political aim; by desacralizing the games and ceremonies attendant on the public cults,
Constantius was attempting to find a way for pagans and Christians to continue
participating in these activities, united behind one emperor.
Unity was the justification, too, for Constantius’ attempts to put an end to reli-
gious dissent. In this regard, Constantius, like Constantine, appears mostly concerned
with religious dissent within the Christian communities of the empire. Constantius’
energies were largely focused on resolving a controversy that had arisen under his
father’s rule; the presbyter Arius had been excommunicated for denying Christ was
fully divine. “Arius was understood to teach that, just as a human son is later in time
than his father and obedient to him, so also the Son of God is posterior to and sub-
ordinate to the Father” (Chadwick 1998: 564 –5). Arius and his supporters attacked
the idea that the Son could be said to be “identical in essence” with the Father,
which was the compromise creed that Constantine had had passed by some 220
bishops at the Council of Nicaea in 325 ce. Constantius, too, sought compromise,
but his interventions could not put an end to the ongoing theological and political
controversies roused by these disputes about the creedal definition of the relation-
ship of the Holy Trinity.
There are many instances of Constantius taking on his role as arbiter of religi-
ous dissent among Christians (see especially T. Barnes 1993: 165 –75), but perhaps
one example will show the difficulties of such a position. Constantius summoned
Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, to Milan, and accused him of undertaking “prac-
tices repugnant to the purpose of the religion over which he presided” (Amm. 15.7.8).
To win support for removing this dissenting bishop, Constantius directed Liberius,
then pope in Rome, to condemn Athanasius as well. Liberius would not play along,
and so the emperor had the bishop removed in the middle of the night (Amm.
15.7.10). Such heavy-handed intervention was not always Constantius’ style, but it
was evident that this emperor would use force if necessary to put an end to religious
dissent within the Christian community, as he tried to establish a new religious koine
more to his liking.
Emperors on Religious Koine and Religious
Dissent, 361– 423 CE: Julian and the Dynasties of
Valentinian and Theodosius
The emergence of Julian as Constantius’ Caesar was an unexpected event in many
ways; similarly, his eventual accession in 361 cewas the result in no small part of
good fortune, since Constantius died before civil war could decide the issue of suc-
cession. With Julian’s accession, the empire had, for the first time since Constantine,
a pagan emperor. Yet Julian’s religious policy was not like Constantius’; he did
not aim to allow for much common ground between pagans and Christians. On the
contrary, Julian’s efforts were largely divisive and served to fuel the rising tide of
intolerance.
Once Julian became Augustus (361–3 ce), he openly embraced paganism and
emphasized the pagan religious element in public life. He restored the temples, and
118 Michele Renee Salzman