帝国危机反应和公元372年的安提阿契尼魔法和叛国罪审判

Q1 Arts and Humanities Studies in Late Antiquity Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1525/sla.2023.7.2.242
K. Langenfeld
{"title":"帝国危机反应和公元372年的安提阿契尼魔法和叛国罪审判","authors":"K. Langenfeld","doi":"10.1525/sla.2023.7.2.242","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The writings of Ammianus Marcellinus, Libanius, and John Chrysostom have enshrined the Antiochene treason and magic investigations conducted under Emperor Valens in 372 CE as a testament to the ruler’s excessive paranoia and poor relationship with the eastern metropolis. By reexamining these three authors’ allegations of judicial corruption and abusive policing during the trials, this article contends that Valens’s response to the crisis was leveraged with far more legality, moderation, and success than often discussed. The rigorous tactics implemented during the trials demonstrate Valens and his administration’s intent to counter potential sedition among Antioch’s citizenry with the full brunt of Roman law and military action. Comparisons with legal precedents reveal, however, that Valens’s administration balanced these stern deterrents with deference to the law and attempted to assuage Antiochene interests throughout the investigations. Antiochene lobbying efforts were also more impactful in mitigating the imperial response, as demonstrated by Chrysostom’s account of a public protest that successfully petitioned Valens to pardon one of the accused. This article concludes that this pardon and Valens’s application of moderated or commuted sentences throughout the trials indicate his efforts to maintain a constructive imperial-urban relationship with the Antiochene populace. This conclusion not only forces a reconsideration of Valens’s relationship with his de facto imperial capital throughout the trials but also indicates the dangers of relying too heavily on literary interpretations of Valens’s reign.","PeriodicalId":36675,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Late Antiquity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Imperial Crisis Response and the Antiochene Magic and Treason Trials of 372 CE\",\"authors\":\"K. Langenfeld\",\"doi\":\"10.1525/sla.2023.7.2.242\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The writings of Ammianus Marcellinus, Libanius, and John Chrysostom have enshrined the Antiochene treason and magic investigations conducted under Emperor Valens in 372 CE as a testament to the ruler’s excessive paranoia and poor relationship with the eastern metropolis. By reexamining these three authors’ allegations of judicial corruption and abusive policing during the trials, this article contends that Valens’s response to the crisis was leveraged with far more legality, moderation, and success than often discussed. The rigorous tactics implemented during the trials demonstrate Valens and his administration’s intent to counter potential sedition among Antioch’s citizenry with the full brunt of Roman law and military action. Comparisons with legal precedents reveal, however, that Valens’s administration balanced these stern deterrents with deference to the law and attempted to assuage Antiochene interests throughout the investigations. Antiochene lobbying efforts were also more impactful in mitigating the imperial response, as demonstrated by Chrysostom’s account of a public protest that successfully petitioned Valens to pardon one of the accused. This article concludes that this pardon and Valens’s application of moderated or commuted sentences throughout the trials indicate his efforts to maintain a constructive imperial-urban relationship with the Antiochene populace. This conclusion not only forces a reconsideration of Valens’s relationship with his de facto imperial capital throughout the trials but also indicates the dangers of relying too heavily on literary interpretations of Valens’s reign.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36675,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Late Antiquity\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Late Antiquity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1525/sla.2023.7.2.242\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Late Antiquity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/sla.2023.7.2.242","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Ammianus Marcellinus, Libanius和John Chrysostom的著作将公元372年Valens皇帝统治下的Antiochene叛国罪和魔法调查作为统治者过度偏执和与东部大都会关系不良的证明。通过重新审视这三位作者对审判期间司法腐败和滥用警察的指控,本文认为瓦伦斯对危机的反应比通常讨论的更加合法、温和和成功。在审判过程中实施的严格策略表明瓦伦斯和他的政府打算用罗马法和军事行动的全部冲击来对抗安提阿公民中潜在的叛乱。然而,与法律先例的比较表明,瓦伦斯的政府在这些严厉的威慑与对法律的尊重之间取得了平衡,并试图在整个调查过程中缓和安条克的利益。安条克的游说在减轻帝国的反应方面也更有影响力,金克索斯托姆描述了一次公众抗议,成功地请求瓦伦斯赦免了一名被告。这篇文章的结论是,这一赦免和瓦伦斯在整个审判过程中对减刑或减刑的应用表明,他努力与安条克民众保持建设性的帝国-城市关系。这一结论不仅迫使人们在整个审判过程中重新考虑瓦伦斯与他事实上的帝国首都的关系,而且表明过分依赖文学对瓦伦斯统治的解释是危险的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Imperial Crisis Response and the Antiochene Magic and Treason Trials of 372 CE
The writings of Ammianus Marcellinus, Libanius, and John Chrysostom have enshrined the Antiochene treason and magic investigations conducted under Emperor Valens in 372 CE as a testament to the ruler’s excessive paranoia and poor relationship with the eastern metropolis. By reexamining these three authors’ allegations of judicial corruption and abusive policing during the trials, this article contends that Valens’s response to the crisis was leveraged with far more legality, moderation, and success than often discussed. The rigorous tactics implemented during the trials demonstrate Valens and his administration’s intent to counter potential sedition among Antioch’s citizenry with the full brunt of Roman law and military action. Comparisons with legal precedents reveal, however, that Valens’s administration balanced these stern deterrents with deference to the law and attempted to assuage Antiochene interests throughout the investigations. Antiochene lobbying efforts were also more impactful in mitigating the imperial response, as demonstrated by Chrysostom’s account of a public protest that successfully petitioned Valens to pardon one of the accused. This article concludes that this pardon and Valens’s application of moderated or commuted sentences throughout the trials indicate his efforts to maintain a constructive imperial-urban relationship with the Antiochene populace. This conclusion not only forces a reconsideration of Valens’s relationship with his de facto imperial capital throughout the trials but also indicates the dangers of relying too heavily on literary interpretations of Valens’s reign.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Studies in Late Antiquity
Studies in Late Antiquity Arts and Humanities-Classics
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊最新文献
Review: The Mediterranean Diaspora in Late Antiquity: What Christianity Cost the Jews, by Ross Shepard Kraemer “No one who has been joined to a spouse will see the Kingdom of Heaven” Who Wrote Ritual Formularies from Egypt? A Study of P.Lond. I 121 (= PGM VII) and Its Possible Relationship with Scholarly Patronage in Late Antiquity National Borders and the Contours of Historical Knowledge Constantine and Eusebius in Antioch
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1