Adam Świętoń
Verbal aggression in the legal
language of The Late Roman Empire the case of the constitutions
preserved in the book 16 of "Codex
Theodosianus"
Studia Prawnoustrojowe nr 25, 51-64
2014
UWM
S tu d ia P raw noustrojow e 25
2014
Adam Św iętoń
K a te d ra P ra w a R zym skiego i Porów naw czego
W ydział P ra w a i A dm inistracji UWM
Verbal aggression in the legal language
of the Late Roman Empire
- the case of the constitutions preserved
in the book 16 of Codex Theodosianus
In tro d u ctio n
In th e course of th e 4th c e n tu ry th e clash b etw e en th e C h ristia n ity and
th e tra d itio n a l religious sy stem of th e an c ie n t R om an w orld k in d led stro n g
m u tu a l anim osity. W hen th e C h ris tia n religion h a d a ttra c te d a tte n tio n and
th e ap p ro v al of th e R om an a u th o ritie s, th e ir a ttitu d e to w ard s old religions
becam e m ore a n d m ore u n fav o u rab le - till th e clim ax d u rin g th e re ig n of
em p ero r T heodosius th e G reat. Along w ith th e p a g a n i also o th e r enem ies of
th e new o rd e r ap p e are d - a p o sta te s an d heretics. T his p a p e r briefly p re se n ts
th e q u estio n of th e v erb al ag gression t h a t m a rk e d th e la te R om an im p erial
leg islation. It is clearly visible in th e law s p u b lish ed to w ard s all th o se who
w ere in opposition to a n ex istin g o rd e r a n d sy stem of v alu es p re ferred by th e
im p erial court. I w ill focus h ere only on th e invectives a n d m a n ife sta tio n s of
in to leran ce o ccurring in th e im p erial c o n stitu tio n s p re serv ed in th e 16th
book of th e C o d e x T h e o d o s i a n u s devoted to religious issues.
Im p eria l co n stitu tio n s w ere no t only th e tool of th e d issem in atio n of th e
law, b u t also esta b lish e d th e ch a n n els of com m unication b etw een th e em pe­
ro r a n d his officials. In th is m a n n e r th e ideological m essage sp re a d according
to th e sh ap e of th e la te R om an p ro p ag an d a. T herefore th e la te im p erial law
m ay be tre a te d (to som e ex ten t) as ex pression of th e g o v ern m en tal orders
an d w ishes th a n as re a l testim o n y of th e social an d political s itu a tio n in th e
L ate R om an E m pire. R esearch of su ch scholars as Tony H onore, F erg u s
M illar, J ill H a rrie s on th e style of th e legal lan g u ag e in th e literary , rh e to ri­
cal a n d h isto rical context exam ined its ideological an d p ro p a g an d a lay er an d
52
A d a m Św iętoń
allow to come to th e in te re stin g conclusions ab o u t th e role of th e law in
e sta b lish in g a n d developing th e lin k b etw een th e em p ero r a n d h is su b jects1.
L ate R om an im p erial p ro p a g a n d a left its m a rk on th e process of cre­
atio n a n d d istrib u tio n th e law - especially in re la tio n to key a re a s of the
em p ero r’s a u th o rity such as econom y a n d tax es, succession of th e power,
m ech an ism of th e a d m in istra tio n a n d th e q u estio n of C h ristian ity . In th is
p erio d th e v erb al ag gression accom panied by in s u lt a n d th r e a t w as in cre­
asin g - it is clearly ev id en t for th e a re a s of social life t h a t w ere th e m ost
v u ln era b le to d isru p tio n a n d d isin te g ratio n . E m p ero r’s a tte n tio n w as focused
on th e efficiency of th e a d m in is tra tio n th re a te n e d by corruption, n efario u s
s u f f r a g i u m , n ep o tism a n d on th e u n ity of th e C h ris tia n w orld en d a n g ere d by
h eretics, un o rthodox m ovem ents, a p o sta te s a n d p ag an s. T h u s th e aim of law
w as n o t only to o rd e r a n d to d em an d b u t also to educate. E d u ca tio n a l role on
law is visible in th e co n stru ctio n of invective w hich is accom panied by the
ap p e als for b e tte rm e n t. S om etim es th r e a t w as added - b u t as a rh e to ric al
com plem ent to th e em p ero r’s re p rim a n d ra th e r th a n crim in al sanction. F or
in sta n c e in h is fam ous c o n stitu tio n em p ero r C o n sta n tin e called th e officials
to stop th e co rruption: “T he rap acio u s h a n d s of th e officials sh all im m e d ia te ­
ly cease, I say, th e sh a ll cease”2 ( c e s s e n t i a m n u n c r a p a c e s o f f i c i a l i u m m a n u s ,
c e s s e n t i n q u a m . . . ) , a n d th e n “if they, a fte r th is w arn in g , do no t cease, they
sh a ll be cu t off by th e sw ord” ( n a m s i m o n i t i n o n c e s s a v e r in t , g l a d i i s p r a e c i d e n t u r ...)3. C u ttin g off th e h a n d s w as in th is case r a th e r a k in d of h a rs h
rh e to ric al figure th a n an n o u n c em en t of th e p u n ish m e n t for th e disobedient
officials. Specific function in th e sp re ad in g of th e p ro p a g an d a, ed u catio n of
th e subjects a n d com m unication b etw een th e m a n d th e h ig h e st a u th o rity
h a d p r a e f a t i o (e q u iv alen t of th e m o d ern pream ble). T he com pilers of th e
C o d e x T h e o d o s i a n u s a n d C o d e x I u s t i n i a n u s h a d sh o rte n e d th e te x ts of con­
stitu tio n s a n d rem oved th e p r a e f a t i o n e s before th e y p u t th e e x tra c t in th e
1 J. Harries, L aw a n d Em pire in Late A ntiquity, Cambridge University Press 1999; idem,
Legal Culture and the Id entity in the Fifth-C entury West, [in:] S. Mitchell, G. Geoffrey (eds.),
E thnictity and Culture in Late A ntuquity, Duckworth, London 2000, p. 45-57; idem, R om an
Law Codes and the R om an Legal Tradition, [in:] J.W. Cairns, P.J. du Plessis (eds.), Beyond
Dogmatics. Law and Society in the R om an World, Edinburgh University Press 2007, p. 53-82;
T. Honoré, Emperors a n d Lawyers, Duckworth, London 1981; idem, Law in the Crisis o f Empire
379-455 AD. The Theodosian D ynasty a n d its Quaestors, Clarendon Press, Oxford 1998;
F. Millar, Emperors a t Work, “The Journal of Roman Studies” 1967, no. 57, p. 9-19. As for
literature about the ideological and legislative role of the constitutions see also M. Stachura,
Foreword to: Codicis Theodosiani Liber Sextus Decimus, A. Caba, (transl.), M. Ożóg, M. Wójcik
(eds.), Wydawnictwo Akademii Ignatianum, Kraków 2014, p. XIV, n. 5.
2 All cited translation of the constitutions denoted as CTh. follows C. Pharr (transl.), The
Theodosian Code and Novels and the Sirm ondian constitutions. A translation w ith commentary,
glossary and bibliography, Princeton University Press 1952.
