HUP Reference: Late Antiquity: Excerpts

EXCERPTS

From A: Angels

The notion that supernatural beings mediate between the divine and human realms in the capacity of "messengers" (mlk; Greek angelos) appears throughout the ancient Mediterranean world, but it is the biblical formulation of angels that underlies their complex development and definition in late antiquity.

The Dead Sea Scrolls, which offer a microcosm of sectarian Jewish angelology in the Graeco-Roman period, posit angels both as representatives of the divine presence and as models of participation in that presence. The imitation of the angels' liturgies is a theme that continues throughout late antiquity. The idealization of the Jerusalem Temple in the Graeco-Roman period also led to the concept of a heavenly temple and a cult staffed with angelic priests. In the Byzantine period, images of the heavenly throne room mirrored the emperor's court, with angels depicted as eunuchs in court apparel.

Another idea articulated in Jewish and Christian texts of the early Roman period that influenced late antique belief was the division of heaven into zones. These divisions, based on proximity to the divine throne, protected the heavenly realm from the impure (Ascension of Isaiah, Apocalypse of Elijah). Numerous texts and amulets show a popular idea in late antique angelology in which particular angelic names and "personalities" were invoked against particular demons and misfortunes (Tobit, Testament of Solomon, 1 Enoch). Such traditions continued with great resilience throughout Judaism and Christianity and are maintained even today in Ethiopian Christianity.

This complex series of angelological traditions, when coupled with the various indigenous Mediterranean and Near Eastern beliefs about divine mediators in the world (often designated angeloi in descriptions), led to the definition of a Christian angelic "pantheon" so well represented in Byzantine icons and texts. From the 4th century through the course of western and Byzantine Christianization, local sacred places often came to be redefined as sites of angelic visitation and service (when they were not rendered as saints' shrines or else castigated as demonic). Local legend and iconography of these angels' activities often preserve the traditions of earlier divinities.

Fourth century theologians, in reaction to Arian Christology, were concerned to distinguish between angels, Christ, and the Holy Spirit. Christ was the head of the angels, but angel Christology was rejected. Basil of Caesarea insisted that the Holy Spirit was not one of the "ministering spirits" created by God. Angels were created by God either before or concurrently with the creation of the material world. The bodies of angels were often thought to be made of a spiritual substance, less corporeal than those of humans. The primary function of angels was to praise God, but they possessed free will. Satan was the leader of fallen angels.

In the 6th century Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite developed Christian angelology in his Celestial Hierarchy. He organized angels into a hierarchy between humans and God, consisting of three triads. Those closest to God were the seraphim, cherubim, and thrones. The middle group included virtues, dominations, and powers. Principalities, archangels, and angels were the orders of angels most active in the human sphere. Gregory the Great and Maximus the Confessor developed these ideas, which proved influential in later medieval angelology.

In late antiquity asceticism came to be identified with the "angelic life." Ascetic commentary on the Gospel, (and Tatian's Diatessaron) interpreted Matthew 22:32 to mean that those who neither married nor were given in marriage in this life were like the angels.

Byzantine liturgy and liturgical art preserved the older Jewish apocalyptic understanding of angels as signs of divine presence and human-divine commingling. Even before the 3rd century development of the Sanctus or Trisagion portion of the liturgy (based on the mysterious vision in Isa. 6:1-5), Christian ritual had emphasized communion with angels as its apex. Byzantine liturgy put ever more emphasis on the belief in angelic participation, not only expanding the Trisagion but also including angelic iconography in processions and ecclesiastical decoration. Processional fans bear the esoteric figures of seraphim, while the later Byzantine development of the iconostasis was meant to represent the immediate proximity of heaven and its angelic liturgy within the liturgical space.

Of the three archangels recognized by the church, Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael, the first two are more frequently depicted. The cult of Michael, located primarily in Asia Minor, was more developed than that of any other archangel. He was also revered in Constantinople, with many churches dedicated to him dating from the 6th century.

In Islam, angels are the guardians of humans, cognizant of and recording the deeds of every person (Qur'an 82:11). In the Qur'an, God commands them to bow down before Adam (for example, 2:34), the significance of this being the primacy of humankind in God's creation. Angels are present in heaven near God and were created to praise him, but other tasks are mentioned as well. In several verses they figure prominently in the deaths of mortals, when they punish unbelievers (7:50) or cause them to die (47:27). The most visual description of them says that they are "messengers with wings two, three, and four" (35:1). There is no separate conception of archangels in Islam; however, Mikal (Michael) and Jibril (Gabriel) are two of the very few angels mentioned by name. The latter is the figure who appears to Muhammad and conveys to him the revelation from God. Iblis (Satan) is an angel who refused to make obeisance to Adam and was subsequently cast out of heaven, but since he is also described as one of the jinn (18:50), a third category of intelligent beings, Muslim commentators have taken his mixed nature to be the cause of his imperfection and disobedience. The two remaining named angels present a unique case. These are the "Babylonian" angels Harut and Marut, who teach humans sorcery that could "cause a man and wife to separate" but do so with God's permission and warn their victims of their intentions beforehand (2:102). Georges Vajda has argued that their names may be linked to two Zoroastrian "archangels," Haurvatat and Ameretat.

