Prayer and Spirituality in the Early Church

Poverty and Riches

Prayer and Spirituality

in the Early Church

Edited by Geoffrey D. Dunn, David Luckensmeyer, and Lawrence Cross

Volume 5 Poverty and Riches

Prayer and Spirituality in the Early Church: Poverty and Riches © Centre for Early Christian Studies 2009 First published in Australia in 2009 by: St Pauls Publications Society of St Paul 60-70 Broughton Road PO BOX 906 Strathfield NSW 2135 in association with the: Centre for Early Christian Studies Australian Catholic University PO Box 456 Virginia QLD 4014 Australia http://www.cecs.acu.edu.au All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, record-ing or by any information and storage system without permission in writing from the publishers. National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication entry: Prayer and spirituality in the early church. Vol. 5: Poverty and riches. Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Poverty – Religious aspects – Christianity. 2. Liturgics – History – Early church, ca. 30-600. 3. Prayer – Christianity – History – Early church, ca. 30-600. 4. Spirituality – History of doctrines – Early church, ca. 30-600. I. Cross, Lawrence, 1943-. II. Dunn, Geoffrey, 1962-. III. Luckensmeyer, David, 1974-. IV. Australian Catholic University. Centre for Early Christian Studies. 270.1 Printed and bound by: QUT Printing Services, Brisbane ISBN: 978 0 9752138 9 6 (v.5)

Contents Preface ix Abbreviations xv Section 1: New Testament William Loader 3

“Good news for the poor” and spirituality in the New Testament: a question of survival

James McLaren 37

Poverty and the world of Jesus Ian J. Elmer 51

More than charity: Paul’s collection for Jerusalem and the principle of reciprocity

Tiffany Hammer 65

Wealthy widows and female apostles: the economic and social status of women in early Roman Christianity

David C. Sim 75

Wealth and poverty in the Gospel of Matthew Section 2: The East Samuel Rubenson 91

Power and politics of poverty in early monasticism Helen Rhee 111

Wealth and poverty in Acts of Thomas Miyako Demura 119

Poverty and asceticism in Clement and Origen of Alexandria

Contents

vi

Anna M. Silvas 133 The emergence of Basil’s social doctrine: a chronological enquiry

Jun Suzuki† 177

A monk who does not talk about love towards God, and charity: reflections on the Evagrian theory of love and its application

Satoshi Toda 191

Pachomian monasticism and poverty Wonmo Suh 201

Ephrem the Syrian’s social critique Alan Cadwallader 215

The inversion of slavery: the ascetic and the archistrategos at Chonai Youhanna Nessim Youssef 237

Research on Coptic hymnography: Psalis of the days – Composition and date

Section 3: The West Angelo Di Berardino 249

“The poor must be supported by the wealth of the churches” (Codex Theodosianus 16.2.6)

Thomas Hunt 269

Grotesque representations of wealth and poverty in Prudentius and Jerome

Naoki Kamimura 283

The emergence of poverty and the poor in Augustine’s early works Kazuhiko Demura 299

Poverty in Augustine’s understanding of his monastic life Edward Morgan 307

Speech as communication, speech as salvation: conflicts in Augus-tine’s theology of language

Geoffrey D. Dunn 319

The care of the poor in Rome and Alaric’s sieges

Contents

vii

Section 4: Comparative Studies Pamela Bright 337

Wealth as a test of the community: reflections of Clement of Alexan-dria and Augustine of Hippo on wealth and communal solidarity

Damien Casey 349

In search of the preferential option for “the other” in Origen and Augustine

Barry M. Craig 361

Gathering angels of the souls of the poor? Luke 16:19-31 Indices 371

Preface

The present volume is the fruit of the fifth triennial international conference, Prayer and Spirituality in the Early Church, held at the St Patrick’s campus in Melbourne of Australian Catholic University from 9-12 January, 2008. It was held in conjunction with the annual conference of the Asia-Pacific Early Christian Studies Society (formerly Western Pacific Rim Patristics Society). Some thirty-six papers were presented, together with three keynote presen-tations from William Loader, Murdoch University, Samuel Rubenson, University of Lund, and Miyako Demura, Sendai University. The essays in this volume are a selection from those revised for publication in the light of comments received at the conference, further research by the authors, and the comments of the anonymous peer reviewers.

The theme of the conference was “Poverty and riches”. As the confer-ence convenor, Lawrence Cross, noted in his message to conference partici-pants there are more warnings about wealth in the New Testament than just about anything else. Christians today are confronted by questions about what they are to do with their own possessions if they wish truly to be a follower of Jesus and what they are to do about the poor. They are confronted by those questions not only within their own consciences but by their non-Christian fellow citizens who are curious about their practices or intrigued to know why they seem to fail to follow the gospel message.

Contemporary society has much to learn about the insights and practices of the Christians of the earliest centuries. Scholarship has recently turned more attention to this question. One thinks of Evelyn Patlagean’s work on poverty in the early Byzantine period, Peter Brown’s essays on how bishops promoted love of the poor, Michael De Vinne’s dissertation at Stanford on how bishops portrayed the poor, Susan Holman’s work on bishops and the poor in Cappadocia, her recent volume on wealth and poverty in early church and society, and Richard Finn’s investigation of almsgiving in early Christianity, to name but a few.1 At the same time there are collaborative

1 E. Patlagean, Pauvreté économique et pauvreté sociale à Byzance 4e-7e siècles (Paris 1977); P. Brown, Poverty and Leadership in the Later Roman Empire (Hanover, NH, and

Preface

x

research projects in Australia, Japan, and South Korea on this topic, and the conference was an opportunity for some of those results and new insights to be presented.

The essays in this volume consider the teachings of Jesus and the experiences of New Testament Christian communities in preserving, living, and transmitting those teachings, and then how succeeding Christian commu-nities over the next four or five centuries interpreted and applied the scrip-tural injunctions and examples to their ever-changing and diverse situations in all parts of the Mediterranean world. Within an eschatological framework how important was it to improve the material condition of the poor in this life? How much giving was demanded of a Christian? What did the rise of asceticism and the emergence of the voluntary poor mean and just how did the voluntary poor live out their poverty? What were the motives of those who gave to the poor and of their clerical leaders who urged them to give? These questions emerge again and again in the essays of this volume.

The volume is divided into four sections. The first concerns the New Testament and is comprised of five essays. William Loader addresses the apparent disparity between Jesus’ message of good news for the poor and the extent of poverty in the world today. With special reference to the Lukan Jesus, he concludes that good news for the poor very early lost its outward focus. Through marginalisation and different social circumstances, the good news shifted to one of prophetic hope where “the poor” are now members of Israel in need. James McLaren examines poverty and the world of Jesus by offering a critique of social models of conflict used for historical Jesus studies. He asserts that scholarship today misunderstands the canonical Gospels and the writings of Josephus by “looking for conflict” in a first-century Judean and Galilean setting, and seeks to correct this bias by introducing non-narrative sources like pottery fragments, coinage, and other archaeological evidence. Ian J. Elmer investigates the principle of reciprocity in terms of Paul’s collection for Jerusalem. He finds that while Paul may have had charitable motivations to pursue such a collection, benefactor-beneficiary relations came into play, whereby the apostle sought to use the collection as a way of maintaining a law-free mission to Gentiles and at the same time re-establishing a relationship with Jerusalem. Tiffany Hammer London 2002); M.J. De Vinne, “The advocacy of empty bellies: episcopal representation of the poor in the late Roman empire” (Ph.D. diss., Stanford 1995); S. Holman, The Hungry Are Dying: Beggars and Bishops in Roman Cappadocia (Oxford 2001); and, R. Finn, Almsgiving in the Later Roman Empire: Christian Promotion and Practice 313-450, OCM (Oxford 2006).

Preface

xi

explores the economic and social status of women in early Roman Christianity. In particular, she contextualises references to Phoebe and Junia in Romans 16 by examining gender roles in the Jewish, Christian, and wider communities. Finally, David C. Sim presents a nuanced interpretation of wealth and poverty in the Gospel of Matthew. Recent scholarship has argued for an affluent Matthean community but Sim is not convinced. Alternatively, he proposes that the Gospel’s references to wealth and material possessions are intended to warn a mixed socio-economic community against accumula-ting wealth, which is contrary to a life of discipleship and the will of God.

