From Augustus’ Shield to Theodora’s Church: Imperial Virtues, Inscriptions, and Changing Discourses on Power in Late Antiquity (original) (raw)

Late Roman Emperorship in Constantinople: Embodiment and 'Unbodiment' of Christian Virtues

Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 2022

The question of the documentary value of the last statues of Late Antiquity has been much debated in many recent publications. This article contributes to this debate and addresses emperors' statuary and its relation to the development of a Christian theology of the Late Roman emperorship. Traditionally, statues demonstrated the military, legal and economic power of Roman emperors, who were depicted as generals, judges or benefactors. Surprisingly, the Christianisation of imperial power seems to have had a limited influence upon the official iconography of emperors. The religious dimension rarely appeared on statues even though they became rarer in Late Antiquity. Whilst literary sources, especially Christian sources, increasingly mentioned emperors' personal piety and demonstrative humility, particularly in the monumental context of Constantinople, imperial statues remained faithful to the traditional iconography of power that obliterated physical weakness and embodied autocratic power.

'The Emperor's New Images – How to Honour the Emperor in the Christian Roman Empire', Emperors and the Divine – Rome and its Influence, CollEGium 20, Helsinki: Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies, 2016.

This article discusses the sacredness of Roman emperors during the late Roman Empire, in the fourth and fifth centuries C.E. as the Empire was gradually Christianized. I shall argue that the imperial ideology with the sacred emperor, which had developed in the preceding centuries, was adopted with a few modifications. The most important of the modifications was " tidying up " of emperor worship using animal sacrifices. Imperial images for the most part retained the associations and connotations they had earlier had with prestige, authority and divinity. In this article, I discuss the difficulties and ambiguities with the sacredness of emperors in the Christianizing Empire, focusing on imperial images. The analysis of a few fourth-and fifth-century Christian writers (for example, Eusebius of Caesarea, Athanasius, John Chrysostom, the anonymous Consultationes Zacchaei et Apollonii, Philostorgius, Severianus of Gabala and Pseudo-Theophilus of Alexandria) reveals a varied and complex set of attitudes towards traditional emperor worship, depending on the socio-political context of the writings. All these views must be examined as part of the debates in which they participate, as in the case of John Chrysostom's homilies in connection with the Riot of Statues in Antioch in 387, or Philostorgius' statements as connected with the disputes between Homoian and Nicene Christians.

Felicior Augusto, Melior Traiano. On the propagation of traditional models of “good emperorship” under Constantine the Great between 306 and 324 AD.

The central question of this research is: to what extend does Constantine present himself as a traditional Roman emperor? Chapter one will look at Constantine’s representation through buildings and iconography. The subject of the first paragraph is Constantine’s building activity in Rome. His appropriation of Maxentius’ buildings will be discussed, most notably the Basilica Nova and the Temple of Venus and Roma, as well as Constantine’s own building activity: the Thermae Constantinianae and his restoration of the Circus Maximus. The second paragraph of this chapter discusses Constantine’s representation through the iconography on the Arch of Constantine. It will be argued that Constantine is placed in the tradition of his renowned predecessors by the use of a traditional iconography on the Arch and by the re-use of decorative panels from the second century. The second chapter provides an analysis of Constantine’s coinage. Firstly, it is placed in the context of the Tetrarchs and of Maxentius. In the second paragraph, Constantine’s portrait is discussed. It will be argued that his portrait was modelled to resemble the portraits of Augustus and Trajan and that it had a distinctly different style than the Tetrarchs. The third paragraph considers the influence of Sol on the reverse side of Constantine’s coinage and the probable reference it makes to a ‘golden age’. Also a concise overview of the other themes on the reverse sides of Constantine’s coinage will be given and these themes will be placed in their proper context. In the conclusion both chapters will come together and some final remarks will be made on the themes that can be viewed both on coinage and by looking at Constantine’s building activity.

‘From Usurper to Emperor: The Politics of Legitimation in the Age of Constantine’, Journal of Late Antiquity 1 (2008), 82-100.

