<<
>>

Exiit edictum: The Census Ordered by Augustus and Its Theological Interpretation

According to the second chapter of Luke's Gospel, at the time of Jesus' birth, �a decree went out from emperor Augustus that all the world should be regis­tered. This was the first registration and was taken while Quirinius was gov­ernor of Syria'.[611] To identify this registration with any historical accuracy is problematic.[612] The history of the effects of this narrative is, however, well- known; and Luke's reference to an actual Roman institution (precisely de­scribed by the Greek apographesthai/apographe, which was the technical term for the Latin censum profiteri or professio census, i.e.

the Roman law institution of the census) is explicit.[613]

The census was held regularly during the Roman Republic. It consisted of an official declaration by the paterfamilias of his family and property. It was made every five years or so, on oath, and in front of specially designated officials. From the middle of the fifth century, the procedure was assigned to the cen­sores, whose task was to account for all citizens and divide them, according to their rank and wealth, into the various classes of the Centuriate order. From the end of the fourth century, the process had involved identifying citizens as members of a particular tribe. Designations like this provided the framework for the collection of taxes, for military conscription, and for eligibility to vote in the assembly of the comitia tributa.[614] Because, as scholars have established, the definition of each person's civic and social identity, and their holding of citi­zenship, was contingent upon the act of declaration taking place before a cen­sor, the census was therefore crucial to the entire political, military, and fiscal organisation of the Roman res publica.[615] [616] [617] [618] Although the frequency of the census declined during the imperial age, and the last one was held in Rome under Vespasian (r.

69-79), emperors continued to depend on the institution for the administrative and fiscal management of the provinces?2

Eventually, a lengthy exegetical elaboration developed along the lines of Luke. Origen (185-253), Ambrose of Milan (339-397), Gregory the Great (540­604), Bede the Venerable (673-735) are just a few authors who turned this spe­cific, juridical, institution into a theological tool - contributing to an herme­neutic enterprise which also sheds light, from a general point of view, on the intertwining of theological and juridical conceptualisations?3 Ambrose's Ex­planatio evangelii secundum Lucam, composed towards the end of the fourth century, is one of the most ancient and influential interpretations. Ambrose speaks particularly eloquently to us in the context of this discussion, as he clearly shifts the legal connotation of the census onto a spiritual plane and develops a spiritualised concept of empire and emperor?4 Commenting on the beginning of the second chapter of Luke's Gospel, he states that the profession of faith is a �spiritual census' and has to be declared to the king of Heaven, i.e. Christ. In Ambrose's view, Christ takes the place of Augustus and his census is truly universal, since it involves all people, even those beyond the borders of the Roman empire: the lord who mandates it must indeed have �power over the whole world'.[619] [620] [621]

Ambrose's reading draws an analogy between the king of Heaven (rex caeli) and the king of the earth (rex terrarum); significantly, Christ is called the �em­peror [imperator]’ of the Christians or the �eternal emperor [aeternus imperator]’ in other Ambrosian texts?6 Such terms, in fact, are common in early Christian literature, where Jesus is referred to as �commander of the army [princeps mili­tiae]’ or, perhaps less frequently, �emperor [imperator]'. As Erik Peterson has pointed out, this usage should be understood not only as a purely military metaphor, in which Christians are �soldiers of Christ [milites Christi]’, but also, in a broader sense, as an affirmation of the belief in the power of Christ to transcend all earthly power?7 This analogical reading neatly matched the Ro­man concept of emperorship that had developed by the third century under the influence of Hellenistic and Neoplatonic ideas, according to which the em­pire was a microcosm reflecting the order of the universe itself and its ruler was thus believed to be divine.

Adapting this view, Christian authors, from Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 260-c. 340) onwards, could argue with ease that the Roman emperor was God's vicegerent on earth, reigning over an empire which was the earthly reflection of the kingdom of heaven.[622]

Returning to our case, Ambrose's analogy between the two cities, as Augus­tine (354-430) was to call them, helps us to understand the parallel, frequently drawn by exegetes, between the census and the last judgment. This is exactly the moment at which the citizens of the city of God and of the city of the devil are set apart, and eternal salvation is decided. Incidentally (and noteworthily), it is this parallel that led to the famous census of English properties, carried out in 1086 by William the Conqueror, being universally known as Domesday. The use of the two cities analogy also opens the door to a clearly political interpre­tation of the pericope - and it is this that is most relevant to our purposes.

