Julian the Apostate died in 363 while fighting a war against the Sassanids. What significant changes to the Empire would his survival brought? He was a known Neoplatonist pagan and was considered an excellent general and it is known that he attempted reforms during his short reign.
Julian the Apostate
- Thread starter Duc d'Orleans
- Start date
I believe that some recent scholarship questions the "excellent general" bit, although Gibbon certainly agreed with you. He definitely believed that he was the next Alexander and dreamed of conquering, not just Armenia and Mesopotamia, but the Iranian plateau - a pretty dubious prospect this late in Rome's career. Still, any Emperor that can impose a Zagros frontier will take some strain off Rome's European fronts.
More interestingly, how does neopaganism develop under Julian? It had already started to become a far more organized and hierarchical religion than it ever was in Caesar's time.
Interesting tidbit, Julian also planned to support the construction of a Third Jewish Temple in Jerusalem.
I realize that Neopaganism was far more developed in Julian's time then in Caesars, but it was my understanding that when Julian died the last I would say powerful "champion" of the religion died. After his death wasn't most forms of religion gone from the empire except for differing forms of Christianity. Couldn't Julian's defeat cause him to make peace and then focus on other areas of the empire or administrating it. For the first half of his life he was more of a scholar then a warrior.
Also if you know off the top of your head, this new evidence, could you tell me where to find it? I would be most interested to read it. Julian is one of my favorite historical figures.
That is true, but then again his reign was short. Who knows, if his reign lasted some 20-30 years, he might have been able to do a lot to develop neo-paganism.
slydessertfox I am a big fan of your timeline. I think that Imperial favor to one religion always has benefits. He was considered an extremely tolerant ruler and was never quick to blame any religious group for problems within the state. Personally I believe he could have done much for the empire. I would go as far as to even say that he may have contributed more stability to the Western Empire because he was there for several years and fought the Gauls in the name of his cousin there as Caesar. If not the whole empire then Italy. But I may be undue biased because he is one of my favorites.
Thanks.
I agree with you here. Julian's early death was a great tragedy for the empire . Though I feel he botched up his Parthian campaign big time, I think he would have learned from his mistakes there.
Welcome
I believe that he would have too. It seems to me because he made several mistakes in Gaul while fighting in Gaul and Germania but he seemed to have learned from them and was an excellent student. I think he would have realized his folly of conquering so soon after he was crowned emperor and consolidated and perhaps looked west or inwards to better prepare for a second invasion.
I believe that he would have too. It seems to me because he made several mistakes in Gaul while fighting in Gaul and Germania but he seemed to have learned from them and was an excellent student. I think he would have realized his folly of conquering so soon after he was crowned emperor and consolidated and perhaps looked west or inwards to better prepare for a second invasion.
Yes, a Julian who ruled the empire 20-30 years longer might be able to change the religious landscape of the empire. If his military adventures in the East had been successful, the Sassanid threat to the empire might have been considerably less.
That's true as well. Plus, as long as he's alive I think confederations like the Alemanni are gonna think twice before disrupting the peace on the borders.
AFAIK, the leading jews did not want Julian's help to build the Third Temple. The work was cancelled after an earthquake.
If the temple had been built under Julian's protection, it might have changed some aspects of Judaism (prolonged animal sacrifice etc.).
Julian's idea was, IIRC, to weaken Christianity by strengthening Judaism.
If the temple had been built under Julian's protection, it might have changed some aspects of Judaism (prolonged animal sacrifice etc.).
Julian's idea was, IIRC, to weaken Christianity by strengthening Judaism.
Didn't it have something to do with the Christian belief that if the Temple were rebuilt the end of the world would happen and he wanted to disprove it?
Would Julian have been strong enough to fight back Christianity if he had lived 20-30 yeares longer?
I am looking forward to getting back to London this evening so I can be scathing about that naive little fool Julian.
That, and it was another alternative religion to Christianity. Not too long before this period, approximately 10% of the Roman Empire was Jewish (mostly converts).
Effects would be hard to predict - Pharisaic or Rabbinic Judaism was totally dominant, but it still did (and does) predict an eventual return to Temple worship, including a hierarchical priesthood and animal sacrifices. Of course, Temple Judaism requires a yearly pilgrimage to Jerusalem, which is going to be hard if you live in, say, Colonia Agrippina, modern Cologne (which had a sizable community already). Maybe a restored Temple worship closer to Judaea and Rabbinic Judaism at the periphery?
Could Julian's revived Paganism have triumphed over Christianity?
I think it would have been hard, but if the Pagan faith could promise people an afterlife and be more filantropic than IOTL, then maybe.
I think it would have been hard, but if the Pagan faith could promise people an afterlife and be more filantropic than IOTL, then maybe.
There's another thread about this just in case your interested:
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=262872
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=262872
I think a possible effect of a successful/long-term reign by Julian isn't that he turns back the tide of Christianity but that he is able to set in motion something that causes the Greco-Roman polytheistic belief system to survive as Jewish analog, i.e. a small, but often persecuted minority, in an otherwise Christian world subject to various pogroms etc but surviving long-term.
Polytheisms (or 'monocultisms', i.e. worshiping almost exclusively a deity, or a divine couple, in a polytheistic background) are in great difficulty facing 'conquering' monotheisms such as Christianity and Islam. Because 'paganism' is more tolerant (the monotheistic Persians did not forcefully convert conquered peoples to Zoroastrianism) and thus in a sheep / wolf position.
What type of 'revived pagan' cult Julian could have promoted. Isis? Mithra?
It could be of interest that, while theologians were excommunicating (and persecuting) each other about the Trinity, popular faith was tending to install a biological triad (the Father, the Mother, the Son) with similarities with the familial trio Osiris, Isis, Horus. And the cult of Saints was evolving to an unconfessed form of 'soft' polytheism?
What type of 'revived pagan' cult Julian could have promoted. Isis? Mithra?
It could be of interest that, while theologians were excommunicating (and persecuting) each other about the Trinity, popular faith was tending to install a biological triad (the Father, the Mother, the Son) with similarities with the familial trio Osiris, Isis, Horus. And the cult of Saints was evolving to an unconfessed form of 'soft' polytheism?