Roman Emperors Dir Julian The Apostate

The emperor Flavius Claudius Julianus reigned from 360 to 26 June 363, when he was killed fighting against the Persians.[[1]] Despite his short rule, his emperorship was pivotal in the development of the history of the later Roman empire. This essay is not meant to be a comprehensive look at the various issues central to the reign of Julian and the history of the later empire. Rather, this short work is meant to be a brief history and introduction for the general reader. Julian was the last direct descendent of the Constantinian line to ascend to the purple, and it is one of history's great ironies that he was the last non-Christian emperor. As such, he has been vilified by most Christian sources, beginning with John Chrysostom and Gregory Nazianzus in the later fourth century. This tradition was picked up by the fifth century Eusebian continuators Sozomen, Socrates Scholasticus, and Theodoret and passed on to scholars down through the 20^th century. Most contemporary sources, however, paint a much more balanced picture of Julian and his reign. The adoption of Christianity by emperors and society, while still a vital concern, was but one of several issues that concerned Julian.

It is fortunate that extensive writings from Julian himself exist, which help interpret his reign in the light of contemporary evidence. Still extant are some letters, several panegyrics, and a few satires. Other contemporary sources include the soldier Ammianus Marcellinus' history, correspondence between Julian and Libanius of Antioch, several panegyrics, laws from the Theodosian Code, inscriptions, and coinage.[[2]] These sources show Julian's emphasis on restoration. He saw himself as the restorer of the traditional values of Roman society. Of course much of this was rhetoric, meant to defend Julian against charges that he was a usurper. At the same time this theme of restoration was central to all emperors of the fourth century.[[3]] Julian thought that he was the one emperor who could regain what was viewed as the lost glory of the Roman empire. To achieve this goal he courted select groups of social elites to get across his message of restoration. This was the way that emperors functioned in the fourth century. By choosing whom to include in the sharing of power, they sought to shape society.

Julian was born at Constantinople in 331.[[4]] His father was Julius Constantius, half-brother of the emperor Constantine through Constantius Chlorus, and his mother was Basilina, Julius' second wife. Julian had two half-brothers via Julius' first marriage. One of these was Gallus, who played a major role in Julian's life.[[5]]   Julian appeared destined for a bright future via his father's connection to the Constantinian house. After many years of tense relations with his three half-brothers, Constantine seemed to have welcomed them into the fold of the imperial family. From 333 to 335, Constantine conferred a series of honors upon his three half-siblings, including appointing Julius Constantius as one of the consuls for 335.[[6]]Julian's mother was equally distinguished. Ammianus related that she was from a noble family.[[7]]   This is supported by Libanius, who claimed that she was the daughter of Julius Julianus, a Praetorian Prefect under Licinius, who was such a model of administrative virtue that he was pardoned and honored by Constantine.[[8]]

Despite the fact that his mother died shortly after giving birth to him, Julian experienced an idyllic early childhood([[9]]   This ended when Constantius II conducted a purge of many of his relatives shortly after Constantine's death in 337, particularly targeting the families of Constantine's half-brothers.[[10]] Julian and Gallus were spared, probably due to their young age. Julian was put under the care of Mardonius, a Scythian eunuch who had tutored his mother, in 339, and was raised in the Greek philosophical tradition, and probably lived in Nicomedia.[[11]]   Ammianus also supplied the fact that while in Nicomedia, Julian was cared for by the local bishop Eusebius, of whom the future emperor was a distant relation.[[12]]   Julian was educated by some of the most famous names in grammar and rhetoric in the Greek world at that time, including Nicocles and Hecebolius.[[13]]   In 344 Constantius II sent Julian and Gallus to Macellum in Cappadocia, where they remained for six years.[[14]]   In 351, Gallus was made Caesar by Constantius II and Julian was allowed to return to Nicomedia, where he studied under Aedesius, Eusebius, and Chrysanthius, all famed philosophers, and was exposed to the Neo-Platonism that would become such a prominent part of his life.[[15]]   But Julian was most proud of the time he spent studying under Maximus of Ephesus, a noted Neo-Platonic philospher and theurgist. It was Maximus who completed Julian's full-scale conversion to Neo-Platonism. Later, when he was Caesar, Julian told of how he put letters from this philosopher under his pillows so that he would continue to absorb wisdom while he slept, and while campaigning on the Rhine, he sent his speeches to Maximus for approval before letting others hear them.[[16]] When Gallus was executed in 354 for treason by Constantius II, Julian was summoned to Italy and essentially kept under house arrest at Comum, near Milan, for seven months before Constantius' wife Eusebia convinced the emperor that Julian posed no threat.[[17]]   This allowed Julian to return to Greece and continue his life as a scholar where he studied under the Neo-Platonist Priscus.[[18]]   Julian's life of scholarly pursuit, however, ended abruptly when he was summoned to the imperial court and made Caesar by Constantius II on 6 November 355.[[19]]

Constantius II realized an essential truth of the empire that had been evident since the time of the Tetrarchy--the empire was too big to be ruled effectively by one man.[[20]]   Julian was pressed into service as Caesar, or subordinate emperor, because an imperial presence was needed in the west, in particular in the Gallic provinces.   Julian, due to the emperor's earlier purges, was the only viable candidate of the imperial family left who could act as Caesar. Constantius enjoined Julian with the task of restoring order along the Rhine frontier.  A few days after he was made Caesar, Julian was married to Constantius' sister Helena in order to cement the alliance between the two men.[[21]]   On 1 December 355, Julian journeyed north, and in Augusta Taurinorum he learned that Alamannic raiders had destroyed Colonia Agrippina. He then proceeded to Vienne where he spent the winter.[[22]]   At Vienne, he learned that Augustudunum was also under siege, but was being held by a veteran garrison. He made this his first priority, and arrived there on 24 June 356.  When he had assured himself that the city was in no immediate danger, he journeyed to Augusta Treverorum via Autessioduram, and from there to Durocortorum where he rendezvoused with his army. Julian had the army stage a series of punitive strikes around the Dieuse region, and then he moved them towards the Argentoratum/Mongontiacum region when word of barbarian incursions reached him.[[23]]

From there, Julian moved on to Colonia Agrippina, and negotiated a peace with the local barbarian leaders who had assaulted the city. He then wintered at Senonae.[[24]]    He spent the early part of the campaigning season of 357 fighting off besiegers at Senonae, and then conducting operations around Lugdunum and Tres Tabernae.[[25]]   Later that summer, he encountered his watershed moment as a military general.   Ammianus went into great detail about Julian's victory over seven rogue Alamannic chieftains near Argentoratum, and Julian himself bragged about it in his later writing.[[26]]   After this battle, the soldiers acclaimed Julian Augustus, but he rejected this title.[[27]]   After mounting a series of follow-up raids into Alamannic territory, he retired to winter quarters at Lutetia, and on the way defeated some Frankish raiders in the Mosa region.[[28]]   Julian considered this campaign one of the major events of his time as Caesar.[[29]]

