The Government Under Julian
Many of Constantius's courtiers were Julian's bitterest
enemies and could expect punishment from him, but several military leaders also resented
their influence. A military court was established with powers to arrest and try those
guilty of crimes during the previous reign. Among those condemned were the leaders of
Constantius's espionage network, such as the infamous Paul "the Chain," who were
responsible for many deaths, and the chamberlain, Eusebius. The dark side of the trial was
that Ursulus, a capable and fair-minded soldier, was condemned on trumped up charges. His
death was considered an unpardonable crime by many and Julian sought to shift blame from
himself to the court (Amm. 22.3). The trials were ended by late January 362.
The imperial court, which since the time of Diocletian had
grown to enormous proportions, was corrupt and marked by more luxury than distinction.
Julian's tastes were simple: he favored an open court with the emperor being accessible,
not hidden away. Ammianus relates (Amm. 22.4) that Julian sent for a barber to have
his hair trimmed and was astonished when the man showed up dressed so splendidly he was
taken for a treasury official. When questioned the barber revealed that he received the
daily rations of 20 men and 20 horses, a substantial salary and more money from bribes for
passing on petitions. Not long after, Julian met a similarly dressed cook. Thousands of
people who thought they had found a secure niche were dismissed. The army of eunuchs who
served the imperial family were dismissed en masse. Julian kept a personal staff of
17. Laws were enacted to control fraud and reject claims from those who had paid bribes
from having their money paid back. Another law limited the use of imperial vehicles for
non-official uses and allocated a fixed number of permits to provincial governors.
What kind of ruler did Julian want to become? A few of his
thoughts were recorded in a letter written to Themistius, who had been in the court off
Constantius and was one of Julian's teachers (253a - 267b), shortly after Julian arrived
in Constantinople. In the letter, the new emperor, quoting Aristotle, believed that a king
must be superior to his subjects in natural endowments, observe the laws and seek justice
(262a-b); an absolute monarchy is not in the nature of the world ass all men have the same
rights (261b). The ideal king would have to be a demi-god who can remove the brutish and
moral elements from his character to meet the demanding expectations of his position
(259b). For his part, Julian confessed he did not feel he had the training and talents to
administer the empire. He entrusted everything to God, adding that he would be free from
responsibility for his shortcomings (254b, 266 c-d).
It is wrong to believe that Julian sought to become a
democratic king. In spite of throwing off the trappings of an autocracy many of his later
actions are those of an autocrat. However, the ideal of justice and reward according to
capacity, the goal of Plato's philosopher-king, were Julian's but behind the directness
and simplicity of the man was the austere Platonic ruler (Amm. 22.9.7).
Restoration of Municipalities
A cornerstone of Julian's policy was to restore the polis
(a polis denoted a town and the surrounding rural area) as an autonomous political
and religious center. Early in 362, Julian issued edicts in an attempt to revive municipal
authority. Churches were ordered to restore land they had usurped with collected revenues
(Amm. 25.4.15; Lib. 13.43) and Julian returned land that had passed to the
State. Christian priests were summoned back to their curial seats to assume their
municipal duties; those who tried to escape were fined (ep. 39). Municipal officials were
exempt from making up taxes with their own money, unless they were wealthy merchants.
Another law required that all administrative duties incumbent upon a councilor must be
performed by them, which served to boost the morale of the curiales by giving
attention to their legislative function.
In April 362, Julian made the aurum coronarium a
voluntary contribution and canceled long-standing debts (Amm. 25.4.16; Lib.
16.19, 18.163). Bearing in mind the problem of depopulation he exempted all municipal
taxes from fathers who had 13 or more children, unless they chose to become a member of
the council. Council membership was extended to all who could bear the expense and not to
the social and professional classes; Julian believed it better to earn distinction instead
of inheriting it (108c-109). An injustice, however, was committed against those whose long
army service had previously earned them an exemption from municipal service when Julian
canceled the right (Amm. 22.93.12). But, of course, there were still people who
bought their way out of service with huge bribes (Lib. 48.17).
