both encouraged and performed numerous animal sacrifices (Amm. 22.5.2; Lib. Or.
18.126). He also tried to reform pagan organizations; so, for example, pagan priests
were to be more like Christian priests in terms of their spiritual authority and
charitable works (Lib. Or.18.236; 84.429c Bidez, Julian, Epist.84, 89). Julian publi-
cized his brand of paganism by an aggressive ideological campaign; he wrote speeches
and published them. He wrote letters and urged others, like the notable pagan
Neoplatonist Sallustius, to promulgate paganism, as Sallustius did in his book On
the Gods and the World. Julian was convinced of the value of animal sacrifice, but
his theology has also been described as approaching a Solar monotheism, especially
in his Hymn to Sol, as noted earlier. In this regard only, Julian could be seen as encour-
aging the religious koine.
It is an irony that did not escape even supporters like Ammianus Marcellinus that
Julian was an emperor who would only allow limited dissent on religious matters.
He was, we know, happy to bring back Christians exiled by Constantius for heresy
in the hope (or so says Ammianus Marcellinus) of fueling religious tensions within
the Christian community (Julian, Epist.110.398d, 114.436a–b; Amm. 22.5.3–5).
But Julian could not brook those pagans and Christians who, at Antioch, disapproved
of his own brand of religiosity; his bitter satire, The Misopogon, reflects an emperor
who, had he lived, would have no doubt taken revenge on religious dissenters in
this city. Indeed, Julian was clever in attacking those who disagreed with his brand
of paganism; his most famous ruling in this area may well be his edict of June 362
that stipulated that only those who were morally upright and who could sincerely
practice what they preached could teach classical literature (Julian, Epist.61, Bidez;
Lib. Or.18.157). Christian professors of rhetoric had to step down; dissenting Christians
had no opportunity for self-defense. It is an important sign of the general willing-
ness to maintain some shared cultural and religious options that Julian was criticized
even by his supporter Ammianus for this law which deepened the divide between
pagans and Christians (32.10.6); even the pagan Libanius omits this law from his
praises for the emperor’s deeds as patron of learning (Or.18.157ff.).
Many Christians interpreted Julian’s early death in a military fiasco in Persia as
proof of the just anger of God against this apostate (cf. Gregory of Nazianzus, Oratio
4 and 5). To signal the new imperial rule, Julian’s immediate successors – Jovian
(363– 4 ce), Valentinian I (364 –75 ce), and Valens (364 –78 ce) – adopted a more
tolerant attitude toward the pagan–Christian religious koineeven as they continued
to restrict religious dissent in Christian communities. So, for example, funding approved
by the emperors Valentinian, Valens, and Gratian led to the restoration of the temple
of Isis at the Port of Ostia between 375 and 378 ce(SIRIS 562 =AE[1961],
no. 152). Although sacrifice was restricted, the ceremonies and rituals of public state
cult continued with public monies.
However, tolerance of the ongoing pagan–Christian public accommodation in
society did not translate into acceptance of religious dissent within the Christian
community. Valentinian was an orthodox Nicene Christian who passed laws hostile to
certain sects deemed heretical and attacked fraudulent clerics (CTh16.2.20, 370 ce;
against Manichees, CTh17.5.3, 372 ce). Valens also intervened in church matters,
but in support of Arians. He upheld the canons of Ariminum (Rimini) and Seleucia
Religious Koineand Religious Dissent 119