Julian began his 358 military campaigns early, hoping to catch the barbarians by surprise. His first target was the Franks in the northern Rhine region. He then proceeded to restore some forts in the Mosa region, but his soldiers threatened to mutiny because they were on short rations and had not been paid their donative since Julian had become Caesar.[[30]]    After he soothed his soldiers, Julian spent the rest of the summer negotiating a peace with various Alamannic leaders in the mid and lower Rhine areas, and retired to winter quarters at Lutetia.[[31]]   In 359, he prepared once again to carry out a series of punitive expeditions against the Alamanni in the Rhine region who were still hostile to the Roman presence. In preparation, the Caesar repopulated seven previously destroyed cities and set them up as supply bases and staging areas. This was done with the help of the people with whom Julian had negotiated a peace the year before. Julian then had a detachment of lightly armed soldiers cross the Rhine near Mogontiacum and conduct a guerilla strike against several chieftains. As a result of these campaigns, Julian was able to negotiate a peace with all but a handful of the Alamannic leaders, and he retired to winter quarters at Lutetia.[[32]]

Of course, Julian did more than act as a general during his time as Caesar. According to Ammianus, Julian was an able administrator who took steps to correct the injustices of Constantius' appointees. Ammianus related the story of how Julian prevented Florentius, the Praetorian Prefect of Gaul, from raising taxes, and also how Julian actually took over as governor for the province of Belgica Secunda.[[33]]   Hilary, bishop of Poitiers, supported Ammianus' basic assessment of Julian in this regard when he reported  that Julian was an able representative of the emperor to the Gallic provincials.[[34]]   There is also epigraphic evidence to support Julian's popularity amongst the provincial elites. An inscription found near Beneventum in Apulia reads:

"To Flavius Claudius Julianus, most noble and sanctified Caesar, from the caring Tocius Maximus, vir clarissimus, for the care of the res publica from Beneventum".[[35]]

Tocius Maximus, as a vir clarissimus, was at the highest point in the social spectrum and was a leader in his local community. This inscription shows that Julian was successful in establishing a positive image amongst provincial elites while he was Caesar.

In early 360, Constantius, driven by jealousy of Julian's success, stripped Julian of many troops and officers, ostensibly because the emperor needed them for his upcoming campaign against the Persians.[[36]]  One of the legions ordered east, the Petulantes, did not want to leave Gaul because the majority of the soldiers in the unit were from this region. As a result they mutinied and hailed Julian as Augustus at Lutetia.[[37]]  Julian refused this acclamation as he had done at Argentoratum earlier, but the soldiers would have none of his denial. They raised him on a shield and adorned him with a  neck chain, which had formerly been the possession of the standard-bearer of the Petulantes and symbolized a  royal diadem. Julian appeared reluctantly to acquiesce to their wishes, and promised a generous donative.[[38]] The exact date of his acclamation is unknown, but most scholars put it in February or March.[[39]] Julian himself supported Ammianus' picture of a jealous Constantius. In his Letter to the Athenians, a document constructed to answer charges that he was a usurper, Julian stated that from the start he, as Caesar, had been meant as a figurehead to the soldiers and provincials. The real power he claimed lay with the generals and officials already present in Gaul. In fact, according to Julian, the generals were charged with watching him as much as the enemy.[[40]] His account of the actual acclamation closely followed what Ammianus told us, but he stressed even more his reluctance to take power. Julian claimed that he did so only after praying to Zeus for guidance.[[41]]

Fearing the reaction of Constantius, Julian sent a letter to his fellow emperor justifying the events at Lutetia and trying to arrange a peaceful solution.[[42]] This letter berated Constantius for forcing the troops in Gaul into an untenable situation. Ammianus stated that Julian's letter blamed Constantius' decision to transfer Gallic legions east as the reason for the soldiers' rebellion. Julian once again asserted that he was an unwilling participant who was only following the desire of the soldiers.[[43]]  In both of these basic accounts Ammianus and Julian are playing upon the theme of restoration. Implicit in their version of Julian's acclamation is the argument that Constantius was unfit to rule.  The soldiers were the vehicle of the gods' will. The Letter to the Athenians is full of references to the fact that Julian was assuming the mantle of Augustus at the instigation of the gods. Ammianus summed up this position nicely when he related the story of how, when Julian was agonizing over whether to accept the soldiers' acclamation, he had a dream in which he was visited by the Genius (guardian spirit) of the Roman state. The Genius told Julian that it had often tried to bestow high honors upon Julian but had been rebuffed. Now, the Genius went on to say, was Julian's final chance to take the power that was rightfully his. If the Caesar refused this chance, the Genius would depart forever, and both Julian and the state would rue Julian's rejection.[[44]] Julian himself wrote a letter to his friend Maximus of Ephesus in November of 361 detailing his thoughts on his proclamation. In this letter, Julian stated that the soldiers proclaimed him Augustus against his will. Julian, however, defended his accession, saying that the gods willed it and that he had treated his enemies with clemency and justice. He went on to say that he led the troops in propitiating the traditional deities, because the gods commanded him to return to the traditional rites, and would reward him if he fulfilled this duty.[[45]]

During 360 an uneasy peace simmered between the two emperors. Julian spent the 360 campaigning season continuing his efforts to restore order along the Rhine, while Constantius continued operations against the Persians.[[46]] Julian wintered in Vienne, and celebrated his Quinquennalia. It was at this time that his wife Helena died, and he sent her remains to Rome for a proper burial at his family villa on the Via Nomentana where the body of her sister was entombed.[[47]]  The uneasy peace held through the summer of 361, but Julian concentrated his military operations around harassing the Alamannic chieftain Vadomarius and his allies, who had concluded a peace treaty with Constantius some years earlier.[[48]] By the end of the summer, Julian decided to put an end to the waiting and gathered his army to march east against Constantius.[[49]] The empire teetered on the brink of another civil war. Constantius had spent the summer negotiating with the Persians and making preparations for possible military action against his cousin.[[50]] When he was assured that the Persians would not attack, he summoned his army and sallied forth to meet Julian.[[51]]  As the armies drew inexorably closer to one another, the empire was saved from another bloody civil war when Constantius died unexpectedly of natural causes on 3 November near the town of Mopsucrenae in Cilicia, naming Julian  -- the sources say-- as his legitimate successor.[[52]]

Julian was in Dacia when he learned of his cousin's death. He made his way through Thrace and came to Constantinople on 11 December 361 where Julian honored the emperor with the funeral rites appropriate for a man of his station.[[53]]   Julian immediately set about putting his supporters in positions of power and trimming the imperial bureaucracy, which had become extremely overstaffed during Constantius' reign.[[54]]   Cooks and barbers had increased during the late emperor's reign and Julian expelled them from his court.[[55]]   Ammianus gave a mixed assessment of how the new emperor handled the followers of Constantius.   Traditionally, emperors were supposed to show clemency to the supporters of a defeated enemy. Julian, however, gave some men over to death to appease the army. Ammianus used the case of Ursulus, Constantius' comes sacrum largitionum, to illustrate his point. Ursulus had actually tried to acquire money for the Gallic troops when Julian had first been appointed Caesar, but he had also made a disparaging remark about the ineffectiveness of the army after the battle of Amida. The soldiers remembered this, and when Julian became sole Augustus, they demanded Ursulus' head. Julian obliged, much to the disapproval of Ammianus.[[56]]  This seems to be a case of Julian courting the favor of the military leadership, and is indicative of a pattern in which Julian courted the goodwill of various societal elites to legitimize his position as emperor.

