] In the Epistle to Diognetus, an extant late second century letter to a Roman official, the anonymous author observes that early Christians functioned as if they were a separate "third race": a nation within a nation. The Christian apologist Tertullian in his ad nationes (1.8; cf. 1.20), mocked the accusation that ‘we are called a third race’, yet there is also ambivalence, since he takes some pride in the uniqueness it represents.^[17] The early Christian had exacting moral standards that included avoiding contact with those that were seen as still "in bondage to the Evil One": (2 Corinthians 6:1-18; 1 John 2: 15-18; Revelation 18: 4; II Clement 6; Epistle of Barnabas, 1920).^[18] In Daniel Praet's view, the exclusivity of Christian monotheism formed an important part of its success, enabling it to maintain its independence in a society that syncretized religion.^[19]

Christianization was not a one-way process.^[20] There was instead a parallelism in the processes of Christianization in that Christianity absorbed indigenous elements just as indigenous religions absorbed aspects of Christianity.^[21] Salzman has shown that, in the process of converting the Roman Empire's aristocracy, Christianity was also shaped by the values of that aristocracy.^[22] Polytheism openly adopted aspects of the new religion transforming and adapting them to fit.^[23] Several early Christian writers, including Justin (2nd century), Tertullian, and Origen (3rd century) wrote of Mithraists copying Christian beliefs.^[24] The Neoplatonist movement began with Plotinus in mid–third century Egypt.^[25] Christian thought had already been influenced by Plato through the church Fathers (see: Clement of Alexandria). By the fifth–century, "Neoplatonism had undergone a process of theologizing", and this evolution in Platonic thought was accompanied by an increased influence on Christianity.^[26]

In 301, Armenia became the first kingdom in history to adopt Christianity as an official state religion.^[27] The transformations taking place in these centuries of the Roman Empire had been slower to catch on in Caucasia. Indigenous writing did not begin till the fifth century, there was an absence of large cities, and many institutions such as monasticism did not exist in Caucasia until the seventh century.^[28]

Scholarly consensus places the Christianization of the Armenian and Georgian elites in the first half of the fourth century, although Armenian tradition says Christianization began in the first century through the Apostles Thaddeus and Bartholomew.^[29] This is said to have eventually led to the conversion of the Arsacid family, (the royal house of Armenia), through St. Gregory the Illuminator in the early fourth century.^[29]

Scholars do not agree on the date, but most assert 337 as the year Mirian III of Iberia (present-day Georgia) adopted Christianity.^[30] According to medieval Georgian narratives, Christianization there began with the Apostle Andrew the First-called and culminated in the evangelization of Iberia through the efforts of a captive woman known in Iberian tradition as "Nona" in the fourth century.^[31] Fifth, 8th, and 12th century accounts of the conversion of Georgia reveal how pre-Christian practices were taken up and reinterpreted by Christian narrators.^[32]

In 325, The Kingdom of Aksum (Modern Ethiopia and Eritrea) became the second country to declare Christianity as its official state religion.

References:

• Collar, Anna (2013). Religious Networks in the Roman Empire (illustrated, reprint ed.). Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781107043442.
• Brown, Peter (1998). "Christianization and religious conflict". In Averil Cameron; Peter Garnsey (eds.). The Cambridge Ancient History XIII: The Late Empire, A.D. 337–425. Cambridge University Press. pp. 632–664. ISBN 978-0-521-30200-5.
• HARNETT, Benjamin (2017). "The Diffusion of the Codex". Classical Antiquity. 36 (2). University of California Press: 183–235. doi:10.1525/ca.2017.36.2.183. JSTOR 26362608.
• Runciman, W. G. (2004). "The Diffusion of Christianity in the Third Century AD as a Case-Study in the Theory of Cultural Selection". European Journal of Sociology. 45 (1): 3–21. doi:10.1017/S0003975604001365. S2CID 146353096.
• Aleksidze, Nikoloz (2018). "7: Caucasia: Albania, Armenia and Georgia". In Lössl, Josef; Baker-Brian, Nicholas J. (eds.). A Companion to Religion in Late Antiquity. John Wiley and Sons. ISBN 9781118968109.
• Hopkins, Keith (1998). "Christian Number and Its Implications". Journal of Early Christian Studies. 6 (2): 185–226. doi:10.1353/earl.1998.0035. S2CID 170769034.
• Trebilco, Paul Raymond (2017). Outsider Designations and Boundary Construction in the New Testament: Early Christian Communities and the Formation of Group Identity. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-108-31132-8.
• Praet, Danny (1992–1993). "Explaining the Christianization of the Roman Empire. Older theories and recent developments". Sacris Erudiri. Jaarboek voor Godsdienstgeschiedenis. A Journal on the Inheritance of Early and Medieval Christianity. 23: 5–119.
• Scourfield, J. H. D. (2007). Texts and Culture in Late Antiquity: Inheritance, Authority, and Change. ISD LLC. ISBN 978-1-910589-45-8.
• Price, S. R. F. (1986). Rituals and Power: The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor (illustrated, reprint, revised ed.). Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-31268-4.
• Salzman, Michele Renee (2002). The Making of a Christian Aristocracy: Social and Religious Change in the Western Roman Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-00641-6.
• Kaplan, Steven (1995). Indigenous Responses to Western Christianity (illustrated ed.). NYU Press. ISBN 9780814746493.
• Meeks, Wayne A. (2002). In search of the early Christians : selected essays. Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-300-09142-7.

Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:56, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

• • Pinging everyone who has ever commented on this article: Sehamahmadd, Angelv03, PrimeBOT, User:Dogface, User:Brian Kendig, Wetman, 71.120.201.39, Firejuggler86, Wesley, Tuomas, Johan Magnus, dab, Zara1709, Isopropyl, Jkelly, Hierophant, Bdubay, 68.110.8.21, Frobnitzem, :bloodofox:, Isidoros47, VatoFirme, James Frankcom, Mistakefinder, Editor2020, InternetArchiveBot, and Nolicmahr. Some of these are no doubt inactive, and I missed a few with no user names attached, but I do think that's the longest list I have ever put on one of these talk page previews. Please comment if you care about these changes. Thank you. Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:38, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

    Wow, I couldn't even find my name as having commented on this page, but this does seem the sort of page I would have commented on at some point! A few notes:

    • Be bold, and I think you're fine in that your changes appear to be mostly focused on one specific section. Still, to make it easier to see your changes, you may want to split them across multiple commits: one for rewriting the 'Early Christianity' section, another for moving the introductory paragraph, &c. That way it might be more clear that you're modifying more than replacing the article.
    • You said "I changed the section title, because 'Ancient' is the term most commonly used in scholarship of the period." That's not the colloquial use of 'ancient' (m-w.com says it's more to do with ' the earliest known civilizations'), but if it's more correct in this article's context, I recommend using it along with an explanation of why it's the appropriate word here.

    Thank you for putting in the effort to improve this article! - Brian Kendig (talk) 03:19, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

• • • Brian Kendig YAY! Somebody answered - and w/o even getting a ping! That's awesome. Thank you!
    • I do agree with you and be bold generally speaking, but in controversial articles such as this one, I have found that offering a preview saves lots of unwelcome surprise for the editors who have already bled for this article. It helps prevent hurt feelings, angst and outright conflict. It is always my goal to make things as easy for others as possible while also maintaining integrity of content. I will do as you suggest and split my changes just in case it does make a difference for someone. Thank you.
    • Beginning here also makes it possible for me to explain, ahead of time, that this is not intended as a one time or a one section edit. I have every intention of having some input to most of this article - even if it is just adding citations for what is there - so that I can legitimately remove that tag. I hate tags. I will do it a bit at a time, but it is needed throughout.
    • There are multiple claims w/o citation, which tends to reflect personal beliefs and leads to errors in fact. What I have covered here so far was lacking in NPOV and due weight in its original form, but the Late Antiquity section is much worse. I found 9 errors in fact, and 2 claims that are questionable, and an absence of current scholarship almost entirely - with no real explanation of the process of change! Where in that section is Christianization/syncretism actually discussed?
    • You are wanted as a contributor! Please continue to participate as you are willing and able! Don't be afraid to edit content - with sources!
    • I will also follow your advice on explaining the use of ancient - here I assume?
    • Thank you as well! This was really great of you! Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:03, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

      Thank you for championing this article, and for doing in a way that's considerate of your fellow editors. I still encourage you to go ahead and make the changes you feel improve the article -- sometimes the best way to find out whether someone has a problem with your changes is to go through with them and then invite discussion afterwards (the "it's easier to get forgiveness than permission" approach). I don't feel knowledgeable enough about the subject matter to make value judgments on it, but if you are able to see assertions with bias and without citations, please go right ahead and remove 'em; the article is better off without them. (And about explaining the use of 'ancient', I meant in the article not the talk page!) Brian Kendig (talk) 02:34, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

      So. The first section is in, with the addition of a definition up front. I am now working on what I know will be the most controversial section - Late Antiquity. There are currently 8 statements that are either partially or wholly contradicted in current scholarship. I am including responses to 6 of them in the text itself, as they are current issues, but the other two I will simply post here - along with the suggested rewrite. Hah! I see my explanation of Ancient is useless because it's about Ancient Rome not Ancient Christianity!! What can I say? Going from one article to another sometimes befuddles the brain. I'll fix it! I am almost ready to post the next section. Thank you! I appreciate such positivity! Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:58, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

This is the period in classical history that is more studied than any other, has more written about it, and contains more controversy than any other period. Combine that with it being foundational to everything that comes after it, and it will be easy to understand why this section will be the longest in the entire article. In an effort to shorten it a little, I have put current discussion of controversial material in notes and put the majority view in the text itself. There are 8 problematic and unsupported statements in the current version, 6 of which are in the text, but 2 of them seemed to have little to do with Christianization, so I simply left them out. If anyone objects they can be added back with current scholarship, but in my view, they don't justify the additional length. They are:

The Battle of Frigidus and pagan revival. Most contemporary scholars no longer think a pagan "revival" as such occurred, and see the story as "romantic myth".^[1]: 2 and ^{[2] : 78} Two "newly relevant texts – John Chrysostom's Homily 6, adversus Catharos (PG 63: 491–492) and the Consultationes Zacchei et Apollonii, re-dated to the 390s, reinforce the view that religion was not the key ideological element" in the Battle of the Frigidus.^[3] p. 191.

