27 Confirmation of the Exemption of Office-Holders in the Communities and the Synagogues from Curial Liturgies Arcadius (and Honorius)
1 July 397
This law, given by Arcadius in his name and in that of Honorius on 1 July 397, was addressed to Caesarius, Praefectus Praetorio of the East.
It confirms the privileges granted to Jewish men of religion after the reign of Constantine and in particular the exemption from the curial liturgies. Its text has been preserved in Codex Theodosianus (CTh 16:8:13). The striking resemblance between this law and a law passed by Constantine in 330 is probably due to the use made by the later draftsmen of the text of the earlier law, which was certainly available to them in the archives.This law embodies some of the principles underlying the policy of the authorities at that time towards the Jews. The government recognized, in the first place, that the Jews were bound to their religion, rites and laws, and was prepared, consequently, to dispense with the service of Jewish men of religion in the curial liturgies. From a legal point of view this recognition was based on several privileges, some of which have not survived but are quoted by our law, and on their reconfirmation by Arcadius and Honorius. Another principle of great importance underlies the recognition by the government that all Jewish men of religion throughout the empire came under the jurisdiction of the patriarchs. Furthermore, the authorities dealt with the matter of their privileges in analogy to the Christian prelates. It is noteworthy that the legislator not only avoided insults and pejorative terms in reference to the Jewish religion, he also employed terms similar—even identical—to those customarily used in reference to the Christian religion, such as ‘leges’, ‘religionis sacramentum’, and ‘caerimoniae’.
This law was abrogated in 398 in Honorius’ part of the Empire (see below, No.
29).Codex Theodosianus, 16:8:13, ed. Mommsen, p. 890
IDEM AA.* CAESARIO* P(RAEFECTO) P(RAETORI)O
ludaei sint obstricti* caerimoniis suis:* nos interea in conservandis eorum privilegiis veteres imitemur, quorum sanctionibus definitum est, ut privilegia his, qui inlustrium patriarcharum dicioni subiecti sunt, 5 archisynagogis patriarchisque* ac presbyteris* ceterisque, qui in eius religionis sacramento* versantur, nutu nostri numinis perseverent ea, quae venerandae Christianae legis primis clericis sanctimonia deferuntur. Id enim et divi principes Constantinus* et Constantius,* Valentinianus et Valens* divino arbitrio decreverunt. Sint igitur etiam a io curialibus muneribus alieni pareantque legibus suis.
DAT. KAL. IUL. CAESARIO ET ATTICO CONSS.·
THE SAME TWO AUGUSTI1 TO CAESARIUS,2 PRAEFECTUS PRAETORIO
The Jews shall be bound3 to their rites;4 while we shall imitate the ancients in conserving their privileges, for it was established in their laws and confirmed by our divinity, that those who are subject to the rule of the Illustrious Patriarchs, that is the Archsynagogues, the patriarchs,5 the presbyters6 and the others who are occupied in the rite7 of that religion, shall persevere in keeping the same privileges that are reverently bestowed on the first clerics of the venerable Christian Law. For this was decreed in divine order also by the divine Emperors Constantine8 and Constantius,9 Valentinian and Valens.10 Let them therefore be exempt even from the curial liturgies, and obey their laws.
GIVEN ON THE CALENDS OF JULY IN THE CONSULATE OF CAESARIUS AND ATTICUS.11
NOTES
1. Augusti: Arcadius and Honorius.
2. Flavius Caesarius was Master of the Offices in the years 386-387, Praefectus Praetorio in the East in 395-397 and in 400-403.
See PLRE, I, s.v.3. Bound: for this meaning of the verb ‘obstringere’ see the text of an inscription from the late second century, which praises a governor of Dacia: ‘nomini... et virtutibus eius obstricta simul et devota provincia’. “The province was bound and devoted to his name... and virtues;” see CIL, III, No. 7902. Compare also Apuleius, Florida, 9, ed. R. Helm, Leipzig 1921, p. 14. Our passage rephrases Constantine’s definition from 330: ‘qui devotions tota se dederunt’ (see above, No. 9).
4. Christian sources usually designate the Jewish Biblical rites by the term ‘caerimoniae’. See, for example, the Vulgata translation to Gn. 26:5 : ‘eo quod oboedierit Abraham voci meae et custodierit praecepta et mandata mea et caerimonias legesque servaverit’, and see also Augustine on this subject: ‘per... caerimoniarumque observationes se a peccatis posse mundari fierique’. “(The Jews) believed that they could cleanse themselves from their sins... through (the priesthood) and observing the rites,” See Epistulae, 82:28, ed. A. Goldbacher, CSEL, XXXIV:2, 1898, p. 380. The divine origin of the Jewish rites implies their fundamentally positive nature, even when seen in a Christian perspective. The legislator repeated here and elaborated Constantine’s definition from 330: ‘legi ipsi praesident’ (see above, No. 9). For the pagan sources of the term consult K. H. Roloff, “Caerimonia,” Glotta, XXXII (1953), pp. 101-138.
5. The word ‘patriarchisque’ is undoubtedly corrupt, for the existence of “patriarchs” subject to the Illustrious Patriarchs and hierarchically under the Archsynagogues is both highly improbable and unsubstantiated by the evidence.
Their identification with the “minor patriarchs,” whose existence is still hypothetical, is again impossible. Mommsen suggested that this word be omitted, or corrected— following Seeck—to ‘patribusque’, “Fathers (of the Synagogue).” Seeck’s correction is indeed the better alternative, for our law is based on Constantine’s law from 330 (CTh 16:8:4), where the Archsynagogues and the Fathers of the Synagogue are specifically mentioned among the men of religion subject to the patriarchs and the presbyters (see above, No. 9).6. The presbyters who served in the communities rather than the members of the Sanhedrin in Palestine, for they are mentioned after the Archsynagogues and the patriarchs (Fathers of the Synagogue) in the group of office-holders subject to the rule of the Illustrious Patriarchs.
7. Rite: the term ‘sacramentum’ signifies here the Jewish Biblical rite. Compare Augustine’s commentary to Job 30:4: ‘sacramenta... quae corporaliter ludaei observare cogebantur sabbatum, circumcisionem et victimas’, “the rites... which the Jews were obliged to observe in a corporeal way, the Sabbath, circumci- sion and sacrifices,” See Adnotationes in lob, XXX, ed. I. Zycha, CSEL, XXVIII:2, 1895, p. 573.
8. Constantine: see above, Nos. 7 and 9.
9. Constantius: not extant.
10. Valentinian and Valens: probably a law promulgated in the names of both Emperors. Not extant.
11. Given... Atticus: 1 July 397.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Godefroy, VI: 1, pp. 492-493; Juster, I, p. 164 n. 1; II, p. 259 n. 4; Seeck, Regesten, p. 293; Ferrari dalle Spade, “Privilegi,” pp. 112-113; Seaver, p. 67; Jones, “Collegiate Prefectures,” p. 80; Avi-Yonah, p. 216; Reichardt, pp. 30, 36; Vogler, pp. 41-42, 66-67.