Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T17:23:59.244Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE RHETORIC OF RELIGIOUS CONFLICT IN ARNOBIUS’ ADVERSVS NATIONES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 April 2019

Konstantine Panegyres
Konstantine Panegyres*
Affiliation:
The University of Melbourne
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In this paper I discuss the ways in which the early Christian writer Arnobius of Sicca used rhetoric to shape religious identity in Aduersus nationes. I raise questions about the reliability of his rhetorical work as a historical source for understanding conflict between Christians and pagans. The paper is intended as an addition to the growing literature in the following current areas of study: (i) the role of local religion and identity in the Roman Empire; (ii) the presence of pagan elements in Christian religious practices; (iii) the question of how to approach rhetorical works as historical evidence.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 69 , Issue 1 , May 2019 , pp. 402 - 416
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 I have used the following critical texts of Adu. nat. in the preparation of this paper: Marchesi, C. (ed.), Arnobii Aduersus Nationes Libri VII. CSLP (Turin, 1953 2)Google Scholar; Bonniec, H. Le (ed. transl. comm.), Arnobe. Contre les Gentiles (Contre les Païens). Tome I, Livre I (Paris, 1982)Google Scholar; Champeaux, J. (ed. transl. comm.), Arnobe. Contre les Gentiles (Contre les Païens). Tome III, Livre III (Paris, 2007)Google Scholar; Fragu, B. (ed. transl. comm.), Arnobe. Contre les Gentiles (Contre les Païens). Tome VI, Livres VI–VII (Paris, 2010)Google Scholar. Where the Budé editions were unavailable, I relied upon Marchesi. Translations (where given) are my own, unless otherwise indicated. Cameron, Averil, Christianity and the Rhetoric of Empire: The Development of Christian Discourse (Sather Classical Lectures 55) (California, 1991), 14Google Scholar and passim is essential background to this study, as are the following works: Levieils, X., Contra Christianos: La critique sociale et religieuse du christianisme des origines au concile de Nicée (45–325) (Berlin, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ratti, S., Polémiques entre païens et chrétiens (Paris, 2012)Google Scholar.

2 See Dowden, K., European Paganism: The Realities of Cult from Antiquity to the Middle Ages (London, 2000), 4Google Scholar; Jones, C.P., Between Pagan and Christian (Cambridge, MA, 2014), 1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar, especially 7. The terms ‘pagan’ or ‘paganism’ remain disputed in contemporary scholarship. The view for a long time has been that paganus was used as a derogatory term for non-Christians by early Christian authors, but—as Cameron, Alan, The Last Pagans of Rome (Oxford, 2011), 14–32Google Scholar demonstrates—this view is inaccurate, as in many cases paganus was used neutrally. A useful explanation is that paganus referred to those not included within the Christian community and was not necessarily a hostile term: Mohrmann, C., ‘Encore une fois: paganus’, VChr 6 (1952), 109–21Google Scholar, esp. 114 and 120. For the term nationes and its relation to gentes and ἔθνη, see Löfstedt, E., Late Latin (Oslo, 1959), 74–5Google Scholar.

3 The problem is about terminology. The need to attribute certain things to paganism or Christianity forced interpretations into a binary opposition; this has not been unchallenged in scholarship. For instance, Dowden (n. 2), 4 suggests that ‘paganism is simply the negative of Christianity’, an idea already refuted by Dagron, G., L'Empire romain d'Orient au IVe siècle et les traditions politiques de l'hellénisme: Le témoignage de Thémistios (Travaux et Mémoires 3) (Paris, 1968), 1Google Scholar; and cf. Fox, R. Lane, Pagans and Christians (London, 1986)Google Scholar for a masterly corrective. Recently these phenomena have been reconceived as integration between pagans and Christians rather than ‘conflict’ or ‘competition’: see Frankfurter, D., ‘Hagiography and the reconstruction of local religion in late antique Egypt: memories, inventions, and landscapes’, CHRC 86 (2006), 13–37Google Scholar; id., ‘Onomastic statistics and the Christianization of Egypt: a response to Depauw and Clarysse’, VChr 68 (2014), 284–9; Pina-Cabral, J. de, ‘The gods of the gentiles are demons: the problem of pagan survivals in European culture’, in Hastrup, K. (ed.), Other Histories (London, 1992), 45–61Google Scholar; Trombley, F.R., Hellenic Religion and Christianisation c.370–529, 2 vols. (Leiden, 1993–4)Google Scholar; Testa, R.L., ‘Le relazioni tra pagani e cristiani: nuove prospettive su un antico tema’, Cristianesimo nella Storia 30 (2009), 255–76Google Scholar.