Samuel Rubenson’s essay is the first in Section 2, which considers issues relating to poverty and riches in the East. He considers the ascetic ideal in early desert monasticism and whether total renunciation was the reality the early literature would have us believe, concluding that there was conflict in some monastic communities because of monks of differing social back-grounds. Helen Rhee argues that Acts of Thomas present riches as that which prevents people from reaching true riches in heaven. Almsgiving is presented in the text as the way of acquiring this heavenly treasure, as an imitation of Christ himself. Miyako Demura contrasts the allegorical exegesis of the scriptures with regard to issues of poverty and wealth in the writings of Clement and Origen in Alexandria. Her insight is that the allegorising of what appears as strict commands in the gospel to embrace poverty, weakened them in such a way that the wealthy could still embrace Christianity, even though Clement utilised a Stoic moral philosophy and Origen a Pauline one. Special mention must be made of Anna Silvas’ contribution. She has included the first-ever English translation of two of Basil of Caesarea’s homilies on issues of wealth and poverty. We are delighted to make them available and hope that they will receive greater attention in future research. Sadly, Jun Suzuki died shortly after the conference and we are grateful to our Japanese colleagues who edited his presentation for publication. He investi-gated the relationship between love and charity in the writings of Evagrius of Pontus, finding that a concern for self rather than others was the key motiva-tion for acts of charity. In Satoshi Toda’s essay on poverty in Pachomian monasticism there is consideration of the idea of total renunciation and the reality of what was practised. There is a focus on the contrast between the early experience under Pachomius and that after his death. Wonmo Suh looks at the harsh social critique in the writings of Ephrem the Syrian, particularly against avarice and fraud, which can be found in both the rich and the poor. Ephrem advocated sharing of resources as the way to overcome this sin. Alan Cadwallader examines The Story of the Miracle of St. Michael of Chonai.

Preface

xii

The essay finds a contrast between the immaterial world of angels and the material world of humanity, with the former providing witness to the latter, with a special emphasis on the meaning of slavery. In the final essay of this section, Youhanna Nessim Youssef continues his research on the Coptic Psalis of the days. These hymns include material on self-denial as the fulfil-ment of the divine will.

Section 3 is devoted to western themes. Angelo Di Berardino investi-gates the changing exemptions from compulsory civic duties for clergy from the curial class throughout the fourth century. By considering the evidence in Codex Theodosianus he concludes that later restrictions on accepting clergy from this class meant that there was an increasing number of poor and poorly-educated clergy during this period. Thomas Hunt compares Pruden-tius’ account of the martyrdom of Lawrence with Jerome Ep. 30, in terms of the grotesque representation of the poor as the church’s true wealth and of a widow’s simple appearance as true beauty. Modern notions of the grotesque help appreciate the simultaneous existence of conflicting representations. Naoki Kamimura delves into the world of Augustine of Hippo’s social back-ground and his early writings to look at his understanding of poverty. The argument is made that poverty is a theological virtue akin to humility for Augustine, even more than it is a social reality, where the attention turns quickly from poverty to almsgiving. Kazuhiko Demura also examines Augustine in terms of his self-understanding of poverty. Using Confessiones he considers the kind of poverty of spirit Augustine required of those clerics who lived in his community. Edward Morgan’s paper explores Augustine’s use of language, particularly his contradictory statements about the pos-sibility of language as communication. For Augustine the solution lies in understanding speech as analogous to the incarnation of the Word. Geoffrey D. Dunn considers Alaric’s sieges of Rome between 408 and 410 and the impact this had on the city’s population, both rich and poor. In particular, he outlines the ways in which Rome’s bishop, Innocent I, responded to Rome’s needs in the aftermath of Alaric.

The final section contains essays that explore themes comparatively between East and West. Pamela Bright presents a comparison of Clement of Alexandria and Augustine of Hippo on the question of the challenges to notions of communal solidarity from the experiences people had of wealth and destitution. She observes Clement’s figurative understanding of self-dispossession and Augustine’s understanding of care for the poor within the context of an interpretation of the Genesis account of the days of creation. Damien Casey situates both Origen and Augustine within Levinas’ ethics of

Preface

xiii

the other. He notes that despite many other differences between these two early Christian writers, a plurality of readings of the scriptural injunction to care for others in both should not surprise us. Barry Craig argues that the parable of the rich man and Lazarus is not really a comparison between a rich man and a poor one but between two rich men: the unnamed man of the parable and Abraham. Using this insight he looks at the parable image of the angels leading Lazarus to Abraham’s bosom and the way it was incorporated into the liturgical tradition.

All of the essays in this volume were peer reviewed anonymously. We are grateful to those who generously reviewed those papers which were submitted for possible inclusion, and to the authors all of whom were willing to revise their contributions in the light of the reviewers’ helpful comments and observations.

We are also grateful to Bronwen Neil who cast her keen eye over a draft of this volume for inconsistencies we had not spotted, to Tom Buchanan who helped in the preparation of the index to the volume, to Dinah Joesoef for her administrative support, and finally to Pauline Allen, director of the Centre for Early Christian Studies, Australian Catholic University, for her support of the conference, the volume, and its editors. Brisbane, 1 July 2009 Geoffrey D. Dunn David Luckensmeyer Lawrence Cross

Abbreviations

AB Anchor Bible ABD Anchor Bible Dictionary ABR Australian Biblical Review Acts Thom. Acts of Thomas ACW Ancient Christian Writers Amb. Ambrose

De obitu Theod. De obitu Theodosii De sacr. De sacramentis

Ap. cons. Apostolic constitutions Apophteg. coll. alph. Apophthegmata collectio alphabetica Apophteg. coll. syst. Apophthegmata collectio systematica Ast. Asterius

Hom. Homilia Athan. Athanasius

Hist. Ar. Historia Arianorum Vita Ant. Vita Antonii

Aug. Augustine Con. acad. Contra academicos Con. Adim. Contra Adimantum Manichei discipulum Conf. Confessiones Con. Faust. Contra Faustum Manicheum De an. et or. De anima et eius origine De bono uid. De bono uiduitatis De cat. rud. De catechizandis rudibus De cui. Dei De ciuitate Dei De doc. chr. De doctrina christiana De dua. an. De duabus animabus De Gen. aud. Man. De Genesi aduersus Manicheos De mag. De magistro De mor. De moribus ecclesiae catholicae et de moribus Mani-

chaeorum De op. mon. De opera monachorum De ord. De ordine De serm. dom. De sermon domini in monte De trin. De trinitate De uera rel. De uera religione De util. cred. De utilitate credendi Enarr. Ps. Enarrationes in Psalmos

Abbreviations

xvi

Ep. Epistula Ex. Gal. Expositio epistula ad Galatas Quaest. euang. Quaestiones euangeliorum Reg. Regula Retr. Retractationes

AugStud Augustinian Studies Basil

De iud. De iudicio Dei Ep. Epistula Hom. dict. temp. fam. Homilia dicta tempore famis et siccitatis Hom. in diu. Homilia in diuites Hom. in illud Homilia in illud: Destruam horrea mea Hom. quod Deus Quod Deus non est auctor malorum Hom. super Ps. Homiliae super psalmos Reg. Regula

B. Bat. Baba Batra BETL Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium BHG Bibliotheca hagiographica graeca BMFD Byzantine Modern Foundation Documents BNTC Black’s New Testament Commentary Breu. Hipp. Breuiarum Hipponense Caes. Arl. Caesarius of Arles

Stat. uirg. Statuta sanctarum uirginum CBNTS Coniectanea Biblica New Testament Series CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly CCL Corpus christianorum, series latina CÉASA Collection des Études Augustiniennes Série Antiquité Cic. Cicero