Another case in point is the officials who made up the imperial bureaucracy. Many of them were subjected to trial and punishment.[[57]]To achieve this goal, during the last weeks of December 361 Julian assembled a military tribunal at Chalcedon, empanelling six judges to try the cases. The president of the tribunal was Salutius, just promoted to the rank of Praetorian Prefect; the five other members were Mamertinus, the orator, and four general officers: Jovinus, Agilo, Nevitta, and Arbetio.[[58]]   Relative to the proceedings of the tribunal, Ammianus noted that the judges, " . . . oversaw the cases more vehemently than was right or fair, with the exception of a few . . .."[[59]]  Ammianus' account of Julian's attempt at reform of the imperial bureaucracy is supported by legal evidence from the Theodosian Code. A series of laws sent to Mamertinus, Julian's appointee as Praetorian Prefect in Italy, Illyricum, and Africa, illustrate this point nicely.   On 6 June 362, Mamertinus received a law that prohibited provincial governors from bypassing the Vicars when giving their reports to the Prefect.[[60]] Traditionally, Vicars were given civil authority over a group of provinces, and were in theory meant to serve as a middle step between governors and Prefects.[[61]]   This law suggests that the Vicars were being left out, at least in Illyricum.   Julian issued another edict to Mamertinus on 22 February 362 to stop abuse of the public post by governors.   According to this law, only Mamertinus could issue post warrants, but the Vicars were given twelve blank warrants to be used as they saw fit, and each governor was given two.[[62]]   Continuing the trend of bureaucratic reform, Julian also imposed penalties on governors who purposefully delayed appeals in court cases they had heard.[[63]] The emperor also established a new official to weigh solidi used in official government transactions to combat coin clipping.[[64]]

For Julian, reigning in the abuses of imperial bureaucrats was one step in restoring the prestige of the office of emperor. Because he could not affect all elements of society personally, Julian, like other Neo-Flavian emperors, decided to concentrate on select groups of societal elites as intercessors between himself and the general populace. One of these groups was the imperial bureaucracy. Julian made it very clear that imperial officials were intercessors in a very real sense in a letter to Alypius, Vicar of Britain. In this letter, sent from Gaul sometime before 361, the emperor praises Alypius for his use of "mildness and moderation with courage and force" in his rule of the provincials. Such virtues were characteristic of the emperors, and it was good that Alypius is representing Julian in this way.[[65]] Julian courted the army because it put him in power. Another group he sought to include in his rule was the traditional Senatorial aristocracy. One of his first appointments as consul was Claudius Mamertinus, a Gallic Senator and rhetorician. Mamertinus' speech in praise of Julian delivered at Constantinople in January of 362 is preserved. In this speech, Claudius presented his consular selection as inaugurating a new golden age and Julian as the restorer of the empire founded by Augustus. The image Mamertinus gave of his own consulate inaugurating a new golden age is not merely formulaic. The comparison of Julian to Augustus has very real, if implicit, relevance to Claudius' situation. Claudius emphasized the imperial period as the true age of renewal. Augustus ushered in a new era with his formation of a partnership between the emperor and the Senate based upon a series of honors and offices bestowed upon the Senate in return for their role as intercessor between emperor and populace. It was this system that Julian was restoring, and the consulate was one concrete example of this bond.[[66]]To be chosen as a consul by the emperor, who himself had been divinely mandated, was a divine honor.[[67]]   In addition to being named consul, Mamertinus went on to hold several offices under Julian, including the Prefecture of Italy, Illyricum, and Africa.[[68]] Similarly, inscriptional evidence illustrates a link between municipal elites and Julian during his time as Caesar, something which continued after he became emperor.[[69]] One concrete example comes from the municipal senate of Aceruntia in Apulia, which established a monument on which Julian is styled as "Repairer of the World."[[70]]

One group he sought to disenfranchise was the Christians. Julian had a nominally Christian upbringing, but by the time he was emperor he had clearly rejected this belief system in favor of Neo-Platonism. There is some debate over just how much he was exposed to Christianity as a young man.[[71]] Some scholars use Basilina's relation to Eusebius of Nicomedia, a brief passage in Athanasius naming a certain Basilina as a supporter of the Arian cause, and a later Christian source which states that Basilina left her property to the Church upon her death as evidence that Julian's mother was Christian.[[72]]   The evidence seems rather flimsy. Regardless, Julian was under the care of Eusebius of Nicomedia for a short time, and at the time of his elevation to Augustus he was at least nominally Christian. Julian attended a service celebrating Epiphany in January of 361 in order to court the support of uncommitted Christians to his claim to the rank of Augustus. Julian seems to have given up actual Christian belief before his acclamation as emperor and was a practitioner of more traditional Greco-Roman religious beliefs, in particular, a follower of  certain late antique Platonist philosophers who were especially adept at theurgy as was noted earlier.[[73]]   In fact Julian himself spoke of his conversion to Neo-Platonism in a letter to the Alexandrians written in 363.   He stated that he had abandoned Christianity when he was twenty years old and been an adherent of the traditional Greco-Roman deities for the twelve years prior to writing this letter.[[74]]

Julian took the occasion of Constantius' fortuitous death openly to declare his paganism. At first it appeared that he was not going to discriminate actively against Christians. In fact, he lifted the ban on Arians and allowed these men and other radical Christian sects to return to their former place in society.[[75]] Julian spoke of this policy in a letter to one Aetius, an Anomean bishop, in which he invited the bishop to return to his see without fear of reprisal.[[76]]   Elsewhere Julian noted that the Christians had become a powerful force during the reigns of the earlier Neo-Flavian emperors and made life difficult for pagans and Christian splinter groups, and he hoped to stop the wholesale slaughter that was occurring between the various factions in the name of religion.[[77]]   Ammianus, however, stated that this policy was actually a ruse to allow free reign to Christian discord so that the Christians would destroy themselves.[[78]]

Soon, Julian became very hostile to Christianity, developing a three-fold strategy effectively to disenfranchise Christians. First, he used legislation to cut off Christians from contact with the mainstream community. Next, he attempted to establish a pagan church structure to rival that of Christianity. Finally, he mounted a philosophical assault on Christianity, trying to show that its belief system was novel and harmful, and also to portray Christians as apostates from Judaism, a much older, more established, and more accepted religion. There is evidence of Julian's attempt to legally disenfranchise Christians both by taking away any special exemptions that they could claim due to their religious beliefs and by prosecuting them for actively advocating their beliefs. A law of the Theodosian Code prohibits decurions from avoiding their compulsory duties on the grounds that they are Christian, and Ammianus spoke of legislation barring Christians from teaching rhetoric and grammar.[[79]]   Julian's actual rescript regarding the latter is included amongst his collected letters, where he declared that Christians who taught the classics were impious, because they taught the traditional forms of worship but ridiculed the beliefs, which had been passed down from the forefathers.[[80]]   In another example of Julian's legal assault upon Christianity, a law from 405 upholds his law banning the Donatist sect in Africa.[[81]]   In a letter of 362 to the citizens of Bostra, Julian admonished the Christian citizens involved in factional strife there that if they sacrificed to the traditional deities, they could remain citizens in good standing. Otherwise they would be stripped of their citizenship.[[82]]