Religion
The 4th century was a time of religious frenzy
when people were obsessed with the divine and relations with the gods had to be kept in
constant order. For Julian, as it had been for the Tetrachs, Christianity was a threat
because by their non-compliance they placed the welfare of the state at risk and sought to
abandon the faith that had been the founding of classical civilization. Julian considered
Christianity a disease (ep. 41 & 58, 229d) and he referred to the members of
the faith as Galileans to deny their creed the claim of being universal. Among his
objections was that Christianity did not promote virtue by allowing its adherents simple
absolution for sins, even capital crimes (336a-b). Indeed, Constantine had waited until
his deathbed before being baptized to receive forgiveness for his numerous crimes. The
veneration of martyrs he saw as a morbid preoccupation with corpses.
Julian had been at pains to keep his pagan faith a secret,
even after he was proclaimed emperor he continued to observe Christian ceremonies. On the
march from Naissos to Constantinople he openly performed a sacrifice which hr recounted to
Maximus (ep. 8; Lib. 18.114) writing that the gods had commanded him to
restore their worship to its former purity. However, Julian had no intention of merely
restoring pagan religion but raising a challenge against the dominance of Christianity.
Has Julian enjoyed a reign as long as his cousin or uncle paganism might have been
established as a power to be reckoned with, a far greater threat to Christianity.
Among the reforms of early 362, Julian issued one or more
decrees aimed at restoring the ancient faith. Property that had been confiscated from
pagan temples was restored and public worship of all religious ceremonies, pagan as well
as Christian, were allowed. Subsidies that the imperial government had paid to Christian
clergy were withdrawn and shifted to pagan clergy and for the rebuilding of temples.
Julian also recalled Christian heretics from exile hopeful that their presence would cause
the Christian church to fragment.
Unlike Christianity, pagan religion did not perform
missionary work to seek converts. Julian sought to remedy this by creating pagan
monasteries and establish a systematic theology. Salutius, his military advisor in Gaul,
wrote a catechism, almost certainly with Julian's participation, called On the
Gods and the Cosmos that sought to establish religious unity, at least among the
educated. Pagan faith, however, had never been exclusive in its worship; cities and small
communities had charge of their own rites and festivals. Pagan monotheism, in Christian
terms, did not exist and was the recognition of a supreme god, as Helios was for Julian
(138c, 151a-d), with the other gods as his subordinates.
One of Julian's goals was to establish a pagan clergy with
the emperor at the apex as pontifex maximus. Regional high priests, ideally schooled in
Neoplatonic philosophy, would be given charge over major areas and were entitled to
appoint priests. Julian intended to write a guide for the priesthood but it seems he did
not accomplish this task, however, many of his principles appear in his letters. His
priests were charged to perform charitable works based on brotherhood "because every
man, whether he will or no, is akin to every other man" (291d). Priests were exhorted
to be generous to the poor, even to criminals, in the belief that philanthropy does not
hinder justice (290d-291a). In a letter to Arascius, the high priest of Galatia, (ep.
22) Julian is particularly clear in what expected from his priests. One fifth of the corn
and wine that was provided to Arasacius must be set aside for the poor. The pagan
priesthood in each city were to found orphanages and hostels that were open to all in
need, not just pagans. Julian was critical of the Christians for keeping their charity to
themselves (ep. 22.430d). These ideas may appear to be Christian in origin but the
Stoics had maintained a long and deeply felt tradition of philanthropy based on
brotherhood.
Pagan priests usually performed their duties part-time;
Julian endowed pagan temples to allow a priest to worship full-time. Days and times were
fixed for sacrifices and priests were urged to set an example for the community by
abstaining from frivolous company and habits, and cultivating the reading of edifying
books. They were to preach regularly in the temple and to avoid going to the theater.