The activities and characters of the Qur'anic angels were considerably fleshed out by early Muslim commentators and collectors of legends. Other angelic figures, including Israfil, the trumpet blower, and 'Isra'il, the angel of death, were added to the core of Muslim beliefs. Many of the stories are based on the traditions of Christianity, Judaism, Zoroastrianism, and local Arabian lore. In general, Islamic angels are most often depicted as figures who perform a variety of services in connection with the period of death and resurrection. An elaborate eschatology of the "punishment in the tomb" alluded to in several Qur'anic verses developed around two non-Qur'anic angels, Munkar and Nakir, who are said to question the dead about their belief on the night after burial. In Shi'ism, angels also attend the imAms in a variety of ways, joining them in prayer and shaking their wings over the imAms' children.

BIBL.: Richard Bell and W. M. Watt, Bell's Introduction to the Qur'an, rev. and enlarged by W. M. Watt (Edinburgh, 1970). B. Caseau, "Crossing the Impenetrable Frontier between Earth and Heaven," Shifting Frontiers in Late Antiquity, ed. R. Mathisen and H. Sivan (Aldershot, Eng., 1996), 333-342. C. Mango, "Saint Michael and Attis," Deltion Christ. Arch. Etaireias, series 4, 11 (1986): 39-62. G. F. Hill, "Apollo and St. Michael: Some Analogies," Journal of Hellenic Studies 36 (1916): 134-162. Glenn Peers, "Apprehending the Archangel Michael," Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 20 (1996): 100-121. Christopher Rowland, The Open Heaven: A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early Christianity (New York, 1982). Individual angels in Islam can be found in the Encyclopedia of Islam, new ed. (Leiden, 1954-).

D.T.F., EDS.

From B: Banditry

From the perspective of the Roman imperial administration, bandits were men who used violence to threaten the political, social, and moral order of the Roman state. Some of these bandits were simply continuing a traditional lifestyle that had always included thievery, rustling, and extortion, while others deliberately resorted to force to challenge the power of imperial magistrates or local notables. The label latrocinium, or banditry (Greek lesteia), thus reflected not necessarily rampant lawlessness but rather the indignation of administrators and notables at their inability to impose their authority in outlying regions. Since the Roman imperial administration was most effective in cities, in lowlands, and in frontier zones dominated by Roman troops, bandits seemed to be especially prevalent in regions isolated by difficult topography. The swamps around the Nile Delta, for instance, were acknowledged to be infested with boukoloi ("cowboys") who had founded villages and raised families. The most common hideouts for bandits were mountains. Isauria in particular had a notorious reputation for its autonomous highland lords, whom Roman troops tried eventually to isolate by enforcing a blockade

To survive, bandits relied on the resources of local communities and sometimes even entire regions; in Syria one village was filled with opulent homes because its men had plundered neighboring villages by disguising themselves as soldiers and merchants. Great landowners offered refuge to bandits in exchange for their service as armed protectors. Thus, controlling bandits was difficult. Cities maintained only small police forces and relied on local notables to serve as peace officers and to organize posses. Governors were expected to maintain order in their provinces, and some even hired bounty hunters and professional killers. Emperors occasionally ordered army troops to track down bandits, or appointed special "prefects for repressing bandits," but in what was perhaps the most successful strategy, they also simply co-opted bandit chieftains by offering them formal friendship and recruiting their supporters into the Roman army.

Because bandits existed on the economic, cultural, and geographical margins of Roman society, they came to represent a symbolic paradigm whose alleged attributes of lawlessness and cruelty (and even cannibalism) were advertised as the reverse of normal society. Ancient novelists, historians, and even rabbis in Judaea played with these ideological categories in order to comment on the nature of power and justice, sometimes implying that bandits were more just than current rulers. Emperors also manipulated the stereotypes of banditry to define political legitimacy: during periods of uncertain succession, civil war, and pressure on the frontiers, they were quick to stigmatize their rivals as mere bandits. By representing a livelihood based on the use of force and defiance, bandits clearly defined the practical limits of state control; by being included in an ideology of state legitimacy, they also hinted at the potential for the emergence of new rulers or even the formation of an alternative state. The best understanding of the ongoing dialectic between banditry and state power came, typically, from Bishop Augustine of Hippo (City of God 4.4): "If justice is removed, what are kingdoms but gangs of bandits on a large scale?"

BIBL.: C. E. Bosworth, "Liss," Encyclopaedia of Islam, New Edition (Leiden, 1954-). B. Isaac, "Bandits in Judaea and Arabia," Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 88 (1984): 171-203. J. L. Kraemer, "Apostates, Rebels and Brigands," Israel Oriental Studies 10 (1980): 34-73. B. D. Shaw, "Brigands in the Roman Empire," Past and Present 105 (1984): 3-52. J. Winkler, "Lollianus and the Desperadoes," Journal of Hellenic Studies 100 (1980): 155-181. V. Neri, I marginali nell'Occidente tardoantico (Bari, 1998).

R.V.