46 Protection of Jews and Synagogues

 (Honorius with) Theodosius II

6 August 420

The law’s subscription dates it to 6 August 412—Honorius’ ninth consulate and Theodosius H’s fifth—but this date does not accord with the chronology of the Illyrian prefecture. In 412 the office of Praefectus Praetorio of Illyricum was in the hands of Leontius, while Philippus served in this office in 421, perhaps as early as 420. This law should be dated, consequently, on the pro- sopographical information supplied by the inscription. The errone­ous date given by Theodosius’ editors can be explained on the assumption that their source supplied an abbreviated inscription, such as ‘ipso Aug. VIIII. et qui fuerit nuntiatus’; it recorded Theo­dosius H’s ninth consulate but omitted his name, and referred to the third consulate of Constantius III in the West, which was never recognized in the East, with the formula usually employed when a consul’s name was either unknown or not recognized. The editors could identify this ninth consulate either with that of Honorius (412) or with that of Theodosius II (420), and they have chosen, mistakenly, the first alternative. They have consequently supple­mented the subscription by Theodosius’ corresponding consulate. Godefroy and Juster dated this law to 418, while Demougeot tends to accept the traditional date of 412.

The legislator extended his protection to Jews persecuted be­cause of their religion, and prohibited the damaging and burning of their synagogues.

This law seems to express the government’s reaction, albeit late, to the attacks directed against Jews and synagogues in several provinces during the preceding decade, such as in Edessa in the years 411-412 and in Alexandria in 414.

Codex Theodosianus, 16:8:21, ed. Mommsen, p. 892

IDEM AA.* PHILIPPO P(RAEFECTO) P(RAETORI)O PER ILLYRICUM

Nullus tamquam* ludaeus, cum sit innocens, obteratur nec expositum eum ad contumeliam religio qualiscumque perficiat.* Non passim* eorum synagogae vel habitacula concrementur vel perperam sine ulla 5 ratione laedantur, cum alioquin, etiam si sit aliquis sceleribus implicatus, idcirco tamen iudiciorum vigor iurisque publici tutela videtur in medio constituta, ne quisquam sibi ipse permittere valeat ultionem. Sed ut hoc ludaeorum personis* volumus esse provisum, ita illud quoque monen­dum esse censemus,* ne ludaei forsitan insolescant elatique sui io securitate quicquam praeceps in Christianae reverentiam cultionis* ad­mittant.

DAT. VIII ID. AUG. CONSTANT(INO)P(OLI) HONOR(IO) VIIII ET THEOD(OSIO) V AA. CONSS.·

THE SAME TWO AUGUSTI¹ TO PHILIPPUS, PRAEFECTUS PRAETORIO IN ILLYRICUM

No one shall be destroyed for being a Jew,² though innocent of crime, nor shall any religion whatsoever execute him while he is exposed to contumely.³ Their synagogues and habitations shall not be indiscriminately⁴ burnt up, nor wrongfully damaged without any reason.

GIVEN ON THE EIGHTH DAY BEFORE THE IDES OF AUGUST AT CONSTANTI­NOPLE, IN THE CONSULATE OF THE TWO AUGUSTI, HONORIUS FOR THE NINTH TIME AND THEODOSIUS FOR THE FIFTH.⁸

Codex Justinianus, 1:9:14, cd. Krüger, p. 62

IDEM AA. PHILIPPO PP.

Nullus tamquam ludaeus, cum sit innocens, obteratur nec expositum eum ad contumeliam religio qualiscumque perficiat: non passim eorum synagogae vel habitacula concrementur vel perperam sine ulla ratione 5 laedantur, cum alioquin, etiam si sit aliquis sceleribus implicitus, idcirco tamen iudiciorum vigor iurisque publici tutela videtur in medio con­stituta, ne quisquam sibi ipse permittere valeat ultionem. Sed ut hoc ludaeorum personis volumus esse provisum, ita illud quoque monendum esse censemus, ne ludaei forsitan insolescant elatique sui securitate quic- 10 quam praeceps in Christianae reverentiam cultionis admittant.

D. VIII ID. AUG. CONSTANTINOPOLI HONORIO VIIII ET THEODOSIO V AA.

CONSS.

1.      Augusti: Honorius and Theodosius II.

2.      For being a Jew: on the use of ‘tamquam’ to express crime, charge or suspicion see C.

3.      Contumely: this reading is awkward and difficult, both because of the extreme severity of the deeds attributed to the persecutors of the Jews—‘perficere’, “to destroy,” and ‘obterere’, “to execute”—and because of the awkward and prob­lematical connection between ‘perficere’ and ‘expositum eum ad contumeliam’, for ‘contumelia’ is the lighter type of injury—‘iniuria’—which does not entail a body injury. See Eugraphius, Commentum Terentii, Heauton Timorumenos, 111:3, ed. P. Wessner, Leipzig 1908, p. 185; Thesaurus Linguae Latinae, Leipzig 1906, s.v. Con­tumelia, Cols. 799-803. Our text is probably corrupt, and should be emended, according to Mommsen, by correcting ‘perficiat’ to ‘proiciat’. Indeed, some of the manuscripts of Codex Justinianus have here ‘proficiat’, which is meaningless, and seems to be a corruption of ‘proiciat’. Mommsen’s emendation has the merit of maintaining the correspondence between ‘innocens’, “innocent,” and ‘expositus’, “sincere,” “frank,” as well as of replacing the connection between ‘expositus’ and ‘ad contumeliam’ by the much better one of ‘proicere’ and ‘ad contumeliam’. This emendation entails a milder sense of ‘obterere’, corresponding to ‘proicere... ad contumeliam’, such as “oppress,” “persecute”, “disgrace.” The emended text should be translated, therefore, as follows: “No one shall be persecuted for being a Jew, though innocent of crime, nor shall any religion whatsoever oppress one who acts openly.”

4.      Indiscriminately: this post-Classical meaning is better than “everywhere,” for it corresponds to ‘sine ulla ratione’ in the text.

5.      All the Jews: the legislator emphasized, by the use of the word ‘perso­nae’, that the law was to provide personal protection to every Jew.

6.       Order: see above, No. 42, n. 5.

7.      The word ‘cultio’ did not have this sense in the Classical sources, but possessed it in Christian sources. Several manuscripts of Codex Justinianus transmit the correct reading, and the Basilica has here θρησκείας, an obvious translation of ‘cultio’. This term was so rare that several manuscripts of both Codex Theodosianus and Codex Justinianus transmit the corrupted reading ‘ultionis’ in place of ‘cultio­nis’, with the result that the entire sentence acquires a new meaning and with the additional necessity to change ‘Christianae’ to ‘Christianam’.

8.       Given... fifth: 6 August 412.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Godefroy, VI: 1, pp. 261-262; Juster, I, p. 464 n. 3; Seeck, Regesten, pp. 25­26, 345; Browe, p. 115; Seaver, pp. 70-71; Demougeot, “Honorius,” p. 285.