Julian defined the function of the images of the gods to his priests as symbolic
representations only that allowed one to worship, but not being the god himself (293a-b,
294b-c). On the other hand, Julian associated the cult of the emperor with the traditional
gods as their sole representative on earth, upholding the notion of the divinity of the
emperor, something his model, Marcus Aurelius, would have disapproved of.
Always impatient, Julian had expected paganism to make
quicker gains against Christianity (ep. 22.429c). in the summer of 362, while
residing in Antioch, he issued a rescript concerning the character of the person city
councils ought to appoint as teachers. But the law was so vague it needed further
explanation by an additional edict (ep. 36). This law, in no uncertain terms,
forbade Christians to teach classical literature for the reason that Christians should not
teach what they do not believe. The literature of Greek antiquity was cherished by
society; its study was intended to form a student's character and the ability to express
oneself in a classical frame of reference. Anyone who wished to pursue a career in public
affairs or gain social distinction needed such an education. For believers of Hellenism,
writings such as those of Homer and Hesiod, were divinely inspired by the gods, so it was
contrary to allow Christians to teach this sacred literature.
The law forced Christian teachers to abandon their
professions, although Julian made an exception with Prohairesios, who he knew, but who
refused the dispensation. Christian students, of course, could attend the lectures of
pagan teachers, giving no choice to a youth who wished to pursue a career in law or the
civil service. The edit was well-timed as Julian understood that Christians had not
established an educational system of their own. Perhaps the scope of the law went further
than teachers of literature to include other professions as the edict was considered
inhumane by pagans (Amm. 22.10.7), as well as Christian. Whatever the full
implications of this edit were for Julian's contemporaries, for modern historians, the
passage of time has blurred its impact.
Julian's idea that Homer and Plato could not be appreciated
unless they were thought of as sacred was eventually accepted by the Christian church.
Homer, Plato and Aristotle, the main influences of intellectual life for the eastern
empire, were given a place as saints in the kingdom of Christ.
Antioch
Julian arrived at Antioch to prepare his campaign against
the Persians amid the celebration of a festival of Adonis, who adherents wailed and
shrieked in mourning. It was ill-omened timing and proved to be a portent. Julian had
expected a demonstration of support as he had befriended the city prior to his residence
(365d, 367d-368a), notably by canceling a large debt the city had incurred and he intended
to make the city the capital (367d; Lib. 15.52-53). At first, he was treated with
respect but after a series of unfortunate incidents Julian became the subject of lampoons
and hatred.
A corn shortage had plagued the city during 362 and Julian
gave his attention to the problem. The Antiochene Senate was reluctant to assist the
emperor (Amm. 22.13.4; Lib. 18.195) and probably were not in a position to
cooperate (Amm. 22.14.2). Angered by the inaction, Julian fixed a maximum price for
corn and ordered 40,000 measures be delivered from the stores of neighboring towns (369a).
But when the grain arrived, as did a subsequent amount of wheat from Julian's own supply,
it was quickly bought up and hoarded by speculators(369b). Frustrated in his efforts to
help Julian received little more than blame.
Among the cult sites he wished restored was the temple of
Apollo at Daphne, near Antioch, and gave his uncle Julian the task of bringing the temple
back to its former splendor (ep. 29). He was, however, horrified when he arrived at
the temple to celebrate the god's festival and saw instead of rich sacrifices, such as a
bull, a lone priest who offered a goose from his own house (361d-362b). Julian went to the
Senate with his complaints and received no satisfaction. Upon his inquires as to why
Apollo had not produced any prophecies he received a reply that the proximity of the body
of St. Babylas, who was buried in a church built in front of the temple by Julian's
brother Gallus, had polluted the temple. Promptly, Julian ordered the body removed to
another site but during the process several Christians made a demonstration of their
hatred for the emperor. Julian lost his temper. Several of the demonstrators were arrested
and tortured, perhaps hoping to be martyred; but once Julian had cooled down he released
everyone. Days later the temple with its 700 year old statue by Bryaxis burned to the
ground (346b-c). The Christians were suspected of starting the fire but nothing could be
proved. Julian believed Apollo had forsaken the city (363c).