Acad. Academica prior De sen. Cato Maior de senectute

1 Clem. 1 Clement 2 Clem. 2 Clement Clem. Alex. Clement of Alexandria

Paed. Paedagogus Quis Quis diues saluetur

Cod. Iust. Codex Iustinianus Cod. Theod. Codex Theodosianus Const. Porph. Constantine Porphyrogenitus

De them. De thematibus CSCO Corpus scriptorum christianorum orientalium CSEL Corpus scriptorium ecclesiasticorum latinorum Cyp. Cyprian

De oper. De opere et eleemosynis Did. Didache Diod. Sic. Diodorus Siculus DOP Dumbarton Oaks Papers

Abbreviations

xvii

ECS Early Christian Studies EKK Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen

Testament Epiph. Epiphanius

Pan. Panarion Eus. Eusebius

HE Historia ecclesiastica Vita Const. Vita Constantini

Evag. Evagrius Ad Eulog. Tractatus ad Eulogium Ad monach. Sententiae ad monachos Ad uir. Ad uriginem Ant. Antirrheticus De malign. cog. De malignis cogitationibus De oct. spr. mal. De octo spiritibus malitiae De orat. De oratione Gnost. Gnosticus Keph. gn. Kephalaia gnostica Paraen. ad monach. Paraenesis ad monachos Pract. Practicus Rerum monach. Rerum monachalium rationes Sch. in Prou. Scholia in Prouerbia Sch. in Ps. Scholia in Psalmos Sk. Skemmata Spirit. sent. Spiritales sententiae per alphabeticum dispositae

GCS Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten drei Jahrhunderte

Germ. Const. Germanus of Constantinople De uit. term. De uitae termino

Geront. Gerontius De Vita Mel. De Vita Melaniae

Gest. coll. Carth. Gesta conlationis Carthaginiensis GNO Gregorii Nysseni opera Greg. Naz. Gregory of Nazianzus

Ep. Epistula Or. Orationes xlv Test. Testamentum

Greg. Nys. Gregory of Nyssa Con. Eunom. Contra Eunomium Dial. de an. et res. Dialogus de anima et resurrection Ep. Epistula

Herm. Hermas Shep. Shepherd Vis. Vision

Herod. Herodotus Hist. Histories

Abbreviations

xviii

Iamb. Iamblichus De myst. De mysteriis

ICC International Critical Commentary Inn. Innocent I

Ep. Epistula INR Israel Numismatic Research JBL Journal of Biblical Literature JECS Journal of Early Christian Studies JEH Journal of Ecclesiastical History Jerm. Jerome

Adu. Iou. Aduersus Iouinianum Comm. in Hiezech. Commentarii in Hiezechielem Ep. Epistula

JHS Journal of Hellenic Studies John Chry. John Chrysostom

De Lazr. De Lazaro conciones 1-7 De sacer. De sacerdotio In ep. 2 ad Cor. In epistulam 2 ad Corinthios argumentum et homiliae

1-30 In Eutr. In Eutropium In Ioh. hom. In Iohannem homiliae 1-88 In Matt. hom. In Matthaeum homiliae 1-90

John Clim. John Climacus Scala Scala paradisi

John Dasasc. John of Damascus Hom. in nat. beat. Mar. Homilia in natiuitatem beatae uirginis Mariae

Jos. Josephus AJ Antiquitates iudaicae BJ Bellum iudaicum Con. Ap. Contra Apionem

JRS Journal of Roman Studies JSNT Journal for the Study of the New Testament JSNTSup Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supple-

ment Series JTS Journal of Theological Studies Just. Justinian

Dig. Digesta Justyn Martyr

Dial. Dialogus LCL Loeb Classical Library Lib. pont. Liber pontificalis Mark the deacon

Vita Porph. Vita Porphyrii Gazensis Mich. Chon. Michael Choniates

Ecom. Nic. Encomium Nicetae NBA Nuova Biblioteca Agostiniana

Abbreviations

xix

NETS New English Translation of the Septuagint NF neue Folge NHC Nag Hammadi codices NICNT New International Commentary on the New Testament NRSV New Revised Standard Version ns new series NTS New Testament Studies OCA Orientalia Christiana Analecta OCM Oxford Classical Monographs OECS Oxford Early Christian Studies OHM Oxford History Monographs Olymp. Olympiodorus Opt. Optatus

Con. Parm. Donat. Contra Parmenianum Donatistam OR Ordines romani Orig. Origen

Comm. in Ioh. Commentarii in Iohannem Comm. in Luc. Commentarii in Lucam Comm. in Matt. Commentarii in Matthaeum libri x-xvii Comm. in Tit. Commentarius in Titum Con. Cels. Contra Celsum De princ. De principiis Hom. in Ier. Homiliae in Ieremiam In ep. ad Rom. In epistulam Pauli ad Romanos libri xv In Gen. hom. In Genesim homiliae xvi In Matt. comm.. ser. Commentariorum series In Leu. hom. In Leuiticum homiliae xvi In Luc. hom. In Lucam homiliae xxxix In Num. hom. In Numeros homiliae xxviii

Oros. Orosius Hist. adu. pag. Historia aduersus paganos

Pach. Pachomius Reg. Regula

Pallad. Palladius Dial. Dialogus Hist. laus. Historia lausiaca

Paulinus the deacon Vita Ambr. Vita Ambrosii

PCBE Prosopographie chrétienne du Bas-Empire Pelag. Pelagius

Ep. ad Demet. Epistula ad Demetriadem PG Patrologia graeca Philo

De Abr. De Abrahamo De praem. De praemiis et poenis

Abbreviations

xx

De sacr. De sacrificiis Abelis et Caini De uit. cont. De uita contemplatiua

Philost. Philostrogius HE Historia ecclesiastica

PL Patrologia latina Plato

Phaed. Phaedrus Plaut. Plautus

Bacc. Bacchides Plot. Plotinus

Enn. Enneades PLRE Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire PO Patrologia orientalis Possid. Possidius

Vita Aug. Vita Augustini Procop. Procopius

B. Vand. Bellum Vandalicum Prosper Tiro

Chron. min. Chronica minora Prud. Prudentius

Pe. Peristephanon REAug Revue des Études Augustiniennes RechAug Recherches Augustiniennes Reg. eccl. Carthag. excerpta Regestri ecclesiae Carthaginensis excerpta RHE Revue d’Histoire Ecclésiastique SacPag Sacra Pagina SBLSym Society of Biblical Literature symposium Series SBT Studies in Biblical Theology SC Sources chrétiennes SCI Scripta Classical Israelica Scr. Syr. Scriptores Syri SEAug Studia Ephemerridis Augustinianum SNT Studien zum Neuen Testament SNTSMS Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series SNTW Studies of the New Testament and Its World SO Spiritualité Orientale Soc. Socrates

HE Historia ecclesiastica Soz. Sozomen

HE Historia ecclesiastica Stob. Stobaeus

Ecl. phy. et eth. Eclogarum physicarum et ethicae Symm. Symmachus

Rel. Relatio Tert. Tertullian

Adu. Marc. Aduersus Marcionem

Abbreviations

xxi

De idol. De idololatria De uirg. De uirginibus uelandis

Theod. Theodoret Ep. Epistula HE Historia ecclesiastica Interp. ad ep. Col. Interpretation in epistulam ad Colossenses

Theod. Stud. Theodore the Studite Antirh. Antirrhetici Ep. Epistula Orat. Oratio

Theoph. Theophanes Chron. Chronographica

TU Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der alt-christlichen Literatur.

Valentinian III Nou. Nouella

VC Vigiliae Christianae Victor Antiochenus

Frag. in Marc. Fragmanta in Marcum Vita Pach. Vita Pachomii Vita Theod. Vita Theodorii

WUNT Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testa-ment

Zos. Zosimus HN Historia noua

Geoffrey D. Dunn Australian Catholic University, Brisbane

The care of the poor in Rome and Alaric’s sieges1

When Alaric and his army captured Rome in August 410, an event unprece-dented since the Gauls took the city over eight-hundred years earlier, the shock felt throughout the Mediterranean world was profound and its signify-cance reflected upon in the literary evidence.2 As John Moorhead has written: “So there took place what has been seen as one of the most important happenings of late antiquity.”3 Indeed, Alan Cameron describes it as the event that spelled the doom of the western empire.4 On the other hand, Thomas Burns says that it was “an event of little military or policy-making consequence but one fraught with emotional, intellectual, and religious signi-ficance.”5 While the capture of Rome has to be seen in the context of the unfolding, volatile relationship between the Goths and the two halves of the Roman empire,6 here our interest primarily will be upon the impact this capture had not upon the political history of the late Roman empire in the West but with its impact upon the population of the city itself, especially in social and economic terms, as far as they can be discerned. My attention

1 Funding for this research was provided generously by the Australian Research Council. 2 See Livy 5.38-55, where the siege of 386 BC is remembered as an occasion where the nobility of the Roman character shone. E. Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, ch. 31 (London 1986, org. edn 1776-1788) vol. 4,83, compared the capture of Rome by Alaric with the siege of Rome by Hannibal in 211 BC. While this event brought fear and panic to those within the walls, it did not result in the capture of the city as did the sieges of 386 BC and AD 410. 3 J. Moorhead, The Roman Empire Divided, 400-700 (London 2001) 39. 4 A. Cameron, Claudian: Poetry and Propaganda at the Court of Honorius (Oxford 1970) 157. 5 T.S. Burns, Barbarians within the Gates of Rome: A Study of Roman Military Policy and the Barbarians, ca. 375-425 A.D. (Bloomington, IN, and Indianapolis, IN 1994) 188. 6 P. Heather, Goths and Romans 332-489, OHM (Oxford 1991) 216, argues that the capture of Rome was not part of Alaric’s plans and was in fact a sign of frustration and the Gothic failure to elicit a settlement with Honorius. On the sieges see P. Courcelle, Histoire littéraire des grandes invasions germaniques, CÉASA 19, 3rd edn (Paris 1964) 45-56. On eastern reactions to Alaric’s capture see W.E. Kaegi, Byzantium and the De-cline of Rome (Princeton, NJ 1968).

Geoffrey D. Dunn

320

shall be turned particularly to what our literary sources, both Christian and non-Christian, tell us about the plight of the urban poor in the light of Alaric’s sieges of Rome. First siege It is the sixth-century Byzantine historian Zosimus who, through his use of Olympiodorus, who wrote sometime after Alaric, provides us with the most detail about the events concerning the Goths in Rome. It is well known that Zosimus attempted to provide an explanation for Rome’s sudden decline to mirror Polybius’ explanation for its meteoric rise to world domination, and that the sack of Rome is the climax of his story of Rome’s largely self-in-flicted ruin.7

In 408, several months after the assassination of Stilicho (the magister utriusque militiae of Vandal descent,8 who had been entrusted by Theodosius as guardian of the emperor Honorius, and was also the latter’s father-in-law and adoptive brother-in-law), Alaric moved threateningly towards Rome.9 He was the leader of a mobile Gothic people, who had been seeking better integration into the empire for over a decade, and had been pursuing a policy of being both an imperial agent and an enemy. He moved towards Rome because his services were not rewarded sufficiently. Stilicho’s promises to

7 Zos., HN 1.1.1; F. Paschoud, Zosime. Histoire nouvelle, t. 1: Livres I et II, Collection des Universités de France (Paris 2000) 6; 1.57.1; Kaegi, Byzantium, 99-145; W. Goffart, “Zosimus, the first historian of Rome’s fall”, American Historical Review 76 (1971) 412-421; and R.T. Ridley, Zosimus, Byzantina Australiensis 2 (Sydney 1982) xi. D. Bohrbacher, The Historians of Late Antiquity (London and New York 2002) 77, notes that the sack of Rome comes at the mid-point of Olympiodorus’ narrative and that for him the event was a low point, but one from which the West had recovered. 8 Jerm., Ep. 123.16.2; CSEL 56/1,93; and Oros., Hist. adu. pag. 7.38.1; CSEL 5,542. 9 On the relationship between Alaric and Stilicho in particular see E. Demougeot, La formation de l’Europe et les invasions barbares. De l’avènement de Dioclétien (284) à l’occupation germanique de l’Empire romain d’Occident (début du VIe siècle), t. 2: Le Ve siècle, Collection Historique (Paris 1979) 451-455; J.M. O’Flynn, Generalissimos of the Western Roman Empire (Edmonton 1983) 14-42; J.H.W.G. Liebeschuetz, Barbarians and Bishops: Army, Church, and State in the Age of Arcadius and Chrysostom (Oxford 1990) 48-85; Burns, Barbarians Within the Gates, 183-223; J. Matthews, Western Aristocracies and Imperial Court AD 364-425, 2nd edn (Oxford 1998) 273-283; Heather, Goths and Romans, 208-213; idem, The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians (Oxford 2006) 216-222; Cameron, Claudian, 156-188; and J. Curran, Pagan City and Christian Capital: Rome in the Fourth Century, OCM (Oxford 2000) 304-305.

The care of the poor in Rome and Alaric’s sieges

321

Alaric early in 408, which included the payment of 4,000 pounds of gold,10 were not renewed by Olympius, the magister officiorum, the man who now dominated Honorius,11 prompting the march on the old capital around No-vember of 408.

Zosimus informs us that not only did the Senate decide to kill Serena, Stilicho’s widow and the emperor’s cousin and adoptive sister, for fear she would betray Rome to Alaric,12 but that the Goths encircled the city and blocked the Tiber. Famine brought about severe food rationing, to be fol-lowed by disease when the bodies of the dead could not be buried.13 While Zosimus reports that cannibalism was considered, fragments of Olympio-dorus and Procopius state that the inhabitants of Rome did resort to this repugnant option.14 It is also Zosimus who conveys the story of Laeta, the

10 Zos., HN 5.29.9; F. Paschoud, Zosime. Histoire nouvelle, t. 3, 1re partie: Livre V, Collection des Universités de France (Paris 2003) 44. Curran, Pagan City, 307, mis-takenly speaks of Alaric besieging Rome at this time in spring 408, when he was actually in Noricum. By his reckoning the siege of November 408 was the second, not the first. 11 Zos., HN 5.36.1-3; Paschoud 3/1,53-54. Matthews, Western Aristocracies, 284-286, considers the confiscations of the property of Stilicho’s supporters carried out by Olympius. This provides a context for the raising of ransom money for Alaric to lift his sieges. On Olympius see J.R. Martindale, The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, vol. 2: A.D. 395-527 (Cambridge 1980) (= PLRE 2) 801-802 (Olympius 2). 12 Zos., HN 5.38.1; Paschoud 3/1,56. A. Demandt and G. Brummer, “Der Prozess gegen Serena im Jahre 408 n. Chr.”, Historia 26 (1977) 489, suggest that Serena’s attempts to help Melania and Pinianus liquidate their assets werewhat earned the Senate’s wrath. On Serena see A.H.M. Jones, J.R. Martindale, and J. Morris, The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, vol. 1: A.D. 260-395 (Cambridge 1971) (= PLRE 1) 824; and C. Pietri and L. Pietri (eds), Prosopographie chrétienne du Bas-Empire, vol. 2: Prosopographie de l’Italie chrétienne (313-604), 2 vols (Rome 1999-2000) (= PCBE 2) 2028-2029 (Serena 1). 13 Zos., HN 5.39.1-3; Paschoud 3/1,57-58. Soz., HE 9.6.3; GCS NF 4,397-398, mentions the famine and pestilence and desertion of many slaves to Alaric, but says nothing about cannibalism, which could, of course, have been more a topos in other sources. 14 Olymp., frag. 7.1; R.C. Blockley, The Fragmentary Classicising Historians of the Later Roman Empire: Eunapius, Olympiodorus, Priscus and Malchus, vol. 2: Text, Translation and Historiographical Notes, ARCA Classical and Medieval Texts, Papers and Mono-graphs 10 (Liverpool 1983) 159. Procop., B. Vand. 1.2.27; J. Havry, Procopii Caesarien-sis Opera Omnia, vol. 1: De bellis libri I-IV, Bibliotheca Scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana (Leipzig 1905) 315, seems to be referring to what took place in August 410 rather than November 408. Burns, Barbarians within the Gates, 233-234, suggests that Zosimus thought the charge of cannibalism was an allegation against paganism and therefore wanted to downplay any truth to it.

Geoffrey D. Dunn

322

widow of the emperor Gratian, and her mother Tisamena, who shared their provisions with many in the city, thereby saving them from starvation.15

Of course Zosimus cannot omit his moralising: when Roman negotia-tions for a settlement with Alaric to lift the siege broke down because of his excessive demands and their threats of military defiance, the Romans are said to have realised that the fact that no one had come to help them was the result of their abandonment of their ancestral customs, i.e., their non-Christian religious rituals.16 However, a shaky peace was negotiated between the Romans and Alaric, with the latter allowing the besieged inhabitants a three-day market, permission to bring food into the city from the harbour, and access through designated city gates, in exchange for 5,000 pounds of gold, and large quantities of silver, silk, skins, pepper, and hostages. How-ever, it was to be a deal the emperor would fail to ratify fully.17 It seems that the new regime in Ravenna was too interested in settling old scores to be swayed by news of the number of dead in Rome and deal seriously with the situation.18

Our interest is with the conditions endured by those trapped within the city. What are we to make of the evidence presented by Zosimus about the impact of this first siege upon conditions in Rome? Of course, he or his sources might have conflated accounts from the several sieges that were to occur, but it would seem that even such a brief siege, which could not have lasted a month, was enough to cripple Rome. One could hazard a guess that the city, with such a large population, simply did not have the capacity to store as much food as would be needed to outlast a siege of any length. A city Rome’s size needed new produce coming through its port constantly. At the same time, the wealthy must have been able to store provisions sufficient in volume that their distribution to those in need was able to sustain a great many through this crisis. Other wealthy families who were not so generous and who had a similar capacity for personal food storage must have endured the crisis relatively unscathed, unlike the bulk of the population.

15 Zos., HN 5.39.4; Paschoud 3/1,58. On Tisamena see PLRE 1,916; and PCBE 2,2206. On Laeta see PLRE 1,492. 16 Zos., HN 5.40; Paschoud 3/1,59-60. 17 Zos., HN 5.41.4 – 5.42.2; Paschoud, 3/1,61-63; 5.44.1; Paschoud 3/1,65. Liebeschuetz, Barbarians and Bishops, 68-70, notes that there is no mention of the granting of land, something which features in Orosius’ account. 18 Zos., HN 5.44; Paschoud 3/1,65. A. Gillett, “Rome, Ravenna, and the last western emperors”, Papers of the British School at Rome 69 (2001) 141, argues that Honorius’ relocation to Ravenna in 408, and not his previous extended visits, should be taken as the definitive move.

The care of the poor in Rome and Alaric’s sieges

323

What emerges from this evidence in Zosimus is that we are not presented with anything specific about the group whom Parkin calls the structural or endemic poor (those unable to work and sustain themselves), nor even the conjunctural or epidemic poor (unskilled labour who lived a subsistence lifestyle), although both these groups would have been included, but about the occasional or episodic poor, those who normally were financially viable but who could be hurt in a crisis.19 This was certainly a crisis of immense magnitude for the city of Rome and the vast majority of its population must have been reduced to levels of desperation and deprivation. What was worthy of comment was the fact that those not normally depen-dent upon charity now were.

Gratian’s devotion to his Christianity is well known and it is perhaps reasonable to conclude that his wife shared his faith, but whether Laeta acted out of an aristocratic noblesse oblige or was motivated by gospel principles of care for the poor Zosimus, not surprisingly, does not say. If she had already been engaged in almsgiving in the years prior to this, then what Zosimus notes is most likely an indication that the scale of her almsgiving was extended during the crisis to include those not normally recipients. In terms of the conditions within the city Sozomen reports that even before Alaric appeared on the scene, the luxury, debauchery and injustice towards locals and strangers alike by some (obviously the rich) warranted divine chastisement, and that Alaric was the unwilling agent of God’s punish-ment.20 Of course, such economic inequalities are present in every society in every age, and so Sozomen’s words simply remind us that it never takes much to exacerbate the already precarious existence endured by the poor. They also remind us that while some might have been doing what they could for those in need, many were not.

Other aristocrats did not behave like Laeta. Melania the younger, famous for her asceticism and almsgiving, together with her husband Pinianus and mother Albina, left Rome about this time, despite the impression from Gerontius that their departure was in 410,21 rather than stay and help those in need. Political realities forced them to leave. They sought to sell their Roman and Italian properties. Maybe their decision to leave was partly prompted by the fall of Stilicho and Serena in 408, with whom they might have been

19 A.R. Parkin, “Poverty in the early Roman empire: ancient and modern conceptions and constructs”, PhD diss. (Cambridge 2001) 27-30. 20 Soz., HE 9.6.4; CGS NF 4,398. 21 Geront., Vita Mel. 19; SC 90,164. The activities of Pompeianus, presumably in the time after they left Rome, would rule out their departure being in 410.

Geoffrey D. Dunn

324

identified rather too closely.22 Perhaps this association is why Pompeianus, the urban prefect, attempted to confiscate their city property, for we are told that the practice was rife after Stilicho’s fall.23 Matthews and Clark suggest, more plausibly, that Pompeianus could have attempted to confiscate the property of Melania and Pinianus after they left Rome, as part of the attempt to raise the money needed to pay the ransom to Alaric, even more than as a reprisal against their support of Serena.24 Curran suggests that it could have been done in an effort to provide emergency supplies for the city, although their initial attempts to sell predated the emergency.25 Harries suggests that Melania and Pinianus found little support from their peers in resisting Pompeianus because their attempts to sell their property and use the proceeds for almsgiving would have outraged aristocratic sensibilities.26 Certainly, whatever ransom would be paid to Alaric would limit the extent to which Rome could meet the emergency needs of its population.

The ransom demanded by Alaric was a difficulty, Zosimus moralises, because either the wealthy were concealing their assets or because the em-peror’s greed had reduced the city to such poverty that the money could only

22 D. Gorce, Vie de Sainte Mélanie, SC 90 (Paris 1962) 165. On Melania see PLRE 1,593 (Melania 2); and PCBE 2,1483-1490 (Melania 2). On Pinianus see PLRE 1,702 (Pinianus 2); and PCBE 2,1798-1802 (Pinianus 2). On Albina see PLRE 1,33 (Albina 2); and PCBE 2,75-77 (Albina 2). 23 Zos., HN 5.35.4; Paschoud 3/1,52; 5.45.3; Paschoud 3/1,66; and Cod. Theod. 5.16.31; Th. Mommsen and P. Krüger (eds), Codex Theodosianus, vol. 1/2: Theodosiani libri xvi cum Constitutionibus Sirmondianis (Hildersheim 1990) 236; 9.42.20-21; Mommsen and Krüger 516. The laws show this practice was not new. On Pompeianus see A. Chastagnol, La Préfecture urbaine à Rome sous le Bas-Empire, Publications de la Faculté des Lettres et Sciences humaines d’Alger 34 (Paris 1960) 447; idem, Les fastes de la Préfecture de Rome au Bas-Empire, Études Prosopographiques 2 (Paris 1962) 265-266; PCBE 2, 1810-1811 (Pompeianus 1); and PLRE 2,897-898 (Pompeianus 2). 24 Matthews, Western Aristocracies, 290 n. 5; and E.A. Clark, The Life of Melania the Younger: Introduction, Translation, and Commentary, Studies in Women and Religion 14 (Lewiston, NY 1984) 106-107. Clark suggests Pompeianus was Christian and not pagan, contrary to the evidence of Geront., Vita Mel. 19; SC 90,166. 25 Curran, Pagan City, 307. 26 J. Harries, “‘Treasure in heaven’: property and inheritance among senators of late Rome”, in E.M. Craik (ed.), Marriage and Property (Aberdeen 1984) 67-68. I am suggesting that to see the attempt to sell the property simply as a means to raise money for almsgiving is too simplistic a reading of a complex situation. It might also have been connected with their willingness to help meet ransom demands from Alaric. Harries’ point perhaps could be expressed more in terms that the more that was raised from this couple the less other rich families would have had to contribute. Further, if they were seen as collaborators with Stilicho, there was even less reason to raise a voice in protest.

The care of the poor in Rome and Alaric’s sieges

325

be raised by looting temple decorations.27 Pompeianus is of interest to us because Gerontius reports that he was killed by the unruly urban mob during a food riot.28 This little piece of information helps illustrate the plight of the Roman populace brought about by Alaric’s campaign. Indeed, shortage of food brought about by disruptions to the importation of grain and the pos-sibility or reality of rioting in its wake had been a feature of urban life in Rome on occasion in the past century. Ammianus mentions the food riots of 359.29 From Symmachus, when he had been urban prefect in 384, we hear of the threat of rioting when the food shipment was delayed.30 Second siege A second embassy of Romans to Ravenna (among whom was the Roman bishop, Innocent), some skirmishes with Alaric, and the overthrow of Olympius in Ravenna in 409 saw new negotiations with the Gothic leader. While it was agreed to pay him an annual income, the offer of a recognised Roman military command was withdrawn by Honorius.31 In his anger Alaric threatened to besiege Rome a second time, but instead offered the emperor even more moderate terms than before, such was his desire not to harm the empire but to be incorporated into it fully. When even these terms were rejected in Ravenna he did march on Rome in November 409.32 This time he captured the port and seized its provisions, making the city agree promptly to accept his terms, which included making the urban prefect, Priscus Attalus, a puppet emperor in the city.33 If there is any truth to Procopius’ story that Alaric put three hundred young Gothic men into the city, it would be best dated to this time of the second siege. One must be suspicious of his story 27 Zos., HN 5.41.5-7; Paschoud 3/1,62-63. 28 Geront., Vita Mel. 19; SC 90,166. 29 Ammianus, 19.10; Ammien Marcellin. Histoire, t. 2: Livres VXII-XIX, Collection des Universités de France (Paris 1970) 146-147. 30 Symm., Rel. 18; R.H. Barrow, Prefect and Emperor: The Relationes of Symmachus A.D. 384 (Oxford 1973) 98-99. On Symmachus see PLRE 1,865-870 (Symmachus 4); and PCBE 2,2142-2143 (Symmachus 1). 31 Zos., HN 5.45-48; Paschoud 3/1,65-71; and Soz., HE 9.7-8; GCS NF 4,398-401. 32 Zos., HN 5.49 – 6.1; Paschoud 3/1.71-74; and F. Paschoud, Zosime. Histoire nouvelle, t. 3, 2e partie: Livre VI & Index général, Collection des Universités de France (Paris 2003) 4. 33 Philost., HE 12.3; GCS 23,141-142; and Olymp., frag. 14; Blockley, Fragmentary Classicising Historians, 173. On Attalus see PLRE 2,180-181 (Attalus 2); and Chastag-nol, La Préfecture urbaine, 266-268.

Geoffrey D. Dunn

326

that it happened just before or during the (final) siege and that their mission was to open the gates of the city to allow his army in.34 If the story has any veracity, perhaps they were simply part of Alaric’s plan to integrate his people into the empire.

Given the lack of imperial support for Rome, many in the city were credited with welcoming this development with Attalus, except for members of the Anician family, who were claimed by Zosimus to control most of the wealth of the city.35 Curran imagines that the leading member of the family at this time, Proba, the widow of Petronius Probus, was viewed with suspicion because of her non-traditional ascetical practice of having a community of virgins in her house.36 I am not convinced that this is the most significant reason, if indeed Zosimus is to be believed on this point, as such a practice was not entirely rare, nor did it threaten the traditional aristocratic management of property all that much. It could more believably have been that the family remained loyal to Honorius and did not put their wealth behind the new regime under Attalus, thereby earning the ire of those in the city who were more sycophantic. If that is the case then it makes Procopius’ story that it was Proba who would let Alaric into the city in August 410 all the more incredible, in the true sense of that word.37 Yet, he records a motive for such an action that is plausible: she wanted the suffering and hunger of the urban population, which had reduced them to cannibalism, to end. One need not agree with Matthews and Curran that Procopius was expressing the same kind of anti-Anician sentiment as would Zosimus, for the emphasis in the former is on her humanitarianism, not any treachery in betraying the city.38 Further, it is just possible that Procopius’ story relates to Proba’s role

34 Procop., B. Vand. 1.2.14-24; Havry 1,313-314. Further, Procop., B. Vand. 1.2.28; Havry 1,316, describes the installation of Attalus as puppet emperor as having taken place after Alaric captured the city. For a negative assessment about the historical value of Pro-copius on the fall of Rome see W. Goffart, Barbarians and Romans A.D. 418-584: The Techniques of Accommodation (Princeton, NJ 1980) 66. 35 Zos., HN 6.6-7; Paschoud 3/2,9-11. 36 Curran, Pagan City, 309. On Proba see PLRE 1,732-733 (Proba 3); and PCBE 2,1831-1833 (Proba 2). On Proba’s community see Jerm., Ep. 130.7; CSEL 56,185-186, who described her as a woman of “universal charity”; and Aug., Ep. 130.16.30; NBA 22,106-108. Her care for this community would continue during her years away from Rome after fleeing in 410. 37 Procop., B. Vand. 1.2.27; Havry 1,315. 38 J. Matthews, “Olympiodorus of Thebes and the history of the west (A.D. 407-425)”, JRS 60 (1970) 93; and Curran, Pagan City, 309. For further discussion on Proba and Alaric’s capture of Rome see G.D. Dunn, “Anicius Hermogenianus Olybrius”, in C. Deroux (ed.), Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History XIV, Collection Latomus

The care of the poor in Rome and Alaric’s sieges

327

in bringing Alaric’s second siege in November 409 (rather than the third one in August 410) to an end.39 It is Sozomen who says that Alaric captured Rome through treachery, although he mentions no names.40 One need not conclude that Procopius was anti-Anician.

One can imagine that Alaric’s efforts to get his puppet to secure Africa for the new regime, an attempt which Attalus bungled, were in part because he realised how vulnerable Rome would be if he could not guarantee it an ongoing source of food. Starving Rome of its vital African food supply is precisely what Heraclianus, Honorius’ loyal comes Africae, did.41 Corn and oil disappeared from Rome both because of the embargo and profiteering, according to Zosimus, and cannibalism was again mentioned as an option for those left without food.42 Sozomen also mentions cannibalism, at least in terms of a suspicion that it occurred, and the fact that without corn people had to eat chestnuts.43 In Bethlehem, Jerome too would come to hear of cannibalism in Rome at this time, and he stated that famine had a greater impact on the people than the actual fall of the city.44 The strangulation of the city’s supplies first by Alaric then by Heraclianus in quick succession must have had a dramatic impact upon living conditions in the old capital. By about July of 410 Alaric removed Attalus from his imperial position.45 With Alaric heading to Ravenna to negotiate once again with Honorius, Zosimus’ narrative ends. Third siege Alaric lay siege to the city for a third time after further negotiation with Ravenna proved impossible and on 24 August 410 it fell to him.46 For details 315 (Brussels 2008) 429-444, although I would modify my view that Procopius was not being critical of Proba at all. 39 In this case, the Anicians, seeing not fresh negotiations between Honorius and Alaric but the installation of Attalus, could have then opposed this development, as described by Zosimus. 40 Soz., HE 9.9.4; GCS NF 4,401. 41 On Heraclianus see PLRE 2,539-540 (Heraclianus 3). 42 Zos., HN 6.11; Paschoud 3/2,13-14. 43 Soz., HE 9.8.8; GCS NF 4,400. 44 Jerm., Ep. 127.12; CSEL 56/1,154. 45 Zos., HN 6.12; Paschoud 3/2,14-15. 46 For the date see Prosper Tiro, Chron. min. 1240; T. Mommsen, Chronica Minora saec. IV, V, VI, VII, vol. 1, MGHAA 9 (Berlin 1892) 466; and Theoph., Chron. AM 5903; C. De Boor, Theophanis Chronographia, vol. 1 (Hildsheim and New York 1980) 80,20-23.