4 Jones (n. 2), 4.

5 Distinction between ‘pagans’ and ‘Christians’: Rebillard, E., Christians and their Many Identities in Late Antiquity, North Africa, 200–450 c.e. (London, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Christianization of ‘pagan’ deities: Simmons, M.B., Arnobius of Sicca: Religious Conflict and Competition in the Age of Diocletian (Oxford, 1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 16, 183–218, 319–34.

6 Micka, E.R., The Problem of Divine Anger in Arnobius and Lactantius (Washington, DC, 1943), 158Google Scholar; Fragu (n. 1), xxxii–xxxvii; Simmons (n. 5), 1–45; Barnes, T.D., ‘Review: monotheists all?’, Phoenix 55 (2001), 142–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Duval, Y., ‘Sur la biographie et les manuscrits d'Arnobe de Sicca’, Latomus 45 (1986), 69–99Google Scholar; van der Putten, J.M.P.B., ‘Arnobe croyait-il à l'existence des dieux païens?’, VChr 25 (1971), 52–5Google Scholar argues that Arnobius does not theoretically exclude the existence of pagan gods, but rather indicates how the Christian God is supreme over them; Geffcken, J., Zwei griechische Apologeten (Leipzig and Berlin, 1907), 290Google Scholar suggests that Arnobius’ concept of the gods might have been taken from Plotinus, Enn. 2.9; see also Lactant. Diu. inst. 1.5.26.

7 Jer. Chron. 326–7 is discussed by Simmons (n. 5), 94–130.

8 Cf. Courcelle, P., ‘La polémique antichrétienne au début du IVe siècle. Qui sont les adversaires païens d'Arnobe?’, RHR 147 (1955), 122–3Google Scholar.

9 Kehoe, D.P., The Economics of Agriculture on Roman Imperial Estates in North Africa (Göttingen, 1988), 11CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Shaw, B.D., Rulers, Nomads, and Christians in Roman North Africa (Aldershot, 1995)Google Scholar.

10 Stēlai reveal the existence of the cult worship of Saturn in combination with worship to Saints, Christ and the Christian God: Beschaouch, A., ‘Une stèle consacrée à Saturne le 8 novembre 323’, BACTH 4 (1968), 253–68Google Scholar; Simmons (n. 5), 184–215.

11 Simmons (n. 5), 22–32; id., Universal Salvation in Late Antiquity: Porphyry of Tyre and the Pagan-Christian Debate (Oxford, 2015) also provides useful information on the competition between Porphyry and Arnobius.

12 Simmons (n. 5), 31–2, 190–2; Le Bonniec (n. 1), 8.

13 Simmons (n. 5), 47–93, 216–42, 319 dates it between 302 and 305, but Cornell, T. (ed.), The Fragments of the Roman Historians (Oxford, 2013)Google Scholar, 1.47 puts forward necessary cautions, suggesting a date between 296 and 311; Edwards, M.J., ‘Dating Arnobius: why discount the evidence of Jerome?’, AntTard 12 (2004), 263–71Google Scholar challenges these views with some controversial but thought-provoking arguments, dating it to 327. Simmons has unfairly called Edwards's position an ‘absolutely ridiculous conclusion’ (Simmons, M.B., ‘Review: B. Fragu, Arnobe. Contre les gentiles. Tome VI. Livres VI–VII’, BMCR 2012Google Scholar, http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2012/2012-08-36.html). It is significant that the only passage in which the work is explicitly mentioned dates it to the reign of Diocletian, between 284 and 1 May 305; see De uir. ill. 79 (cf. the notice in Chron. 326–7): Arnobius sub Diocletiano principe Siccae apud Africam florentissime rhetoricam docuit scripsitque aduersus gentes quae uulgo exstant uolumina; cf. De uir. ill. 80, Firmianus, qui et Lactantius, Arnobii discipulus, sub Diocletiano principe. It is also significant that between writing Chron. (c.380) and De uir. ill. (c.392–3) Jerome accessed Lactantius’ letters, which probably contained reliable information about Arnobius: Simmons (n. 5), 51; Kelly, J.N.D., Jerome: His Life, Writings and Controversies (London, 1975)Google Scholar, 83 n. 19. The controversy over the date is not yet settled. The most recent discussion is Edwards, M.J., ‘Some theories on the dating of Arnobius’, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 92 (2016), 671–84Google Scholar.

