Hot-Take: Temple to Constantine's Family in Spello, Italy

This morning, I began receiving several excited and perplexed messages about an apparent discovery of a temple dedicated to Constantine's 'divine ancestors'. Here is an article about it in the Jerusalem Post: http://tinyurl.com/ysdwx98y.

Does this add to or up-end our understanding of Constantine in terms of his relation to Christianity?

Not really.

Scholars have long recognized that Constantine promoted himself and his religious allegiance in terms that would be acceptable to both Christians AND 'pagans'. The so-called 'Arch of Constantine' (erected c. A.D. 315), which stands right next to the Colosseum in Rome, has a suitably generic inscription that refers to 'divine inspiration' granting him victory in battle in 312. Also, the town of Spello, Italy, where this temple to his 'divine ancestors' is located, is the ancient town of Hispellum: there's a surviving rescript (an official reply to a petition of the emperor) referring directly to such a temple. So this discovery of an actual temple comes as no surprise to historians, I'm sure.

The rescript to Hispellum grants permission for the building of a temple to the Flavian family (Constantine's imperial family), and seems to respond positively to the request by non-Christians to build that temple and pay divine homage to the imperial family through it. Constantine grants all of this, but with a very specific qualification: "that no temple dedicated in our name shall be defiled by the deceptions of any contagious and unreasonable religious belief."

In other words, paying your respects in this way to the imperial family is entirely acceptable ... but the people are not to actually sacrifice in that temple. Constantine's name and family are not to be associated with traditional practices of sacrifice: the reason is because Constantine was highly sensitive to anything that might offend the 'supreme God'—whom he identified as the God worshipped by Christians.

This is difficult, because sacrificing on behalf of (or even to) an emperor and his family was long-standing practice since Augustus allowed subjects in the eastern part of the empire to do so. Also, pagan religion (and ancient religion in general) is practically defined by sacrifice so it stands out clearly that Constantine may be trying to play it both ways: let people continue with their long-standing traditional practices, particularly when it comes to expressing respect for the reigning emperor and his family as well as loyalty to the empire ... but don't spill any blood in doing so.

I go into greater detail on questions related to why Constantine would have tried to please pagans without alienating Christians mainly in Chapter 2 of my book. The news article's suggestion that 'Christianization' was not instantaneous under Constantine but rather a more lengthy process is no surprise to historians, either ... but probably comes as annoying contrary evidence to those who have understood wrongly Constantine and the significance of his relations with Christianity. Douglas Boin, the scholar mentioned in the article associated with the archaeological work done in Spello, does not refer to the discovery's aid in relation to Constantine but rather to expanding historical understanding of the community itself and urban society in late antiquity.