Religion and the Construction of a Christian Roman Polity

Author:

Rotiroti Francesco1

Affiliation:

1. Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro

Abstract

This article seeks to define a theoretical framework for the study of the relation between religion and the political community in the Roman world and to analyze a particular case in point. The first part reviews two prominent theories of religion developed in the last fifty years through the combined efforts of anthropologists and classicists, arguing for their complementary contribution to the understanding of religion's political dimension. It also provides an overview of the approaches of recent scholarship to the relation between religion and the Roman polity, contextualizing the efforts of this article toward a theoretical reframing of the political and institutional elements of ancient Christianity. The second part focuses on the religious legislation of the Theodosian Code, with particular emphasis on the laws against the heretics and their performance in the construction of the political community. With their characteristic language of exclusion, these laws signal the persisting overlap between the borders of the political community and the borders of religion, in a manner that one would expect from pre-Christian civic religions. Nevertheless, the political essence of religion did also adapt to the ecumenical dimension of the empire. Indeed, the religious norms of the Code appear to structure a community whose borders tend to be identical to the borders of the whole inhabited world, within which there is no longer room for alternative affiliations; the only possible identity outside this community is that of the insane, not belonging to any political entity and thus unable to possess any right.

Publisher

University of California Press

Subject

History,Classics

Reference186 articles.

1. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the international conference on “Religions and Violence. Ideologies, Rites, Conflicts,” organized by the Museum of Religions “Raffaele Pettazzoni” from 13–17 June 2017, in Velletri. I wish to thank the Director of the Museum, Dr. Igor Baglioni, for his tireless work in the organization of this event. My thanks also and especially go to the editors and anonymous reviewers from Studies in Late Antiquity for their valuable suggestions, which have contributed to an undoubtedly clearer and more effective presentation of my argument.

2. See, e.g., Polybius 6.56.6–12, ed. T. Büttner-Wobst, Polybii historiae, 5 vols. (Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, 1889–1905), 2:306–7; and Mucius Scaevola—whether real or fictitious—as quoted by Augustine, De civitate Dei 4.27 (Corpus Christianorum Series Latina 47:120–22). Against this explanation, see George J. Szemler, The Priests of the Roman Republic: A Study of Interactions Between Priesthoods and Magistracies (Brussels: Latomus, 1972), 193–94; Georges Dumézil, La religion romaine archaïque avec un appendice sur la religion des Étrusques, second edition (Paris: Payot, 1974), 131–38; J. H. Wolf G. Liebeschuetz, Continuity and Change in Roman Religion (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979), esp. 1–54; John Scheid, Les dieux, l’état et l'individu: Réflexions sur la religion civique à Rome (Paris: Seuil, 2013), 35–41, 81–93.

3. On these features of ancient historiography, see Arnaldo Momigliano, “Popular Religious Belief and the Late Roman Historians,” Studies in Church History 8 (1972): 1–18.

4. See Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde, “Die Entstehung des Staates als Vorgang der Säkularisation,” in Säkularisation und Utopie. Ebracher Studien. Ernst Forsthoff zum 65. Geburtstag (Stuttgart, Berlin, Köln and Mainz: W. Kohlhammer Verlag, 1967), 75–94. The nature and extent of the so-called secularization, however, are the subject of diverging interpretations: see Philip S. Gorski, “Historicizing the Secularization Debate: Church, State, and Society in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe, ca. 1300 to 1700,” American Sociological Review 65 (2000): 138–67.

5. See Bruce Lincoln, Holy Terrors: Thinking about Religion after September 11, second edition (Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 2006), 56–61.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3