The second and third parts of Julian's strategy to discredit Christianity are better documented. Two letters show specifically the issues Julian wanted to address by structuring pagan leadership on the Christian model. Sometime in late 361 or early 362, Julian sent a letter to Theodorus making him high priest of the diocese of Asia with the power to appoint priests in all the cities in this region. Theodorus was to see that such priests were worthy of the office. Specifically, they were to be just towards their fellow citizens and treat the Gods with piety. In this epistle, Julian lamented that current society had forgotten "customs of the forefathers in religious matters."[[83]]   In another letter we see the details of Julian's religious reforms. In 362 Julian sent this missive to Arsacius, high priest of Galatia. He complained that while the traditional rituals had been restored, the Christians continued to gain converts.   This angered Julian because he considered Christians atheists.   Julian went on to demand that the priests in Galatia put their beliefs into positive social action, such as copying Christian charity, care for the dead, and a holy lifestyle. He then proceeded to lay down a series of prohibitions. No priest was to go to a tavern, frequent the theatre, or engage in a base profession. Julian then commanded that Arsacius set up hostels for charity in every city in Galatia. Furthermore, 1/5 of 30,000 modii of wheat and 60,000 pints of wine allocated to Galatia were to be used for charity distribution. Julian told Arsacius that the helping of the community by the priests was the way of the forefathers, with such practices dating back to the time of Homer.[[84]]

One of the fundamental issues raised in these letters is that of patronage. Julian feared that Christian practices were causing many citizens to look to other sources than the emperor for protection and security. Julian as emperor was supreme patron, and it was his duty to provide for his clients, the citizens of society. As was suggested earlier, a goal of Julian's reforms in general was to set up a series of intercessory social institutions. The earlier letter to Alypius and Mamertinus' panegyric established how Julian wished various societal elites to function as intercessors between himself and the broader society at large. Julian wished for his religious officials to serve in this same capacity, and it infuriated him that Christian leaders were usurping a role that was rightly his to bestow. In yet another letter from 362 to an unnamed official, Julian puts forth these very ideas. Julian stated that as emperor and supreme pontiff, he represented the link between general society and the divine. The unnamed official, by harassing imperial priests and generally interfering in religious matters, was disrupting Julian in his role as emperor.[[85]]

The third prong of Julian's attack against Christianity was to discredit the very legitimacy this sect had gained in the forty-eight years before Julian assumed office. Julian laid out most of his arguments in his treatise Against the Galileans;  it should be noted, in passing, that Julian was indebted to Porphyry in his composition of this work. In this work he first linked the Christians to Judaism. He then attacked the Judeo-Christian doctrine that humans as created beings were not divine.[[86]]   Such a belief was anathema to traditional philosophic thought, which in general held that humans were simply a part of the divinity who had been separated due to some catastrophe.[[87]]   Julian then went on to establish how Christianity was at odds with its Jewish roots, because Judaism did not acknowledge Christ, the key figure in Christian belief.[[88]] Julian asserted Judaism, though still an impious religion, was more legitimate than Christianity, because at least it was thousands of years old. He questioned how anybody could practice a religion that had only three hundred years of history behind it.[[89]]  Julian put his attack on Christian ideology into practice by attempting to reconstruct the Jewish Temple at Jerusalem, which had been destroyed by the emperor Titus in A.D. 70.[[90]] Christians saw the destruction of the Temple as key event fulfilling prophecy that invalidated ancient Jewish Law and validated the New Testament.[[91]] In 363, Julian appointed Alypius to head the reconstruction of the Temple, but construction was halted due to mysterious balls of flame that kept erupting and killing the workers at the site.[[92]]   Julian halted the project as he prepared for his Persian campaign, and it was never resumed.[[93]]

One of the main results of Christian impiety that offended Julian was their propensity to cause disruptions in the communities they lived in. One such case was in Alexandria, where the citizens lynched the unpopular bishop George after he had threatened to destroy the temple to the emperor's Genius.[[94]]   Julian wrote a scathing letter to the citizens of Alexandria in 362 in which he asserted that the actions of the citizens had threatened the welfare of the community. According to Julian, the perpetrators had forgotten their forefathers. Furthermore, because the gods had appointed him to rule the world, the citizens had acted immoderately in slaying George without consulting Julian.[[95]]Similarly, he wrote a letter to Hecebolius in which he denounced the Arian Christians in Edessa for causing public riots and disturbing the harmony. He threatened to withdraw his clemency from that region if such continued.[[96]] Julian never had a chance to implement fully some of the reforms under discussion. After spending some time in Constantinople in 362, he began a journey through Asia Minor to Antioch, the jumping-off point for his Persian campaign, stopping along the way to visit the various communities in the region. At these stops he often gave money, men, and materials, thus showing concrete examples of his benefaction.[[97]]   That winter, drought and a major earthquake struck the region. The Senate at Antioch became very angry and refused to support Julian when he did not divert resources gathered for his upcoming campaign against the Persians for relief to the disaster victims. This prompted Julian to write his satire Misopogon (or Beard Hater), but preparations for the war went on.[[98]]

The exact goals Julian had for his ill-fated Persian campaign were never clear. The Sassanid Persians, and before them the Parthians, had been a traditional enemy from the time of the Late Republic, and indeed Constantius had been conducting a war against them before Julian's accession forced the former to forge an uneasy peace. Julian, however, had no concrete reason to reopen hostilities in the east. Socrates Scholasticus attributed Julian's motives to imitation of Alexander the Great, but perhaps the real reason lay in his need to gather the support of the army. Despite his acclamation by the Gallic legions, relations between Julian and the top military officers was uneasy at best. A war against the Persians would have brought prestige and power both to Julian and the army.[[99]]

Julian set out on his fateful campaign on 5 March 363. Using his trademark strategy of striking quickly and where least expected, he moved his army through Heirapolis and from there speedily across the Euphrates and into the province of Mesopotamia, where he stopped at the town of Batnae. His plan was to eventually return through Armenia and winter in Tarsus.[[100]]   Once in Mesopotamia, Julian was faced with the decision of whether to travel south through the province of Babylonia or cross the Tigris into Assyria, and he eventually decided to move south through Babylonia and turn west into Assyria at a later date. By 27 March,[[101]]  he had the bulk of his army across the Euphrates, and had also arranged a flotilla to guard his supply line along the mighty river.[[102]] He then left his generals Procopius and Sebastianus to help Arsacius, the king of Armenia and a Roman client, to guard the northern Tigris line.  It was also during this time that he received the surrender of many prominent local leaders who had nominally supported the Persians.   These men supplied Julian with money and troops for further military action against their former masters.[[103]]   Julian decided to turn south into Babylonia and proceeded along the Euphrates, coming to the fortress of Cercusium at the junction of the Abora and Euphrates Rivers around the first of April,[[104]] and from there he took his army west to a region called Zaitha[[105]] near the abandoned town of Dura where they visited the tomb of the emperor Gordian which was in the area.  On April 7 he set out from there into the heart of Babylonia and towards Assyria.[[106]]

