|capital punishment||either death or loss of citizenship and exile (according to the glossary in Pharr).|
|compulsory public service||(functio, munus, munia, necessitas, officium). As an integral part of the taxation system, the government imposed upon the people the burden of performing certain public services without remuneration, but ordinary tax payments were often called by this name (munera pecuniaria), since they were the most essential of the compulsory public services. The burden of these compulsory services fell most heavily on the middle and lower classes. Some of these services, such as that of various offices in the municipality, were called “honors.” Thus in every municipality the leading citizens were appointed to membership in the municipal council as decurions, and they were compelled to serve their municipalities and the central government in numerous official capacities, at great personal expense and inconvenience, and often to the complete ruin of their fortunes. The various landholdings were subject to the payment of special services, payments which the land-holders usually imposed on their tenants, though some of these services, such as the collection of recruits for the army and recruit taxes were performed by the landholders themselves. Other compulsory services of property were the free quartering of soldiers and other members of the imperial service on householders, and the furnishing of various supplies, such as wood, lumber, sand, and other building materials. In addition, services and supplies were requisitioned for the maintenance of the public post and for services in connection with the transport of troops and supplies for the army. Especially burdensome were the menial and physical compulsory services, such as limeburning, charcoal burning, and breadmaking. In addition, the lower classes must furnish labor in the State armories, in the mines and quarries, in the construction and repair of public buildings, highways and bridges, and in a vast number of menial tasks that were performed for the socialized State. (Pharr, p. 577).
See Elliott, T.G. “The Tax Exemptions Granted to Clerics by Constantine and Constantius II.” Phoenix 32, no. 4 (Winter 1978): 326-36.
|Life of Constantine||The authenticity of many of Constantine’s laws in found in the Life of Constantine is questionable, especially the laws supposedly passed against paganism. The Life of Constantine was not a purely historical work, but a work praising and admiring the emperor from a Christian perspective. All records of anti-pagan legislation by Constantine are found in the Life of Constantine, leading many to question the veracity of such reports.
Scott Bradbury (see below) argues that anti-pagan laws were passed, but not expected to be enforced. Rather, they served as an ideal or ethical law. He gives examples of this type of law, and shows that anti-pagan legislation was only cautiously and partly enforced as late as 398. He shows how references in Theodosian code 16.10.2 and Libanius’ autobiography suggest that such laws were passed but not enforced.
Others (such as Curran below) have argued that anti-pagan legislation was never passed, and such records by Eusebius only reflect the emperor’s personal inclinations. Unfrequented temples may have been torn down to build churches, and such incidences were reinterpreted by Eusebius in light of Constantine’s personal detest for pagan sacrifices.
Scott Bradbury, “Constantine and the Problem of Anti-Pagan Legislation in the Fourth Century.” Classical Philology 89, no. 2 (April 1994): 120-39.
John Curran, Pagan City and Christian Capital (Oxford 2000), chapter 5, “The Legal Standing of the Ancient Cults in Rome,” esp. pp. 169-81.
A.H.M. Jones, “Notes of the Genuineness of the Constantinian Documents in Eusebius’ Life of Constantine,” The Journal of Ecclesiastical History 5 (1954), pp. 197-200.
|on Constantine’s declarations at Nicaea||Recorded in:Eusebius, VC 3.12;
Rufinus, H.e. 10.2;
Socrates, H.e. 1.8;
Sozomen, H.e. 1.17.19;
Theodoret H.e. 1.7.12;
Gelasius, H.e. 2.7.39-41 and 2.8.3;
Cassiodorus, H.e. 2.2.2 and 2.5.7;
Barhadbesabba Arabaia, History (PO 23.207);
Isidorus Mercator, Decr. Coll.;
Gregorius Presbyter, De Conc. Nic. Prim. These are all explained and translated in Coleman-Norton, Roman State and Christian Church (London: SPCK, 1966) pp. 127-35
|Passion of Maximian and Isaac||For English translation, see Maureen A. Tiley, Donatist Martyr Stories: The Church in Conflict in Roman North Africa, Translated Texts for Historians, vol. 24 (Liverpool 1996), pp. 61-75|
|Eusebius of Vercelli, opera:||Eusebius Vercellensis: Opera quae supersunt, V. Bulhart, ed. in Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, vol. 9 (Turnhout: Brepols, 1957).|
No Responses yet