3 CTh. 1.16.7. For detailed analyze of the constitution see. M. Stachura, Wrogowie porząd­
ku rzymskiego. Stu d iu m zjawiska agresji językowej w Kodeksie Teodozjusza, Nowelach Postteodozjańskich i Konstytucjach Sirm ondiańskich, “Historia Iagellonica”, Kraków 2010, p. 64f.
Verbal aggression in the legal language o f the Late R om an Empire.
53
C odes4, b u t in som e cases th e re m a in s of p ro p a g an d a a n d ad m o n itio n p e n e ­
tra te d p a r ts of th e te x ts w hich w ere p re serv ed in th e Codes.
L egal lan g u ag e of la te a n tiq u ity w as q u ite specific a n d in com parison
w ith th e law of classical e ra w as p e rm e a te d w ith th e v erb al aggression5. As
M ichał S ta c h u ra s ta te s in h is w ork, 29% of tex ts p re serv ed in th e C o d e x
T h e o d o s i a n u s co n tain s one offensive w ord a n d alm ost 3% of th e m contain
five or m ore offensive expressions. As for th e P ost-T heodosian Novels w hich
w ere u n to u ch ed by th e com pilers ab o u t 76% of th e m a te ria l co n tain one
in su ltin g or aggressive ex pression a n d n e a rly 24% co n tain five or m ore
in v ectiv es6. T he re la tiv e ly h ig h d iv ersity of invective a n d also a h ig h degree
of re p e a ta b ility is distinctive. So th e q u estio n arise s ab o u t th e h a r s h style of
th e co n stitu tio n s w hich no t survived in its original form.
C oncerning m isb eh av io u r of th e subjects such as co rru p ted officials, a p ­
p a rito rs, im p erial ag e n ts or ju d g es such p h ra se s a re u sed as b a n d itry (l a t r o c i n i u m ) , ro bbery ( r a p a c i t a s ) , violent action, a s s a u lt ( i m p e t u s ) , p lu n d e r (d e p r a e d a t i o ) . T h e y a r e d riv e n b y g re e d , n e f a rio u s a m b itio n ( a v a r i t i a ,
c u p i d i t a s ) , h a te or envy ( i n v i d i a ) , au d a city ( a u d a c i a ) , insolence ( i n s o l e n t i a )
or m ad n ess ( fu r o r ) . S om etim es ap p e a rs th e association w ith th e despised
an im als - for exam ple th e efforts of th e officials prom oted u n law fu lly to
h ig h e r g ra d es a re defined as s u b r e p t i o w hich su g g est slith e rin g into th e
w orld of privileges like a sn ak e or v ip er7. A p p arito rs are v erb ally b ra n d e d as
w icked, a rro g a n t ( s u p e r b u s ) a n d n efario u s ( n e f a r i u s ) 8 . W rongdoers a n d a n ta ­
g o nists a re described as public enem ies ( h o s te s p u b l i c i ) for in sta n c e sorcerers
( m a g i ) a n d so o th say ers ( h a r u s p i c e s ) a re show n as th e enem ies of m an k in d
( i n i m i c i h u m a n i g e n e r i s )9. Some law s depict th e m as i n i m i c i : “a n enem y
alik e of th e fisc a n d of th e w om en” ( f is c i e t m u l i e r i s i n i m i c u s ) or “th e public
en em y a n d O u r ow n enem y” ( p u b l i c u s a c n o s t e r i n i m i c u s ) . In th is la tte r
in sta n c e em p ero r C o n sta n tin e II is considered ho stile to th e P eople a n d a t
th e sam e tim e p erso n ally to th e em p ero r C o n s ta n tiu s 10.
4 Ibidem, p. 45.
5 As for the distinctions between the legal terminology of the classical and post-classical
age see: ibidem p. 38-42.
6 Ibidem, p. 63.
7 E.g. CTh. 1.15.10, CTh. 1.16.3, CTh. 1.16.7, CTh. 1.28.3, CTh. 1.32.32, CTh. 5.14.31,
CTh. 6.4.22.3, CTh. 6.29.5, CTh. 6.35.11, CTh. 8.4.28.3, CTh. 10.4.1, CTh. 11.1.32, CTh. 11.7.3,
CTh. 13.11.11. See also M. Stachura, Wrogowie porządku rzymskiego..., p. 109f, 112f, 132f.
8 CTh. 1.16.7.
9 CTh. 6.4.22.3, CTh. 9.16.6. The term h u m a n u m genus means all human kind which
lives on the world - orbis terrarum (after enlargement of the territory of the Roman State
described often as orbis R om anus or orbis noster). H u m a n u m genus is opposed to animals (see
D. 1.1.1.3). For more precise interpretation of the term see L. Janssen, “Superstitio" and the
Persecutions o f the Christians, “Vigiliae Christianae” 1979, no. 33, p. 144f.
10 CTh. 10.11.1, CTh. 11.12.1. M. Stachura points out the difference between the words
inimicitia and hostilitas. Inim icitia appears in the sources in relation to the personal unfriendli­
ness inside the Roman community (it is antonym of amicitia). Hostilitas (antonym of societas)
54
A d a m Św iętoń
V erbal a g g r e ssio n to w a rd s h e r e tic s a n d p a g a n s
As for th e im p erial c o n stitu tio n s re la te d to religious issu es th e v erbal
ag g ressio n tu rn e d a g a in s t som e groups of subjects w hich can be g en erally
d escribed (as in som e co n stitu tio n ) by th e ex pression “enem ies of th e C ath o ­
lics”11. T he b u lk of legal te x ts re fe rre d to th is problem is p re serv ed in th e
followed title s of 16 th book of th e C o d e x T h e o d o s i a n i u s : title 5 (D e h a e r e t ic i s )
a n d title 10 (D e p a g a n i s , s a c r i f i c i i s e t t e m p l i s ) from w hich th e title devoted to
th e h eretics is th e m ost m a rk e d by v erb al violence.
T he en d of th e fo u rth ce n tu ry in th e R om an E m p ire w as a period of th e
consolidation of th e s ta te ’s religious policy. Its nu cleu s w as th e orthodox
C h ris tia n ity w ith th e em p ero r in its ce n tre as th e g u a ra n to r a n d p ro tec to r of
th e C h ris tia n religious u n ity a n d th e le a d e r of th e C h ris tia n w orld12. T h e­
odosius II saw th e role of th e em p ero r ju s t “as a so rt of m ed iato r b etw een
God a n d M an, who received form God th e d u ty to ru le in o rd e r t h a t th e re be
h arm o n y b etw een th e religious a n d tem p o ra l life of th e people”13. T h u s th e
concept of th e “only tru e fa ith ”(u n a c a t h o l i c a v e n e r a t i o 14) w as harm o n ized
w ith th e id ea of th e one ab so lu te (in th e se c u la r a n d religious sense) ru le r of
th e s ta te t h a t w as m u ltic u ltu ra l b u t u n ite d in God.
