Anastasius, Justinian, and the Pagans: A Tale of Two Law Codes and a Papyrus
Anastasius, Justinian, and the Pagans: A Tale of Two Law Codes and a Papyrus
复制标题
阿纳斯塔修斯、查士丁尼和异教徒：两部法典和一份纸莎草纸的故事
DOI：
10.1353/jla.0.0049
复制
发表时间：
2009
影响因子：
0.2
通讯作者：
S. Corcoran
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Corcoran
P. Oxy。1814年的《查士丁尼法典》第十五卷为《查士丁尼法典》第一版的内容提供了最直接的证据。它提供了与第二版（534年的Codex repetitae praelectionis）进行比较的基础，揭示了在后来的版本中如何添加，删除，替换和重新定位材料。特别是，纸莎草纸从CJ 1.11（关于异教徒，祭祀和寺庙）的材料介绍中揭示了帝国对异教徒的政策。因此，CJ21.11.9 = CJ11.11.10被证明是由阿纳斯塔修斯发布的，这一事实经常被学者忽视，因为它没有反映在克鲁格的标准法典版本中。有人认为，在502年布吕泰骚乱之后，可以找到一个令人信服的背景下，这一反异教徒的措施。CJ21.11.10和雅典异教哲学教学的结束之间的传统联系得到了肯定，该法律可追溯到529年夏末/秋季，与Tribonian控制法律的政策相吻合。最后，正是在CJ21.11.10的详细反异教措施中，才有了CJ11.11.1被删除的原因（缺席第二版）可以找到。这个神秘的宪法不应该与君士坦丁的失踪法律反对牺牲，但很可能是在某种程度上保护异教徒的措施，因此很可能是一位前基督教皇帝的私人诏书，源自格里高利法典
P. Oxy. XV 1814 provides the most direct evidence for the contents of the First Edition of the Justinian Code (the Novus Codex of 529). Providing the basis for a comparison with the Second Edition (the Codex repetitae praelectionis of 534), it reveals how in the later edition material was added, removed, replaced, and relocated. In particular, the papyrus throws light on imperial policy toward the pagans from its presentation of material under CJ 1.11 (On Pagans, Sacrifices, and Temples). Thus CJ21.11.9 = CJ11.11.10 is shown to have been issued by Anastasius, a fact often overlooked by scholars, because it is not reflected in Krüger's standard Code edition. It is argued here that a convincing context for this anti-pagan measure can be found in the aftermath of the Brytae riots of 502. The traditional association between CJ21.11.10 and the ending of pagan philosophical teaching in Athens is affirmed, with the law dated to the late summer/autumn of 529, coinciding with Tribonian taking control of legal policy. Finally, it is in the detailed anti-pagan measures of CJ21.11.10 that the reasons for the deletion of CJ11.11.1 (absent from the Second Edition) can be found. This mysterious constitution should not be associated with Constantine's missing law against sacrifice, but was probably a measure protective of pagans in some way and so most likely a private rescript of a pre-Christian emperor deriving from the Gregorian Code