Ammianus then stated that Julian and his army crossed into Assyria, which on the face of things appears very confusing. Julian still seems to be operating within the province of Babylonia between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers.[[107]]   The confusion is alleviated when one realizes that,for Ammianus, the region of Assyria encompassed the provinces of Babylonia and Assyria.[[108]]   On their march, Julian's forces took the fortress of Anatha,[[109]] received the surrender and support of several more local princes, and ravaged the countryside of Assyria between the rivers.[[110]]  As the army continued south, they came across the fortresses Thilutha and Achaiachala, but these places were too well defended and Julian decided to leave them alone.[[111]]   Further south were the cities Diacira and Ozogardana, which the Roman forces sacked and burned.[[112]]   Soon, Julian came to Pirisabora and a brief siege ensued, but the city fell and was also looted and destroyed.[[113]]  It was also at this time that the Roman army met its first systematic resistance from the Persians. As the Romans penetrated further south and west, the local inhabitants began to flood their route.[[114]] Nevertheless, the Roman forces pressed on and came to Maiozamalcha, a sizable city not far from Ctesiphon. After a short siege, this city too fell to Julian.[[115]]   Inexorably, Julian's forces zeroed in on Ctesiphon, but as they drew closer, the Persian resistance grew fiercer, with guerilla raids whittling at Julian's men and supplies. A sizable force of the army was lost and the emperor himself was almost killed taking a fort a few miles from the target city.[[116]]

Finally, the army approached Ctesiphon following a canal that linked the Tigris and Euphrates. It soon became apparent after a few preliminary skirmishes that a protracted siege would be necessary to take this important city.[[117]]   Many of his generals, however, thought that pursuing this course of action would be foolish.[[118]]   Julian reluctantly agreed, but became enraged by this failure and ordered his fleet to be burned as he decided to march through the province of Assyria.[[119]]   Julian had planned for his army to live off the land, but the Persians employed a scorched-earth policy.[[120]] When it became apparent that his army would perish (because his supplies were beginning to dwindle)[[121]] from starvation[[122]] and the heat[[123]] if he continued his campaign, and also in the face of superior numbers of the enemy, Julian ordered a retreat on 16 June.[[124]]   As the Roman army retreated, they were constantly harassed by guerilla strikes.[[125]]   It was during one of these raids that Julian got caught up in the fighting and took a spear to his abdomen. Mortally wounded he was carried to his tent, where, after conferring with some of his officers, he died. The date was 26 June 363.[[126]]

Thus an ignominious end for a man came about who had hoped to restore the glory of the Roman empire during his reign as emperor. Due to his intense hatred of Christianity, the opinion of posterity has not been kind to Julian. The contemporary opinion, however, was overall positive. The evidence shows that Julian was a complex ruler with a definite agenda to use traditional social institutions in order to revive what he saw as a collapsing empire. In the final assessment, he was not so different from any of the other emperors of the fourth century. He was a man grasping desperately to hang on to a Greco-Roman conception of leadership that was undergoing a subtle yet profound change.

Select Bibliography

I. Primary Sources

Ammianus Marcellinus. Res gestae. J.C. Rolfe ed. and trans., Ammianus Marcellinus (3 vols.). London, 1964.

Claudius Mamertinus. Gratiarum actio Mamertini de consulato suo Iuliano Imperatori. C.E.V. Nixon and

Barbara Saylor Rodgers  and C.E.V. Nixon eds., In Praise of Later Roman Emperors: The Panegyrici Latini. Berkeley, 1994.

Codex Theodosianus. T. Mommsen, P.M. Meyer, P. Krüger eds.,

Theodosiani libri XVI cum constitutionibus sirmondianis et leges novellae ad Theodosianum pertinentes (2 vols). Berlin, 1905.

Consularia Constantinopolitana. T. Mommsen ed., MGH AA 9. Berlin 1892, repr. Berlin, 1961.

Epitome de Caesaribus. F.R. Pichlmayr and R. Gruendel eds. Berlin, 1961.

Eunapius. Fragmenta. R.C. Blockley ed. and trans., The Fragmentary Classicising Historians of the Later Roman Empire (2 vols.). Liverpool, 1983.

Eutropius, Breviarum ab urbe condita. H.W. Bird ed. and trans., Translated Texts for Historians vol. 14. Liverpool, 1993.

Corpus Inscriptionum Latinorum. Vol. 9. T. Mommsen ed. Berlin, 1883.

Gregory of Nazianzus. Orationes  4-5 J.P. Migne ed., Patrologiae Graecae 35. Paris, 1864.

Hilary. Liber II ad Constantium. Alfred Feder ed., Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum 60. Vienne, 1916.

Julian. Contra Galilaeos. Wilmer Cave Wright ed. and trans., The Works of the Emperor Julian (3 vols.). London, 1923.

________. Epistula ad SPQ Atheniarum. Wilmer Cave Wright ed. and trans., The Works of the Emperor Julian (3 vols.). London, 1923.

________. Epistulae. Wilmer Cave Wright ed. and trans., The Works of the Emperor Julian (3 vols.). London, 1923.

________. Misopogon. Wilmer Cave Wright ed. and trans., The Works of the Emperor Julian (3 vols.). London, 1923.

Libanius. Orationes. A.F. Norman ed. and trans., Libanius: Selected Works (3 vols.). London 1969.

Orosius. Adversus paganos historiarum libri septem. Z. Zangemeister ed., CSEL 5. Vienna, 1882.

Philostorgius. Historia Ecclesiastica. J. Bidez ed., GCS 21. Paris (?), 1913.

Sextus Aurelius Victor. Liber de Caesaribus. F.R. Pichlmayr and R. Gruendel eds. Berlin, 1961.

Socrates Scholasticus. Historia ecclesiastica. J.P. Migne ed., Patrologiae Graecae 67. Paris, 1864.

Sozomen. Historia ecclesiastica. GCS 50 (1960).

Theoderet. Historia ecclesiastica.Edited by Parmentier GCS (1911).

Zonaras. Epitome Historiarum. Edited by T. Büttner-Wöbst CSHB Bonn, 1897.

Zosimus. Nova Historia. François Paschoud ed. and trans., Zosime: Histoire Nouvelle (3 vols.). Paris, 1971-89.

II. Secondary Sources
 

Athanassiadi-Fowden, Polymnia. Julian and Hellenism: An Intellectual Biography. Oxford, 1981.
Banchich, Tom. "Gallus." De Imperatoribus Romanis website.