Since it's been discounted it seemed appropriate to simply leave it out.

The second is the article's claim that By this time the Christian hierarchy had adopted classical education and culture as the marks of the civilized person, thus bringing the two social groups into alliance. This is just a mistake. Those early Christians who were educated had all been classically educated as Romans. Scourfield, on page 3 of ^[4] discusses Cameron's argument that "Roman culture was all the culture there was" as irrefutable. For educated pagans and educated Christians the classical texts used for educational purposes were the same texts. The new religion did not form outside Roman culture, it formed within it. Different it was in many ways, but its adherents and its organizational structures were products of the same world that produced those who opposed it.

But this has little to do with Christianization - that I can see - so I just left it out.

If anyone objects, yada yada.

I am posting part of the suggested replacement for Late Antiquity in the following section, separate from this, so it can be all discussed separately as needed. After that, I will follow with more on the Germanic peoples, and the Fifth century by itself, and that will close out Late Antiquity.

I intend to separate out the 6th-8th centuries from the next section, because that is when Ancient Christianity turned into medieval Christianity and changed because of Byzantine influence. The priorities and methods of Christianization changed pretty dramatically in that period.

Jenhawk777 (talk) 17:49, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:29, 21 August 2022 (UTC) Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:29, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

I am in the process of fixing aLL the citations and will have that done before publication. I had to post here as is, in order to find them, because I have so much crap in my sandbox. Jenhawk777 (talk) 05:10, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Jenhawk777 (talk) 17:47, 31 August 2022 (UTC) Jenhawk777 (talk) 17:47, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

This next section is really long, but personally, I think it needs to be. Much of the stuff on Justinian could be put in a note, but it seems like it's important enough to be in the article itself. Please tell me if there are objections. Article content is always improved when it includes the differing perspectives of multiple editors. (I have shortened the specific country entries accordingly)

Don't worry about the red references, they are already in the bibliography of the article itself, and won't be red there.

Somebody, anybody, please! The Paradigm shift only really requires the first two paragraphs and the rest could be in a note, which would make it all less cumbersome. But it seems so significant! Does anyone else have an opinion on this? Personal feelings welcome! Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:49, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

This reads like an overspecific dementi. How narrow does one need to define terms to say that paganism, which in practice was outlawed everywhere and punished if found out, and those methods pushed by force, not forced conversion? And not to mention that you have to define "this era" to specifically end before the massive amounts of forced conversion that we know happened in the early medieval period. Should manipulative language like that really be on wikipedia? Atanar (talk) 18:29, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Atanar Oh thank goodness someone finally showed up to participate! I am glad of it, glad you are here, and glad to deal with this issue. I appreciate that this is an altered perspective from the old point of view, and it is often difficult for people to wrap their minds around. The statement in the article is indeed a denial of that expected perspective. It is discussed to some limited degree in the section on Constantine and in note #6 in the article, but there is so much material on this now that it is pretty much irrefutable.

Sacrifice and magic were outlawed everywhere, not paganism in general; paganism continued. Plus there is consensus among scholars that the laws were not enforced. They could not have much impact without enforcement. Constantine used force against the Donatists but not against pagans. This article references Leithart's biography of Cpnstantine, on page 302, as saying Constantine did not adopt a policy of forced conversion. Other places in the book he discusses the writings of Constantine's contemporary Lactantius on church policy against the use of force. Weimer and Thompson are harder to access, since they are in a German book, but I was able to through the library. Weimar discusses another contemporary of Constantine, Libanius, as also saying Constantine did not use force. There are also two more references in the text. There are also more references available. Hal Drake discusses "proof" that Constantine did not use force in the fact that the radical Christian Firmicus Maternus wrote twice calling for exactly that, and there is no reason for that if it was already being done. see pages 136-138. Bradbury, Errington, Brown, Salzman - all of them say the same nowadays. Jewish scholarship focuses on the policy of proseletyzing as negative for Jews, but also does not claim conversion by force until Visigothic Spain in the seventh century.

I think MacMullen is the one lone voice in opposition, his work is mostly old, and his minority view is discussed in that same note. This section is just too long to discuss all minority views in the text.

"This era" is specified in the heading.

Ah, but I haven't gotten to the middle ages yet. What is true of one age is not necessarily true of another - or place - or person. Christianity went through radical change when the Byzantines took over, and again after the 1200s when the church became largely secular. There is no doubt it was a persecuting entity in the middle ages, on its own behalf, and by lending its support to the secular governments who used persecution to centralize power. But that is all yet to come and not present in the fourth or fifth centuries. Things started changing under the Byzantine Justinian I. And that is coming up in the next section.

I hope this helps. I am glad for your participation. Thank you. Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:07, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Atanar I have now created a new section on the topic of force. I will add more on down in the article when it becomes chronologically correct to do so. It is an important topic and pertinent to this article. I am trying to be very careful and am using multiple sources for all of this. I welcome your input. Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:05, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Since I have gotten almost no response to pre-posting material here, and since it makes it more difficult for me, I have now posted an under construction tag and will move to working directly in the article from now on. Any objections at any time can and should be brought here. Thank you Jenhawk777 (talk) 06:50, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

I am currently out of town and inactive for a few days so please don’t remove the tag because nothing is happening. I will be back next week. I have opted to leave Serbia and Croatia as is because they are properly sourced. Will move on to sourcing next section next week. Jenhawk777 (talk) 14:25, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm back now and will continue working on citing this article. Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:28, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

I will be mostly gone from WP for the next two weeks. Happy holidays everyone! Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:01, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

It has taken 6 months, with an occasional break, to completely source and remove all tags from this article. I have done my best and hope it meets with approval and general support. If there are any problems, I am more than willing to compromise, confer and negotiate in good WP style. Thank you. Jenhawk777 (talk) 22:13, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

The article currently uses a mix of short form references and inline citations. I intend to standardise them to all use {{sfn}} templates. I believe this acceptable under the third point of "Generally considered helpful" in WP:CITEVAR, but I've posted this first in case anyone objects. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 19:47, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

On what basis could anyone possibly object? This is amazingly wonderfully helpful - a truly great gift - wait, has someone been mean to you? Tell me and I will hunt them down! Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:37, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Different editors have very, very slightly differing ideas about how formatting should be done. And as with anything that is barely discernable and has no real effect it can cause vicious and life long vendettas. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 21:03, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Human beings are beyond explaining aren't they? Well, I for one admire your abilities and your work and most of all your spirit of helpfulness and cooperation. They are obviously lunatics, but lord knows the world is full of those! You take care of yourself and let your friends help. The world is a crazy place and there's nowhere crazier than wikipedia. Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:07, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

All done now, do try and keeping tidy ;). -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 15:22, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I do try, I swear I do, I just suck at what you are brilliant at. I think I've done everything right only to have bright red letters follow me. I note there are 5 citations w/o page numbers - how do I manage to do stuff like that? Ah - not all of it is mine! Praise God hallelujah!! I'm not the only idiot here! Some days that's the best I can say... Thank you again and again for all your help and hard work. I think you're amazing - and you can tell - I really do need you! Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:33, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Well we compliment each over, because I suck at writing articles. And as always I'm willing to help, just drop me a note if you need anything. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 21:59, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

You make me smile. Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:12, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

I was about to get back to Berkhofer! Really! It was late, I was tired, I went to bed with every intention of coming back... now I don't have to. So thank you. I can hardly believe it's done. 6 months. Crazy huh? Now it needs reevaluation - not a start class anymore. Jenhawk777 (talk) 22:16, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Happy to hear it's finally done! (Are you sure this time? :) -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 22:44, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

I just had to go remove 6 references to content I had also cut back on. It is sometimes hard to tell the difference between further support and a big ol' rabbit hole. I try to keep things on point but sometimes I just run on and on...

Maybe it's never really done, but maybe I am finally done with it. Jenhawk777 (talk) 05:27, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

After working on this article for 6 months, sourcing it meticulously and removing all tags, I have now nominated it for GA. For those who first began what is a phenomenal piece of work and for those of us who supplied the final flourishes, please support this effort in any way you can. Thank you. Jenhawk777 (talk) 17:06, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

This entry contains material suppressed at Halloween by User:Dogface and User:Brian Kendig. Readers should be aware that the Roman Catholic Church denies the very basis of this article. Consult "history" at the top of the entry page to see whether useful material has been suppressed.

"Christianization is also a term used for "baptized paganism"" I moved this apparent solecism here. Wetman 00:41, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

"the practice of converting pagan cult practices, pagan religious imagery, pagan sites and the pagan calendar to Christian uses."

Is there any evidence that the Roman Catholic Church denies every detail in the article? I sincerely doubt this; it looks like a sidelong ad hominem attack. Even if this were true at one point in time, as soon as someone adds some detail which the RCC does not deny, the blanket statement at the top of the article would become false. Therefore I'm removing it. Wesley 17:53, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Excellent! That's in matters of cult, images, sites and calendar. Then we shall see no more reverting of any of this factual material at Wikipedia, at for example Halloween, All Saint's Day etc etc etc. --Wetman 18:54, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The point was that such blanket statements are bound to be wrong, sooner or later. I'm sure the fact checking at those articles will continue. ;-) Wesley 06:00, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

An ongoing campaign, of which User:Wesley is a (hopefully thoughtless) footsoldier, viz:

• "Edit" at Halloween: "The holiday was a day of religious festivities in various northern European pagan traditions, until it was appropriated by Christian missionaries (along with Christmas and Easter, two other traditional northern European pagan holidays)" (italics suppressed) --Wetman 20:38, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I haven't looked at either article recently. However, the dating of Easter is obviously related to the dating of the Jewish Passover to begin with, and Christmas' connection with Saturnalia etc. is debatable either way. Neither is an open and shut case for either side. Wesley 23:00, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This is not entirely true. In the early phases of Christianity early christian churches, "basiilicas", were built often built at places of great religious tolerance such as Cenchreae (also transliterated as Kenchreai) and stood next to other temples of worship. The structure of these churches is nearly uniformly that of a basilica (often with a baptistry), which is important to note because the basilica is a Roman public structure very different from the structure of Roman (and Greek) temples. A basilica structure cannot be substituted for a Greek or Roman Temple which requires opennesss to the light (most often with orientation opening to the East where the sunrises) and visibility of the cult statue from front entrance of the temple.

