Page 150 - Envoys and Political Communication in the Late Antique West 411 - 533

Envoys and Political Communication,411–533

imposes his will on a hostile Valentinian I through divine violence; and,
again attending Maximus’ court, Martin knows that his virtus has dimin-
ished after exactly the sort of compromise of his integrity he fears in
36
the Vita. Germanus, by contrast, can part amicably even from the bar-
barian idolater Goar. The benefits of Germanus’ voyages for the various
communities on whose behalf he acts is made patent; by contrast, Vita
Martini does not even name those on whose behalf Martin acts (it is in the
later Dialogi that the followers of Priscillian are named). Sulpicius’ Vita
of Martin did not provide a precedent for either the narrative structure
or the imagery of Constantius’ work.
Constantius may have used Paulinus of Milan’s Vita Ambrosii,awork
lacking the stylistic skills of Sulpicius’ or Constantius’ writings, as a model
for his brief outline of Germanus’ cursus publicus prior to his assump-
37
tion into the clergy. In Vita Ambrosii, the bishop confronts the emper-
ors Magnus Maximus, Theodosius I (three times), Valentinian II, and
Eugenius. 38 Some of these confrontations arise from embassies during
which Ambrose acts on behalf of a second imperial court, or of sections
of the Italian populace; others, occurring within Milan, stemmed from
Ambrose’s assertive interpretation of the duties and authority of his of-
fice as bishop of the city. The work has a sense of chronology alien to
Vita Martini; many episodes are datable, and these are usually placed in
chronological order. But this chronology is a function of Ambrose’s his-
torical engagement with the imperial court of Milan, not the product of a
literary design. Paulinus emphasises Ambrose’s involvement in the major
imperial events of the 380s and 390s and the influence he claimed to wield
over the imperial court on ecclesiastical and secular affairs. In doing so,
Paulinus follows Ambrose’s lead in his own writings, which Paulinus fre-
39
quently uses and often cites. The chronology of Vita Ambrosii is notan
‘internal’ sequence, constructed by the hagiographer to give form to his
narrative. How much time elapses between, for example, Ambrose’s em-
bassy to Magnus Maximus and his confrontation with Theodosius I over
the destruction of the synagogue of Callinicum would be unknowable
were these events not dated from other sources. Vita Ambrosii is notunlike

36
Sulpicius Severus, Dialogi ii, 5 (Valentinian I); iii, 11–13 (Maximus).
37
Levison, nn. to Constantius, Vita Germani, 251–2 n. 5; Borius, Introduction to Vie de Germain,
33–5. Doubts: Chadwick, Poetry and Letters, 265.On Vita Ambrosii: Emilien Lamirande, Paulin de
Milan et la Vita Ambrosii: aspects de la religion sous le Bas-Empire (Montreal, 1983).
38
Paulinus, Vita Ambrosii, PL 14,cc. 19, 22–4, 26, 31.
39
Neil McLynn, Ambrose of Milan: Church and Court in a Christian Capital (The Transformation of
the Classical Heritage 22; Berkeley, 1994), esp. xvii, 371–2. On Ambrose’s embassies (to Magnus
Maximus on behalf of Valentinian II, and to Theodosius I on behalf of the supporters of Eugenius
after the latter’s death): ibid., 160–3, 354.
124