This event marked a turning point in how Julian dealt with
the Christians. Although he did not express regret over the destruction of the temple
(Libanius wrote an oration over the sad event (ep. 58.400c)) his former toleration was
gone. When the city of Nisibis in Mesopotamia complained about Persian attacks Julian
replied that the city must first give up their Christianity. Shortly after this, Julian
issued an edict prohibiting funerals during the day (ep. 56), the time when
Christian funerals were held. It was considered an ill omen to pagans to meet a funeral
procession and was pollution to those who had sanctified themselves for worship.
Julian conducted many sacrifices at Antioch, generally
using bulls, which were greeted by the Antiochenes as an excuse for debauchery and proof
that the emperor was a boor and pleasure-killer. The sight of the temple altar and the
emperor covered in blood and gore was capable of engendering feelings of disgust among
pagans as well as Christians. The Antiochenes criticized his personal appearance, making
fun of his beard; Julian responded by writing his Misopogon or, Beard-Hater
(337a-371c), a satire in which Julian expresses his indignation. In this work, Julian
contrasts the Antiochenes , with their self-indulgent ways (359c-d), to his brave Celts,
who knew him as a wise and just ruler (360c). But Julian presents an ideal image of the
Celts, one not shared by Ammianus who thought they were brutes (Amm. 22.12.6-7).
Relations with the city became bad enough for Julian to refuse to see a delegation from
the Senate and Libanius barely managed to patch up a partial concord. Julian's feelings
about the city are summed up by his comment that: "…the city is of one mind with
respect to me-for some of you are ungrateful and the others whom I fed are
ungrateful…" (370b).
The Persian War
Diocletian inflicted a serious defeat on the Persians in
297 leading to 40 years of peace between the two empires. But in the last years of
Constantine I, a new king, Shapur II, resumed hostilities. With the death of his father,
Constantius II inherited the conflict and spent much of his time in the east conducting
inconclusive campaigns. The tide turned in 359, when, after a long siege, the fortress of
Amida fell to the Persians (Amm. 18.7-10, 19.1-8) followed by the loss of several
more fortresses during the next year (Amm. 20.6-7). Julian was faced with an
unstable frontier in the east that needed his attention, but instead of seeking to
stabilize the area he decided to conquer Persia.
The heroic exploits of Alexander the Great had the
influence of legend during late antiquity; to the Neoplatonists he was the
philosopher-king of Plato. Julian had criticized the king for his arrogance in claiming he
was not the son of Philip II, but of Ammon (45d-46a). However, Alexander as conqueror of
Persia answered his emotional needs as a model, as for his uncle before him (Lib.
17.17). Church writers would claim that Maximus, who had accompanied Julian, had convinced
him he was Alexander reincarnated. From the beginning, Julian expected success and saw the
entire Persian empire falling into his hands (Lib. 18.282). Solidi issued before the
campaign depict Julian dragging a captive by the hair, celebrating the valor of the Roman
army.
Julian marched with his army from Antioch on March 5, 363,
following the Euphrates, supported by a fleet of ships loaded with supplies. To create a
diversion, Julian sent his cousin, Procopius, with 30,000 troops, almost half his army, to
march north along the Tigris and rejoin the main force in Assyria. But the rendezvous
never happened.
During the Persian campaign Julian pushed religious fervor
to the extreme by sacrificing so many bulls, sometimes a hundred at a time, that Christian
writers commented had Julian been victorious he would have run out of animals to
sacrifice. All of this was to ensure a successful outcome of the expedition but the
sacrifices were probably opposed by half the army while many others cared little for the
knowledge of divination Julian was seeking but enjoyed the glut of meat and drink (Amm.