On the otherhand at some sites such as Nemea, a Christian basilica was erected nearby --though not on top of-- a pagan temple. Its from a later date than the one at Cenchreae 5th or 6th century, and although a separate structure from the pagan sanctuary, it was built with blocks taken from the nearby Sanctuary of Zeus.

Regardless, this sentence is vague (does building a new structure next on old one like at nemea count as building on a site consecrated as a Pagan temple?) and characterizes a broad and diverse period of time (500 years) with a generalization that falls apart upon closer inspection of the different time periods. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.106.88.77 (talk • contribs) 00:14, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

This has since been rewritten in more detail. -- Beland (talk) 01:26, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

I know this is a lot: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jenhawk777 (talk • contribs) 14:29, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Late antiquity (4th–5th centuries)

Main articles: Christianization of the Roman Empire and Spread of Christianity

Further information: Constantine I and Christianity, Persecution of paganism under Theodosius I, and Theodosius I

Favoritism, hostility, and iconoclasm

The Christianization of the Roman Empire is frequently divided by scholars into the two phases of before and after the conversion of Constantine in 312. Constantine has long been credited with ending the persecution of Christianity and establishing religious tolerance with the Edict of Milan, but the nature of the Edict, and Constantine's faith, are both heavily debated in the twenty-first century.^{[1][note 1]}

According to Harold A. Drake, Constantine's religious policies did not stem from faith as much as they stemmed from his duty as Emperor to maintain peace in the empire.^[1]: 4 Drake asserts that, since Constantine's reign followed Diocletian's failure to enforce a particular religious view, Constantine was able to observe that coercion had not produced peace.^[1]: 4 Constantine's religious policy was aimed at including the Church in a broader policy of civic unity. This required some official tolerance of the pagan majority.^[5]

Constantine's personal views favored one religion over the other, and he made his revulsion toward sacrifice clear, but contemporary scholars are in general agreement that he did not support the suppression of paganism by force.^[6][7][8][9] He never engaged in a purge,^[10] there were no pagan martyrs during his reign,^[11][12] and pagans remained in important positions at his court.^[6] Constantine ruled for 31 years and never outlawed paganism. In the words of an early edict, he decreed that polytheists could "celebrate the rites of an outmoded illusion," so long as they did not force Christians to join them.^[11][13]

Constantine's main approach to religion was to use enticement by making the adoption of Christianity beneficial.^[14] "Imperial patronage, legal rights to hold property, and financial assistance" were important contributions to successful Christianization over the next hundred years.^[15] However, most scholars also agree it was Constantine who issued the first law against paganism's practice of animal sacrifice.^{[16][17][note 2]} These laws menaced death, but during Constantine's reign, no one suffered the death penalty for violating them.^{[26][27]: 87, 93} There is no record of anyone being executed for violating religious laws before Tiberius II Constantine at the end of the sixth century (574–582).^[27]: 93 Still, classicist Scott Bradbury notes that the complete disappearance of public sacrifice by the mid-fourth century "in many towns and cities must be attributed to the atmosphere created by imperial and episcopal hostility".^[28]

In Eusebius' church history, there is a bold claim of a Constantinian campaign against the temples, however, there are discrepancies in the evidence.^[29] Temple destruction is attested to in 43 cases in the written sources, but only four have been confirmed by archaeological evidence.^[30] Trombley and MacMullen explain that discrepancies between literary sources and archaeological evidence exist because it is common for details in the literary sources to be ambiguous and unclear.^[31][32] For example, Malalas claimed Constantine destroyed all the temples, then he said Theodisius destroyed them all, then he said Constantine converted them all to churches.^{[33]: 246–282 [34][note 3]}

Yet Constantine did destroy some temples. In the previous 300 years, Roman authority had periodically confiscated various church properties, some of which were associated with Christian holy places. For example, Christian historians alleged that Hadrian (2nd century) had, in the military colony of Aelia Capitolina (Jerusalem), constructed a temple to Aphrodite on the site of the crucifixion of Jesus on Golgotha hill in order to suppress Jewish Christian veneration there.^[44] Constantine was vigorous in reclaiming confiscated properties whenever these issues were brought to his attention, and he used reclamation to justify that temple's destruction.^{[45][46][47][48]} Using the vocabulary of reclamation, Constantine acquired several more sites of Christian significance in the Holy Land. At the sacred oak and spring at Mamre, a site venerated and occupied by Jews, Christians and pagans alike, the literature says Constantine ordered the burning of the idols, the destruction of the altar, and erection of a church on the spot of the temple.^[49] The archaeology of the site, however, shows that Constantine’s church, along with its attendant buildings, only occupied a peripheral sector of the precinct, leaving the rest unhindered.^[50]

Rewriting history

Late Antiquity from the third to the sixth centuries was the era of the development of the great Christian narrative, an interpretatio Christiana of the history of humankind. This meant reassessing and relocating past histories, ideas and persons on the historical mental map. In this construction of the past, Christian writers built on the models of the preceding tradition, creating competing chronologies and alternative histories.^[51]: 12

In the early fourth century Eusebius wrote Chronici canones in which he developed an elaborate synchronistic chronology wherein he reinterpreted the Greco-Roman past to reflect a Christian perspective.^{[51]: 11, 28} In the early fifth century Orosius wrote Historiae adversus paganos in response to the charge that the Roman Empire was in misery and ruins because it had converted to Christianity and neglected the old gods. Maijastina Kahlos explains that, "In order to refute these claims, Orosius reviewed the entire history of Rome, demonstrating that the alleged glorious past of Romans in fact consisted of war, despair and suffering. Orosius’s Historiae adversus paganos is a counter-narrative... Instead of a magnificent Roman past, he construes a history in which ... Christ is born and Christianity appears to have appeared ... just when Roman power was at its height – all this according to a divine plan... Both writers took over and reinterpreted the Greco-Roman past to explain and legitimize their own present".^[51]: 28

Despite the ongoing presence of a Christian majority, Christian literature of the fourth century does not focus on converting pagans.^[52] Instead, it depicts Constantine's conversion as evidence of the Christian god's final triumph in Heaven over the pagan gods.^[53] Brown indicates that, as a result of this "triumphalism," paganism was seen as vanquished.^[54][55] There was no need and no determination to use the laws to convert unbelievers. It was sufficient that non-Christians should keep a low profile and not disturb the rhetoric of triumph.^[56] Based on the sheer number of laws directed against it, Michele R. Salzman indicates that heresy was the greatest concern for most Christians of the fourth and fifth centuries including Constantine.^[57][55] According to Peter Brown, "It would be a full two centuries before Justinian would envisage the compulsory baptism of remaining polytheists, and a further century until Heraclius and the Visigothic kings of Spain would attempt to baptize the Jews. In the fourth century, such ambitious schemes were impossible".^[52]

Historian John Curran writes that, under Constantine's successors, Christianization of Roman society proceeded by fits and starts.^{[58][note 4]} Paganism in a broader sense did not end when public sacrifice did.^[61][62] Historian Peter Brown explains that polytheists were accustomed to offering prayers to the gods in many ways and places that did not include sacrifice, that pollution was only associated with sacrifice, and that the ban on sacrifice had fixed boundaries and limits.^[63] Paganism continued, co-existing with Christianity despite official threats, occasional mob violence,^{[note 5]} and Constantine's confiscation of temple treasures for his new capitol. Paganism remained widespread into the early fifth century continuing in parts of the empire into the 600s.^{[66][note 6]}

Theodosius

Main article: Theodosius I

In the centuries following his death, Theodosius gained a reputation as the champion of orthodoxy and the vanquisher of paganism. Modern historians see this as a later interpretation of history by Christian writers rather than actual history.^{[84][85][86][note 7]} Theodosius reiterated his Christian predecessors' support of Christianity and bans on animal sacrifice, divination, and apostasy. A number of laws against these practices were issued towards the end of his reign in 391 and 392, however recent historians have tended to downplay the role of the emperor's 'copious legislation' as limited in effect.^{[94][95][96][note 8]}

Most legislation was aimed at heretics not pagans. Contemporary scholarship indicates the Edict of Thessalonica (380) was about opposing Arianism, establishing unity in Christianity, and suppressing heresy.^[102] As German ancient historian Karl Leo Noethlichs [de] writes, the Edict of Thessalonica was neither anti-pagan nor antisemitic; it did not declare Christianity to be the official religion of the empire; and it gave no advantage to Christians over other faiths.^{[103][note 9]} Cameron writes that Theodosius did 'certainly not' ban paganism.^[110]

During his first official tour of Italy (389–391), the emperor won over the influential pagan lobby in the Roman Senate by appointing its foremost members to important administrative posts.^[111] Theodosius also nominated the last pair of pagan consuls in Roman history (Tatianus and Symmachus) in 391.^[112] In his 2020 biography of Theodosius, Mark Hebblewhite concludes that Theodosius never saw himself, or advertised himself, as a destroyer of the old cults. The emperor's efforts at promoting Christianization were "targeted, tactical, and nuanced". They were intended to prevent political instability and religious discord and promote the peace.^[113][114]

Theodosius allowed other pagan practices to be performed publicly and temples to remain open.^{[115][116][96]} He also voiced his support for the preservation of temple buildings, but nonetheless failed to prevent the damaging of several holy sites in the eastern provinces.^{[96][117][118]} Following the death in 388 of Cynegius, the praetorian prefect thought to be responsible for that vandalization, Theodosius replaced him with a moderate pagan who subsequently moved to protect the temples.^{[33]: 53 [113][119]} There is no evidence of any desire on the part of the emperor to institute a systematic destruction of temples anywhere in the Theodosian Code, and no evidence in the archaeological record that extensive temple destruction took place.^{[120][121]: 63 [31]}

I think (I hope) these are all the references:

• Barnes, T. D. (1968). "Legislation against the Christians". The Journal of Roman Studies. 58: 32–50. doi:10.2307/299693. JSTOR 299693. S2CID 161858491.
• Barnes, T.D. (1985). "Review of Christianizing the Roman Empire A.D. 100–400 by R. Macmullen". Echos du Monde Classique: Classical Views. 29 (3): 495–496.

