Toto

Just to clear up one point, the statistics are perhaps more reliable than many such numbers:

Catholic site

Wikipedia gives the source for the statistics.

But of course, this was war, and civil wars are bloodier than others. The Catholic priests appear to have been killed because they were partisans in a civil war, not as martyrs to abstract beliefs.

If anyone wants to pursue this, I will split it out and move it.

Bede

Toto, next time the crusades, or the Croatian Ustasha regime or the wartime background to most witch hunts comes up, do be sure to make the same point. But somehow I doubt you are going to.

Best wishes

Bede

Bede's Library - faith and reason

Toto

Bede - I don't spend a lot of time discussing the crusades. The Croatian Ustasha, like some other Balkan nationalist movements, was based a toxic combination of religion and nationalism.

What's your point?

Bede

That by jumping in when you did, you expose yourself as a hypocrite.

Toto

I leave it to the onlookers to decide.

Getting back to the OP - Vlasis Rassias has written a book in modern Greek titled "DEMOLISH THEM.." which is the source of a list of bad things that Christians did to pagans that has been repeated multiple times on various internet sites and bulletin boards, without authorization. The book has not been translated into English. I gather than Rassias claims to have used Byzantine sources, so it may be hard to check his facts. His ideological stance is clear - he is trying to revive ancient Hellenistic paganism.

I think there may be slips between Rassias and the internet list, since the internet list claims that Constantine established Christianity as the sole recognized religion in the Roman Empire, which is not true, and not the sort of mistake anyone with any familiarity with the subject matter would make.

countjulian started to examine the list, and rejected the first claim regarding the Council of Ancyra He then asks for help verifying the rest.

The list is not the same one as the Christian Crimeline reviewd on Tektonics with contributions from Bede and Roger Pearse, but I have not examined it for overlap.

You may proceed.

countjulian

Thanks Toto. No matter what differences we've had, I still have great respect for you , Bede, and I hope my sarcastic remarks did not hurt any feeling or impressions. I apologize for any harmful remarks I made, said or implied. I did not nor do I support the persecution of Catholic priests and laity in the Spanish civil war in any way, and if I appeared to do so, I apologize. I would still like your input on the matter, being the "skeptic" on this subject and all, and would be very grateful for any help you could render. I would also be willing to continue speakign with you on the matter of the Spanish Civil War, if you so desire, though I must confess a lack of knowledge on the subject. Could we get back to the matter hand?

The next one down on the list says (and I hope mentioning and verifying them one at a time is not another breach of copyright)

Now, as for the claim of "Christianism as the only official Relgion of the Roman Empire" Rassias later says,

So he does acknowledge a difference between the decrees of Theodosius and Constantine. I, though, would still strike the "Christianism as the only official Relgion of the Roman Empire" from a list of mine. Now, Fox confirms the part about the priest and oracle of Apollo, so I have trust in it. I have, however, not heard anything about the Mt. Athos incident. Does anybody have any information?

Bede

CJ,

Apology is accepted. I shall try and act a little more humble myself.

It is clear that Constantine became a Christian and you could fairly say that the Emperor's religion was the state religion. However, pagan cults did continue and Rome, the city, continued to carry out all the old rites until the reign of Theodosius.

Fox, as you say confirms the sacking of the Temple of Apollo at Didyma (Pagans and Christians p 671). Note though that he explains that this shrine was struck for very specific reasons - it was the origin of the great persecution of Diocletian. That started when the priest of Apollo at Didyma (the same one who was attacked? We don't know - it was in 305AD, whereas the lynching was at least twenty years later) told Diocletian that the Christians were the reason that an augery had failed and thus set off the persecution (Chadwick, Early Church, p. 121). Unsurprisingly, he was subject to a revenge attack. Note though that your source uses the plural 'priests' whereas Fox uses the singular and that Fox doesn't say he was killed.

Finally, Fox lists six Temples that were attacked during the reign on Constantine and says each were special cases (like Didyma). Mount Athos isn't included. The first Christian monks didn't arrive there until the 5th century. So we could rewrite the entry:

324: Constantine officially tolerates all religions but makes Christianity his personal cult. Christians carry our revenge attacks on six pagan shrines linked to the great persecution or other provocations. A prophet of Apollo, who may have been responcible for the great persecutions start, is tortured by a mob.

Best wishes

Bede

Bede's Library - faith and reason

Roger Pearse

You're very welcome. That's what they're there for, and all out of copyright so we can all copy them freely. It would amaze me if there was money in the fathers anyway.