Journal of Late Antiquity, 2008

Modern scholarship, following the template laid down by Lactantius and Eusebius, has viewed the achievements of Constantine chiefly through the prism of his Christianity, with the result that his secular achievements have been comparatively neglected. This article addresses those secular policies, focusing on how Constantine sought to assert his legitimacy during the various stages of his rise to power. It takes as its starting point the modern debate on the legitimacy of Constantine’s elevation to the purple and whether or not he can be justifiably described as a usurper. Through close scrutiny of a variety of documentary sources—particularly inscriptions, but also coins—it establishes how Constantine sought to affirm the legitimacy of his position as emperor at a number of critical moments, and to have that legitimacy accepted both by other members of the imperial college and by the empire’s populace at large. It emerges that Constantine appealed to a variety of means to assert his legitimacy, for example, as a member of a college of emperors, as the preferred candidate of the army or Senate, as victor in civil war, or as a member of a dynasty. Furthermore, he invested considerable effort in buttressing his claims by actively deconstructing the legitimacy of his rivals, notably Maxentius and Licinius, whom he designated instead as tyranni. Thus Constantine made a notable contribution to the articulation of ideas of imperial legitimacy in the fourth century, and his strategies were adopted, most immediately, by his sons.

Virtus et virtutes Augustorum: The worship and the promotion of the emperor’s individually deified achievements and his relevant virtues in the provinces of Achaea and Macedonia (31 B.C. – A.D. 192), MA Thesis (in Greek, abstract in English)

The presence of virtues in Antiquity is an underestimated subject in modern bibliography. However, since the classical age, virtues such as ‘Tyche’ (‘Fortuna’) and ‘Nike’ (‘Victoria’) were individual divinities, which could shape every man’s destiny and provide their gifts. As power was bestowed upon one person during the Hellenistic and Imperial age, the need to justify his position was crucial. In religious terms, this was possible directly through the worship of the princeps or indirectly through the adoration of his virtues. Thus, in this essay the worship and the promotion of the Roman emperor’s individually deified achievements and his relevant virtues in the provinces of Achaea and Macedonia during the first three dynasties are being analysed. The concentrated data consists of 39 inscriptions and 204 coins and can lead to certain conclusions. In the ‘Introduction’, the previous bibliography (1.1) as well as the presence of the virtues since the Hellenistic era and the age of the res publica (1.2) are examined. The second part begins with a short study of the virtues as cities’ formal titles (2.1). Afterwards, the promotion and the worship of the imperial Victory (‘Victoria Augusta’) throughout the inscriptions and the coinage of the aforementioned provinces is thoroughly analysed. In the next subchapter, the various virtues, which were honoured and worshipped in Achaea and Macedonia, are examined (2.3). In addition, in the third part the inscriptions of the imperial virtues are interpreted in relation to the topography and the date of their dedication (3.1 and 3.2 respectively). Additionally, a prosopographical analysis of the dedicators and the priests of these virtues is necessary in order to clarify what kind of people chose to be connected with such virtues (3.3). Finally, the examination of the inscriptions per ‘Greek’ cities and ‘Roman’ colonies is also essential in order to determine in which communities this phenomenon was more widespread (3.4). In conclusion, the plurality of the imperial achievements and virtues which could be honoured and worshipped by the cities collectively or by citizens individually is impressive. Roman colonies, such as Corinth, Nicopolis and Philippi and cities, such as Athens or Gytheion, participated actively in this practice. All cities established new cults or erected altars and statues to the imperial virtues, often responding to events in Rome, in the borders of the Empire or even within the cities themselves. Thus, a hidden clue of Roman Greece is unearthed; Cities and individuals, mainly members of the civic elite, chose to approximate the imperial virtues and successes in order to be displayed as well as to share a portion from the majesty of the Roman Imperium and his princeps. Eventually, the worship of the imperial virtues encloses many themes, as the personal ethics, the sacred identity of cities and colonies, the provincial elite, the virtues and the predominant figure of the emperor. The old subject of ‘Romanisation’, which appears often among researchers, seeks here answers; What was the impact of the worship and promotion of the imperial virtues in the process of ‘Romanisation’ of these provinces?