From this perspective, the Iberian historian Paulus Orosius (c. 375-c. 418) is perhaps the most relevant ancient Christian sources and is key to any explora­tion of Christian ideas on empire. His Historiae adversus paganos - written at the beginning of the fifth century and much indebted to Eusebius' theories on Constantine's emperorship - associates the Christianisation of the figure of the emperor with the Romanisation of the figure of Christd[623] In Orosius' view, the peaceful unification of the orbis Romanum under Augustus was part of God's plan for the propagation of the Gospel, and the emperor is presented as the forerunner of Christ, who, conversely, endorsed Rome as his fatherland:

It was by the will of our Lord Jesus Christ that this City prospered, was protected, and brought to such heights of power, since to her, in prefer­ence to all others, He chose to belong when He came, thereby making it certain that He was entitled to be called a Roman citizen according to the declaration made in the Roman census list.[624]

In view of Orosius' imperial enthusiasm, the participation of Christus in the census appears to offer political endorsement and implies the justification of Roman imperial power, which should be obeyed.

Caesar is designated as �prince of all men' in this reading, �and the Romans [as] lords of the world'.[625] [626] [627]

Following in Orosius's footsteps, later exegetes often saw in these verses of Luke a distinct political message. A few thirteenth-century examples will serve to bring us chronologically closer to the focus of this chapter, while also summa­rising and drawing two interpretative strands. The topic of obedience to tempo­ral power is dealt with extensively by Bonaventure of Bagnoregio (c. 1217-1274) in his Commentarius in Evangelium S. Lucae. In his discussion of the relevant verses, Bonaventure also emphasises the fact that Jesus was registered in order to com­ply with all higher authorities on earth: â€?by paying the census tax', Jesus and his family â€?made themselves subject to the king [subiectionem habebant ad regem in professionem]’ and â€?declared themselves to be subject to Roman empire [se subiectos esse Romano imperio]∖22 The explicit link between census and subjec­tion is emphasised by Bonaventure's citing of a number of biblical references typically quoted by Christian authors in connection with political subjection, thus confirming that Luke's pericope deserves a place alongside other, today bet­ter known, biblical passages used to justify political authority?3

Bonaventure’s lines refer implicitly to fiscal issues, although this aspect is more evident in the widely circulated Postillae in universa Bibla by Hugh of St. Cher (c. 1190-1263), where the census in which Jesus participated voluntarily is described as �the exhibition of subjection [subiectionis exhibitio]’, since it in­volves the payment of tax.[628] Here, again, the Postillae are building on the work of earlier exegetes: previous Christian thinkers had stressed that the payment of a tax necessarily meant the acceptance of the political authority that im­posed it, mainly basing their opinion on Jesus’s invitation to render to Caesar what is Caesar’s (Matthew 22:21) and on Paul’s Letter to the Romans - particu­larly its most political verses at the beginning of Chapter 13.

A passage in the commentary In Epistulam ad Romanos, which was, until the sixteenth century, attributed to Ambrose - and thus had a significant influence on medieval doctrine - is insistent upon this point: by paying tributes and rendering to Cae­sar that which is Caesar’s, �people know that they are not free, but act under authority, which is from God. They are subject to their ruler, who acts as God’s deputy [principi enim suo, qui vicem dei agit] [...] and the proof of their subjec­tion [subiectionis probatio] is that they pay him tribute [tributa]’.[629] [630] [631] The well- known brocard praestatio tributi probatio subiectionis est - which had been collected some decades earlier in the ordinary gloss to the Bible (on Rom 13:6),26 and, finally, found its way into the Liber Extra (x 3.39.2), where it is wrongly ascribed to Augustine’s commentary on Romans 1327 - may well be a summary of this passage by pseudo-Ambrose. The Sententiae by Peter Lombard (c. 1100-1160), a masterpiece which was later commented on by Hugh of St. Cher too, also moved in this direction: in a question exploring the possi­bility of resistance to political authority, the Letter to the Romans and its ordi­nary gloss are cited to argue that princes and kings �are not to be resisted in those things which God commands to be given to them, namely tributes and suchlike’.[632] Whatever Hugh's source actually was, the Postillae are clearly following an unbroken line of reasoning and explicitly connect our pericope to fiscal and political issues which were widely debated in twelfth and thirteenth centuries.

That census-taking, the payment of taxes, and political subjection all be­came entangled in one another over the long centuries of New Testament ex­egesis is undeniable. It is therefore no surprise to find the same entanglement in numerous medieval political and juridical texts.

2

<< | >>
Source: Cavanagh Edward (ed.). Empire and Legal Thought: Ideas and Institutions from Antiquity to Modernity. Brill,2020. — 634 p.. 2020

More on the topic Exiit edictum: The Census Ordered by Augustus and Its Theological Interpretation: