Julian Emperor of Rome

Julian was the last pagan Emperor of Rome. He was highly educated and many consider him a very good military leader. He ruled from AD 360-363. Then he was killed in combat against the Persians. His campaign for the most part was very successful until his death. No one knows for sure how who killed him. In Gore Vidal's historical novel it says he was killed by a Christian Roman. My question say, Julian lived to a ripe old age say in his 70's. Just how much is the Roman empire changed? I have some ideas. But would like to hear from others.
 
It was Julian's desire to create a Pagan philanthropic , and maybe to create a Hellenistic Pagan alternative to the Christian Church, with High Priests charged with the provincial-level administration of all temples. If this was successfully implemented, it might have lended some coherency to the cause of Polytheism. The Christian Church then would have experienced alot of difficulty in re-instating itself into the framework of Roman government, challenged as it would be by an ecclesiastical-style Paganism.
 
It was Julian's desire to create a Pagan philanthropic , and maybe to create a Hellenistic Pagan alternative to the Christian Church, with High Priests charged with the provincial-level administration of all temples. If this was successfully implemented, it might have lended some coherency to the cause of Polytheism. The Christian Church then would have experienced alot of difficulty in re-instating itself into the framework of Roman government, challenged as it would be by an ecclesiastical-style Paganism.

Interesting, never heard of that.

Nevertheless, I'D assume that Julian would soon face problems not only with the Christians, but also with Jews and whats-their-name-with-the-bull-in-the-caves, pagans which do not share his visions about a more coherent "ecclestiastical" paganism - in particular due to theological arguments and due to the simple fact that there is no such thing as a monolitic pagan faith - and finally with more or less non-religious secular elites which may loose power to priests. Given the infighting the Christian churches experienced IOTL, I'd assume that any approach to "reform" Roman paganism is doomed.
 
I've always been rather unconvinced by the arguments of Julian as a great Emperor who could have "saved" the Empire from Christianity and therefore decline. I think this is a bit of a hangover from the Gibbon era, to be honest. Julian was certainly an intelligent man, but he absolutely lacked the common touch (witness the chaos of what happened in Antioch when he arrived), and was at best a decent millitary commander, certainly not another Julius Caesar or Belisarius. His mission into Persia did not experience anywhere near the level of success experienced by those of Trajan or Severus, and by time of Julian's death, the Romans were limping home after an embarrassing series of setbacks and defeats.

If he survives the Persian campaign, I really can't see him surviving long, or the Christian faith being particuarly severely challenged. Julian did not seek to return to outright persecution of the Christians in OTL, but I think ITTL, frustration at Christianity's refusal to die may push him down this path by about 370 or so. Persecution may then, paradoxically enough, push the Christians back together into a single community, rather than a number of squabbling ones, and thus strengthen the faith.
 
Interesting, never heard of that.

Nevertheless, I'D assume that Julian would soon face problems not only with the Christians, but also with Jews and whats-their-name-with-the-bull-in-the-caves, pagans which do not share his visions about a more coherent "ecclestiastical" paganism - in particular due to theological arguments and due to the simple fact that there is no such thing as a monolitic pagan faith - and finally with more or less non-religious secular elites which may loose power to priests. Given the infighting the Christian churches experienced IOTL, I'd assume that any approach to "reform" Roman paganism is doomed.

The Jews and MITHRIASTS are a complete minority. The Jews not possessing anything in the way of political influence, and the Mithriasts being too exclusionary for it to actually matter to them. I'm referring to the organization of Hellenistic and local Romanized cults into a single religious hierarchy. The differences amongst them might not be such a factor. Just look how different the Trinatarians (Catholics) were from the Arians, the Docetists and the Marcionites.

These subdivisions of Christianity had very contrasted ideas about the nature of their god and Jesus, with the Marcionites and the Docetists believing that Jesus was NOT a flesh-and-blood human being, but rather an ethereal spirit whom descended from heaven in the form of an adult. The Marcionites in particular believed their god to be a seperate and superior god to Yahweh of the Old Testament.

