EMPEROR JULIAN AND THE ANTIOCHIANS: CONFLICT OF CULTURAL TRADITIONS

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to explore the conflict over cultural traditions that took place between the Antiochians and emperor Julian in July of 362 – March of 363 AD. This confrontation is described in works by the participants, Julian and Libanius, as well as by other authors, both Christian and pagan, which provides with sufficient material to determine the aim of Julian’s arrival in Antioch, to clarify the socio-political situation in the city, to highlight the emperor’s main policies and to shed light onto the parties’ perception of the conflict. The methodology is based on the principles of scientificity, historicism, systematics as well as the use of general scientific methods (induction and deduction, analysis and synthesis) and special historical methods (historical and systemic, historical and genetic, methods of historiographical and source analysis). The scientific novelty consists in the fact that it is the first attempt in the Ukrainian historiography to explore the cultural aspect of the conflict between Julian and the inhabitants of Antioch. The research results in the following conclusions. The crisis resulted primarily from Julian’s intention to reverse cultural trends: the emperor intended to turn Antioch into the foothold for his reforms, so he focused on solving economic problems and, most importantly, on revitalizing pagan cults. Each of the policies failed due to a misunderstanding between Julian and the Antiochians as well as communication problems. The emperor’s economic rulings only exacerbated the food problems; his innovations in the governmental bodies met resistance from the curiales. The bitterest failure was the attempt to act upon religious and cultural traditions: Antiochian Christians refused to be converted to paganism, while religiously indifferent people were frightened by Julian’s fanaticism and obsession with this topic. Julian’s cultural ignorance prevented him from realizing the importance of his visits to the theatre that was primarily a platform for the authority to hear the public opinion in the form of acclamations. The crisis was escalated, among other factors, by the emperor’s personality: he expected his subjects not only to accept his reforms but also to vigorously support them and admire him as the ruler, which was impossible in those circumstances.