O ne of th e m ost fu n d a m e n ta l ru le w hich ch a ra c te rise s a n d a t th e sam e
tim e ex p lain s th e a ttitu d e th e C h ristia n orthodox to w ard s th e d isse n te rs w as
c r e d o of N icene. E m p ero rs re p eated ly acknow ledged th e N icene C reed as the
g ro u n d of th e “tru e fa ith ”. In th e ir c o n stitu tio n ad d ressed in 380 AD to th e
people of C o n sta n tin o p le (th a t is th e people of th e R om an E a s t)15 em perors
T heodosius th e G reat, V a le n tin ian II a n d G ra tia n drew u p th e d istin c t line
is applies to the situation of hostility in the relationships outside the Roman state. But someti­
mes these two words were used as a synonyms. M. Stachura, Wrogowie porządku rzymskiego...,
p. 84, 87 n. 339 and p. 87-92.
11 CTh. 16.5.42 (Eos, qui catholicae sectae su n t in im ici. ..), CTh. 16.5.62, CTh. 16.5.64. It is
worth to note that this hostility might move from internal relationships to external - the
majority of Goths, Vandals and Ostrogoths that invaded Roman territory was Arian faith.
M. Wójcik, „Szaleństwo A ria n " ja ko przestępstwo godzące w jedność państw a, [in:] A. Dębiński,
H. Kowalski, M. Kuryłowicz (eds.), S a lu s rei publicae suprema lex. Ochrona interesów państw a
w praw ie karnym starożytnej Grecji I R zym u, Wydawnictwo KUL, Lublin 2007, p. 367.
12 Bishop Ambrosius praised Gratian and Theodosius the Great as a head of Christian
community (Am brosius , De obitu Theodosii 51). Theodosius I deserved with absolute certainty
to be remembered as promoter of the Christian faith. On the one hand he supported fides
Catholica, on the other actively and radically fought off the heretic movements and controver­
sies. In this respect his reign was landmark. See I. Fargnoli, M any F aiths and One Emperor.
R em arks about the Religious Legislation o f Theodosius the Great, „Revue Internationale des
droits de l’Antiquité” 2005, no. 52, p. 146f.
13 M.R. Salzman, The evidence for the conversion o f the Rom an empire to the Christianity
in book 16 o f the “Theodosian Code", “Historia” 1993, no. 42, p. 362.
14 CTh. 16.5.38.
15 CTh. 16.1.2. See G.G. Archi, Teodosio I I e la sua codificazione, Edizioni Scientifiche
Italiane, Napoli 1976, p. 159.
Verbal aggression in the legal language o f the Late R om an Empire.
55
b etw een C ath o lics16 a n d th e re s t “w hom We adjudge d em en ted a n d in s a ­
n e”17. Those who do no t ad h e re to th e N icene C reed th e c o n stitu tio n a sc ri­
b ed th e foolishness a n d u n co n tro llab le m ad n ess ( d e m e n t i a , v e s a n i a ) a n d op­
posed th e m to th e believers of th e f i d e s C a t h o l i c a - th e only tru e a n d official
relig io n 18. T hey w ere u n d o u b ted ly h eretics a n d a p o state s, b u t in w ider sense
b esides th e C h ristia n d isse n te rs th e c o n stitu tio n also b ra n d e d th o se who
w orsh ip p ed th e old R om an gods. N ext y e a r (381 AD) T heodosius th e G re at
issu ed a n o th e r c o n stitu tio n th a t s tre n g th e n e d th e fo u n d atio n of th e C atholic
fa ith by th e su p p o rtin g th e N icene C reed a n d m ade th e C atholics its protecto rs 19. T he law is also th e g re a t exam ple of th e elab o rate invective a g a in st
un o rth o d o x sects (see below). B oth co n stitu tio n s w ere included by Theodo­
siu s II in h is C o d e x as a le g e s g e n e r a t e s a n d alm o st h u n d re d y e a rs la te r by
J u s tin ia n in h is Code. T h eir location in th e s tru c tu re of th e 1st book of the
J u s tin ia n Code in d icates t h a t th e se law s co n stitu te d one of th e m ost im por­
ta n t prin cip les of th e s ta te policy in th e field religious a n d ideological affa­
irs 20 a n d defined R om an E m p ire as a n orthodox C h ristian .
T he religious policy b u ilt on th e conception of th e one tru e religion w as
by d efin itio n in to le ra n t a n d u n frie n d ly to a n y m isre p re se n ta tio n s. It m u s t be
also re m em b ered t h a t ho stile a ttitu d e to th e h eretics aro u sed due to th e
c h a ra c te r of som e religious d isp u tes a n d q u a rre ls. N ot all of th e m took place
in a n atm o sp h ere of in te lle c tu a l debates. Some controversies w ere discussed
in th e w ay of th e rio ts a n d s tre e t fights. C o nsequently th e h eretics w ere seen
as serious th r e a t to th e public o rd e r21.
T he im p erial law on th e religious affairs w as c h a ra c te rise d by stro n g
an tag o n ism . O n th e one side th e re are C atholics on th e o th e r four groups of
subjects m ay be d istin g u ish ed : h eretics a n d schism atics ( h a e r e tic i e t s c h i s m a ti c i, th o se who u n d e rm in e th e orthodox dogm as), ap o sta te s ( a p o s t a t a e , those
16 Catholici were Christians which confessed the dogma of “the single Deity of the Father,
the Son, and the Holy Spirit, under the concept of equal majesty of the Holy Trinity” (hoc est, ut
secundum apostolicam disciplinam evangelicamque doctrinam pa tris et filii et spiritus sancti
unam deitatem sub p arili maiestate et sub pia trinitate credam us [CTh. 16.1.2]). Therefore they
were loyal to the catholicum “the general principle” (see s.v. catholicum , P.W. Glare (ed.),
Oxford L a tin Dictionary, Clarendon Press, Oxford 1996, p. 285) which was the Nicene Creed.
According to T. Honoré Catholici represented “the whole body of the church” (T. Honoré, Law in
the Crisis o f Em pire 379-455 AD. The Theodosian D ynasty and its Quaestors, Clarendon Press,
Oxford 1998, p. 5).
17 CTh. 16.1.2 (reliquos vero dem entes vesanosque iudicantes...).
18 G.G. Archi, op. cit., p. 159.
19 CTh. 16.5.6, CTh. 16.5.6.2 (Is autem nicaenae adsertor fidei, catholicae religionis verus
cultor accipiendus est...).
20 The constitution CTh. 16.1.2 opens first book of the Justinian Code. The law promulga­
ted by Theodosius I in 381 (CTh. 16.5.6) comes after. As for the Justinian’s religious policy in
relation to fides Catholica see S. Kursa, Ochrona ortodoksyjnej wiary w ustawodawstwie J u sty ­
niana, “Zeszyty Prawnicze UKSW” 2012, z. 12.2, p. 7f.
21 A. Dębiński, U stawodawstwo karne rzym skich cesarzy chrześcijańskich w sprawach
religijnych , Redakcja Wydawnictw KUL, Lublin 1990, p. 50.