14 Croix, G.E.M. de Ste., the, ‘Aspects of “Great” Persecution’, HThR 47 (1954), 75–113Google Scholar; Frend, W.H.C., ‘The failure of the persecutions in the Roman empire’, P&P 16 (1959), 10–30Google Scholar; Davies, P.S., ‘The origin and purpose of the Persecution of a.d. 303’, JThS 40 (1989), 66–94Google Scholar.

15 On Arnobius’ polemic and its contexts: Amata, B., Problemi di antropologia arnobiana (BSR 64) (Rome, 1984), 142Google Scholar; Föllinger, S., ‘Aggression und Adaptation: zur Rolle philosophischer Theorien in Arnobius’ apologetischer Argumentation’, in Fuhrer, T. and Erler, M. (edd.), Zur Rezeption der hellenistischen Philosophie in der Spätantike: Akten der 1. Tagung der Karl-und-Gertrud-Abel-Stiftung vom 22.–25. September 1997 in Trier (Stuttgart, 1999), 13–32Google Scholar.

16 Millar, F., The Emperor in the Roman World (31 b.c. – a.d. 337) (Ithaca, NY, 1977), 573Google Scholar; Geffcken, J., The Last Days of Greco-Roman Paganism (Amsterdam, 1978), 56–74Google Scholar; Liebeschuetz, J.H.W.G., Continuity and Change in Roman Religion (Oxford, 1979), 252Google Scholar.

17 Millar (n. 16), 9 argues that the Greek philosophical climate around the court contributed to the outbreak of Diocletian's persecutions; cf. Corcoran, S., The Empire of the Tetrarchs: Imperial Pronouncements and Government, a.d. 284–324 (Oxford, 1996)Google Scholar, passim.

18 Hadot, P., Porphyre et Victorinus (Paris, 1968), 1.86Google Scholar; perhaps also Cornelius Labeo was an influence on Arnobius’ intellectual development: Kroll, W., ‘Die Zeit des Cornelius Labeo’, RhM 71 (1916), 309–57Google Scholar.

19 Euseb. Hist. eccl. 6.19.

20 The question has been raised as to whether Porphyry was a Christian or converted to Christianity at some point: Socrates, Hist. eccl. 3.23 with Schott, J.M., ‘“Living like a Christian, but playing the Greek”: accounts of apostasy and conversion in Porphyry and Eusebius’, JLA 1 (2008), 258–77Google Scholar and Kaabia, R., ‘Arnobe de Sicca du paganisme au christianisme: l’évolution cultuelle d'un lettré romano-africain’, in Ruggeri, P. and Cocco, M.B. (edd.), L'Africa romana: momenti di continuità e rottura, 3 vols. (Rome, 2015), 2.1217–28Google Scholar.

21 Simmons (n. 11), xii, 3–91 (trio of works on pagan soteriology); id. (n. 5), 216–42 (De philosophia ex oraculis), suggesting how Arnobius seems to respond directly to arguments contained in De philosophia ex oraculis in the first book of Aduersus nationes; id., ‘Review: R. Berchman, Porphyry Against the Christians’, JECS 16 (2008), 263–5, at 264 notes: ‘the extant fragments reveal more a work written for pagans than a predominantly anti-Christian book’. If it were not a predominantly anti-Christian book, it is however difficult to find other reasons for which Constantine had  Porphyry's anti-Christian works burned in 325 (Socrates, Hist. eccl. 1.9.30); see Digeser, E.D., ‘Lactantius, Porphyry, and the debate over religious toleration’, JRS 88 (1998), 129–46Google Scholar, at 131–2; id., The Making of a Christian Empire: Lactantius and Rome (Ithaca, NY, 2000), 90–6; cf. Johnson, A.P., Religion and Identity in Porphyry of Tyre: The Limits of Hellenism in Late Antiquity (Cambridge, 2013), 5, 300CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

22 Johnson (n. 21), 24; Smith, A., Porphyry's Place in the Neoplatonic Tradition: A Study in Post-Plotinian Neoplatonism (The Hague, 1974), 21Google Scholar.