• Leone, Anna (2013). The End of the Pagan City: Religion, Economy, and Urbanism in Late Antique North Africa (illustrated ed.). OUP. ISBN 978-0-19-957092-8.

• Cameron, Alan (2011). The Last Pagans of Rome. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-974727-6.
• Cameron, Averil (1991). Christianity and the rhetoric of empire : the development of Christian discourse. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-07160-5.
• Cameron, Averil (1993). The Later Roman Empire, AD 284-430 (illustrated ed.). Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-51194-1.

• Bradbury, Scott (1995). "Julian's Pagan Revival and the Decline of Blood Sacrifice". Phoenix. 49 (4): . 331–56.

• Bayliss, Richard (2004). Provincial Cilicia and the Archaeology of Temple Conversion. Oxford: Archaeopress. ISBN 978-1-84171-634-3.

• Lavan, Luke; Mulryan, Michael, eds. (2011). The Archaeology of Late Antique 'Paganism'. Leiden: Brill. ISBN 978-90-04-19237-9.

• Salzman, Michele Renee. "Rethinking Pagan-Christian Violence". In Drake (2006), pp. 265–286.

• Drake, H. A. (1995). "Constantine and Consensus". Church History. 64 (1): 1–15. doi:10.2307/3168653. JSTOR 3168653. S2CID 163129848.

• Drake, H.A., ed. (2006). Violence in Late Antiquity: Perceptions and Practices. Aldershot: Ashgate. ISBN 978-0-7546-5498-8.

• Leithart, Peter J. (2010). Defending Constantine The Twilight of an Empire and the Dawn of Christendom. InterVarsity Press. ISBN 978-0-8308-2722-0.

• Wiemer, Hans-Ulrich (1994). "Libanius on Constantine". The Classical Quarterly. 44 (2): 511–524. doi:10.1017/S0009838800043962. S2CID 170876695.

• Bradbury, Scott (1994). "Constantine and the Problem of Anti-Pagan Legislation in the Fourth Century". Classical Philology. 89 (2): 120–139. doi:10.1086/367402. S2CID 159997492.

• Southern, Patricia (2015). The Roman Empire from Severus to Constantine (second, revised ed.). Routledge. ISBN 978-1-317-49694-6.

• Digeser, Elizabeth DePalma (2000). The Making of a Christian Empire: Lactantius & Rome. Cornell University Press. ISBN 978-0-8014-3594-2.

• Jones, Arnold Hugh Martin (1986). The Later Roman Empire, 284-602: A Social Economic and Administrative Survey. Vol. 1 (reprint ed.). JHU Press. ISBN 978-0-8018-3353-3.
• Kahlos, Maijastina (2019). Religious Dissent in Late Antiquity, 350–450. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-006725-0.
• Bagnall, Roger S. (2021). Egypt in Late Antiquity (illustrated, reprint ed.). Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-1-4008-2116-7.

• Constantelos, Demetrios J. (1964). "Paganism and the State in the Age of Justinian". The Catholic Historical Review. 50 (3): 372–80. JSTOR 25017472.

• Brown, Peter (1992). Power and persuasion in late antiquity : towards a Christian empire. Madison, Wis.: University of Wisconsin Press. ISBN 978-0-299-13344-3.
• Brown, Peter (1993). "The Problem of Christianization" (PDF). Proceedings of the British Academy. 84. Oxford University Press: 89–106.
• Brown, Peter (1998). "Christianization and religious conflict". In Averil Cameron; Peter Garnsey (eds.). The Cambridge Ancient History XIII: The Late Empire, A.D. 337–425. Cambridge University Press. pp. 632–664. ISBN 978-0-521-30200-5.
• Brown, Peter (2003). The rise of Western Christendom : triumph and diversity, A.D. 200-1000 (2nd ed.). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers. ISBN 978-0-631-22137-1.

• Salzman, Michele Renee (1993). "The Evidence for the Conversion of the Roman Empire to Christianity in Book 16 of the 'Theodosian Code". Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte. 42 (3). Franz Steiner Verlag: 362–78. JSTOR 4436297.
• * Salzman, Michele Renee (2010). "Ambrose and the Usurpation of Arbogastes and Eugenius: Reflections on Pagan-Christian Conflict Narratives". Journal of Early Christian Studies. 18 (2). Johns Hopkins University Press: 191–223. doi:10.1353/earl.0.0320. S2CID 143665912.

• Clark, Elizabeth A. (1992). "The End of Ancient Christianity". Ancient Philosophy. 12 (2): 543–546. doi:10.5840/ancientphil199212240.

• Markus, Robert Austin (1990). The End of Ancient Christianity (illustrated, reprint ed.). Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-33949-0.

• Thompson, Glen L. (2005). "Constantius II and the First Removal of the Altar of Victory". In Jean-Jacques Aubert; Zsuzsanna Varhelyi (eds.). A Tall Order: Writing the Social History of the Ancient World – Essays in honor of William V. Harris. Munich: K.G. Saur. pp. 85–106. doi:10.1515/9783110931419. ISBN 978-3-598-77828-5.

• Hart, David Bentley (2009). Atheist Delusions: The Christian Revolution and Its Fashionable Enemies (unabridged ed.). Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-300-15564-8.

• Hughes, Kevin L.; Paffenroth, Kim, eds. (2008). Augustine and Liberal Education. Lexington Books. ISBN 978-0-7391-2383-6.

• Hebblewhite, Mark (2020). Theodosius and the Limits of Empire. London: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315103334. ISBN 978-1-138-10298-9. S2CID 213344890.

• Errington, R. Malcolm (1997). "Christian Accounts of the Religious Legislation of Theodosius I". Klio. 79 (2): 398–443. doi:10.1524/klio.1997.79.2.398. S2CID 159619838.
• Errington, R. Malcolm (2006). Roman Imperial Policy from Julian to Theodosius. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. ISBN 978-0-8078-3038-3.

• Schwartz, Seth (2005). "Chapter 8: Roman Historians and the Rise of Christianity: The School of Edward Gibbon". In Harris, William Vernon (ed.). The Spread of Christianity in the First Four Centuries: Essays in Explanation. BRILL. ISBN 978-90-04-14717-1.

• MacMullen, Ramsay (1984). Christianizing the Roman Empire : (A.D. 100-400). New Haven. ISBN 978-0-300-03216-1.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)

• Van Dam, Raymond (1985). "From Paganism to Christianity at Late Antique Gaza". Viator. 16: 1–20. doi:10.1484/J.VIATOR.2.301417.

• Riggs, David. "Christianizing the Rural Communities of Late Roman Africa: A Process of Coercion or Persuasion?". In Drake (2006), pp. 297–308.

• Salzman, Michele Renee; Sághy, Marianne; Testa, Rita Lizzi, eds. (2016). Pagans and Christians in late antique Rome : conflict, competition, and coexistence in the fourth century. New York, NY. ISBN 978-1-107-11030-4.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)

• Sáry, Pál (2019). "Remarks on the Edict of Thessalonica of 380". In Vojtech Vladár (ed.). Perpauca Terrena Blande Honori dedicata pocta Petrovi Blahovi K Nedožitým 80. Narodeninám. Trnavská univerzity. p. 67-80. ISBN 978-80-568-0313-4.

References

1. [1]

   Siecienski, A. Edward (2017). Constantine: Religious Faith and Imperial Policy (illustrated ed.). Routledge. p. 3. ISBN 9781351976114.
2. [2]

   Drake 1995, pp. 2, 15.
3. [3]

   Drake 1995, pp. 1, 2.
4. [4]

   Drake 1995, p. 3.
5. [5]

   Drake 1995, pp. 9, 10.
6. [6]

   Leithart 2010, p. 302.
7. [7]

   Wiemer 1994, p. 523.
8. [8]

   Drake 1995, p. 7–9.
9. [9]

   Bradbury 1994, pp. 122–126.
10. [10]

    Leithart 2010, p. 304.
11. [11]

    Brown 2003, p. 74.
12. [12]

    Thompson 2005, p. 87,93.
13. [13]

    Drake 1995, pp. 3, 7.
14. [14]

    Bayliss 2004, p. 243.
15. [15]

    Southern 2015, p. 455–457.
16. [16]

    Bradbury 1995, p. 343.
17. [17]

    Bradbury 1994, p. 139.
18. [18]

    Salzman, M. R. (1987). 'Superstitio' in the Codex Theodosianus and the Persecution of Pagans1, Vigiliae Christianae, 41(2), 172-188. doi: https://doi.org/10.1163/157007287X00049
19. [19]

    Digeser 2000, p. 168.
20. [20]

    Hart 2009, pp. 19, 186.
21. [21]

    Brown 1998, p. 638. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFBrown1998 (help)
22. [22]

    Digeser 2000, pp. 168–169.
23. [23]

    Digeser 2000, p. 169.
24. [24]

    Roux, Marie. "Codex Theodosianus XVI.10.12 (8th November 392 CE)". Judaism and Rome. European Research Council. Retrieved 20 June 2022.
25. [25]