Geoffrey D. Dunn

328

of Alaric’s forces in the city we have to rely upon the ecclesiastical his-torians. All Socrates tells us is that his men pillaged the city, burnt many structures, plundered money and valuables for themselves, and put many leading senators to death.47 Sozomen goes as far as to say that Alaric permit-ted his army to take as much plunder as they were able from homes, but ordered that the basilica of St Peter be spared and be available as a place of sanctuary.48 In a movie-like moment, inserted to personalise and make com-prehensible what is otherwise too epic, he relates the story of how a bar-barian soldier’s thirst for rape was quenched by the heroic resolve of a Roman wife, such that he ended up conducting her to the safety of St Peter’s and provided six gold coins for her support.49

Orosius adds St Paul’s to St Peter’s as a place of refuge and that Alaric’s instructions were to take valuables but spare lives. However, Gallia Placidia, the emperor’s sister, was seized as a hostage and married to Athaulfus, one of Alaric’s relatives.50 Orosius too has a personalised moment where a Gothic soldier encounters an elderly Christian virgin in a church who is prepared to surrender to him the gold and silver liturgical vessels from St Peter’s basilica, which seem to have been entrusted to her for safekeeping. We are told that he sought instruction from Alaric, who ordered that the vessels, the virgins, and other Christians could return to the basilica un-harmed. Many non-Christians joined the procession in order to escape.51 Of course, all this fits into Orosius’ moral perspective that Rome’s humiliation was due to its dependence on the barbarian Stilicho and the activity of Rome’s pagan population, but that the destruction was not worse was because of God’s mercy towards its Christian element.52 Augustine too noted how many Christians had found refuge in churches and such was his surprise at how many non-Christians had not been punished for the wickedness of their situation that he was motivated to write De ciuitate Dei in order to wrestle with the mysteries of God’s dealing with the world.53

47 Soc., HE 7.10.4; GCS NF 1,355. 48 Soz., HE 9.9.4; GCS NF 4,401. 49 Soz., HE 9.10; GCS NF 4,401-402. 50 Oros., Hist. adu. pag. 7.40.2; CSEL 5,549; and Olymp., frag. 20.1-3, 22.1-3, 24; Block-ley, Fragmentary Classicising Historians, 183-189. 51 Oros., Hist. adu. pag. 7.39.3-10; CSEL 5,545-547. 52 Oros., Hist. adu. pag. 7.37.8-11; CSEL 5,539-540. See Jerm., Ep. 123.16; CSEL 56/1,93 for a similar criticism of Stilicho. 53 Aug., De ciu. Dei 2.2; NBA 5/1,98.

The care of the poor in Rome and Alaric’s sieges

329

On the other hand, Jerome blamed the capture of Rome for the death of Marcella, Pammachius, and many others.54 As Proba and other members of the Anician family fled Rome for the safety of the sea while it went up in smoke, her son Olybrius died.55 In his letter to Principia commemorating Marcella, Jerome described the dead bodies in Rome being food for carrion and how Alaric’s soldiers, refusing to believe that Marcella could be without treasure for looting, living in the house she did, attacked her. She was beaten until her Christian resolve in the face of hunger and violence moved them to take her to St Paul’s. She died a few months later from her injuries.56 While the basilicas of the two apostles might have been spared, many other churches were not, according to Jerome.57 There is much rhetorical exag-geration in Jerome’s accounts, but even so one ought to believe that a good deal of physical violence and death was associated with the looting by Alaric’s soldiers, no matter what his orders.

Heather describes Alaric’s capture of Rome as “one of the most civilized sacks of a city ever witnessed”.58 Perhaps a little more realistic is Kulikow-ski’s assessment that the three days of looting of the city was quite a blow to Rome’s fortunes.59 Yet, we know very little about the impact of this event upon the city itself. Orosius informs us that to listen to the Romans speak one would never know that anything had taken place, the visible signs of fire damage being the only testimony.60 Indeed, while a fragment of Olympio-dorus argues that Rome was already recovering, it must be remembered that this was said about 414, and Caecina Decius Aginatius Albinus, the urban prefect, while noting the increased population of the city, actually was reporting on how the city was not coping with increased demands on its limited food supplies.61 Rutilius Claudius Namatianus, urban prefect in 414, the predecessor of Albinus, was someone who must have known the impact on Rome first-hand. Yet his De reditu suo, written in 416, while it indicates

54 Jerm., Comm. in Hiezech., 1.pref.; CCL 75,3. On Marcella see PLRE 1,542-543 (Marcella 2); and PCBE 2,1357-1362 (Marcella 1). On Pammachius see PLRE 1,663; and PCBE 2, 1576-1581. 55 Jerm., Ep. 130.7; CSEL 56/1,183-184. 56 Jerm., Ep. 127.13-14; CSEL 56/1,155-156. 57 Jerm., Ep. 128.5; CSEL 56/1,161. 58 Heather, The Fall of the Roman Empire, 227. 59 M. Kulikowski, Rome’s Gothic Wars: From the Third Century to Alaric, Key Conflicts in Classical Antiquity (Cambridge 2007) 177. 60 Oros., Hist. adu. pag. 7.40.1; CSEL 5,548-549. 61 Olymp., frag. 25; Blockley, Fragmentary Classicising Historians, 189. On Albinus see PLRE 2,50-51 (Albinus 7); and Chastagnol, La Préfecture urbaine, 273-275.

Geoffrey D. Dunn

330

that Gaul has suffered devastation, gives no indication that Rome has suf-fered in any way.62 Bertrand Lançon points to the epigraphic evidence for the fact that restoration work continued in Rome until the end of Honorius’ reign.63 Augustine and Jerome tell us of the psychological impact and significance of the event as perceived by the rest of the Mediterranean world, or at least by intellectual Christians such as themselves.64

While Jerome mentions the fact that the naked and hungry die on the doorsteps of others (presumably the rich), this is in reference to their every-day situation, even though the comment is placed in the context of Rome’s destruction.65 The suggestion here must be that their suffering was intensified by the sieges. While Pelagius could write of the rich and poor sharing in the same fear, what we find in Jerome is him turning his attention to the fate of the wealthy.66 They were the ones able to flee Rome and move around the Mediterranean in search of safety, in many cases on their own properties in the provinces, even to Bethlehem where Jerome lived.67 It stunned Jerome to see the rich and powerful reduced to poverty and need. Their exile from the old capital was more humiliation than someone of their status ought to endure.68 Yet their poverty must have been relative. Deme-trias, the granddaughter of Proba, even in exile in Africa, still possessed necklaces, pearls and gems, which she could renounce to embrace a life of virginal asceticism. Her mother and grandmother were able to give her the dowry that would have gone to her husband in order that she could sustain her life of asceticism.69 Proba could do this because she was selling off other property (and selling it to the church, Jerome noted bitingly).70 Indeed, she

62 On Namatianus see PLRE 2,770-771; and Chastognol, La Préfecture urbaine, 271-273. 63 B. Lançon, Rome in Late Antiquity: Everyday Life and Urban Change, AD 312-609, trans. A. Nevill, Eng. edn (Edinburgh 2000) 39. See CIL 6.1718, 1703 (= ILS 5715), 37128; and Cod. Theod. 14.4.10; Mommsen and Krüger 782-783. 64 Besides other references elsewhere in this paper see Jerm., Ep. 126.2; CSEL 56/1,144; and Aug., Serm. 81.8-9; NBA 30/1,606-610; 105.9.12 – 105.10.13; NBA 30/2,296-300. On Augustine’s attitude see J.-C. Fredouille, “Les Sermons d’Augustin sur la chute de Rome”, in G. Madec (ed.), Augustin prédicateur (395-411). Actes du Colloque Interna-tional de Chantilly (5-7 sept. 1996), CÉASA 159 (Paris 1998) 439-448. 65 Jerm., Ep. 128.5; CSEL 56/1,161. 66 Pelag., Ep. ad Demet. 30; PL 30,45. 67 Jerm., Comm. in Hiezech., 3.pref.; CCL 75,91; 7.pref., CCL 75,277; and idem, Ep. 130.4; CSEL 56/1,179. 68 Jerm., Ep. 130.5; CSEL 56/1,180. 69 Jerm., Ep. 130.5; CSEL 56/1,180; 130.7; CSEL 56/1,182. On Demetrias see PLRE 2,351-352. 70 Jerm., Ep. 130.7; CSEL 56/1,183.