23 Riedweg, C., Pythagoras: His Life, Teaching, and Influence (Ithaca, NY, 2005), 155–61Google Scholar.

24 Simmons (n. 5), 23; thus Augustine called Porphyry's works studies in the magical arts (De ciu. D. 10.29).

25 Cf. Beatrice, P.F., ‘Le traité de Porphyre contre les Chrétiens: l’état de la question’, Kernos 4 (1991), 119–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 136; Le Bonniec (n. 1), 57.

26 Frend, W.H.C., ‘Prelude to the Great Persecution: the propaganda war’, JEH 38 (1987), 1–18Google Scholar. Scholarship has tended to maximize the literary aspects of these works while minimizing their oratorical polemical functions; for the fragments of Porphyry's Contra Christianos, consult Becker, M., Porphyrios, Contra Christianos: Neue Sammlung der Fragmente, Testimonien und Dubia mit Einleitung, Übersetzung und Anmerkungen: Texte und Kommentare (Berlin, 2016)Google Scholar with Cameron, Alan, ‘The date of Porphyry's ΚΑΤΑ ΧΡΙΣΤΙΑΝΩΝ’, CQ 17 (1967), 382–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Barnes, T.D., ‘Porphyry Against the Christians: date and the attribution of fragments’, JThS 24 (1973), 424–42Google Scholar; id., ‘Scholarship or propaganda? Porphyry Against the Christians and its historical setting’, BICS 39 (1994), 53–65; Berchman, R.M., Porphyry Against the Christians: Studies in Platonism, Neoplatonism, and the Platonic Tradition (Leiden, 2005)Google Scholar. On rhetoric in the world of Arnobius: Heath, M., ‘Rhetoric in mid-antiquity’, in Wiseman, T.P. (ed.), Classics in Progress (Oxford, 2002), 419–39Google Scholar.

27 Dunn, G.D., Tertullian (London, 2004), 25CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

28 de Labriolle, P., Histoire de la littérature latine chrétienne (Paris, 1924), 265Google Scholar is a strong proponent of this. On early Christian rhetoric more generally: Wilder, A.N., Early Christian Rhetoric: The Language of the Gospel (Cambridge, MA, 1964)Google Scholar; Hughes, F.W., Early Christian Rhetoric and 2 Thessalonians (Sheffield, 1989)Google Scholar; Lukas, V., Rhetorik und literarischer ‘Kampf’: Tertullians Streitschrift gegen Marcion als Paradigma der Selbstvergewisserung der Orthodoxie gegenüber der Häresie (Frankfurt am Main, 2008)Google Scholar; Sider, R., Ancient Rhetoric and the Art of Tertullian (Oxford, 1971)Google Scholar; Cameron (n. 1). For a comparative analysis of the rhetoric of Arnobius and Firmicus Maternus, see Semperena, L. and Guadalupe, M., ‘Rhétorique et argumentation dans l'apologétique latine de la période constantinienne’, in Puertas, A.J. Quiroga (ed.), Rhetorical Strategies in Late Antique Literature: Images, Metatexts and Interpretation (Leiden, 2017), 44–72Google Scholar.

29 Heath, M., ‘Porphyry's rhetoric’, CQ 53 (2003), 141–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30 On the culture of Latin apologetic: Edwards, M.J., Religions of the Constantinian Empire (Oxford, 2015), 19–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

31 Euseb. Praep. euang. 5.1.10 = A. Harnack, Porphyrios, Gegen die Christen (Berlin, 1916), fr. 80: νυνὶ δὲ θαυμάζουσιν εἰ τοσούτων ἐτῶν κατείληφεν ἡ νόσος τὴν πόλιν, Ἀσκληπιοῦ μὲν ἐπιδημίας καὶ τῶν ἄλλων θεῶν μηκέτι οὔσης; Ἰησοῦ γὰρ τιμωμένου οὐδεμιᾶς δημοσίας τις θεῶν ὠφελείας ᾔσθετο.