56
A d a m Św iętoń
who ab a n d o n th e C h ris tia n fa ith - q u i e x c h r i s t i a n i s p a g a n i f a c t i s u n t 22),
Je w s a n d p ag a n s ( p a g a n i , th o se who c u ltiv ate old R om an w orship). O u t of
th e m th e h eretics w ere tre a te d w ith th e stro n g est ag gression. It m ay be
ex p lain ed by th e a w aren e ss of th e th r e a t cau sed by th e h e re tic a l doctrines to
th e ideological u n ity of th e s ta te (an d th u s also political). L egal lan g u ag e of
th e co n stitu tio n s reflects th is an x iety - th o se who d im in ish “tru e religion”
a re “a u th o rs of sed itio n ”, “d istu rb e rs of th e peace of th e C h u rch ” a n d “d is tu r­
b ers of th e C atholic fa ith ”23. It th is w ay th e y also violate th e d ig n ity p restig e
a n d a u th o rity ( a u c t o r i t a s ) of th e em p ero r24. T he n u m b e r of issu ed a n d p re se ­
rv ed co n stitu tio n s d e m o n stra te s th e concern of th e R om an a u th o ritie s over
th e problem of heretics. C o d e x T h e o d o s i a n u s co n tain s 66 c o n stitu tio n s a g a ­
in s t h e re tic s co m pared w ith 25 re la te d to p a g a n s a n d only 7 re la te d to
sc h ism a tic s (b u t it m u s t be re m e m b e re d t h a t th is p ro p o rtio n s show th e
scope of s itu a tio n in th e firs t h a lf of th e 5 th c e n tu ry w h e n th e Code w as
p ro m u lg a te d )25.
It sh ould be also no ted t h a t d espite th e aggressive, in to le ra n t a n d in su l­
tin g overtones of th e law th e orthodox C h ris tia n ity k e p t th e door open for
th e re p e n ta n t sin n ers. H a rs h invectives in th e lan g u ag e of th e law -m akers
a n d in te lle c tu a ls w ere accom panied by th e ap p eals for p a tie n t a n d gentle
actio n s to b rin g h eretics, ap o sta te s a n d p ag a n s b ack to th e bosom of th e
C h urch. L a c ta n tiu s in his w ork D i v i n a r u m I n s t i t u t u i o n u m l i b r i V I I recom ­
m en d ed to act in m o d eratio n a n d p a tie n tly 26. E ven th e ra d ic a l leg islatio n of
T heodosius th e G re a t w as in fact o rien te d to th e re sto ra tio n of th e heretics
to th e orthodox C h u rch a n d only in th e case of fa ilu re th e sin n e rs should be
definitively se p a ra te d from th e C h ris tia n society27.
L egal sources do no t propose th e explicit definition of th e w ord “h e re tic ”
or “h eresy ”. S om etim es th e leg islatio n u sed th e n am e of p a rtic u la r h eresy in
o rd e r to clarificatio n 28. In th e y e a r of 395 em perors H onorius a n d A rcadius
in clu d ed am ong th e h eretics all th o se who “deviate, even in a m in o r p o in t of
doctrine, from th e te n e ts a n d th e p a th of th e C atholic religion”29. It is
22 CTh. 16.7.1.
23 CTh. 16.1.4 (ut seditionis auctores pacisque turbatae ecclesiae...) = CTh. 16.4.1 (seditionis auctores pacisque turbatae ecclesiae...), CTh. 16.4.3 (et fidem catholicam turbat...).
24 CTh. 16.4.4.
25 See M.R. Salzman, The evidence for the conversion..., p. 375.
26 E. DePalma Digeser, Lactantius, Porphyry, a n d the Debate over Religious Toleration,
“The Journal of Roman Studies” 1998, no. 88. p. 124. On the religious tolerance and intolerance
see. A.H. Armstrong, The Way and the Ways: religious tolerance and intolerance in the fourt
century AD, “Vigiliae Christianae” 1984, no. 38, p. 1-17.
27 I. Fargnoli, op. cit., p. 150.
28 M. Wójcik, Szaleństw o A rian... p. 371. See eg. CTh. 16.5.6, CTh. 16.5.11, CTh. 16.5.12,
CTh. 16.5.65.
29 See CTh. 16.5.28. The meaning of the word “heretic” was enlarged by Theodosius II
(and in consequence by Justinian) through the reception of the constitution promulgated in 380
AD by Theodosius I (CTh. 16.1.2 = C. 1.1.1) and covered also pagans and Jews (A. Dębiński,
Verbal aggression in the legal language o f the Late R om an Empire.
57
difficult to co n sider th is view as com plete a n d sufficient definition especially
as it do n o t d istin g u ish th e h eretics from th e sch ism atics (th e difference
w hich w as seen by th e co n tem p o raries30).
H eretics w ere considered as a h etero geneous group of th e m em bers of
th e co m m unities o u tsid e of th e m a in O rthodox C h ristia n C h u rch su p p o rted
by th e sta te . O n th e o th e r h a n d from th e legal p o in t of view th e R om an
a u th o ritie s saw th e m as hom ogeneous body a n d th is is a tte s te d by th e
g o v ern m en tal religious policy (for exam ple, th e re is only one title in Codex
T heo d o sian u s devoted to th e vario u s h e re tic m ovem ents)31. A policy w hich
re ach e d its clim ax d u rin g th e re ig n of th e T heodosius th e G reat.
H eresy as such is described as c r i m e n , s a c r i l e g i u m . T his is d en o tatio n of
th e crim e in th e legal sen se32, fu rth e rm o re by u sin g th e w ord of s a c r i l e g i u m
in a rh e to ric al figures th e h eretics w ere stig m a tiz ed as w icked m en, w rong­
doers, m a l e f i c i eq u al to tra ito rs to th e s ta te a n d em p ero r (because of id e n tifi­
catio n of th e c r i m e n la e s a e m a i e s t a t i s w ith th e crim e of s a c r i l e g i u m in th e
R om an crim in al law )33. Som e th e c o n stitu tio n s co n tain th e ex pression w hich
am plify th e m e an in g th e w ord of c r i m e n . Term of s c e l u s is u sed to describe
th e crim in al activity as ex trem ely atrociou s34.
Herezja ja ko przestępstwo praw a rzymskiego, [in:] A. Dębiński, H. Kowalski, M. Kuryłowicz
(eds.), S alus rei publicae..., p. 49; M. Stachura, Foreword to: Codicis Theodosiani Liber Sextus
Decimus, p. XXXI). In short heretics follows the “heresy” which is very opposite of the “orthodo­
xy” (“true”, “correct”, “right”, “appropriate” doctrine). See N. Widok, Ortodoksja, herezja, schi­
zm a - wyjaśnienie pojęć, [in:] F. Drączkowski, J. Pałucki, P. Szczur, M. Szram, M. Wysocki,
M. Ziółkowska, Ortodoksja, herezja, schizm a w kościele starożytnym , Polihymnia, Lublin 2012,
p. 16. For more comparison between these two terms see F. Zuccotti, „Furor haereticorum
S tu d i sul trattam ento giuridico della follia e sulla persecuzione della eterodossia religiosa nella
legislazione del Tardo Impero Romano, Giuffre Editore, Milano 1992, p. 186f.
30 In the early Christian writings words of “heretic” and “schismatic” were used as
a synonyms but probably as soon as in the fourth century in the East these two words gained
different meaning. See N. Widok, op. cit., p. 29, 32. The difference is visible in the phrases
contained in constitutions CTh. 16.5.1 (haereticos autem atque schismaticos...), CTh. 16.5.62
(M anichaeos haereticos schism aticos sive m athem aticos.om nem que sectam catholicis inim icam...) and CTh. 16.5.64 (Manichaeos haereticos sive schismaticos om nemque sectam catholicis
inim icam ...). Interesting constitution of Arcadius, Honorius and Theodosius II issued in the
year of 405 (CTh. 16.6.4) attests the awareness of such distinction: the schism is quite different
from heresy (quae, ne haeresis vocaretur, appellationem schism atis praeferebat), but heresy can
be born out of the schism (Ita contigit, u t haeresis ex schism ate nasceretur).