The care of the poor in Rome and Alaric’s sieges

331

still had the resources to buy the freedom of many in her household whom, rather than being welcomed as refugees, Heraclianus had sold into slavery.71 Augustine too could comment upon Proba’s continued wealth while she was in Africa.72

In this the Anician women were in the same situation as Melania and Pinianus in Africa, who were able to live on their own property near Thagaste, which in fact was larger than the town itself.73 The attempt to force Pinianus to be ordained reveals that he was still a person of wealth.74 Augus-tine could report that the Roman refugees in Africa objected to his spiritual interpretation of the power of the martyrs to protect.75 So Jerome’s picture of the destitution of the wealthy needs a degree of tempering.

As for those left in Rome without the means to escape we hear next to nothing. How those who managed to survive did so, we are not told. With so many wealthy Christians who were inclined to almsgiving having fled the city, the plight of the poor must have been magnified. In fact, the only thing we know comes from a letter written by Innocent, the Roman bishop of the time, written I believe in 413, to Marcianus, bishop of Naissus. In it he mentions how he had established himself in Ravenna to petition the emperor directly because of the never-ending needs of the Roman people.76 Innocent had been in Ravenna in August 410,77 yet we need not conclude that he continued to reside in Ravenna for some time thereafter, which is the basis for the suggestion of others that Ep. 16 had to be written in 409 or 410.78 If

71 Jerm., Ep. 130.7; CSEL 56/1,184-185. Aug., De ciu. Dei 2.2; NBA 5/1,96, mentions how he sought to bring solace to such women. 72 Aug., Ep. 130.1.1; NBA 22,72-74. On Augustine and Proba see G.D. Dunn, “The elements of ascetical widowhood: Augustine’s De uiduitatis and Epistula 130”, in W. Mayer, P. Allen, and L. Cross (eds), Prayer and Spirituality in the Early Church, vol. 4: The Spiritual Life (Strathfield, NSW 2006) 247-256. 73 Geront., Vita Mel. 21; SC 90,172. 74 Aug., Epp. 125.2; NBA 22,12-14; 126.7; NBA 22,30. See S. Lancel, St. Augustine, trans. A. Nevill, Eng. edn (London 2002) 312-314; and P. Brown, Augustine of Hippo: A Biography, 2nd edn (Berkeley and Los Angeles 2000) 286-294. 75 Aug., Serm. 105.9.12; NBA 30/2,296; 296.6; NBA 33,328. 76 Inn. I, Ep. 16; PL 20,519: “Verum nunc in Ravennati urbe mihi constituto, propter Romani populi necessitates creberrimas…” On the dating of the letter see G.D. Dunn, “The letter of Innocent I to Marcianus of Naissus” (forthcoming). 77 Oros., Hist. adu. pag. 7.39.2; CSEL 5,545. Jerm., Ep. 127.10; CSEL 56/1,153, did not mention where Innocent was in August 410. 78 For those who date Ep. 16 to 409 or 410 see P. Jaffé, Regesta Pontificum Romanorum, Bd 1: A S. Pietro ad a. MCXLIII, rev. F. Kaltenbrunner, 2nd edn (Leipzig 1885) 46; E. Caspar, Geschichte des Papsttums von den Anfängen bis zur Höhe der Weltherrschaft,

Geoffrey D. Dunn

332

the suggested dating of the letter is correct, we may conclude that the suffer-ing experienced by the Roman population was lengthy and therefore severe, which the length of time it took to carry out restoration work in Rome would suggest. We may surmise also that help from Ravenna had not been ade-quate. Did Innocent’s efforts prompt Honorius to make a brief visit to Rome in August 414 in connection with Rome’s restoration?79 Interestingly, in only one of his other surviving letters did Innocent mention Rome’s experience, and that was in a letter to Probus, most likely another member of the Anician family.80 While the letter provides information about the abduc-tion of Roman women, it tells us nothing else of relevance.

Caspar and Green suggest that some of the aristocrats who fled Rome criticised Innocent for his absence from the city during its capture.81 How-ever, there is no evidence of this. Conclusion Yet, just as we obtain our first insight into conditions in the city in the aftermath of Alaric’s final siege we must bring this paper to a conclusion. Our evidence simply comes to an end. As is most often the case in human history, the spotlight is drawn only to the rich and the powerful. What the urban poor experienced is painted with only the broadest of brush strokes.

Bd. 1: Römische Kirche und Imperium Romanum (Tübingen 1930) 312 n. 4; E. Demougeot, “A propos des interventions du pape Innocent Ier dans la politique séculiere”, Revue Historique 212 (1954) 32; J. Gaudemet, L’Église dans l’Empire romain (IVe-Ve siècles), Histoire du Droit et des Institutions de l’Église en Occident 3 (Paris 1958) 120; and H.E.J. Cowdrey, “The dissemination of St. Augustine’s doctrine of holy orders during the later patristic age”, JTS ns 20 (1969) 465. Further, I believe that Ep. 13; PL 20,515-517, is Innocent’s first letter to Rufus and must predate the letter to Rufus mentioned in Ep. 16. 79 Cod. Theod. 16.5.55; SC 497,232-234. See Gillett, “Rome, Ravenna”, 141. R.W. Burgess, “The ninth consulship of Honorius, A.D. 411 and 412”, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 65 (1986) 215, notes that 414 was Honorius’ vicennalia but that, unlike 404, he did not hold the consulship that year but in 415. If the situation in Rome remained bad enough at the start of 414, perhaps Honorius delayed celebrations of the vicennalia until later in the year, although the length of time in Rome (Honorius was in Ravenna on 8 August and 17 September – Cod. Theod. 13.5.38; Mommsen and Krüger 756-757) would seem to be too short for any significant celebration. 80 Inn. I, Ep. 36; PL 20,602-603. 81 Caspar, Geschichte des Papsttums, 299; and M.R. Green, “Pope Innocent I: the church of Rome in the early fifth century”, PhD diss. (Oxford 1973) 12-13.

The care of the poor in Rome and Alaric’s sieges

333

Their voices remain silent and their situation neglected. It would be fair to say that Alaric contributed to the economic downward spiral from which Rome would take many centuries to recover. Famine and disease brought about by the sieges led to death and no doubt to a dramatic increase in the number of the destitute in the city. While someone like Demetrias would return to Rome eventually, some of the other wealthy who fled might never have and even if they did, things would never be the same. Further barbarian incursions throughout Europe would undermine their income base. We may conjecture that without the financial contribution of the rich to mitigate the impact of poverty, the fate of the urban poor in Rome only got worse. The Roman church under Innocent did what it could for the inhabitants of the old capital, but for whatever reason this is not something about which its bishop has left us much preserved evidence. Indeed, with the church acting as a conduit between the almsgiving of the rich and the needy, the evaporation of its income meant that the church’s efforts must have been restricted.82 Alaric’s sieges of the old capital certainly had a dramatic if under-reported impact upon the poor of Rome.

82 One would like to know if the gifts Innocent presented to the basilica of Gervasius and Protasius (now S. Vitale), bequeathed by Vestina, mentioned in Lib. pont. 42.4-6; L. Duchesne, Le Liber Pontificalis. Texte, introduction et commentaire, t. 1 (Paris 1955) 220-222, occurred before or after Alaric’s sieges. On this church see H. Brandenberg, Ancient Churches of Rome from the Fourth to the Seventh Century: The Dawn of Christian Architecture in the West, trans. A. Kropp, Bibliothèque de l’antiquité tardive 8 (Turnhout 2005) 153-155.