22.12.6-7). The closer links Julian sought with the supernatural failed him as it became
apparent that the gods did not look favorably on his enterprise. Yet his obsession
continued. On the march, a letter was received from Salutius begging Julian not to
continue fell on deaf ears (Amm. 23.5.4-5). Julian's hubris grew until he
was dominated by one idea: the defeat of Persia.
The campaign began with the successful capture of several
key fortresses which only fueled Julian's overconfidence, so he disregarded the opinions
of his generals (Amm. 24.6.5, 24.7.3-4). The Etruscan soothsayers that accompanied
the expedition warned of many ill omens and advised the emperor to continue no further:
they were ignored (Amm. 23.5.9). Julian's greatest triumph came near the Persian
capital, Ctesiphon, on May 29, when the Persians suffered a terrible defeat with the loss
of 2,500 men compared to 70 Romans (Amm. 24.6). Julian planned to sacrifice 10
bulls to Mars following his victory but 9 died before they could be led to the altar and
the tenth escaped; when captured and finally sacrificed its liver showed ominous signs.
Angrily, in defiance of the god, Julian declared he would never again sacrifice to Mars (Amm.
24.6.16).
After a council of war, the decision was made not to
besiege the Persian capital but to break off the campaign and return home by way of the
Euphrates (Amm. 24.7). Had Julian at last paid attention to the gods or had
something else occurred? Were there Persian spies in the ranks or had the army been led
into a trap? Whatever the reason, Julian ordered the supply boats to be burned as they
could not travel upstream with any speed and the retreat began. The Persian's carried out
a scorched earth policy, destroying anything of use to the Romans; their army followed
launching sudden attacks.
Julian received a warning from his Etruscan soothsayers
that he should avoid fighting, (Amm. 25.2.7-8) but on June 26, during another
Persian attack, Julian rode into battle without his breastplate to rally his soldiers. His
bodyguards dispersed in the confusion. Suddenly, the emperor was pierced in the side by a
cavalry spear. He was brought to his tent where he lived for several hours attended by
Maximus and Priscus and did not name a successor (Amm. 25.3; Lib.
18.268-273). On the eve of his death, the Genius of the Romans appeared to Julian, veiled,
and passed sorrowfully through his tent (Amm. 25.2.3); at once he knew what fate
awaited (Amm. 25.2.4) and died in the belief that the heavens and stars called him
to union (Amm. 25.3.22). News of the emperor's death caused celebration in Antioch,
while the Christians saw in it the vengeance of Heaven. Julian was buried at Tarsus (Lib.
18.306), his tomb facing that of Maximinus Daia (Libanius maintained that he should have
been buried next to Plato at the Academy). A Greek couplet was inscribed upon it:
Here lies Julian after the strong-flowing Tigris,
both a good king and a brave soldier
Who killed Julian? The question has provoked many
hypotheses. It has been accepted by the majority of modern writers that a Persian struck
the fatal blow. Ammianus simply states that the hand that threw the spear was unknown (Amm.
25.3.6). Libanius at first accepted that a Persian was responsible (Lib. 17.32) but
modified his opinion later that the murderer was a Taiene, one of the Saracens hired by
the Christians to fight for the Roman side. In evidence Libanius offers the fact that
Julian was the only soldier killed on the Roman side (Lib. 24.17) and no reward was
offered to the killer by the Persians, nor did anyone step forward to claim a prize from
the king, for whom this would have been a great service (Lib. 24.8,18). Libanius
informs us that the Roman peace delegation was questioned by Shapur as to why they showed
no concern for avenging Julian (Lib. 24.20). Perhaps Julian's killed, if Persian,
also died in the battle. Who killed Julian can never be known for certain.
Libanius (Lib. 18.309) adds the following on Julian:
"And since I have made this mention of portraits, many
cities have set his (Julian's) in the temples of the gods, and before now people have
offered up prayers to him also, asking some blessing, and they have not been
disappointed."