________.  "Julian's School Law: Cod. Theod. 13.3.5 and Ep. 42, " Ancient World 24  (1993), 5-14.

Bidez, J. La vie de l'empereur Julian. 3d edition. Paris, 1965.

Bowersock, G.W. Julian the Apostate. Cambridge, MA, 1978.

Breckenridge, James. "Julian and Athanasius: Two Approaches to Creation and Salvation." Theology 76 (1973): 73-81.

Brodd, Jeffrey Burnham, "Apostate, philo-Semite, or syncretic Neoplatonist?: Julian's intentions for rebuilding the Jerusalem temple." Ph.D. diss. (University of California, Santa Barbara, 1992).

Dimaio, Michael. "The Transfer of the Remains of the Emperor Julian from Tarsus to Constantinople." Byzantion 48 (1978): 43-50.

________. "The Antiochene Connection: Zonaras, Ammianus Marcellinus, and John of Antioch on the reigns of the Emperors Constantius II and Julian." Byzantion 50 (1980): 158-85.

________."Infaustis Ductoribus Praeviis: the Antiochene Connection, Part II," Byzantion 51 (1981), 502ff

________. and Duane Arnold. "Per Vim, per Caedem, per Bellum: A Study of Murder and Ecclesiastical Politics in the Year 337 A.D." Byzantion 62 (1992): 158-211.

Jones, A.H.M. The Later Roman Empire 284-602: A Social, Economic and Administrative Survey. 3 Volumes. Oxford, 1964.

________., J.R. Martindale, and J. Morris. The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, Volume I, A.D. 260-395. Cambridge, 1971.

Kaegi, Walter E. "Domestic Military Problems of Julian the Apostate." Byzantinische Forschungen 2 (1967): 247-64.

________. "Constantine's and Julian's Strategies of Strategic Surprise against the Persians." Athenaeum n.s. 69 (1981): 209-13.

Mathisen, Ralph W. "Fourth Century Roman Imperial Types." Journal for the Society of Ancient Numismatics. 3 no.1 (1971-2): 12ff.

Müller-Seidel, Ilse. "Die Usurpation Julians des Abtrünnigen im Lichte seiner Germanenpolitik." Historische Zeitschrift 180 (1955): 225-44.

Robert Panella, "The Emperor Julian and the God of the Jews," Koinonia, 23 (1999), 15-31.

Smith, Rowland. Julian's Gods: Religion and Philosophy in the Thought and Action of Julian the Apostate. London, 1995.

von Borries, E. "Julianos (26)." Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft 10: 26-91. Munich, 1918.

Wilken, Robert L. The Christians as the Pagans saw Them. New Haven, 1984.

Notes:

[[1]] Full name comes from inscriptions and coinage. For details see PLRE 1, s.v. "Fl. Claudius Julianus 29."

[[2]]Bowerstock, Julian, 2-11.

[[3]]Mathisen, Fourth Century, 12-5; Athanassiadi-Fowden, Julian and Hellenism, 96-7.

[[4]]Ammianus, 22.9.2; 25.3.23. The exact date of his birth is a matter of dispute, but most scholars accept 331 as the date based upon Ammianus Marcellinus. See Bowersock, Julian, 22 for a brief overview of the historiography on this controversy. Inscriptional evidence indicates he was born on 6 November (CIL 1² p. 302). Julian himself refers vaguely to his year of birth (Ep 51, 434B). For a detailed discussion of Julian's early life and the sources thereon, see Thomas Banchich, DIR, s.v. "Gallus."

[[5]]PLRE 1, s.v. "Iulius Constantius 7; s.v. "Basilina"; s.v. "Fl. Claudius Constantius Gallus."

[[6]]Bowerstock, Julian, 21.

[[7]]Ammianus, 25.3.23.

[[8]]Libanius, Or. 18.9; PLRE 1, s.v. "Julius Julianus 35."

[[9]]Julian, Misopogon, 352B.

[[10]]For a discussion of the purge of 337, the succession of the sons of Constantine, and the sources that treat these matters, see Michael DiMaio and Duane Arnold, "Per Vim, Per Caedem, Per Bellum: A Study of Murder and Ecclesiastical Politics in the Year 337 A.D.," Byzantion, 62 (1992), 158ff.

[[11]]Julian, Misopogon, 352 A-B.

[[12]]Ammianus, 22.9.4; Sozomen does not mention Eusebius by name (Hist. Eccl., 5.2.7ff).

[[13]]PLRE 1, s.v. "Nicocles;" s.v. "Hecebolius."

[[14]]The exact date of Julian's exile to Macellum is disputed, with some scholars putting it in 342. See Smith, Julian's Gods, 25. 344 seems the most logical date for we have Julian's own account of this six year period where he states that Gallus, who spent the six years at Macellum also, went straight from this estate to the imperial court, where he was proclaimed Caesar. This latter event occurred in 351 (Julian, Ep. Ad SPQ Ath., 272a). For a thorough discussion of the chronology of Julian and Gallus' early education and stay in Asia Minor, its sources, and the problems surrounding this issue, see Banchich, DIR , s.v. "Gallus."

[[15]]PLRE 1, s.v. "Fl. Claudius Constantius Gallus;" s.v. "Aedesius 3;" s.v. "Eusebius 13;" s.v. "Chrysanthius;" and Athanassiadi-Fowden, Julian and Hellenism, 32-3.

[[16]]Julian, Ep. 8.415A-D; 12.383a-b; Athanassiadi-Fowden, Julian and Hellenism, 33-7.

[[17]]Julian, Or. 3.11 8C and Ep. Ad SPQ Ath, 274A-B; for a full discussion of Gallus' Caesarship and his fall from power, see Banchich, DIR, s.v. "Gallus."

[[18]] E. von Borries, RE 10, s.v. "Julianus (26)," col. 31.20ff; J. Bidez, La vie de l'empereur, Julian, (Paris, 1930), 112ff; Julian, Ep. Ad SPQ Ath., 273a, Or. 3.118C; Ammianus, 15.2.7-8; Lib. Or. 18.27; Socrates, Hist. Eccl. 3.1; Sozom., Hist. Eccl.5.2.

[[19]]Ammianus, 15.8.17; Socrates, Hist. Eccl. 2.34; Cons. Const, ann. 355; Zonar., 13.10.1; Julian, Ep. Ad SPQR Ath., 277A; Aur. Vict ., Caesar. 42.17, Epit. 42.12; Orosius, 7.29.15; Sozom., Hist. Eccl. 5.2.20; Ammianus, 15.8.1ff; Theodoret., Hist. Eccl. 3.1.3; Zos., 3.2.1ff.

[[20]]Ammianus, 15.8.17; Lib., Or. 12.39, 13.16; Philostorgius, Hist. Eccl. 4.2; John of Rhodes, Artemii Passio 15.

[[21]]Ammianus, 15.8.18; Philostorgius. Hist. Eccl. 4.2; John of Rhodes, Artemii Passio 15 ; Socrates, Hist. Eccl. 3.1; Zonar., 13.10.1.

[[22]]Ammianus, 15.8.18-21; von Borries, RE 10, col. 33.24.