Procopius, of course. I didn't know that Bill had scanned it, but glad that he has.

Me too.

I gather. Whether that is a respectable position for you to adopt I wouldn't like to say.

I think so too. But let's be clear that we're some way from the starting point now, which was arguing from the Theodosian code.

But isn't it a terrible mistake to mix together the situation in the 4th century with the policies of the Byzantine government in the 6th?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

countjulian

Ok. I'll buy that, as Fox does mention it as a reprisal aginst the oracle. Now, for our next entry,

This finds support in the exact same page of Fox, as well as MacMullen. It should also be mentioned that Fox supports the idea that more pagan temples were destroyed during this period, and Eberhar Sauer's Archaeology of Religious hatred seems to support that notion from archaeological evidence.

This next one finds support in MacMullen, Christianizing the Roman Empire, p. 49-50. He quotes Sozomen, H.E. 2.5, which says, " it appeared necessary to the emperor to teach the governors to suppress their superstitious rites of worship. He thought that this would be easily accomplished if he could get them to despise their temples and the images contained therein.To carry this project into execution he did not require military aid; for Christian men belonging to the palace went from city to city bearing imperial letters. The people were induced to remain passive from the fear that, if they resisted these edicts, they, their children, and their wives, would be exposed to evil. The vergers and the priests, being unsupported by the multitude, brought out their most precious treasures, and the idols called diopeth, and through these servitors, the gifts were drawn forth from the shrines and the hidden recesses in the temples. The spots previously inaccessible, and known only to the priests, were made accessible to all who desired to enter. Such of the imagesas were constructed of precious material, and whatever else was valuable, were purified by fire, and became public property. The brazen images which were skillfully wrought were carried to the city, named after the emperor, and placed there as objects of embellishment, where they may still be seen in public places, as in the streets, the hippodrome, and the palaces. Amongst them was the statue of Apollo which was in the seat of the oracle of the Pythoness, and likewise the statues of the Muses from Helicon, the tripods from Delphos, and the much extolled Pan, which Pausanias the Lacedaemonian and the Grecian cities had devoted,-after the war against the Medes.

As to the temples, some were stripped of their doors, others of their roofs, and others were neglected, allowed to fall into ruin, or destroyed. The temple of Aesculapius in Aegis, a city of Cilicia, and that of Venus at Aphaca, near Mount Lebanon and the River Adonis, were then undermined and entirely destroyed. Both of these temples were most highly honored and reverenced by the ancients"

This again lends credence to the idea that more than 6 temples were destroyed under Constantine.

So maybe the entry should read


324: Constantine officially tolerates all religions but makes Christianity his personal cult. Christians carry our revenge attacks on six pagan shrines linked to the great persecution or other provocations, and many more may have been destroyed. A prophet of Apollo, who may have been responcible for the great persecutions start, is tortured by a mob.

Actually, if you read his introduction, he says he never scanned any of the texts, he typed them in by hand, which I, anyway, think is admirable. I intend to do the same with some other Loebs not avaliable online, too.

Indeed it would be a terrible mistake to confuse the two situations together, if indeed they are different. My intention, through analyzation of this list, is to find out whether the two are the same, amongst other things. Care to join in?

Bede

Again, we see the list compiler being disingenuous. We have six temples mentioned by Fox. The list compiler has added more, thrown in Mt Athos and stuck a little 'etc' on the end. Also, he doesn't mention what happened at the Temples of Aphrodite which explains why they were targetted. Still, your emendation seems fair enough.

We do know that Constantine collected art from around the Empire but there was nothing all that unusual about that. Rome was full of statury uprooted from all over the place. The Romans were the world's greatest looters and their armies used to return laden with all sorts of stuff. Constantine had to get the decoration from somewhere and Christians didn't have any yet. This episode is motivated by want of cash more than anything else. Remember, even Christian kings have been happy to swipe church property when they needed it (Charles Martel and Henry VIII most famously). Finally, bear in mind that Sozomen is writing over a century after the event and so we cannot treat him as reliable. I think Libanius had something to say on this, though. That would be a near contemporary source if anyone can dig it up.

So for the looting:

CJ, you have twice stated that you thought paganism was more tolerant than Christianity. That is the statement that I found most objectionable and I'd like to see some justification. What I said about gladiators and infanticide still stand and we are finding that McMullen's views based on some quite flimsy evidence.

Best wishes

Bede

Bede's Library - faith and reason