To those who clung to the old beliefs Julian became a
martyred leader and as much a saint as any Christian, even capable of answering prayers.
Coinage
The coinage of Julian can be relegated to periods of his
reign by the appearance of his beard. As was related, above, the beard he had grown what a
student of philosophy was shaved on becoming Caesar, as required by Court protocol and
because a beard was associated with the practice of pagan religion. During the years he
was Caesar it was not possible for Julian to grow his beard, but neither could he after
being proclaimed Augustus. While negotiating with Constantius, Julian showed deference
toward his cousin that required him to remain clean shaven (280d, 285d). Hopes that there
could be dual Augusti is demonstrated with the reverse legend: VICTORIA DD NN AUGG
depicting a victory walking, holding a branch, Coins were also issued depicting Roma and
Constantinopolis with the legend GLORIA REIPVBLICAE.
When it became clear that Julian could not gain recognition
he issued coins depicting a soldier with trophy and kneeling figure with the legend:
VIRTVS EXERC GALL to honor his Gallic army. All of these transitional coins bear a
portrait of a beardless Julian. Only when he was sole Augustus and had proclaimed his
pagan faith did Julian grow his beard (December 361), and from this point his portraits
show him with one. It is possible to observe the growth of his beard, especially on the
coins of Antioch, from a short beard, to a longer, squared growth, until it was long
enough to be trimmed to a point (Amm. 25.4.22).
Among Julian's reforms of early 362 was the introduction of
two new coins: a reformed follis (AE1) which weighed approximately 8.20 grams and
contained 3 percent silver, and a smaller bronze coin (AE3) weighing 2.95 grams, showing a
helmeted emperor with spear and shield and vows on the reverse.
The AE1 is the most interesting and controversial of
Julian's coins. In his own day the coin was the subject of insult by the Antiochenes
(355d). The reverse depicts a bull with two stars above and the legend: SECVRITAS REIPUB.
The bull was early identified with the Apis bull by numismatists, including Harold
Mattingly, which was discovered inEgypt in 362 (Amm. 22.14.6). Ammianus noted that
the bull was sacred to the moon and distinguished by the presence of a crescent moon on
it's right side. The Apis bull had been depicted on many Roman provincial coins by several
emperors and is always shown with this distinguishing mark, along with a disk between its
horns and an altar before it. The practicality of depicting the Apis bull on a coin with
wide circulation must be questioned because the animal was only on regional interest.
Ammianus went through the trouble of explaining the significance of the bull which his
readers would not have understood.
Clearly, Julian's AE1 does not depict an Apis bull, not is
it a Mithraic bull, as the god is always depicted cutting the throat of the animal. J.P.C.
Kent challenged the Apis bull interpretation favoring a symbolic representation of a bull
guarding a herd, derived from a passage by Dio Chrosstom comparing a good emperor to a
bull. This idea would probably have had appealed to Julian, but does not explain the
presence of the two stars above the bull.
The stars suggest an astrological meaning. Julian's birth
can be theoretically place in May 332, in the astrological sign of Taurus. Astrology
enjoyed great popularity in Julian's time and the many astrological references in his
writings lead one to believe he had some knowledge of the subject. The two stars above the
bull can represent Hyades and Pleiades of the Taurian constellation. The best explanation
is that the bull is a symbolic representation of Julian, probably of his own choosing,
representing himself as the protector of the Roman empire, as the legend makes clear.