    Bradbury 1995, p. 331; Cameron 2011, pp. 45, 67.
26. [26]

    Lavan & Mulryan 2011, p. xxiv.
27. [27]
28. [28]

    Bradbury 1995, p. 345-356.
29. [29]

    Bradbury 1994, p. 123.
30. [30]

    Lavan & Mulryan 2011, pp. xxvii, xxiv.
31. [31]

    R. MacMullen, Christianizing The Roman Empire A.D.100–400, Yale University Press, 1984, ISBN 0-300-03642-6
32. [32]

    Trombley, F. R. 1995a. Hellenic Religion and Christianization, c. 370-529. New York. I. 166-8, II. 335-6
33. [33]

    Trombley, Frank R. Hellenic Religion and Christianization, c. 370–529. Netherlands, Brill Academic Publishers, 2001.
34. [34]

    Bayliss 2004, p. 110.
35. [35]

    Leone 2013, p. 82.
36. [36]

    Leone 2013, p. 28.
37. [37]

    Lavan & Mulryan 2011, p. xxvi.
38. [38]

    Bradbury 1995, p. 353.
39. [39]

    Brown 2003, p. 60.
40. [40]

    Jones 1986, pp. 8–10, 13, 735.
41. [41]

    Bagnall 2021, p. p=261-269.
42. [42]

    Leone 2013, p. 2.
43. [43]

    Leone 2013, p. 29.
44. [44]

    Loosley, Emma (2012). The Architecture and Liturgy of the Bema in Fourth- To-Sixth-Century Syrian Churches (illustrated ed.). Brill. p. 3. ISBN 9789004231825.
45. [45]

    Bayliss 2004, p. 30.
46. [46]

    MacMullen, R. Christianizing The Roman Empire A.D.100-400, Yale University Press, 1984, ISBN 0-300-03642-6
47. [47]
48. [48]

    Bradbury 1994, p. 132.
49. [49]

    Bradbury 1994, p. 131.
50. [50]

    Bayliss 2004, p. 31.
51. [51]

    Kahlos, Maijastina. "Seizing History: Christianising the Past in Late Antique Historiography." (2015).
52. [52]

    Brown 1998, p. 640. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFBrown1998 (help)
53. [53]

    Brown 1993, pp. 90–91, 640.
54. [54]

    Brown 1993, p. 90.
55. [55]

    Brown 1998, p. 634,640,651. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFBrown1998 (help)
56. [56]

    Brown 1998, p. 641. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFBrown1998 (help)
57. [57]

    Salzman 1993, p. 375; 861.
58. [58]

    Curran 2000.
59. [59]

    Bradbury 1994, p. 126.
60. [60]

    Salzman, Michele R. "'Superstitio'in the Codex Theodosianus and the Persecution of Pagans1." Vigiliae christianae 41.2 (1987): 172-188.
61. [61]

    Constantelos 1964, p. 372.
62. [62]

    Brown 1998, pp. 641, 645. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFBrown1998 (help)
63. [63]

    Brown 1998, p. 645. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFBrown1998 (help)
64. [64]

    Brown 1992, pp. 85–87.
65. [65]

    Manders, Erika; Slootjes, Daniëlle (2020). "Leadership, Ideology and Crowds in the Roman Empire of the Fourth Century AD" (PDF). (Heidelberger althistorische Beiträge und epigraphische Studien. 62.
66. [66]

    Salzman, M.R., The Making of a Christian Aristocracy: Social and Religious Change in the Western Roman Empire (2002), p. 182
67. [67]

    MacMullen 1984, p. 46–50.
68. [68]

    Salzman 2006, p. 265.
69. [69]

    Barnes 1985, p. 496.
70. [70]

    Hart 2009, p. 148-152.
71. [71]

    Schwartz 2005, p. 150–151.
72. [72]

    Schwartz 2005, p. 152.
73. [73]

    Schwartz 2005, p. 150–152.
74. [74]

    Lavan & Mulryan 2011, p. 155.
75. [75]

    Salzman, Michele Renee. chapter= Rethinking pagan-Christian violence." in Drake Violence in late Antiquity. Routledge, 2016. 287-308.
76. [76]

    Salzman 2006, p. 278–279.
77. [77]

    Salzman 2006, p. 279.
78. [78]

    Salzman 2006, p. 280.
79. [79]

    Salzman 2006, p. 282.
80. [80]

    Riggs 2006, p. 297; 308.
81. [81]

    Salzman, Sághy & Testa 2016, p. 2.
82. [82]

    Scourfield 2007, p. 2–4. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFScourfield2007 (help)
83. [83]

    Van Dam 1985, p. 2.
84. [84]

    Errington 2006, pp. 248–249.
85. [85]

    Cameron 2011, p. 74.
86. [86]

    Hebblewhite 2020, chapter 8.
87. [87]

    Cameron, p. 74 (note 177). sfn error: no target: CITEREFCameron (help)
88. [88]

    Cameron, pp. 46–47, 72. sfn error: no target: CITEREFCameron (help)
89. [89]

    Testa, Rita Lizzi (2007). "Christian emperor, vestal virgins and priestly colleges: Reconsidering the end of roman paganism". Antiquité tardive. 15: 251–262. doi:10.1484/J.AT.2.303121.
90. [90]

    Graf, pp. 229–232. sfn error: no target: CITEREFGraf (help)
91. [91]

    Tony Perrottet (2004). The Naked Olympics: The True Story of the Ancient Games. Random House Digital, Inc. pp. 190–. ISBN 978-1-58836-382-4. Retrieved 1 April 2013.
92. [92]

    Hamlet, Ingomar. "Theodosius I. And The Olympic Games". Nikephoros 17 (2004): pp. 53–75.
93. [93]

    Remijsen, Sofie (2015). The End of Greek Athletics in Late Antiquity. Cambridge University Press.
94. [94]

    McLynn 1994, pp. 330–333. sfn error: no target: CITEREFMcLynn1994 (help)
95. [95]

    Errington 2006, pp. 247–248.
96. [96]

    Woods, Religious Policy. sfn error: no target: CITEREFWoods (help)
97. [97]

    Cameron 2011, pp. 60, 63, 68.
98. [98]

    Errington 1997, p. 410-411; 430.
99. [99]

    Bilias and Grigolo 2019, p. 82. sfn error: no target: CITEREFBilias_and_Grigolo2019 (help)
100. [100]

     Simeoni, Manuel. "THEODOSIAN CODE (CODEX THEODOSIANUS) 16.10: TEXT". European Pagan Memory Day. Retrieved 19 April 2022.
101. [101]

     Errington 1997, p. 431.
102. [102]

     Sáry 2019, p. 73.
103. [103]

     Sáry 2019, pp. 72–74, fn. 32, 33, 34, 77.
104. [104]

     Sáry 2019, p. 70.
105. [105]

     C. Pharr (tr.), The Theodosian Code and Novels and the Sirmondian Constitutions (Princeton, 1952), 440.
106. [106]

     Sáry 2019, p. 71-72.
107. [107]

     Errington 1997, pp. 4, 412.
108. [108]

     Sáry 2019, pp. 73, 77.
109. [109]

     Sáry 2019, p. 79.
110. [110]

     Cameron, pp. 60, 65, 68–73. sfn error: no target: CITEREFCameron (help)
111. [111]

     Cameron, pp. 56, 64. sfn error: no target: CITEREFCameron (help)
112. [112]

     Bagnall et al., p. 317. sfn error: no target: CITEREFBagnallCameronSchwartzWorp (help)
113. [113]

     Hebblewhite, chapter 8. sfn error: no target: CITEREFHebblewhite (help)
114. [114]

     Errington 2006, p. 251.
115. [115]

     Kahlos, p. 35 (and note 45). sfn error: no target: CITEREFKahlos (help)
116. [116]

     Errington 2006, pp. 245, 251.
117. [117]

     Errington 2006, p. 249.
118. [118]

     Ramsay MacMullen (1984) Christianizing the Roman Empire A.D. 100–400, Yale University Press, p. 90.
119. [119]

     Cameron, p. 57. sfn error: no target: CITEREFCameron (help)
120. [120]

     Lavan & Mulryan 2011, p. xxx.
121. [121]

Christianization of the 5th–8th centuries

Romanness, tolerance and intolerance

The nature of Roman culture contributed to its Christianization: religious syncretism, Roman political culture, a common language, and Hellenist philosophy made Christianization of the Roman empire easier than in places like Persia or China.^[1] The relative ease of travel that was enabled by universal currency, a system of laws, relative internal security, and good roads aided the process of Christianization as well. Judaism was also significantly important to the spread of Christianity. Evidence clearly shows the Jewish Diaspora communities were where Christians gave many of their earliest sermons.^[2]

The two religious traditions co-existed and largely tolerated each other throughout most of the fourth and fifth centuries.^[3][4][5] Christianization had worked in both directions transforming the structure and ideals of both the Church and the Empire through this long period of symbiosis.^[6] By the time a fifth-century pope attempted to denounce the Lupercalia as 'pagan superstition', religion scholar Elizabeth Clark says "it fell on deaf ears".^[7] In Historian R. A. Markus's reading of events, this marked a colonization (the appropriation of something belonging to others for one's own use) by Christians of pagan values and practices.^[8] For Alan Cameron, the mixed culture that included the continuation of the circuses, amphitheaters and games – sans sacrifice – on into the sixth century involved the secularization of paganism rather than appropriation by Christianity.^{[9][note 10]}

Up to the time of Justin I and Justinian I (527 to 565), there was some toleration for all religions; there were anti-sacrifice laws, but they were not enforced. Thus, up into the sixth century, there still existed centers of paganism in Athens, Gaza, Alexandria, and elsewhere.^{[28][note 11]} Brown points out that, even though the imperial laws against sacrifice were not enforced, they did have a cumulative effect: by 425, they had set in place a religious ordering of society with Catholics at the center and others at the periphery.^[31] That ordering would thereafter prove to be an inseparable adjunct of imperial rule, in the empire itself and, later, in the sub-imperial states of the west.^[31]