31 M. Stachura, Wrogowie porządku rzymskiego..., p. 188
32 Eg. CTh. 16.5.34. A. Barzano (ed.), Il cristianesimo nelle leggi di Rom a imperiale,
Paoline Editoriale Libri, Milano 1996, p. 91. Regarding to the heresy as a crime of sacrilege see
A. Dębiński, Ustawodawstwo karne rzym skich cesarzy chrześcijańskich..., p. 83f; idem, „Sacrilegium " w praw ie rzym skim , Redakcja Wydawnictw KUL, Lublin 1995, p. 168f; idem, Herezja
jako przestępstw o ... , p. 45f.
33 See A. Dębiński, Sacrilegium..., p. 113f.
34 CTh. 16.5.7, CTh. 16.5.34.1, Nov. Val. 18. Term of scelus emphasizes the inhumanity of
the act. In the legal sense there is no dissimilarity between crimen and scelus at least as for the
constitutions preserved in the 16th book of the Theodosian Code. See M. Stachura, Wrogowie
porządku rzymskiego..., p. 145.
A d a m Św iętoń
58
T he te rm of h a e r e t i c u s is th e invective on p a r w ith th e n am e of th e
specific h eresy (like th e A rian s, th e E u n o m ian s th e M an ich aean s, P epyzites,
M acedonians etc.35). In th e c o n stitu tio n from th e y e a r of 381 T heodosius th e
G re a t d eclared t h a t th e v ery n am e of th e founder of h eresy is om inous as
b a d om en ( p r o d i g i u m ) 36. C h ristia n s opposed th e n am es of founders of heresy
to th e N am e of C hrist.
As it h as b een m entioned above th e constitutions reflect th e fe ar of h e re ­
sies because of th e th re a t to security of s ta te a n d public order. Assem blies
( c o n v e n t u s ) or com m unities of heretics w ere com pared w ith noisy rebellious
crowd w hich is accom panied by bustle, quarrels, verbal skirm ishes and scuffles.
E m perors V alentinian an d Valens p u t in 372 AD in th e law against assem blies
of M anicheans word t u r b a 37. T here w as alw ays a danger of th e transform ation
th e quiet discussion into the noisy q u arrel accom panied by the riots, b u t the
m ain in ten tio n of th is expression w as to associate th e heretics w ith th e savage
crowd of aggressive p lu n d erers. The p a rtic ip a n ts of th e h eretical assem blies
w ere seen as riotous “d istu rb e rs” of th e peace (not only of s ta te b u t also
C hurch) w hich acted “w ith fla g ra n t a n d d am n ab le au d a city ”38. P a rtic ip a tio n
i n su ch m eetin g w as considered as in c ite m e n t to w ard s th e C atholic fa ith a n d
society39. A n o th er law s described congregations of h eretics as tu m u ltu o u s40.
H eretics w ere also n am ed as im pious ( p r o f a n u s ) . F o r T heodosius I th e
M an ich a ean s w ere defilers a n d c o rru p te rs of th e C h ristia n d octrine ( p r o fa n a t o r a t q u e c o r r u p t o r c a th o l ic a e d i s c i p l i n a e ) , who “leave th e com m unity of
good people” a n d choose “secret tu rb u le n t g a th e rin g s ” (s e c r e ta t u r b a ). In th e
law of H o norius a n d T heodosius II p ro m u lg ated in 408 AD h eretics are
described “as h ostile to C atholics”4 1 .
Invectives w ere applied also in o rd e r to h u m ilia te th e h e re tic a l doctri­
nes. A ccording to th e rh e to ric a l s tru c tu re s th e p ro p a g atio n a n d teac h in g of
h eresy b rin g d iscred it on God ( i m m i n u t i o D e i 42), offend H is m ig h ty n am e
a n d in s u lt H is d iv in ity 43. T hey w ere defined as im pious (like th o se of M ani35 CTh. 16.5.11 (id est Eunom iani, A rriani, Macedoniani, P neum atom achi M anichaei, Encratitae, Apotactitae, Saccofori, Hydroparastatae...), CTh. 16.5.12 (Vitiorum institutio deo atque
hom inibus exosa, E unom iana scilicet, Arriana, Macedoniana, A pollinariana ceterarumque sectarum...), see also CTh. 16.5.59 and 16.5.60.
36 CTh. 16.5.6.
37 CTh. 16.5.3 (Ubicumque manichaeorum conventus vel turba huiusm odi repperitur...).
38 CTh. 16.1.4 (ut seditionis auctores pacisque turbatae ecclesiae...), CTh. 16.4.2 (Et si quis
posthac ausu gravi adque dam nabili contra huiusm odi legem veniendum esse crediderit...).
39 CTh.16.4.3 (et fidem catholicam turbat et populum ...).
40
41
42
43
CTh.
CTh.
CTh.
CTh.
16.4.4 and 16.4.5.
16.5.9pr, CTh. 16.5.42 (Eos, qui catholicae sectae su n t inimici...).
16.5.5.
16.5.15 (Omnes diversarum perfidarum que sectarum, quos in deum miserae vesania conspirationis exercet...), CTh. 16.5.26 (audeat coetus illicitos congregare profanaque mente
om nipotentis dei contam inare mysterium ...), Nov. Val. 18 (detestandam d ivinitas iniuriam...).
See also M. Stachura, Wrogowie porządku rzymskiego..., p. 85
Verbal aggression in the legal language o f the Late R om an Empire.
59
ch aean s), pro fane ( i n s t i t u t i o p r o f a n a 44), false ( r e lig io f a l s a 45), vicious ( i n s ti t u t i o n e f a r i a 46), perfidious (p e r f i d i a )47, profane teac h in g ( p r o f a n u m p r a e c e t p u m )48, s u p e rstitio n ( s u p e r s t i t i o 49 - som etim es th e m e an in g w as am plified
by ad d in g th e adjectives: p erv erse or n efario u s - s u p e r s t i t i o p e r v e r s a , s u p e r ­
s t i t i o n e f a r i a 50), e rro r (error)51. D issem in atio n of th e h e re tic a l doctrines w as
e q u a te d w ith w id esp read in g p estilen ce ( p e s t i s )52. In one of th e co n stitu tio n s
em p ero rs s ta te d t h a t h eretics are h a te fu l to God a n d m a n ( v i t i o r u m i n s t i t u ­
tio d e o a t q u e h o m i n i b u s e x o s a ) 53. A ccording to th e rh e to ric a l style th e y tak e
p a r t in “ritu a l perform ance of th e ir ow n perfidy” or “cerem onies of th e ir dire
com m union”54.
T eachers a n d p ro p a g ato rs of th e h eresies w ere re fu sed to th e access to
th e co m m u n ity of all h u m a n - for in sta n c e by p ro m u lg atio n of th e law of
V a le n tin ian a n d V alens in 372 AD55. T hey should live - as Theodosius,
44 CTh. 16.5.3.
45 CTh. 16.5.4.
46 CTh. 16.5.5.
47 CTh. 16.5.25, 16.5,63. Perfidia is the antonym of fides and in general sense means the
lack of loyalty and untruthfulness. Perfidious person is untrustworthy (see s.v. perfidia, perfidiosus, perfidus, [in:] P.W. Glare, (ed.), Oxford L atin Dictionary, p. 1338). Here perfidia means
the betrayal of the fides Christiana. M. Stachura, Wrogowie porządku rzymskiego..., p. 138.
48 CTh. 16.5.24.
49 CTh. 16.5.10 (ad nullam tam en ecclesiam haereticae superstitionis turba conveniat...),
CTh. 16.5.34 (Eunom ianae superstitionis clerici...), CTh. 16.5.39 (Donatistae superstitionis haereticos...), CTh. 16.5.51, CTh. 16.5.54, CTh. 16.5.56, CTh. 16.5.65.1, CTh. 16.5.66, Nov. Val 18.
Superstitio meant irrational and unreasoning attitude to religion, religious exaltation (see s.v.
superstitio, [in:] P.W. Glare, (ed.), Oxford L atin D ictionary , p. 1878; M.R Salzman, “Superstitio"
in the Codex Theodosianus and the persecution o f pagans, “Vigiliae Christianae” 1987, no. 41,
p. 173). For Livy superstitio was the perversion (pravitas) hostile to the Roman order which
was represented among other things by the traditional worship. In the early Roman empire
Christian superstitio threatened to the Pax Deorum and exposed all citizens to the wrath of the
Gods. Heretical superstitio was hostile to the late Christian community just as the Christian
superstitio was hostile to the early Roman state of the Nero and Domitian (A. Barzano (ed.), Il
cristianesimo nelle leggi..., p. 25f; L. Janssen, op. cit., p. 151f; M. Stachura, Wrogowie porządku
rzymskiego..., p. 127). At the turn of the third century this term appeared in the pejorative
sense in the technical legal language (with reference to the Jewish faith). During the fourth
century its meaning was getting more and more offensive - at first in relation to the paganism
(during the reign of the Constantine) and then in relation to each religion different from the
orthodox Christianity. Lactantius put the false superstitio in opposition to the true Christian
faith (M.R Salzman, “Superstitio"..., p. 174f). In the late antiquity term superstitio was used
also in relation to the Jewish religion (D. 50.2.3.3, CTh. 2.1.10, CTh. 12.1.158, CTh. 16.8.24,
CTh. 16.8.28). For more detailed survey of term superstitio in the legal language see also
M. Stachura, Wrogowie porządku rzymskiego..., p. 169f and the literature cited there.
50 CTh. 16.5.5, CTh. 16.5.48.
51 CTh. 16.5.11 (Omnes omnino, quoscumque diversarum haeresum error exagitat.. '.), CTh.
16.5.20 (Nulla eorum perversitati vel publica conventicula vel latentiora erroribus secreta tribuantur), CTh. 16.5.21 (In haereticis erroribus...). Sometimes error was synonym of heresy, see CTh.
16.5.19 (sub cuiuslibet haeresis sive erroris nomine constituti... ).
52 CTh. 16.5.44.
53 CTh. 16.5.12.
54 CTh. 16.5.12.
55 CTh. 16.5.3.
60
A d a m Św iętoń
V a le n tin ian II a n d G ra tia n ord ered in th e y ea rs of 384 a n d 388 - fa r aw ay
from th e good a n d h o n est m en, city w alls (it m u st be re m em b ered t h a t in th e
A n tiq u ity “th e city” m e a n t “th e civilization”) a n d com m unity of th e s a in ts 56.
T he sam e em perors said h a rs h ly ab o u t M an ich aean s: “In sh o rt, th e y shall
h av e n o th in g com m on w ith th e w orld” (m ore precisely it m e a n t probably
C h ris tia n w orld)57. In th e legal lan g u ag e it m e a n t b a n is h m e n t (in th e sp h ere
of th e public law) an d d ep riv a tio n of som e rig h ts in th e sp h ere of th e p riv ate
law (e.g. t e s t a m e n t i f a c t i o a c t i v a ) . T he tech n ical sense of th e se law s w ere
covered by rh e to ric a l invective w hich b ra n d e d h eretics as o u tc a st of th e
C h ris tia n society.
T h ro u g h th e u se of th e invectives leg islato rs th re w doubt on th e m e n ta l
ab ilitie s of th e h e retics. A ccording to th e offensive expressions th e y re m a in ed
in th e s ta te of m e n ta l w eak n ess w hich is described as d e m e n t i a h a e r e tic o r u m 58, f u r o r 59, f u r o r r e l i g i o n i s 6 0 , i n s a n i a h a e r e t i c o r u m 61 or v e s a n i a 62. D e ­
m e n t i a is a s ta te of m e n ta l confusion cau sed by stu b b o rn re m a in in g in e r r o r ,
th e foolishness caused by th e polluted m in d 63, th e “d e ra n g e m e n t of th e
m in d ”64. F u r o r is a s ta te of to ta l confusion cau sed by stru g g le betw een
irra tio n a l p assio n a n d in telle ct in w hich th is la tte r w as defeated 65. The
h e re tic a l f u r o r is also a s ta te of blind an d a rro g a n t tr u s t in th e pow er
ra tio n a lis tic m ind t h a t cause m isguidance66. It a p p e a rs t h a t som etim es d e ­
m e n t i a a n d f u r o r w ere synonym s67.
E x cellen t exam ple of perfectly co n stru cted invective is th e c o n stitu tio n
of T heodosius th e G re a t w hich w as p ro m u lg ated in 381 AD ju s t before th e
C h ris tia n O rthodox C ouncil a t C o n sta n tin o p le68. It defended th e N icene
C reed a n d w as aim ed a t h eresies - by its provisions th e h e re tic assem blies
w ere p ro h ib ited an d th e h e re tic cu lts stig m a tiz ed . In th is law th e suggestion
56 CTh. 16.5.13 (in aliis locis vivant ac pen itu s a bonorum congressibus separentur ...),
CTh. 16.5.14 (Apollinarianos ceterosque diversarum haeresum sectatores ab om nibus locis iubem us inhiberi, a moenibus urbium, a congressu honestorum, a com munione sanctorum...).
57 CTh. 16.5.18 (N ihil ad su m m u m his sit com mune cum mundo...).
58 CTh. 16.5.24, see CTh. 5.16.32 “foolishness of Eunominas” (dementia E unom ianorum ).
59 CTh. 16.5.31, 16.5.32; in both constitutions: quorum furor tantum suasit errorem...; see
also CTh. 16.5.60. Term furor appears also in early Christian writings - for example in relation
to the “madness of Arius” (M. Wójcik, Szaleństw o Arian..., p. 360). Arians were styled by
Ambrosius as mad or foolish men (ibidem, p. 367).
60 CTh. 16.5.25.
61 CTh. 16.5.65 pr.
62 CTh. 16.5.15, CTh. 16.5.25.
63 CTh. 16.5.6 pr (nulla a d exercendam anim i obstinatioris dem entiam p ateat occasio),
CTh. 16.5.26 (eorumque sanctissim a nom ina pollutis m entibus usurpare).