32 Adu. nat. 1.3, arguing that pagans blame disasters on the offences of the Christians (iniuriis … offensionibus).

33 Adu. nat. 2.13. On pagan and Christian theories of salvation, see: Chadwick, H., ‘Christian and Roman universalism in the fourth century’, in Wickham, L.R. and Bammel, C.P. (edd.), Christian Faith and Greek Philosophy in Late Antiquity (Leiden, 1993), 26–42Google Scholar; Simmons (n. 5), 264–303; Hirschman, M., ‘Rabbinic universalism in the second and third centuries’, HThR 93 (2002), 101–15Google Scholar; Buell, D.K., ‘Race and universalism in early Christianity’, JECS 10 (2002), 429–68Google Scholar; Simmons, M.B., ‘Via universalis salutis animae liberandae: the Pagan-Christian debate on universalism in the later Roman empire (a.d. 260–325)’, StPatr 40 (2006), 245–61Google Scholar; id., ‘Porphyrian universalism: a tripartite soteriology and Eusebius's response’, HThR 102 (2009), 169–92; id. (n. 11).

34 The notion of conflict is reflected in some contemporary scholarship, influenced by Momigliano, A. (ed.), The Conflict between Paganism and Christianity in the Fourth Century (Oxford, 1963)Google Scholar. In recent work the discourse has been broken down, though it was immediately questioned by P. Brown, ‘Recensione’, The Oxford Magazine (May 16, 1963), 300–1. See Testa, R.L. (ed.), The Strange Death of Pagan Rome (Turnhout, 2013)Google Scholar; Salzman, M., Sághy, A. and Testa, R.L. (edd.), Pagans and Christians in Late Antique Rome: Conflict, Competition, and Coexistence in the Fourth Century (Cambridge, 2016)Google Scholar, passim. John Chrysostom's representation of pagan attacks upon Christian doctrine reveals the difficulty Christians had in differentiating themselves from paganism: ‘How do you accuse us of polytheism when you have three gods?’ (πῶς … ἡμῖν ἐκαλεῖ πολυθεΐαν;): see John Chrysostom, In Joann. Hom. 17.4 (= PG 49.112) with translation and discussion in Cameron (n. 2), 29.

35 Arnobius has been described as an early Voltaire: Labriolle (n. 28), 265. Style and tone: Gabarrou, F., Le Latin d'Arnobe (Paris, 1921)Google Scholar; Hagendahl, H., La prose métrique d'Arnobe (Göterborg, 1936)Google Scholar; K.B. Francke, Die Psychologie und Erkenntnislehre des Arnobius (Diss., Leipzig, 1878); Viciano, A., Retórica, filosofía y gramática en el Aduersus nationes de Arnobio de Sica (Frankfurt and Bern, 1993)Google Scholar. Greek influences: Festugière, A.-J., ‘Arnobiana’, VChr 6 (1952), 208–54Google Scholar; Fragu (n. 1), xxiv–xxv; Plato as supreme philosopher: Adu. nat. 2.36, though being pagan he is uester Plato at 2.13–14. Arnobius’ classicizing or archaic style: van der Putten, J.M.P.B, ‘L'emploi de nec et neque dans Arnobe’, VChr 25 (1971), 51Google Scholar; T. Lorenz, De clausulis Arnobianis (Diss., Breslau, 1910); Mohrmann, C., Études sur le latin des chrétiens III (Paris, 1961), 138Google Scholar.

36 Arnobius’ knowledge of Roman poetry: Fragu (n. 1), xxiv–xxix; Freund, S., Vergil im frühen Christentum: Untersuchungen zu den Vergilzitaten bei Tertullian, Minucius Felix, Novatian, Cyprian und Arnobius (Paderborn, Munich, Vienna and Zurich, 2003), 256–342Google Scholar; Le Bonniec, H., ‘Echos ovidiens dans l’Aduersus nationes d'Arnobe’, in Chevalier, R. (ed.), Colloque présence d'Ovide (Paris, 1982), 145–57Google Scholar.