It is possible to follow in the laws the emergence of a language of intolerance shared by the Christian court and by vocal elements in provincial society.^[31] Christian writers and imperial legislators alike drew on a rhetoric of incessant conquest and reconquest that affected every facet of upper-class society.^[32] These Christian sources with their violent rhetoric, have had great influence on modern perceptions of this period.^[33] However, outside of violent rhetoric, non-Christian (non-heretical) groups of pagans and Jews lived peacefully alongside their Christian neighbors through a tolerance based on contempt throughout most of Late Antiquity.^[34][35]

Paradigm shift: Justinian I and the Byzantine papacy

Main article: Byzantine papacy

See also: Interpretatio Christiana

Christianization changed between the fifth and eighth centuries. The weight of wealth after the fifth century turned Christianity in a new direction.^{[36][note 12]} This period shifted away from the "massive" Greek and Roman secularism common to John Chrysostom's and Augustine's fourth century world. By the time of Pope Gregory I (540 – 604), "there was little room for the secular" in it.^[39]

In these centuries, Ancient Christianity, (as it had existed in the Western empire with some religious competition, toleration and secularism), came to an end.^[40][39] Most scholars agree the 7th and 8th centuries are when the 'end of the ancient world' is most conclusive and well documented.^[41]: 85 Eleven of the thirteen men who held the position of Roman Pope from the late seventh to the middle of the eighth century were the sons of families from the East.^[42] This Byzantine papacy, along with losses to Islam, and changes within Christianity itself, transformed Christianity into its medieval form as exemplified by the creation of the Papal state and the alliance between the papacy and the militant Frankish king Charlemagne.^[43][44][45]

In the first half of the sixth century, the eastern emperor Justinian I (r. 527–565) came to Rome to liberate it from barbarians leading to a guerrilla war that lasted nearly 20 years.^[46] After fighting ended, Justinian used what is known as a Pragmatic Sanction to assert control.^[47] The Sanction effectively removed the supports that had allowed the senatorial aristocracy to retain power.^[48] The political and social influence of the Senate's aristocratic members began to disappear from civic life in Rome. By 630, the Senate had fully ceased to exist, and its building was converted into a church.^[48] Bishops stepped into civic leadership in their place.^[48] The position and influence of the pope rose.^[49] By the eighth century, papal control of Rome was fully established. Italy can be said to have become a Christian country.^[48]

Under Justinian, "the full force of imperial legislation against deviants of all kinds, particularly religious" ones, was applied in practice, writes Judith Herrin.^[50]: 213 According to Anthony Kaldellis, Justinian is remembered as "the last Roman emperor of ecumenical importance", yet it is as the emperor who sought to extend Roman authority around the Mediterranean, that he is often seen as a tyrant and despot.^[51][52] Justinian sought to centralize imperial government, became increasingly autocratic, and "nothing could be done", (not even in the Church), that was contrary to the emperor's will and command.^[53]

Where Constantine had granted the right to all to follow freely whatever religion they wished through the Edict of Milan, Justinian's religious policy reflected his conviction that a unified Empire presupposed unity of faith.^[54][55] The church was prevented from using physical force to convert non-believers, especially Jews who were protected by law, but Justinian did use social boycotting, repressive law and his own personal interference in the affairs of others, such as instructing the Jews on how to practice their religion.^[56] The Samaritans had been in the same category as Jews, a permitted religion under Roman law, but in 529 Samaritans rose in revolt, were "ruthlessly crushed" and lost their status. Justinian persecuted them thereafter with rigorous edicts.^[57]

He purged the bureaucracy of those who disagreed with him.^[58] Imperial laws that had been laid down by pagan Emperors like Diocletian and Maximian to persecute Christians were used against the Manicheans.^[59]: 285 Judith Lieu writes that, "By the sixth century, anathematized, vilified as a 'defilement', its leaders beheaded, their followers exiled, impoverished or also slain, Manichaeism was extinguished, and with its books destroyed, left only its name to the Christian world as a term of abuse for dualisms generally".^[60] In Kaldellis' estimation, "Few emperors had started so many wars or tried to enforce cultural and religious uniformity with such zeal".^{[61][62][63][64]}

Herrin asserts that, under Justinian, this involved considerable destruction.^[65] The decree of 528 had already barred pagans from state office when, decades later, Justinian ordered a "persecution of surviving Hellenes, accompanied by the burning of pagan books, pictures and statues" which took place at the Kynêgion.^[65] Herrin says it is difficult to assess the degree to which Christians are responsible for the losses of ancient documents in many cases, but in the mid-sixth century, active persecution in Constantinople destroyed many ancient texts.^[65]

Reformatting native religious and cultural activities and beliefs into a Christianized form was officially sanctioned; preserved in the Venerable Bede's Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum is a letter from Pope Gregory I (540-604) to Mellitus (d.604), arguing that conversions were easier if people were allowed to retain the outward forms of their traditions, while claiming that the traditions were in honor of the Christian God, "to the end that, whilst some gratifications are outwardly permitted them, they may the more easily consent to the inward consolations of the grace of God".^[66]

References

1. [1]

   Praet & 1992-1993, p. 11-12. sfn error: no target: CITEREFPraet1992-1993 (help)
2. [2]

   Praet & 1992-1993, p. 16. sfn error: no target: CITEREFPraet1992-1993 (help)
3. [3]

   Leone 2013, pp. 13, 42.
4. [4]

   Cameron 1993, p. 392–393.
5. [5]

   Brown 1998, p. 645. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFBrown1998 (help)
6. [6]

   Brown 1963, p. 284. sfn error: no target: CITEREFBrown1963 (help)
7. [7]

   Clark 1992, pp. 543–546.
8. [8]

   Markus 1990, pp. 141–142.
9. [9]

   Cameron 2011, pp. 8–10.
10. [10]

    Lavan & Mulryan 2011, p. xxxix.
11. [11]

    Markus 1990, p. 142.
12. [12]

    Schuddeboom 2017, pp. 166–167, 177. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSchuddeboom2017 (help)
13. [13]

    Schuddeboom 2017, p. 167. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSchuddeboom2017 (help)
14. [14]

    Schuddeboom 2017, pp. 167–169, 176. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSchuddeboom2017 (help)
15. [15]

    Schuddeboom 2017, pp. 167–169. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSchuddeboom2017 (help)
16. [16]

    Schuddeboom 2017, pp. 169. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSchuddeboom2017 (help)
17. [17]

    Lavan & Mulryan 2011, p. 178.
18. [18]

    R. P. C. HANSON, THE TRANSFORMATION OF PAGAN TEMPLES INTO CHURCHES IN THE EARLY CHRISTIAN CENTURIES, Journal of Semitic Studies, Volume 23, Issue 2, Autumn 1978, Pages 257–267, Accessed 26 June 2020 https://doi.org/10.1093/jss/23.2.257
19. [19]

    Schuddeboom 2017, p. 181-182. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSchuddeboom2017 (help)
20. [20]

    Schuddeboom 2017, p. 179 fn.39. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSchuddeboom2017 (help)
21. [21]

    MacDonald, William L. (1976). The Pantheon: Design, Meaning, and Progeny. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-01019-1
22. [22]

    Krautheimer, R. 1980. Rome, Profile of a City, 312-1308. Princeton, New Jersey.
23. [23]

    Schuddeboom 2017, p. 179. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSchuddeboom2017 (help)
24. [24]

    Schuddeboom 2017, p. 182. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSchuddeboom2017 (help)
25. [25]

    Schuddeboom 2017, p. 181. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSchuddeboom2017 (help)
26. [26]

    Schuddeboom 2017, p. 174. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSchuddeboom2017 (help)
27. [27]

    Schuddeboom 2017, pp. 181–182. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSchuddeboom2017 (help)
28. [28]

    Constantelos 1964, p. 372.
29. [29]

    Hinson, E. The Early Church: Origins to the Dawn of the Middle Ages. Abingdon Press (2010). Part. "The Western Rome Empire".
30. [30]

    Salamon, Maciej. Paganism in the Later Roman Empire and in Byzantium. Universitas (1991). p. 128.
31. [31]

    Brown 1998, p. 639. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFBrown1998 (help)
32. [32]

    Brown 1998, p. 640. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFBrown1998 (help)
33. [33]

    Bayliss, p. 68. sfn error: no target: CITEREFBayliss (help)
34. [34]

    Brown 1998, pp. 633, 641. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFBrown1998 (help)
35. [35]

    MacMullen 1986, pp. 133–134. sfn error: no target: CITEREFMacMullen1986 (help)
36. [36]

    Brown 2012, pp. 512–515, 530. sfn error: no target: CITEREFBrown2012 (help)
37. [37]

    Markus 1990, p. 26.
38. [38]

    Brown 2012, pp. 514–517, 530. sfn error: no target: CITEREFBrown2012 (help)
39. [39]

    Markus 1990, p. 228.
40. [40]

    Brown 2012, p. 515. sfn error: no target: CITEREFBrown2012 (help)
41. [41]

    BROWN, P. R. L. “RELIGIOUS DISSENT IN THE LATER ROMAN EMPIRE: THE CASE OF NORTH AFRICA.” History, vol. 46, no. 157, 1961, pp. 83–101. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/24405338. Accessed 22 Aug. 2022.
42. [42]

    Ekonomou 2007, pp. 245–247. sfn error: no target: CITEREFEkonomou2007 (help)
43. [43]

    Miller, 1974 & p79. sfn error: no target: CITEREFMiller1974p79 (help)
44. [44]

    Salzman 2021, pp. 335–336. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSalzman2021 (help)
45. [45]

    Ekonomou 2007, pp. 63–64. sfn error: no target: CITEREFEkonomou2007 (help)
46. [46]

    Ekonomou 2007, p. 1, 3. sfn error: no target: CITEREFEkonomou2007 (help)
47. [47]

