Theodosian Empresses

Theodosian Empresses:
Women and Imperial Dominion
in Late Antiquity

Kenneth G. Holum is Professor of History at the University of Maryland. His book about the four Theodosian empresses was published in 1982 (hardcover). A paperback version appeared in 1989. The main text is divided into seven chapters.

At the end of the book we have a bibliography and an index. References to ancient sources and modern works are given in footnotes (not endnotes).

There are 19 illustrations, 12 of which are coins. Every coin has two sides: obverse and reverse. In this book both sides are shown. When there are 12 coins, it means there are 24 pictures. There is also a statue of an Augusta, a statuette of an Augusta, and a portrait of an Augusta. The portrait is seen from four different angles.

In addition, we have a plan of Constantinople and a genealogical table (a family tree). Finally, we have a detail of a large silver disc discovered in Spain (known as the Missorium of Theodosius) and a small ivory panel, known as the Translation of Relics Ivory from Trier.

The illustrations are well-chosen, but unfortunately they are only in black-and-white. It is a shame. If you are going to look at a picture of gold coin, you can see so much more if the picture is in colour.

Holum likes to show off his considerable erudition: in the footnotes he quotes from French and German scholars in the original language. Greek and Latin sources are also quoted in the original language. Why? I think the reason is that this book began its life as a Ph.D. dissertation for the University of Chicago.

Eventually, the dissertation was turned into a published book, but it seems that many of the original footnotes were kept intact. In the main text, however, Greek and Latin quotes are usually translated into English. Three of the seven chapters are divided into three sections by two subheadings. In this way they are more reader-friendly. But four chapters do not have any subheadings. This is old-style writing and publishing: each time there are about 30 pages without a single break!

In this book the focus is on four Theodosian empresses: Flacilla, Eudoxia, Pulcheria, and Eudocia, who reigned in the east. Each empress gets one chapter. As Holum says on page 3, “These were indeed a colorful lot, and their careers merit detailed investigation.”

While I agree, I would like to ask: what about Galla Placidia? She was also a Theodosian empress, although she was from the west. She had a most dramatic and turbulent life, but in this book she is only mentioned in passing. She does not get her own chapter, as the other four empresses do. This is a shame.

[See Hagith Sivan, Galla Placidia: The Last Roman Empress, 2011.]

Holum’s account is based on a hypothesis: the Theodosian empresses were not only part of the imperial family, they ruled the empire. Holum thinks his hypothesis is confirmed. On page 3 he says: “Ultimately, these women did achieve authentic imperial dominion.”

I do not agree. Instead of a hypothesis, it might be more useful to ask some questions: (1) Were the Theodosian empresses part of the imperial power structure? (2) Were they sometimes able to get their way? (3) Did they rule the empire?

While the answer to question 1 and 2 is yes, the answer to question 3 is no, and Holum himself provides the evidence: when an empress was able to get her way, there was usually some kind of trick involved, such as the episode in 402 when an infant emperor (Theodosius II) granted a petition (page 55). His father Arcadius later accepted the decision because “the lady empress nagged him incessantly.”

Chapter V is about Nestorius, who was bishop of Constantinople 428-431, and the church council in Ephesus in 431. Nestorius managed to offend almost every social class in Constantinople and to insult the empress Pulcheria as well. In order to solve the escalating conflict the emperor called a church council in Ephesus. If you think this was about theological interpretations, think again. If you think Christianity at the time was about respect for others and tolerance for the ideas of others, think again.

The important players arrived with a large group of followers who tried to intimidate their opponents. The council was a farce: one council reached one decision. Then a counter-council reached the opposite decision. Since the bishops could not agree, the emperor would have to decide. He had hired Nestorius in 428, and he stood by him all the way, but in 431 he realised that he had to go. According to Holum, this is proof of his hypothesis (page 147): “Remarkably, Pulcheria defeated both the bishop and her brother the emperor.” The phrase “Pulcheria’s victory at Ephesus” is used twice (pp. 175, 179).

I do not agree. We have to ask some questions here: why did this happen? Was it because of something that she did? Or because of something someone else did? As Holum himself shows, many other elements wanted the same outcome as she did. We cannot know how much or even if Pulcheria contributed to the downfall of Nestorius. He might have been fired even if Pulcheria never said a word about him and never did a thing to oppose him. While Holum believes this episode shows that Pulcheria exercised real power, I think it is a case of wishful thinking.

Holum has written an interesting book about the four Theodosian empresses who reigned in the east. But he forgot one Theodosian empress who reigned in the west, and the structure of the book – seven long chapters with very few subheadings – is a bit old-fashioned. Sometimes the going gets a bit tough. Moreover, the illustrations are only in black-and-white, and in spite of what the author claims, his hypothesis is not confirmed.

* * *

 

Kenneth G. Holum, Theodosian Empresses:
Women and Imperial Dominion in Late Antiquity,
University of California Press (1982, 1989), 258 pages

* * *