The mint of Arelate in Gaul produced coins that depart from
the usual reverse types of Julian's reign with the addition of an eagle. A single solidus
type, with a bearded portrait, was issued by the mint using the VIRTVS EXERC GALL legend,
but with the addition of an eagle to the right of the soldier. The eagle, being the bird
of Zeus, makes it clear that the god is giving a crown to the new emperor and is an
admission of the debt Julian owed to his Gallic army. Christians were shocked by the
public display of statues of Julian that were placed next to those of Jupiter, which
suggested that the god had presented the throne to the emperor (Soz. 5.17.3). The
eagle, bearing a wreath, also appears on the VOTA X silver reverse types and,
significantly, on the AE1 issues to the right of the bull. The inclusion of an eagle onthe
AE1 provides additioanl proof that the bull represents Julian symbolically being crowned.
Conclusion
Despite the hardships endured by Julian during his
captivity his character never deviated from nobility. His capacity for learning and his
courage in pursuing his aims far surpassed Julian's contemporaries and went beyond
personal gratification. He clearly knew the society he was governing; his reforms aimed at
the restoration of municipalities could have accomplished much is restoring the finances
of cities and devolve authority back to city councils. Although Julian was hostile toward
Christianity, which was equally returned, many Christian leaders, such as Augustine (City
of God 5.21) recognized and praised his talents. The poet Prudentius, although
condemning Julian's religious views, said of him: "Yet of all the emperors there was
one in my boyhood, I remember, a brave leader in arms, a lawgiver, famous for speech and
action, one who cared for his country's weal…".
With these observations must be added the shortcomings
which Ammianus recorded (25.4). Julian tended to dominate conversation with ceaseless
talking; he sought popularity and liked to be praised, even over trivial matters; he was
addicted to divination and was prey to superstition. At times, he acted contrary to the
ideals of justice, especially toward the Christians. But he was not a war-monger. Ammianus
held Constantine I responsible for the Persian war and believed Julian was trying to
retrieve the military situation in the East as he had done in Gaul.
With Julian's death his plans to restore pagan religion and his administrative reforms were doomed. A reign that had begun with optimism had ended with the foundering of the Persian expedition and the mysterious death of the emperor. Strictly viewed by historians Julian achieved nothing; but he entered the hearts and minds of people and, in spite of failure, was not forgotten. In fact, as centuries have passed his reputation, vilified by the Catholic church, has been rehabilitated and he enjoys a popularity based upon his personality and beliefs than on the unfinished goals of his reign.
© David A. Wend 1995
Notes
1 Browning,Robert, The Emperor Julian,(University of California Press,1976),p. 126.
2 Browning,Robert,op. cit.,p. 132.
3 Athanassiadi,Polymnia, Julian:An Intellectual Biography,(Routledge,1992),p. 85.
4 Browning,Robert,op. cit.,p. 166.
5 Athanassiadi,Polymnia,op. cit.,pp. 187-89.
6 Also, see Celsus, On the True Doctrine (7.62) where Celsus comments that only infants believe an image of a god is the actual god.
7 Athanassiadi,Polymnia,op. cit.,pp. 190-191.
8 Browning,Robert,op. cit.,pp. 168-173.
9 Athanassiadi,Polymnia,op. cit.,p. 124.
10 Athanassiadi,Polymnia,op. cit.,pp. 203-204.
11 Browning,Robert,op. cit.,p. 183.
12 MacMullen,Ramsay,op. cit.,pp. 40-41.
13 Athanassiadi,Polymnia,op. cit.,pp. 201-203.
14 See Libanius's Oration 15 written to Julian and Oration 16 to the Antiochenes on Julian's anger.
15 Browning,Robert,op. cit.,p. 189.
16 Athanassiadi,Polymnia,op. cit.,p. 193.
17 Kent,J.P.C.,Roman Coins,(London,1978),No. 690.
18 Browning,Robert,op. cit.,pp. 207-208.
19 Mattingly,Harold,Roman Coins,(London,1960),p. 240.
20 Kent,J.P.C.,"Notes on Some Fourth-Century Coin Types",Numismatic Chronicles 14 (1954),pp. 216-217.
21Gillard,Frank,op. cit.,p. 140.
22Gillard,Frank,op. cit.,p. 141.