    Salzman 2021, p. 298. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSalzman2021 (help)
48. [48]

    Salzman 2021, p. 335. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSalzman2021 (help)
49. [49]

    Salzman 2021, p. 299. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSalzman2021 (help)
50. [50]

    Herrin, Judith (2009). "Book Burning as purification". In Rousseau, Philip; Papoutsakis, Emmanuel (eds.). Transformations of Late Antiquity: Essays for Peter Brown, Volume 2 (illustrated, reprint ed.). Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. ISBN 9780754665533.
51. [51]

    Kaldellis 2012, pp. 1–3. sfn error: no target: CITEREFKaldellis2012 (help)
52. [52]

    Stern 1998, p. 151. sfn error: no target: CITEREFStern1998 (help)
53. [53]

    Mansi 1762, p. 970B. sfn error: no target: CITEREFMansi1762 (help)
54. [54]

    Irmscher 1988, p. 165. sfn error: no target: CITEREFIrmscher1988 (help)
55. [55]

    Anastos, Milton. "The Edict of Milan (313): A Defence of Its Traditional Authorship and Designation." Revue des études byzantines 25.1 (1967): 13-41.
56. [56]

    Grayzel 1968, p. 93. sfn error: no target: CITEREFGrayzel1968 (help)
57. [57]

    Evans 2005, p. 26. sfn error: no target: CITEREFEvans2005 (help)
58. [58]

    Kaldellis 2012, p. 2. sfn error: no target: CITEREFKaldellis2012 (help)
59. [59]

    BROWN, PETER. “RELIGIOUS COERCION IN THE LATER ROMAN EMPIRE: THE CASE OF NORTH AFRICA.” History, vol. 48, no. 164, 1963, pp. 283–305. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/24405550. Accessed 26 Aug. 2022.
60. [60]

    Lieu, Judith M. (1999). "The'attraction of women'in/to early Judaism and Christianity: gender and the politics of conversion". Journal for the Study of the New Testament. 21 (72): 5–22. doi:10.1177/0142064X9902107202. S2CID 144475695.
61. [61]

    Kaldellis 2012, p. 3. sfn error: no target: CITEREFKaldellis2012 (help)
62. [62]

    Irmscher 1988, p. 166. sfn error: no target: CITEREFIrmscher1988 (help)
63. [63]

    Lichtenberger & Raja 2018, pp. 85–98. sfn error: no target: CITEREFLichtenbergerRaja2018 (help)
64. [64]

    Synek 2014, pp. 245–258. sfn error: no target: CITEREFSynek2014 (help)
65. [65]

    Herrin 2009, p. 213.
66. [66]

    Bede (2007) [1910]. The Ecclesiastical History of the English Nation. Translated by Jane, L. C. New York: Cosimo Classics. p. 53. ISBN 9781602068322. Retrieved 16 September 2017.

1. [1]

   There have, historically, been many different scholarly views on Constantine's religious policies.^[2] For example Jacob Burckhardt has characterized Constantine as being "essentially unreligious" and as using the Church solely to support his power and ambition. Drake asserts that "critical reaction against Burckhardt's anachronistic reading has been decisive."^[3] According to Burckhardt, being Christian automatically meant being intolerant, while Drake says that assumes a uniformity of belief within Christianity that does not exist in the historical record.^[4]
2. [2]

   There is a long history of scholarly disagreement over whether or not Constantine, as the first Christian emperor, outlawed public sacrifice.

   • After the defeat of Licinius in A.D. 324, Constantine was in control of the whole Empire. According to Eusebius, it was then that Constantine issued a law which forbade sacrifice. This law is no longer in existence; it is only known second hand through Eusebius. However, it does seem likely that Constantine did pass such a law but that "it was a local law, applicable only in parts of the Eastern Empire; Eusebius supports this view, for he records Constantine's actions against pagan shrines only in the Eastern and never in the Western Empire." Indeed, it is the limited and local intent of this law which, according to Barnes, explains its loss and why Eusebius does not cite it verbatim. Moreover, Constantine never legislated against sacrifice in the West, which is why Firmicus Maternus, some ten years later, urges Constantine's sons to do precisely that.^[18]: 178
   • T. D. Barnes and others maintain that Constantine did ban sacrifice throughout the empire, concluding that "paganism was now a discredited cause. A change so sudden, so fundamental, so total, shocked pagans...".^[19] Except there is no evidence of such a shock; the extant record is characterized by a complete absence of reaction. As a result, others such as H. A. Drake and R. Malcolm Errington have challenged the existence and substance of such a law.^[19]
   • Errington concentrates on Constantine's letter to the eastern provinces, noting that it explicitly states both Christianity and paganism were allowed.^[19] Classical language professor Scott Bradbury has written that Constantine did ban sacrifice because his sons later referenced him as having done so, but other possible explanations for that reference have been offered, and that explanation raises the problem that emperors Constans (337-50) and Constantius II (337-61) at first only outlawed public and nocturnal sacrifice.^[20]
   • Brown notes that the language of the anti-sacrifice laws "was uniformly vehement", and the "penalties they proposed were frequently horrifying", evidencing the intent of "terrorizing" the populace into accepting this change.^[21] Bradbury acknowledges that there is no record of anyone in Constantine's era being prosecuted for sacrificing, nor is there evidence of any of the horrific punishments ever being enacted.^[22] Bradbury concludes that Constantine must have written the laws but did so without ever expecting them to be enforced.^[23]
   • A number of scholars have assumed toleration was incompatible with Christianity, yet others have allowed that forbearance toward polytheism would not have been impossible for the first Christian emperor. A few authors suggest that "true Christian sentiment" might even have motivated Constantine, since he held the conviction that, in the realm of faith, only freedom mattered.^[23]
   • Marie Roux asserts that it has been established by Roman historian Lucio De Giovanni that, under Constantine, "only the practice of divinatory sacrifices performed in a private context (sacrificia domestica) or during the night were prohibited. Those practices were seen as having slipped out from under public control, whereas traditional haruspicina, (the consultation and interpretation of the entrails of the sacrificed victims by official priests in a public context), remained authorized.^[24] This kind of legislation was already in place in Tiberius' reign indicating that Constantine’s policy did not differ from that of previous emperors.^[24]
   • The Imperial laws provide important evidence of Imperial intent to promote Christianity, eliminate the practice of sacrifice and control magic, though Christian emperors often tolerated other pagan practices.^[25] Brown notes that the language of the anti-sacrifice laws "was uniformly vehement", and the "penalties they proposed were frequently horrifying", evidencing the intent of "terrorizing" the populace into accepting the changes.^[21]
3. [3]

   A number of elements coincided to end the temples, but none of them were strictly religious.^[35] Earthquakes caused much of the destruction of this era.^[36] Civil conflict and external invasions also destroyed many temples and shrines.^[37] Economics was also a factor.^[35][38][39] The Roman economy of the third and fourth centuries struggled, and traditional polytheism was expensive and dependent upon donations from the state and private elites.^[40] Roger S. Bagnall reports that imperial financial support declined markedly after Augustus.^[41] Lower budgets meant the physical decline of urban structures of all types. This progressive decay was accompanied by an increased trade in salvaged building materials, as the practice of recycling became common in Late Antiquity.^[42] Economic struggles meant that necessity drove much of the destruction and conversion of pagan religious monuments.^[35][38][39] In many instances, such as in Tripolitania, this happened before Constantine the Great became emperor.^[43]
4. [4]

   Constantine's sons banned pagan state religious sacrifices in 341.^[59] The content and intent of this law is much debated.^[60]: 179 In English, it says "Superstition shall cease; the madness of sacrifices shall be abolished. For if any man in violation of the law of the sainted Emperor, Our father, and in violation of this command of Our Clemency, should dare to perform sacrifices, he shall suffer the infliction of a suitable punishment and the effect of an immediate sentence." Interpretation depends entirely on what was meant by the term superstitio.^[60]: 180 In fact, independent testimony from the period 340-363 indicates that paganism and sacrifice continued in Rome despite the law.^[60]: 181
5. [5]

   Mob violence was an occasional problem in all the independent cities of the empire as there were no modern style police forces. Taxes, food and politics were common reasons for rioting. Religion was also a factor though it is difficult to separate from politics since they were intertwined in all aspects of life.^[64]

   • In 361, the murder of the Arian bishop George of Cappadocia was committed by a mob of pagans, although there is evidence he had cruelly provoked them.
   • The conflict over the Serapeum involved both a Christian and a pagan mob.
   • The Jews and the Christians each gathered to fight in 415, although the sources indicate it was the upper levels of the Jewish community who decided to massacre the Christians after Cyril made serious threats to their leadership.^{[65]: 7, 11, 15–16}
   • A Christian mob threw objects at Orestes and, finally, Hypatia was killed by a Christian mob though politics and personal jealousy were probably the primary causes.^{[65]: 19–21}
   • Mobs were commonly composed of lower-class urban dwellers, often included upper class educated pagans, Jews and Christians, and in Alexandria, monks from the monastery of Nitria.^{[65]: 18, 22}
6. [6]

