Classical Numismatics Discussion
  Welcome Guest. Please login or register. 10% Off Store-Wide Sale Until 2 April!!! Explore Our Website And Find Joy In The History, Numismatics, Art, Mythology, And Geography Of Coins!!! Expert Authentication - Accurate Descriptions - Reasonable Prices - Coins From Under $10 To Museum Quality Rarities Welcome Guest. Please login or register. 10% Off Store-Wide Sale Until 2 April!!! Explore Our Website And Find Joy In The History, Numismatics, Art, Mythology, And Geography Of Coins!!! Support Our Efforts To Serve The Classical Numismatics Community - Shop At Forum Ancient Coins

New & Reduced


Author Topic: Arianism  (Read 4448 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jochen

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 12278
  • Omnes vulnerant, ultima necat.
Arianism
« on: January 15, 2005, 07:49:10 pm »
Hi!

I wonder wether there are reminiscences in the coinage related to the big struggle of Athanasius (homoousios) against Arianism (homoiousios) and his victory over Arianism at the council of Nicaea AD 325. Any issue which celebrates the victory of the Orthodoxia? Or any issue which reflects the deep religious confrontations of this time?

Any information highly appreciated!

Regards

Offline Varangian

  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 463
  • Det er ikke å unngå fare det vi har komme!
Re:Arianism
« Reply #1 on: January 15, 2005, 08:35:43 pm »
Well, Constans was fiercely orthodox, and Constantius II was as strongly Arian...there would be a place to look for evidence of conflict.

I've always been rather confused by the declaration of "victory" over Arianism at Nicea in 325.  Constantius II actively persecuted Athanasius, assassinated Paul, Bishop of Constantinople, and forced acceptance of Arianism upon the Empire around 359 or so.  

Orthodox Christianity was suppressed until the accession of Jovian, where it finally and permanently gained the ascendancy.


Offline Heliodromus

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2176
Re:Arianism
« Reply #2 on: January 15, 2005, 11:12:04 pm »
Magnentius's "Chi-Rho" type is believed to have been issued to garner orthodox support in the west (which he gained after having killed Constans) as he went against the Arian Constantius II in the east. Given that the Chi-Rho (whatever it may mean!) was a symbol of Constantine's who supported Athanasius's orthodoxy established at the council of Nicea in 325, it does seem reasonable to regard the Chi-Rho as an orthodox symbol.

Whether Magnentius himself was Christian/orthodox or was just using this symbol for strategic advantage is a matter of dispute... Athanasius says he was baptized, yet he (Magnentius) also passed laws reenabling pagan sacrifices!

Here's my own example - a double maiorina (the only type issued for this denomination).

I keep on meaning to start a thread on the meaning & origin of the (nominally) alpha-omega on this coin. The official explanation is that this refers to Revelations 22:13 "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.", which could also be taken as a statement of orthodoxy. I have to wonder though if there might not be a more prosaic explantation... Magnentius was in the habit of putting a letter, often an "A" on his reverses, and perhaps the "omega" was just a value mark for this unusual denomination?!

It's also interesting that the alpha is upper case ("A"), while the omega is lower case ("w"), and also that what is supposedly meant to be an "A" is quite often actually an "N" or even reverse "N" as on my example!

If it does refer to Revelations 22:13, then I'm curious how it got on this coin... was there any precedent for using alpha-omega as an abbreviation before then, and was there any precedent for using it together with the "Chi-Rho"?

Ben

Offline Steve Minnoch

  • Tribunus Plebis 2007
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 2307
Re:Arianism
« Reply #3 on: January 16, 2005, 03:27:09 am »
Without a great deal of direct knowledge all I can do is quote the work of others:
In this case from Adkins, Lesle and Roy A, Dictionar of Roman Religion, 1996,  p46, from the entry headed "Chi-Rho"

"...The chi-rho was often accompanied b the Greek letters alpha and omega (in upper or lower case). These were the first and last letters of the Greek Alphabet, known to Christians from Revelation 1:8 and 21:6, and signified the beginning and the end. In western provinces, the chi-rho and alpha and omega would not have been understood as Greek letters but only as Christian symbols.  The chi-rho is found on numerous portable and nonportable objects such as tableware, votive plaques and lead tanks."

It is accompanied by a sublime photo of a chi-rho (with A and W) on a coffin.

That seems to count heavily against the suggestion that the W has a numismatic purpose: it is hard to believe that it's appearance on a coin led to its general use as a religious symbol when the "reference to Revelation" theory works so well.  I can't point to a dated use of the A-W though.

I know it is dangerous to draw on modern comparisons, but the use of A-Z is so prevalent in obvious in our own culture to refer to the full range of options, I would be surprised if the use of A-W for the same thing did not predate christianity by quite a long time!  But the important question is, did bad actors back then cover the range of emotions from Alpha to Beta?  :)

Steve


Offline Steve Minnoch

  • Tribunus Plebis 2007
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 2307
Re:Arianism
« Reply #4 on: January 16, 2005, 03:33:58 am »
...

Offline slokind

  • Tribuna Plebis Perpetua
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 6654
  • Art is an experimental science
    • An Art Historian's Numismatics Studies
Re:Arianism
« Reply #5 on: January 16, 2005, 04:18:36 am »
The Omega that looks like a W to us evolved from the  :Greek_Omega: naturally in pen and ink, as its round center shrank and its "handles" grew out and up, in the same period that serifs, too, tended to grow.  On papyri you can see pure upper case gradually evolving into lower case bookhands.  The rounded and angular W type of omega occurs quite commonly before the middle of the 3rd century on coins, especially Provincials of Hadrianopolis and Anchilaos in Thrace, but I name those only because I know them.  Pat L.