The reason why the Catholics triumphed over their rivals was due to its obsession with hierarchal discipline over theology, which is why they compromised alot, and included a number of formerly Pagan traditions and rituals.

The Pagan cults for the most part share enough superficial characteristics, for there to be a possible organization to commandeer the running of temples and sanctuaries across the Empire.
 
Last edited:
I was under the impression Julian was a Mithraist himself, in addition to other things.

Unless he tries to forcibly incorporate every non-Abrahamic religion into some "alternative to Christianity," I doubt they'd give him trouble.
 
I was under the impression Julian was a Mithraist himself, in addition to other things.

Unless he tries to forcibly incorporate every non-Abrahamic religion into some "alternative to Christianity," I doubt they'd give him trouble.

Somehow, I think it would have been impossible for Julian to persue the policies he had if he were a committed Mithriast.

He probably didn't expect to incorporate every single non-Abrahamic religion into a single cult. Just Hellenism, Religio Romana and those Romanized Gods and cult centres heavily acculturated by the Greeks and Romans (Sulis-Minerva, Apollo-Belenos, Cybele, Isis, Serapis ect).
 
Somehow, I think it would have been impossible for Julian to persue the policies he had if he were a committed Mithriast.

I know Mithraism was picky about who could join (soldiers and prominent men), but were they picky about what other religious pursuits members could enjoy like the Christians were?
 
Interesting, never heard of that.

Nevertheless, I'D assume that Julian would soon face problems not only with the Christians, but also with Jews and whats-their-name-with-the-bull-in-the-caves, pagans which do not share his visions about a more coherent "ecclestiastical" paganism - in particular due to theological arguments and due to the simple fact that there is no such thing as a monolitic pagan faith - and finally with more or less non-religious secular elites which may loose power to priests. Given the infighting the Christian churches experienced IOTL, I'd assume that any approach to "reform" Roman paganism is doomed.
Jews? No, I don't think so.
He actually allowed the Jews to rebuild the temple of Jerusalem and just before departing East the works on it have begun, though there was some fire or something right after the construction works began, and it was finally abandoned after Julian got killed.
 
Jews? No, I don't think so.
He actually allowed the Jews to rebuild the temple of Jerusalem and just before departing East the works on it have begun, though there was some fire or something right after the construction works began, and it was finally abandoned after Julian got killed.

Yep. According to Gibbon, it was interpreted that this was a supernatural sign that God didn't want the Temple rebuilt too early.

However, given that there's a fault line running through Palestine up into Asia Minor, it could have been some kind of geologic event.
 
Yep. According to Gibbon, it was interpreted that this was a supernatural sign that God didn't want the Temple rebuilt too early.

However, given that there's a fault line running through Palestine up into Asia Minor, it could have been some kind of geologic event.
yep, I checked it up and there was an earthquake there at the time, though it could also be an accidental fire or even sabotage.
Christians, though, took it as a sign from god that he doesn't want the temple to be built.
 
I know Mithraism was picky about who could join (soldiers and prominent men), but were they picky about what other religious pursuits members could enjoy like the Christians were?

Mithriasts were Henotheistic. They tolerated the existence of other faiths, but if a Mithriast were to become Emperor, he may be expected to endorse either the state religion or the religion of the majority. In the 360's CE, there would still be a large number of practicing Pagans, and for Roman Pagans, the Pontifex Maximus was always the Emperor, while for the Greeks, in centuries past, their kings and archons would have been expected to preside over certain sacred ceremonies. As Julian decided to restore and enhance Polytheism, he would understand what his role would be in traditional Hellenistic Polytheism. And persuant to this action, it would perhaps cost him his place among the congregation of Mithras. Individual Mithriasts might be forgiven for propitiating their private household genii, or sacrificing to agricultural deities to ensure a good harvest, but when it comes to state gods, that may be a different matter.
 
Top