64 See s.v. dem entia, [in:] P.W. Glare (ed.), Oxford L a tin Dictionary, p. 511.
65 M. Stachura, Wrogowie porządku rzymskiego..., p. 125f. For more explanation of the
term see ibidem, p. 124-131.
66 Ibidem, p. 130.
67 See CTh. 16.5.32, where dem entia is equal to furor.
68 CTh. 16.5.6. M. Stachura, Wrogowie porządku rzymskiego..., p. 77.
Verbal aggression in the legal language o f the Late R om an Empire.
61
a p p e a r t h a t h eretics are d ifferen t k in d of m en . The scornful p h ra se “th is
k in d of m en ” ( h u i u s m o d i h o m i n u m g e n u s ) d istin c tly d istin g u ish those driv en
by f u r o r h a e r e t i c o r u m from C h ris tia n s. It is w o rth to note t h a t in a n o th e r
law 69 th is “o th e r k in d of m en ” is opposed to orthodox C h ris tia n com m unity
called sim ply “a good m en ” (b o n i ). T h u s we have h ere sim ply d istin ctio n
b etw een good a n d evil, m o ral a n d u n m o ral. N ext com es th e rh e to ric a l con­
stru c tio n by w hich em p ero r ex p resses his extensive d isg u st a t “co n ta m in a ­
tio n of th e P h o tin ia n 70 pestilence, th e poison71 of th e A ria n sacrilege, crim e
of th e E u n o m ia n 72 perfidy, a n d th e se c ta ria n m o n stro sities, abom inable b e ­
cause of th e ill-om ened n am es of th e ir a u th o rs ”73. H eresy is sin ister, polluted
a n d d an g ero u s like a venom of sn a k e . The contact of th e C h ris tia n w ith the
h e re tic is as d an g ero u s as co n tact w ith th e v ip er or w ith th e in fected by th e
p lag u e74. H ere th e stro n g c o n tra s t is visible b etw e en h e re tic a l o u tcast a n d
orthodox C h ris tia n who is described as “a d efen d er of th e N icene fa ith a n d
as a tru e a d h e re n t of th e C atholic religion who confess t h a t A lm ighty God
a n d C h rist th e Son of God are One in n am e, God of God, L ig h t of L ight, who
does n o t vio late by den ial th e H oly S p irit w hich we hope for a n d receive from
th e S u p rem e A u th o r of th in g s; t h a t m a n who esteem s, w ith th e percep tio n of
in v io late fa ith , th e undiv id ed su b stan ce of th e in c o rru p t Trinity...”75.
Im p eria l co n stitu tio n s a g a in st p ag a n s w ere less h a r s h in th e v erb al an d
leg al co n tex t. T he range a n d in te n sity of th e in s u lts w ere not so larg e as in
th e case of th e heretics. In th e la te fo u rth c e n tu ry th e b e lie f in th e old
R om an gods w as not a crim e. A crim e w as only th e sacrifice offered to th e gods
an d p artic ip a tio n in som e tra d itio n a l cerem onies (like a u s p i c ia ) . The religious
policy to w ard s th e pag an s focused m ainly on th e places of cult, tem ples an d
sh rin es a n d an o th er m an ifestatio n s of p ag a n w orship. As M. S ta c h u ra says the
R om an law created th e category of the “q u iet p ag a n s” who lives in accordance
w ith th e law . However, as M . S alzm an points out, th e in te n tio n of th e to ta l
69 CTh. 16.5.11.
70 F otiniani were followers of the doctrine of Fotinus, bishop of Sirmium. A. Barzano
(ed.), Il cristianesimo nelle leggi..., p. 365; Codicis Theodosiani Liber Sextus Decimus, p. 43*,
note D.
71 The word of “venom” (venenum) is more appropriate because of the association with
snake or viper.
72 An extreme Arian sect. A. Barzano (ed.), Il cristianesimo nelle leggi..., p. 365; Codicis
Theodosiani Liber Sextus Decimus, p. 44*, note A.
73 CTh. 16.5.6.1 (Fotinianae labis contaminatio, A rriani sacrilegii venenum, Eunom ianae
perfidiae crimen et nefanda m onstruosis nom inibus auctorum prodigia sectarum ab ipso etiam
aboleantur a u d itu ).
74 As for the rare comparison of the heretics with venomous snakes and vipers see
M. Stachura, Wrogowie porządku rzymskiego..., pp. 77, 132-133.
75 CTh. 16.5.6.2 (Is autem Nicaenae adsertor fidei, catholicae religionis verus cultor accipiendus est, qui om nipotentem deum et C hristum filiu m dei uno nom ine confitetur, deum de deo,
lum en ex lum ine: qui spiritum sanctum , quem ex sum m o rerum parente speram us et accipimus,
negando non violat: apud quem intemeratae fidei sensu viget incorruptae trinitatis indivisa
substantia ...).
62
A d a m Św iętoń
conversion w as h id d e n b eh in d th e offensive la n g u a g e 76. A t th e b eg in n in g of
th e fo u rth c e n tu ry th e a u th o ritie s ’ policy w as re la tiv e ly m o d e ra te 77. In th e
course of y ea rs th e m ore d iscrim in ativ e ap p ro ach a p p e a re d - th e pag an s
w ere d e b a rre d from m i l i t i a a r m a t a a n d m i l i t i a c o h o r t a l i s ( p a l a t i n a ) , in th e
six th c e n tu ry th e y lost am ong o th e r t e s t a m e n t i a c t i o 78.
D esp ite th e fact th a t p ag a n s w ere n o t th e object of th e severe ag g res­
sion, th e legal lan g u ag e tre a te d th e m w ith som e contem pt. T he te rm p a g a n u s describes th e m a n who lives in th e countryside a n d it h a s pejorative
co n n o tatio n - in th e w orld of a n tiq u ity th e re w as a clea r opposition b etw een
to w n co m m u n ity a n d th e co u n try dw ellers. In th is context th e p a g a n u s who
lived on th e o u tsk irts of civilization w as considered as a n uncivilized sim p le­
ton. T he offensive c h a ra c te r of w ord of p a g a n u s is visible on th e social
background. In th e late fo u rth ce n tu ry tra d itio n a l R om an cults w ere still
su p p o rted to som e ex ten t by th e elite of th e R om an society, especially by
m em bers of sen a to ria l o rd er in Rome a n d p o te n t io r e s in th e w est of E m p ire79.
T he old w orship is described as s u p e rstitio n ( p a g a n a s u p e r s t i t i o ) - b u t
only w ith reference to th e p a g a n sacrifice a n d rite s, as in th e law of 320 AD
a n d of 323 AD80. By p ro m u lg atio n th is form er C o n sta n tin e d eb a rre d th e
h a r u s p i c e s from th e religious life of R om an. T his la tte r forbade to com pel th e
C h ris tia n s to perform ance of lu s tra l sacrifice - described h e re as r i t u s a lie n a e s u p e r s i t i o n i s 81. O nly som etim es te rm s u p e r s t i t i o re la te s in g en e ral to th e
p a g a n relig io ns82. F o r exam ple c o n stitu tio n of T heodosius I of 381 AD83
co n tain p h ra se “m ad a n d sacrilegious” ( v e s a n u s a c s a c r i l e g u s ) in o rd e r to
describe th e p a g a n who offer th e sacrifice to th e old gods, b u t th is is still less
76 M.R Salzman, The evidence for the conversion ... , p. 368; M. Stachura, Wrogowie porząd­
ku rzymskiego..., p. 191.