[[23]]Ammianus, 16.2.1-13.

[[24]]Ammianus, 16.3.1-3; Julian, Ep Ad SPQR Athen. 279B.

[[25]]Ammianus, 16.4.1-5; 16.11.1-15.

[[26]]Ammianus, 16.12.64; Julian, Ep. Ad SPQ Ath., 279B.

[[27]]Ammianus, 16.12.1-70.

[[28]]Lib., Or. 18.70; Ammianus, 17.1.1-14; 17.2.1-4.

[[29]]Ep. Ad SPQR Ath. 280Cff

[[30]]Ammianus, 17.8.1-5; 17.9.1-7.

[[31]]Ammianus, 17.10.1-11; 18.1.1; Lib. Or. 18.77-78.

[[32]]Ammianus, 18.2.1-19; 20.1.1; Lib., Or. 18.18ff; Zonar., 13.10.10.

[[33]]Ammianus 17.3.1-6.

[[34]]Hilary, Liber II ad Constantium, 2.

[[35]]CIL 9.1562.

[[36]]Ammianus spells out what forces Julian sent to Constantius (20.4.1-5), but Julian (Ep Ad SPQR Ath., 280D, 283B), Libanius (Or. 12.58), and Zosimus (3.8.3-4) are considerably vaguer in their comments.

[[37]]Ammianus, 20.4.10-14; Ammianus, 20.4.1; Eunap., fr. 14.4, FHG, 4.19-20; Lib., Or. 12.57-58, 18.92-93;John of Antioch, fr. 177, FHG, 4.605; Zosimus, 3.8.3; Mamertinus, Pan. Gratiarum actio, 4.5-5.1; for a discussion of Julian's acclamation as Augustus, see von Borries, RE 10, col. 36.60ff, Bidez, Julien, 177ff, and Ilse Müller-Seidel, "Die Usurpation Julians des Abtrünnigen im Lichte seiner Germanspolitik," HZ, 180 (1955), 230ff.

[[38]]Ammianus 20.4.17-20; Julian, Ep Ad SPQR Ath. 284B-D; Zonar., 13.10.12-15 ; Zos., 3.9.2-3; Lib., Or. 18.98ff.

[[39]]Jones, Later Roman Empire, 120; Bowerstock, Julian, 46-7.

[[40]]Julian, Ep. Ad SPQ Ath., 277D, 278A-B.

[[41]]p. Ad SPQ Ath., 283A-285B, with his prayer to Zeus specifically at 284C.

[[42]]Ammianus, 20.8.5-18; Ep. Ad SPQ Ath., 283d.

[[43]]Ammianus, 20.8.5-10. ; Ammianus (20.8.13 [=Zonar., 13.10.18]) may preserve actual fragments of the letter which Julian sent to Constantius on this issue; for a fuller discussion of Julian's letter to Constantius, see Michael DiMaio, "The Antiochene Connection: Zonaras, Ammianus Marcellinus, and John of Antioch on the Reigns of the Emperors Constantius II and Julian," Byzantion, 50 (1980),163ff

[[44]]Ammianus, 20.5.10.

[[45]]Julian, Ep. 8.

[[46]]Ammianus 20.10.1-3; 20.11.1-32.

[[47]]Ammianus, 21.1.1-5; possibly she died in childbirth (Zonar., 13.11.2).

[[48]]Ammianus, 21.4.1-8.

[[49]]Ibid, 21.5.1-13.

[[50]]Ibid, 21.6.1-9.

[[51]]Ammianus, 21.7.1-6, 13.6-7; Zonar., 13.11.10-11a; Lib., Or. 12.62, 71 and 18.165; John of Rhodes, Artemii Passio 20 .

[[52]]Ammianus, 21.15.2-5, 22.2.1. On the death of Constantius see Zonar., 13.11.11a; Lib., Or. 18.117; Aur. Vict., , Epit. 42.17; Eutrop., 10.15; John of Antioch, fr. 177, FHG 4.605; John of Rhodes, Artemii Passio 20; Philostorgius, Hist. Eccl. 6.5; Sozom., Hist. Eccl. 5.1.6. Concerning the date of Constantius' demise see Theoph., AM 5852 (1.46.10ff); Cons. Const., ann. 361; Chron. P. ann. 361; Socrates, Hist. Eccl. 2.47-3.1; Ammianus dates the death to 5 October 361 (21.15.3); Jerome gives only the year of Constantius' death (Chron. Ann. 2377 [Helm, 242]). The problem of the date of Constantius' death is resolved as follows. Consularia Constantinopolitana has "III non. Nov." while Ammianus 21.15.4 states "tertium nonarum Octobrium" in many manuscripts. Seyfarth's superior Teubner edition of Ammianus, however, on p. 244, line 14, prints an emended "Novembrium." Cod. Theod. 12.1.49 put Constantius in Antioch on 29 August 361. He could not have reached Mopsucrenae by Oct. 5. Jerome, pace PLRE I p. 226, does not give a month. Word of Constantius' death reached Alexandria on 30 November (Hist. Acephala 8). Two months -- i.e., from October. 5 to November 30 -- would be too long a time for such news to arrive in Egypt. November has to be the choice.

[[53]]Ammianus, 22.2.1-5; Cons. Const., ann. 361; Zos., 3.11.2; Sozom. Hist. Eccl. 5.1.6-8.Socrates, Hist. Eccl 3.1; Zonar., 13.12.2-5; John of Rhodes, Passio Artemii 20-21; Philostorgius. Hist. Eccl. 6.6; Greg. Nazianz., Or. 5.16-17; Lib., Or. 18.120ff.

[[54]]Ammianus, 22.3.1-12; 22.4.1-10; Lib., Or. 18.130ff.

[[55]] Socrates, Hist. Eccl. 3.1; Cedrenus, 1.532.18ff; Theoph., AM 5853 (1.47.11ff).

[[56]]Ammianus, 22.3.7-8.

[[57]]For example, Pentadius was charged with involvement in the matter of Gallus and was threatened with banishment; he was later acquitted (Ammianus, 22.3.5). Apodemius was executed because of his eagerness for the death of Silvanus and Gallus (ibid., 22.3.11). Paul the Catena, head of the agentes in rebus, was convicted on similar charges and executed (John of Rhodes, Artemii Passio 21; Lib., Or. 18.152). Eusebius the Eunuch was condemned for his complicity in the death of Gallus (Zonar., 13.12.26; Ammianus, 22.3.12; John of Rhodes, Artemii Passio 21; Sozom. Hist. Eccl. 5.5.8).

[[58]]Ammianus., 22.3.1ff.

[[59]]ibid., 22.3.2.

[[60]]CTH 1.15.4.

[[61]]Jones, Later Roman Empire, 373-5.

[[62]]CTH 8.5.12.

[[63]] Ibid 11.30.31.

[[64]] Ibid 12.7.2.

[[65]] Julian, Ep. 7.

[[66]] Claudius Mamertinus, Gratiarum actio, 2.1-2.

[[67]]ibid., 16.1-4; 19.1-2.