37 On Cicero, see Arnobius’ adulation at Adu. nat. 3.6; Le Bonniec (n. 1), 47; id., ‘L'exploitation apologétique par Arnobe du De natura deorum de Cicéron’, Caesarodunum 19 (1984), 89–101; but note Edwards (n. 30), 39. Cf. Festugière (n. 35).

38 Arn. Adu. nat. 3.6–7; L. Táran, Collected Papers: 1962–1999 (Leiden, 2001), 463.

39 MacCormack, S., ‘Cicero in Late Antiquity’, in Steel, C.E.W. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Cicero (Cambridge, 2013), 251–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 256–7.

40 Adu. nat. 2.73: non doctorum in litteris continetur Apollinis nomen Pompiliana indigitamenta nescire? Cf. Lipka, M., Roman Gods: A Conceptual Approach (Leiden, 2009), 70–1CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On Arnobius and the indigitamenta, see now Champeaux, J., ‘À l’école de Varron: Arnobe et les indigitations’, in Garcea, A., Lhommé, M.-K. and Vallat, D. (edd.), Polyphonia Romana: hommages à Frédérique Biville (Hildesheim, 2013), 743–53Google Scholar.

41 As well as drawing on Varro's style, Arnobius cites Varro's information thus: e.g. Adu. nat. 6.3.8 (ut tradit in Admirandis Varro), 3.39, 3.40, 3.41, 4.3, 5.8 (Varro ille Romanus multiformibus eminens disciplinis et in uetustatis indagatione rimator), 6.3, 6.11, 6.23, 7.1, 7.2. Cf. Le Bonniec (n. 1), 48.

42 Frend (n. 26), 14; Momigliano, A., On Pagans, Jews, and Christians (Middletown, CT, 1987), 61–5Google Scholar, 71.

43 See Champeaux, J., ‘Arnobe lecteur de Varron (Adu. nat. III)’, REAug 4 (1994), 327–52Google Scholar; Lehmann, Y., Varron théologien et philosophe romain (Collection Latomus 237) (Brussels, 1997)Google Scholar.

44 Sogno, C., ‘Persius, Juvenal, and the transformation of satire in Late Antiquity’, in Braund, S. and Osgood, J. (edd.), A Companion to Persius and Juvenal (Oxford, 2012), 363–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 369.

45 Adu. nat. 5.18.5. Cf. Masterson, M., ‘Authoritative obscenity in Iamblichus and Arnobius’, JECS 22 (2014), 373–98Google Scholar.

46 On Christian self-definition, see generally Meyer, B.F., Sanders, E.P. (edd.), Self-Definition in the Greco-Roman World. Vol. 3: Jewish and Christian Self-Definition (Philadelphia, 1983)Google Scholar, passim. A useful brief discussion is Löhr, W., ‘Modelling second-century Christian theology’, in Paget, J.C. and Lieu, J. (edd.), Christianity in the Second Century: Themes and Development (Cambridge, 2017), 151–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 168. For other treatments, see Pocock, J.G.A., Barbarism and Religion. Vol. 1: The Enlightenments of Edward Gibbon (Cambridge, 2004), 65–6Google Scholar: the early Church's struggle for self-definition is discussed in Jurieu's, P. Histoire critique des dogmes et des cults (Paris, 1704)Google Scholar.

47 Cf. McCracken, G.E., Arnobius of Sicca: The Case Against the Pagans (Westminster, MD, 1949), 23Google Scholar; Simmons (n. 5), 7, 113–17; Edwards, M.J., ‘The flowering of Latin apologetic’, in Edwards, M.J., Goodman, M., Price, S. and Rowland, C. (edd.), Apologetics in the Roman Empire: Pagans, Jews, and Christians (Oxford, 1999), 197–222Google Scholar; Testa, R.L., ‘Il terrore delle leggi in difesa dell’insatiabilis honor della Chiesa: la retorica della rappresentazione cristiana dell'Impero’, in Paño, M.V. Escribano and Testa, R.L. (edd.), Política, religión y legislación en el imperio romano. Politica, religione e legislazione nell'impero romano (IV e V secolo d. C.) (Bari, 2014), 117–38Google Scholar; vital background in Price, S., ‘Religious mobility in the Roman empire’, JRS 102 (2012), 1–19Google Scholar.