   • In his 1984 book, Christianizing the Roman Empire: (A.D. 100–400), and again in 1997, Ramsay MacMullen argues that widespread Christian anti–pagan violence, as well as persecution from a "bloodthirsty" and violent Constantine (and his successors), caused the Christianization of the Roman Empire in the fourth century.^[67][68]
   • Award winning historian Michelle Renee Salzman describes MacMullen's book as "controversial".^[68]
   • In a review, T. D. Barnes has written that MacMullen's book treats "non-Christian evidence as better and more reliable than Christian evidence", generalizes from pagan polemics as if they were unchallenged fact, misses important facts entirely, and shows an important selectivity in his choices of what ancient and modern works he discusses.^[69]
   • David Bentley Hart also gives a detailed discussion of MacMullen's "careless misuse of textual evidence".^[70]
   • Schwarz says MacMullen is an example of a modern minimalist.^[71] Schwarz suggests that minimalism is beginning to show signs of decline because it tends to understate the significance of some human actions, and so makes assumptions that are hard to support.^[72] As a result, "MacMullen's account of Christianization as basically an aggregation of accidents and contingencies" is not broadly supported.^[73]
   • Archaeologists Luke Lavan and Michael Mulryan of the Centre for Late Antique Archaeology indicate that archaeology does not show evidence of widespread conflict.^[74] There is no evidence to indicate that conversion through force was an accepted method of Christianization at any point in this era.^{[75]: 268–269}
   • In Gaul, some of the most influential textual sources on pagan-Christian violence concerns Martin, Bishop of Tours (c. 371–397), the Pannonian ex-soldier who is "solely credited in the historical record as the militant converter of Gaul".^[76]
   • These texts have been criticized for lacking historical veracity, even by ancient critics, but they are still useful for illuminating views of violence held in late fourth century Gaul.^[77]
   • The portion of the sources devoted to attacks on pagans is limited, and they all revolve around Martin using his miraculous powers to overturn pagan shrines and idols, but not to ever threaten or harm people.^[78]
   • Salzman concludes that "None of Martin's interventions led to the deaths of any Gauls, pagan or Christian.
   • Even if one doubts the exact veracity of these incidents, the assertion that Martin preferred non-violent conversion techniques says much about the norms for conversion in Gaul" at the time Martin's biography was written.^[79]
   • Archaeologist David Riggs writes that evidence from North Africa reveals a tolerance of religious pluralism and a vitality of traditional paganism much more than it shows any form of religious violence or coercion: "persuasion, such as the propagation of Christian apologetics, appears to have played a more critical role in the eventual "triumph of Christianity" than was previously assumed".^[80][81]
   • In the twenty first century, the conflict model of Christianization has become marginalized.^[82] According to Raymond Van Dam, "an approach which emphasizes conflict flounders as a means for explaining both the initial attractions of a new cult like Christianity, as well as, more importantly, its persistence".^[83]
7. [7]

   Cameron explains that, since Theodosius's predecessors Constantine, Constantius, and Valens had all been semi-Arians, it fell to the orthodox Theodosius to receive from Christian literary tradition most of the credit for the final triumph of Christianity.^[87] Numerous literary sources, both Christian and pagan, attributed to Theodosius – probably mistakenly, possibly intentionally – initiatives such as the withdrawal of state funding to pagan cults (this measure belongs to Gratian) and the demolition of temples (for which there is no primary evidence).^[88]

   • Theodosius has long been associated with the ending of the Vestal virgins, but twenty-first century scholarship asserts the Virgins continued until 415 and suffered no more under Theodosius than they had since Gratian restricted their finances.^[89]: 260
   • Theodosius turned pagan holidays into workdays, but the festivals associated with them continued.^[90]
   • Theodosius probably did not discontinue the ancient Olympic Games.^[91][92] Sofie Remijsen [nl] says there are several reasons to conclude the Olympic games continued after Theodosius I, and that they came to an end under Theodosius II, by accident, instead. One newly discovered reason has been found in two extant scholia on Lucian that connect the end of the games with a fire that burned down the temple of the Olympian Zeus during Theodosius II's reign.^[93]: 49
8. [8]

   Sozomen, the Constantinopolitan lawyer, wrote a history of the church around 443 where he references the law of 8 November 392. This law has been described by some as a universal ban on paganism that made Christianity – in effect – the official religion of the empire.^[97][98] The law describes and bans practices of private domestic sacrifice, such as the lares fire, which were thought to have "slipped out from under public control".^{[99][24][100]} Sozomen evaluates the law of 392 as having had only minor significance at the time it was issued.^[101]
9. [9]

   • In English, the Edict of Thessalonica (380) says "the [Nicene] religion that is followed by the Pontiff Damasus and by Peter, Bishop of Alexandria" shall be practiced by all "who are ruled by the administration of Our Clemency" and that those who "sustain the infamy of heretical dogmas" will receive both divine and earthly vengence.^[104][105]
   • The Edict was addressed directly to the people of the city of Constantinople and was valid throughout the Eastern empire – but only the Eastern Empire. Theodosius did not become emperor of both East and West until 392.^[106][107]
   • It is clear from mandates issued in the years after 380 that this edict was not intended as a requirement for pagans or Jews to convert to Christianity.^[102] Hungarian legal scholar Pál Sáry explains that, "In 393, the emperor was gravely disturbed that the Jewish assemblies had been forbidden in certain places. For this reason, he stated with emphasis that the sect of the Jews was forbidden by no law. It is also important to note that during the reign of Theodosius pagans were continuously appointed to prominent positions and pagan aristocrats remained in high offices."^[102]
   • The Edict applied only to Christians, since Christians alone could be heretics, and within that group, it was directed only to Arians.^[108] It declared those Christians who refused the Nicene faith to be infames, and prohibited them from using Christian churches. Sáry uses this exemplar: "After his arrival in Constantinople, Theodosius offered to confirm the Arian bishop Demophilus in his see, if he would accept the Nicene Creed. After Demophilus refused the offer, the emperor immediately directed him to surrender all his churches to the Catholics."^[109]
10. [10]

    • After the mid-fifth century, pagan temples began, on occasion, being converted into Christian churches.^[10][11] Scholarship has been divided over whether this represents Christianization as a general effort to demolish the pagan past, was instead simple pragmatism, an attempt to preserve the past's art and architecture, or some combination.^[12] Feyo Schuddeboom addresses this by using the city of Rome as a microcosm of temple conversion in the empire.^[13]

    • Although it is a small percentage of the four hundred and twenty-four temples known to have existed in Rome, Rome witnessed eleven temple conversions from the seventh to the twelfth century, which is more than any other single location in the empire.^[14]

    • Schuddeboom lists these as the churches of "San Bartolomeo all’Isola, San Basilio, San Lorenzo in Miranda, Santa Maria dei Martiri, Santa Maria de Secundicerio, San Nicola in Carcere, San Nicola dei Cesarini, San Sebastiano al Palatino, Santo Stefano delle Carrozze, Sant’Urbano alla Caffarella, and the oratory of Saints Peter and Paul (now Santa Francesca Romana)... located in the ancient city center, except Sant’Urbano, which is on the Via Appia.

    • In addition, we know of three Mithraea in Rome that were [reduced to rubble and] built over by churches: at San Clemente, Santa Prisca, and Santo Stefano Rotondo, all situated well outside the city center. These Mithraea have traditionally been included in the temple conversions in Rome, but, ... they in fact form a distinct group chronologically, architecturally, topographically, and conceptually".^[15]

    • According to modern archaeology, 120 pagan temples were converted to churches in the whole of the empire, out of the thousands of temples that existed, with two thirds of them dated at the end of the fifth century or later. In the fourth and fifth century, there were no conversions of temples in the city of Rome.^[16] None of the churches attributed to Martin of Tours can be shown to have existed in Gaul in the fourth century.^[17]

    • R. P. C. Hanson says the direct conversion of temples into churches did not begin until the mid fifth century in any but a few isolated incidents.^[18]: 257 It is likely this timing stems from the fact that these buildings and places remained officially in public use, ownership could only be transferred by the emperor, and temples remained protected by law.^[19]

    • "That Christian emperors continued to protect the temple buildings of Rome is evident from their legislation. A law by Constantius and Constans, issued to the urban prefect of Rome, already prescribed that “although all superstitions must be completely eradicated, nevertheless, it is Our will that the buildings of the temples situated outside the walls shall remain untouched and uninjured.” Arcadius and Honorius issued a law to the praetorian prefect of Italy, determining that “all public buildings and buildings that belong to any temple, those that are situated within the walls of the city or even those that are attached to the walls, [ . . . ] shall be held and kept by decurions and members of guilds.” Finally, a law by Leo and Majorian, issued to the urban prefect of Rome, specifically demanded that “all the buildings that have been founded by the ancients as temples [ . . . ] shall not be destroyed by any person.”... These laws stand in contrast to those in the East, which call for the destruction of temples; see CTh 16.10.16, 25." says Schuddeboom.^[20]

    • "What portion of this real estate was made available to the Church was therefore principally a matter of imperial, not Church, policy".^[19] That is why Boniface IV (608–615) needed authorization in 609 from the emperor Phocas to convert the Pantheon into a Church, and why Honorius I (625–638) asked the emperor Heraclius’s permission to recycle the bronze roof tiles of the temple of Venus and Roma.^{[21][22] : 65–72} It is only with the formation of the Papal State in the eighth century, (when the emperor’s properties in the West came into the possession of the bishop of Rome), that the conversions of temples in Rome took off in earnest.^[23]

    • "With the sole exception of the Pantheon, all known temple conversions in Rome date from the time of the Papal State, when imperial donations were no longer required".^[24] Temple conversion was limited to a small number of buildings and sites, without any sign of ideological based actions or wanton destruction.^[25] Temples were preserved whole or repaired for reuse just as many secular buildings were.^[26]

    • Schuddeboom concludes "There is nothing to suggest that their status as former places of pagan worship made them any less or more attractive than other buildings possessed of similar architectural and topographical qualities...".^[25] Individual temples and temple sites were converted to churches primarily to preserve their exceptional architecture or were used pragmatically because of their exceptional location.^[27]
11. [11]

    When Benedict of Nursia went to Monte Cassino around 530, he found a temple to Apollo with its statue and altar on which people still placed their offerings.^[29] By the 590s, Pope Gregory I complains about pagan rituals among landowners and peasants on Church lands in Sicily and Sardinia.^[30]
12. [12]

    In Late Antiquity, people had felt no need for special holy men who could access the divine for them, but the gradual "magicization" of the church's sacraments and devotions also increased the role of "holy men" who could provide that.^[37] For the laity, that meant their donations, which had been for maintenance of the church, the sick and the poor, instead became donations for the dead to insure their salvation after death, all of which went into church coffers.^[38]