Offline Robert_Brenchley

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 7307
  • Honi soit qui mal y pense.
    • My gallery
Re:Arianism
« Reply #6 on: January 16, 2005, 05:42:27 am »
I've never been too convinced by the claim that the Magnentius issue was intended as a symbol of orthodoxy, but I haven't looked at early use of the alpha-omega symbol, I'm just a bit weary of insubstantial arguments supporting orthodox conclusions! The reason that the Nicene Creed is regarded as a victory over Arianism is found in the original promulgation, not the version used in church liturgies today.

It seems that at the Council of Nicea in 325, Eusebuis and the Arians attempted to get their views accepted, and were rejected. The The 'orthodox' faction, let by Athanasius, then inserted their own phrases, 'from the substance ot to f the Father' and 'of one substance with the Father', denying the Arian claim that Jesus was 'of similar substance', the 'substance' being the ultimate 'essence' of the person; unfortunately HYPOSTASIS doesn't translate into either Latin or English, and the meaning has been distorted. There was an appendix, now left off, which said 'But as for those who say, There was when he was not, and Before being born he was not, and that he came into being out of nothing, or who assert that the Son of God is of a different hypostasis or substance, or is subject to alteration or change - these the Catholic and apostolic Church anathematizes (or damns). These were all Arian clims; they held that Jesus was created in time, and was not of identical substance to the father. The 'orthodox' claimed that their views were more 'biblical', but in fact both could cite the New Testament in support of their views, they just used different bits of it. If I remember correctly (I have to dash out and take a service, so I'll have to look it up later), Constantine himself is alleged to have dictated the phrase about 'one substance with the Father'.
Robert Brenchley

My gallery: https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/index.php?cat=10405
Fiat justitia ruat caelum

Offline Robert_Brenchley

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 7307
  • Honi soit qui mal y pense.
    • My gallery
Re:Arianism
« Reply #7 on: January 16, 2005, 08:40:02 am »
Right, I'm back from my service. It seems the Eusebius says in a letter that Constantine suggested the key phrase about 'the same substance'. Since Eusebius was arguing the other point of view, he's likely to be telling the truth about this; it sounds as though the conclusion of the Council was determined by the emperor himself. This became the pattern; orthodox emperors called orthodox Councils, Arian emperors Arian Councils. In 357, for instance, a synod of bishops met at Sirmium, in the presence of Constantius II, a convinced Arian. The resulting document was later condemned as 'the blasphemy of Sirmium'.

The document we call the 'Nicene Creed' today was in fact a new document produced at the Council of Constantinople in 451, though the Western Church has altered one phrase since, much to the disgust of the Orthodox Churches. It didn't have the anathemas at the end, and while it has a great deal in common with the original creed of Nicea, there are sufficient differences to regard it as a new production, and the title 'Nicene Creed' used for it as misleading. It was claimed to represent the personal faith of the emperor, so again the imperial influence is present. It's still anti-Arian, with the clause about 'of one substance with the Father', but not so overtly so, as the extreme form of it which was opposed by Nicea was now obsolete.
Robert Brenchley

My gallery: https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/index.php?cat=10405
Fiat justitia ruat caelum

Offline Jochen

  • Tribunus Plebis Perpetuus
  • Procurator Monetae
  • Caesar
  • *****
  • Posts: 12278
  • Omnes vulnerant, ultima necat.
Re:Arianism
« Reply #8 on: January 16, 2005, 08:48:01 am »
Thanks, Robert, to deal with us your profound knowledge! So some of the most important parts of the Nicaeen Creed are created by the emperor. I think he was tired of the endless quarreling about an iota and such things and wanted to set an end to these disputes for he had other problems too in his empire.

It is interesting that nowadays a revival of Arianism could be noticed. Especially under the so-called 'progressive' theologians it is quite usual to say, that the term 'Son of God' is meant only metaphoric, and Jesus was only a  man with high moral standards.
And why they do so? I think there is a connection to the political correctness. If Jesus is 'homoousios' with God, then that is a severe obstacle on the way to the equivalence of all religions and the denying of any absolute truth.

Regards

Offline Robert_Brenchley

  • Procurator Caesaris
  • Caesar
  • ****
  • Posts: 7307
  • Honi soit qui mal y pense.
    • My gallery
Re:Arianism
« Reply #9 on: January 16, 2005, 01:05:48 pm »
'#Son of God' in Jesus' time couls have meant a number of things, and none of them was really what orthodox Christianity means. It's used in the Old Testament to refer to the nation of Israel (Exodus 4:22), the Israelite king (Psalm 2:7, etc.), angels (Genesis 6:2, etc.), and in Eccesiasticus it's used of holy men. Luke uses it of Adam (Luke 3:38). If you really trawled through the texts, you might find yet more meanings, I haven't done a real study on it. So pinning the term down isn't easy at all.

There are very few theologians trying to say that religions are equivalent, mostly the furthest they get is a rather patronising approach where Muslims, say, are seen as 'anonymous Christians' who God treats as though they were 'proper' Christians, even though they're not aware of it. OK as far as it goes, but I wonder how the average Christian would react to being called an 'anonymous Muslim'? I think the real reason is a recognition that the Biblical texts aren't really saying what church tradition has always claimed, and people are trying to get to grips with what the authors might have meant in their own context, before doctrines like the Trinity or the two natures had been developed. But this is getting really OT!
Robert Brenchley

My gallery: https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/index.php?cat=10405
Fiat justitia ruat caelum

 

All coins are guaranteed for eternity