48 νυνὶ δὲ θαυμάζουσιν εἰ τοσούτων ἐτῶν κατείληφεν ἡ νόσος τὴν πόλιν, Ἀσκληπιοῦ μὲν ἐπιδημίας καὶ τῶν ἄλλων θεῶν μηκέτι οὔσης; Ἰησοῦ γὰρ τιμωμένου οὐδεμιᾶς δημοσίας τις θεῶν ὠφελείας ᾔσθετο, Euseb. Praep. euang. 5.1.10 = Harnack (n. 31), fr. 80. The passage indicates competition between rival cults. On rivalry and imitation between the cults of Asclepius and Jesus: Yeung, M.W., Faith in Jesus and Paul (Tübingen, 2002), 83–95Google Scholar, especially 89; Wells, L., The Greek Language of Healing from Homer to New Testament Times (Berlin and New York, 1998), 13–102Google Scholar, 120–54.

49 van der Putten, J.M.P.B., ‘Arnobiana’, VChr 25 (1971), 40–50Google Scholar, at 42–3, on Arnobius’ use of gens.

50 Simmons (n. 5), 319–34.

51 M. Leglay, Saturn Africain. Histoire (Paris, 1966) (= SAH), 1.97–9, 1.190–1; for the image, see Leglay, M., Saturne Africain. Monuments, 2 vols. 1: Afrique Proconsulaire; 2. Numidie-Maurétanies (Paris, 1966)Google Scholar (= SAM), 1.227; Picard, G.C., Les religions de l'Afrique antique (Paris, 1954), 120Google Scholar.

52 Simmons (n. 5), 193.

53 Lepelley, C., Les cités de l'Afrique romaine au bas-empire, 2 vols. (Paris, 1979–81), 1.34Google Scholar; Peyras, J., ‘Le fundus aufidianus: étude d'un grand domaine romain de la région de Mateur’, AntAfr 9 (1975), 181–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 216; CIL 8.11824 = ILS 7457.

54 SAM 1.230 no. 1 = Merlin, A., Inscriptions Latines de la Tunisie (Paris, 1944)Google Scholar (= ILT), 573.

55 SAM 1.230 no. 1 = ILT 573.

56 SAM 1.236 no. 5; SAM 1.237 no. 7; perhaps the ritual referred to at Adu. nat. 7.29.4.

57 SAM 1.291 no. 1, plate 7, fig. 1.

58 Ferchiou, N., ‘Témoignages du culte de Saturne dans le Jebel Mansour (Tunisie)’, CahTun 26 (1978), 9–25Google Scholar, at 23 fig. 1.

59 Bonniec, H. Le, ‘“Tradition de la culture classique”: Arnobe témoin et juge des cultes païens’, BAGB 2 (1974), 201–22Google Scholar.

60 Cf. Brown, P., The Cult of the Saints: Its Rise and Function in Late Antiquity (Chicago, 1981), 5Google Scholar; Mora, F., Arnobio e i culti di mistero: Analisi storico-religiosa del V libro dell'Aduersus Nationes (Rome, 1994)Google Scholar.

61 e.g. I.Carth. 3.271 (= Ennabli, L., Les Inscriptions funéraires chrétiennes de Carthage. Vol. 3: Carthage intra et extra muros [Paris and Rome, 1991]Google Scholar).

62 See Simmons (n. 5), 193–211.

63 Tertullian is perhaps referring to the sun cult, which emerged in the 270s at Rome: Lane Fox (n. 3), 593. On this statement of Tertullian, see Taylor, M., Anti-Judaism and Early Christian Identity: A Critique of the Scholarly Consensus (Leiden, 1995), 14Google Scholar.

64 Cadotte, A., La Romanisation des Dieux: L'interpretatio romana en Afrique du Nord sous le Haut-Empire (Leiden, 2007)Google Scholar; Benabou, M., La résistance africaine à la romanisation (Paris, 1976)Google Scholar; Leglay (n. 51 [SAH]).