[[68]]PLRE 1, s.v. "Claudius Mamertinus 2."

[[69]]Athanassiadi-Fowden, Julian and Hellenism, 96.

[[70]]CIL 9.417.

[[71]] Bowerstock, Julian, 24; Jones, Later Roman Empire, 120-1; Banchich, DIR, s.v.. "Gallus".

[[72]]PLRE 1, s.v. "Basilina"; Athanassiadi-Fowden, Julian and Hellenism, 18; for a more detailed assessment of Basilina's bequests, see Banchich, DIR, s.v. "Gallus."

[[73]] Ammianus, 21.2.4-5; Zonar., 13.114-5.

[[74]]Julian, Ep. 47.434D.

[[75]]Ammianus, 22.5.3-4.

[[76]]Julian, Ep. 15.404B-C.

[[77]]Ibid, 52.436A ff.

[[78]]Ammianus, 22.5.4.

[[79]]CTh 12.1.50. Ammianus, 22.10.7; Thomas Banchich has argued that the so-called rescript has been wrongly thought of as the Greek  version of the law in the Codex Theodosianus; the relationship between the two texts, in his opinion, is much more complex  ("Julian's School Law: Cod. Theod. 13.3.5 and Ep. 42, " Ancient World  24 [1993], 5-14)..

[[80]]Julian, Ep. 36.423.A-D.

[[81]]CTH 16.5.37.

[[82]] Julian, Ep. 41.437A-B.

[[83]] Ibid, Ep. 20. Quote from 453D.

[[84]]Ibid, Ep. 22.429.C-D, 430a-d, 431A-D, 432A.

[[85]] Ibid, Ep. 18. 450B-D, 451A-D.

[[86]]Ibid, Contra Galilaeos, 39A-94A.

[[87]] Breckenridge, "Julian and Athanasius," 74-6.

[[88]] Ibid, Contra Galilaeos, 253A-E.

[[89]] Ibid, Contra Galilaeos, 191E.

[[90]]Ammianus, 23.1.7; Julian, Ep. 25.398A.

[[91]]Wilken, Christians, 185.

[[92]]This event naturally received a lot of attention in Christian sources. See Greg. Nazianz., Or. 5.3ff; Socrates, Hist. Eccl. 3.20; Sozom., Hist. Eccl. 5.22.2ff; John of Rhodes, Artemii Passio 58; Philostorgius, Hist. Eccl. 7.9; Theoph., AM 5855; Theodoret., Hist. Eccl. 3.20.4ff; Zonar., 13.12.24ff; for a fuller  discussion of this event, the sources that treat it, and the state of the current scholarship on this matter, see Robert Panella, "The Emperor Julian and the God of the Jews," Koinonia, 23 (1999), 15-31; for another perspective, see  Jeffrey Burnhamm Brodd, "Apostate, philo-Semite, or syncretic Neoplatonist?: Julian's intentions for rebuilding the Jerusalem temple." Ph.D. diss. (University of California, Santa Barbara, 1992)..

[[93]]Ammianus, 23.1.1-3.

[[94]]Ibid, 22.11.1-11.

[[95]]Julian, Ep. 21.

[[96]] Ibid, Ep. 40.

[[97]]Ammianus, 22.9.1-17.

[[98]]Ibid, 22.14.1-7.

[[99]]Socrates HE 3.21; Kaegi, "Constantine's and Julian's Strategies, 209-10;" Kaegi, "Domestic Military Problems," 261-2.

[[100]]Ammianus, 23.2.1-8.

[[101]]Ammianus,23.3.7-8.

[[102]]Ammianus,23.3.8-9; his fleet consisted of warships, vessels for the construction of bridges, and cargo vessels . The number of vessels varies from source to source (Ammianus, 23.3.9, 1100 vessels; Magnus of Carrhae FHG 4.5, 1250 ships; Zos., 3.12.2, ca 1200 vessels as well as many others; Zonar., 13.13.8-9, 1100 vessels).

[[103]]Ammianus, 23.3.1-9.

[[104]]Ammianus, 23.5.1; Zos., 3.12.3, 3.13.1.

[[105]]Zosimus calls it Zautha (3.14.2).

[[106]]Ammianus, puts the tomb before Julian's arrival in Dura (23.5.1-15) . Zosimus 3.14.2 confirms Dura as the location of Gordian's tomb.

[[107]]Ammianus 24.1.1-2.

[[108]]Ibid, 23.6.15; 23.

[[109]]Ibid., 24.1.6ff; Zosimus mentions the event without naming the location (3.14.2-4); Libanius, although deliberately vague, seems to refer to these matters (Or. 18.218).

[[110]] Ibid, 24.1.1-16 ;Zos., 3.15.1ff.

[[111]]Ammianus 24.2.1-2; Zosimus (3.15.1-2) and Libanius (Or. 18.19), though vague, seem to allude to these events..

[[112]]Ammianus, 24.2.3-4; Zosimus calls the place Zaragardia and his account of these events is quite elaborate as well as confusing (3.15.4-6)..

[[113]]Ammianus 24.2.5-22; Lib., Or. 18.227-8; Zos., 3.17.3ff..

[[114]]Ammianus, 24.3.10-14; Lib., Or. 18.223-27; Zos., 3.19.3-4.

[[115]]Ammianus, 24.4.1-31; Libanius seems to relate to this event, although his account is quite vague (Or. 18.235-2420; Zosimus does not specify the city by name (3.20.2-3.22.7).

[[116]]Ammianus, 24.5.1-12.

[[117]] Ibid, 24.6.1-17; for a discussion of Julian's burning the ships at Ctesiphon and his council of war there, see Michael DiMaio,"Infaustis Ductoribus Praeviis: the Antiochene Connection, Part II," Byzantion 51 (1981), 502ff.

[[118]]Ammianus 24.7.1-2; Greg. Nazianz., Or. 5.10 .

[[119]]Ammianus 24.7.4; Lydus, De Mens. 4.75 (102.21ff); Sozom., Hist. Eccl 6.1.9; Libanius puts the emphasis on the uselessness of boats for the return trip (Or. 18.262-3)); other sources mention the event in passing (Augustine, CD 5.21; Zos., 3.26.2-3; Ephram, Hymns 2-3 [=Bickerll, ZKT 2 (1876), 341 345]; Greg. Nazianz., Or.. 5.12; Festus 28; Theodortet., Hist. Eccl., 3.25.1).

[[120]]Ammianus, 24.7.7,25.1.10, 25.2.1; Zos., 3.26.4. 3.27.1, 3.28.1; Lib., Or. 18.264.

[[121]]Ammianus, 25.1.10; Zos., 3.28.1; Greg. Nazianz., Or. 5.12.

[[122]]Ammianus, 25.2.1; Zos., 3.28.3; Greg. Nazianz., Or. 5.12; Magnus of Carrhae, FHG 4.6; Theodoret., Hist. Eccl. 3.25.3 Philostorgius, Hist. Eccl. 7.15.

[[123]]Ammianus, 25.1.3, 25.1.18; Ephram, Hym