77 As for the policy of Constantine and his successors towards pagans see. T. D. Barnes,
C hristians and Pagans in the Reign o f Constantius, [in:] F. Vittinghoff, E. P. Meijering, W.H.C.
Frend and others (eds.), L ’Eglise et l’Em pire au IVe siècle, Genève 1989, p. 322f; R.M. Errington,
C onstantine and the Pagans, “Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies” 1988, no. 29.3, p. 309f.
78 A.H.M. Jones, The Later R om an Em pire 284-602. A social economic and adm inistrative
survey, Basil Blackwell, Oxford 1964, p. 938.
79 One of the most eminent representatives of paganism in the West was Symmachus. As
for the pagan senators see M. Piechocka-Kłos, Chrześcijanie i poganie. R ozkład sil w senacie
rzym skim pod koniec IV wieku, “Studia Warmińskie” 2013, no. 50, p. 285f. See also I. Fargnoli,
op. cit., p. 154; A.H.M. Jones, The Social B ackground o f the Struggle between P aganism and
Christianity, [in:] A. Momigliano (ed.), The Conflict between Paganism a n d C hristianity in the
Fourth Century, Clarendon Press, Oxford 1963, p. 18f; idem, The Later R om an Em pire 284­
602.. ., p. 938-943.
80 CTh. 9.16.1, CTh. 16.2.5.
81 As for the prohibition of the sacrifice which were treated as superstitio see also law of
Constantine promulgated in 341 AD (CTh. 16.10.2) moreover those of Theodosius (CTh.
16.10.12.2, 392 AD), Arcadius and Honorius (CTh. 16.10.18, 399 AD).
82 As in the law promulgated in 353 AD (CTh. 16.10.5), 395 AD (CTh. 2.8.22) 399 AD
(CTh. 16.10.16) and in 415 AD (CTh. 16.10.20).
83 CTh. 16.10.7.
Verbal aggression in the legal language o f the Late R om an Empire.
63
offensive th a n te rm f u r i o s u s u sed w ith reference to th e heretics. T he te rm of
h o s t i s f i d e i C h r i s t i a n a e ap p e a rs in th e c o n stitu tio n of V a le n tin ian III (445
AD) to w ard s M a n ich a ean s84 - th e y a re styled as ho stile to C h ristia n fa ith
a n d public o rd e r85.
C o n clu sio n s
S tu d y of M. S ta c h u ra on th e invective in th e la te a n tiq u ity show t h a t th e
v erb al ag g ressio n re la te d m ain ly to th e heretics. T hey w ere th e m ost con­
dem n ed social group in th e C h ris tia n R om an em p ire86. T he abusive la n g u ­
age w as u sed no t only to stig m a tiz e th e m as th e enem ies of th e public order,
b u t also to d istin g u ish th e m from th e C h ris tia n com m unity. By th e creatio n
of th e visible division into “good m en ” a n d “m a d m e n ” th e em perors trie d to
d isa rm th e d an g ero u s pow er of th e h e re tic a l doctrines. Im p eria l c o n stitu ­
tions w hich are devoted to th e religious issu es h av e cre a te d s a c r i l e g i u m as
a religious crim e, b u t also have divided th e R om an com m unity a n d have
assig n ed th e h eretics a n d ap o sta te s to th e place on th e o u ts k irts of th e
com m unity of “good m en ”. W hen T heodosius I o rd ered to expel h eretics and
th e ir m a d n e ss o u tsid e th e w alls of th e cities (CTh. 16.5.6.3, a n d CTh.
16.5.14), h e sym bolically rem oved “a n o th e r k in d of m en ” from th e civilized
com m unity. It m u st be re m em b ered t h a t h eresies ra ise d d isp u tes a n d q u a r­
rels w hich som etim es cau sed religious rebellions. In th is w ay th e h eresies
h av e u n d erm in e d th e u n ity of th e C h ristia n world. T h u s th e h a r s h and
offensive form s of com m unications are m ore u n d e rs ta n d a b le as th e only w ay
of dialogue w ith th e enem y w ithin.
S tr e sz c z e n ie
A gresja ję zy k o w a w tek sta ch a k tó w p ra w n ych z okresu późn ego
cesa rstw a rzym skiego n a p r zy k ła d z ie k o n stytu cji zachow anych
w 16 k sięd ze Codex Theodosianus
Słowa kluczowe: herezja, pogaństwo, Codex Theodosianus, późne cesarstwo rzymskie, wczesne
chrześcijaństwo.
C echą c h a ra k te ry s ty c z n ą późnego c e sa rstw a rzym skiego je s t se ria fu n ­
d am en ta ln y c h zm ian w obszarze polityki, ad m in istracji, ekonom ii i życia
społecznego. P rze m ia n y w życiu religijnym w zbudzały najw ięcej kontrow ersji
84 Nov. Val. 18. M. Stachura, Wrogowie porządku rzymskiego..., p. 83. It is interesting that
Manicheans are styled as pagans and their religion as pagan superstition (superstitio pag a n is ).
85 Nov. Val. 18 (inim ica publicae disciplinae et hostis fidei C hristianae ...).
86 M. Stachura, Wrogowie porządku rzymskiego..., p. 202, 205.
64
A d a m Św iętoń
i w sposób n ajb ard ziej isto tn y zm ieniły oblicze I m p e r i u m R o m a n u m . N a p ię­
cia i ta rc ia społeczne n a tle religijnym n asiliły się d rasty czn ie w m om encie,
gdy re lig ia ch rześc ijań sk a o siąg n ęła s ta tu s „państw ow ej” i zaczęła przyciągać
uw agę cesarsk iej władzy. Jed n o ść re lig ijn a stan o w iła dla rzym skich cesarzy
ch rześcijań sk ich isto tn y problem . W okresie pom iędzy IV a VI w. podjęli oni
szereg d ziała ń m ających n a celu u trz y m a n ie spójności ideologicznej dogm a­
tów relig ii ch rześcijańskiej. W iele w ydanych w ty m czasie regulacji praw nych
m iało c h a ra k te r dyskrym inacyjny, m .in. n a gru n cie p ra w a pryw atnego (np.
zak az sp o rz ąd za n ia te s ta m e n tu przez heretyków ) i publicznego (w tym k a r ­
nego - ja k sk lasyfikow anie h erezji jak o p rzestęp stw o s a c r i l e g i u m ) . P rzek az
w zm acn ian y był przez zastosow anie nacechow anych a g re sją sform ułow ań,
k tó re stygm atyzow ały zachow ania sprzeczne z w izją społeczeństw a rząd zo n e­
go przez je d y n ą praw d ziw ą religię. W niniejszym a rty k u le a u to r b a d a skalę
i in ten sy w n o ść ag resji językow ej w języ k u p ra w a w kontekście społecznym
i historycznym . A nalizie poddane zostały cesarsk ie kon sty tu cje zachow ane
w 16 księdze K odeksu Teodozjańskiego ze szczególnym uw zględnieniem ty tu ­
łu 5 (O h e r e t y k a c h ) i 10 (O p o g a n a c h , o f i a r a c h i ś w i ą t y n i a c h ) .