65 Blomart, A., ‘Frugifer: une divinité mithriaque léontocéphale décrite par Arnobe’, RHR 210 (1993), 5–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

66 e.g. M. Garcia, Saint Alban and the Cult of Saints in Late Antique Britain (Diss., Leeds, 2010); Ginzburg, C., I benandanti: Stregoneria e culti agrari tra Cinquecento e Seicento (Turin, 2002 2)Google Scholar; Hen, Y., Culture and Religion in Merovingian Gaul, a.d. 481–751 (Leiden, 1995)Google Scholar. The Gosforth Cross (a.d. 930–50) in Cumbria is an outstanding example of the unification of Christian and pagan symbolism: Berg, K., ‘The Gosforth Cross’, JWI 21 (1958), 27–43Google Scholar.

67 It was for theologians such as Arnobius and Porphyry to supply the philosophical difference, if there was little practical difference. Consider the way in which the Christian God gradually assumed Saturn's role as the protector of agriculture in Sicca: Simmons (n. 5), 211–15. It seems that, on undertaking such assimilation, Christian authors accepted the necessity for peaceful integration in practice while strongly rejecting it in rhetoric.

68 Arnobius has perhaps adapted παρονομασία, or the device of etymologizing wordplay, from Varro, who also used it to describe religious matters (Ling. 5.61).

69 See e.g. Dowden (n. 2), 7–8. On Arnobius’ treatment of rural divinities, see now Champeaux, J., ‘Au pays des dieux: la géographie religieuse d'Arnobe dans l’Aduersus nationes’, in Julia, M.-A. (ed.), Nouveaux horizons sur l'espace antique et moderne: actes du symposium ‘Invitation au voyage’ juin 2013, Lycée Henri IV (Bordeaux, 2015), 47–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

70 See Curran, J.R., Pagan City and Christian Capital: Rome in the Fourth Century (Oxford, 2000)Google Scholar; Testa, R.L., ‘Concluding remarks: Vrbs Roma between pagans and Christians’, in Salzman, M., Sághy, A. and Testa, R.L. (edd.), Pagans and Christians in Late Antique Rome: Conflict, Competition, and Coexistence in the Fourth Century (Cambridge, 2016), 399–407Google Scholar.

71 Simmons (n. 5), 187.

72 Warmington, B.H., The North African Provinces from Diocletian to the Vandal Conquest (Cambridge, 1954), 66Google Scholar.

73 Kehoe (n. 9), 11.

74 Shaw (n. 9), lxxx.

75 Gsell, S., ‘Esclaves ruraux dans l'Afrique romaine’, in Mélanges Gustave Glotz (Paris, 1932), 1.397–415Google Scholar, at 1.415 n. 1.

76 Kehoe (n. 9), 118.

77 Kehoe (n. 9), 118; Gummerus, H., Der römische Gutsbetrieb (Leipzig, 1906), 84Google Scholar; Neeve, P.W. de, Colonus (Amsterdam, 1984)Google Scholar, 102 n. 173; Martin, R., Recherches sur les agronomes latins et leurs conceptions économiques et sociales (Paris, 1971), 347–8Google Scholar.

78 Kehoe, D., ‘Private and imperial management of Roman estates in North Africa’, Law and History Review 2 (1984), 241–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

79 Kehoe (n. 9), 11–12.

80 See Beschaouch (n. 10).

81 Jordan, D., ‘Two Christian prayers from south-eastern Sicily’, GRBS 25 (1984), 297–302Google Scholar; id., ‘Cloud-drivers and damage from hail’, ZPE 133 (2000), 147–8.

82 On Arnobius’ treatment of these topics, cf. also Bonniec, H. Le, ‘Un témoignage d'Arnobe sur la cuisine de sacrifice romain’, REL 63 (1985–7), 183–92Google Scholar.

83 McGowan, A., Ascetic Eucharists: Food and Drink in Early Christian Ritual Meals (Oxford, 1999), 3CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

84 McGowan (n. 83), 12.

85 Alikin, V.A., The Earliest History of the Christian Gathering: Origin, Development and Content of the Christian Gathering in the First to Third Centuries (Leiden, 2010), 35CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

86 On this subject, see Diosono, F., ‘Professiones gentiliciae: the collegia of Rome between paganism and Christianity’, in Salzman, M.R., Testa, R.L. and Sághy, M. (edd.), Pagans and Christians in Late Antique Rome (Cambridge, 2016), 251–72Google Scholar.

87 See Trombley (n. 3), passim.