AnTard, 7, 1999, p.

165 174

AMBROSE AND GRATIAN

TIMOTHY D. BARNES

Ambroise et Gratien
Lauteur rexamine la chronologie des rencontres et des rapports dAmbroise avec Gratien, en
fonction des dplacements de lempereur dans les annes 375-385 et de ceux de lvque de Milan,
Rome en 378 et Sirmium entre lt 378 et fin fvrier/mars 379. Cette rvision de la chronologie
habituellement admise entrane dimportantes consquences pour la datation des livres I-II du De
Fide, composs non pas Milan mais durant le sjour dAmbroise Sirmium : louvrage aurait t
command par Gratien se rendant en Orient et lui aurait t livr son passage de retour, aprs
Andrinople. La commande supplmentaire de Gratien, exprime par lettre, ne trouve pas sa
ralisation dans les livres III-V du mme trait, adaptation de sermons milanais, mais dans le De
spiritu sancto, compos fin 380 ou au printemps de 381. Dans lintervalle, Ambroise a boycott les
visites de Gratien Milan en 379 et 380, pour protester contre lattribution dune basilique aux
homens, basilique dont la restitution aux catholiques serait placer dans lhiver 380/381 : elle
entrana la rconciliation dAmbroise avec Gratien et la composition du trait promis. [J.-M. C.]

The dealings between Ambrose, who was consecrated

bishop of Milan on 7 December 374, and Gratian, who
became the senior Roman emperor in the West on the death
of his father Valentinian on 17 November 375, are by no
means a novel topic for scholarly discussion. All recent
books about Ambrose, whether their primary focus is
historical or theological, perforce devote much space,
sometimes whole chapters, either to Ambrose's dealings
with Gratian in general or specifically to De Fide I-II,
which he wrote at the emperor's request1. Moreover, there

is a trenchant monograph with the title Ambrose of Milan

and emperor Gratian 2, while the date, circumstances and
purpose of the composition of De Fide I-II have been
discussed both by Otto Faller in the preface to his critical
edition of the work and by several other scholars3.
It is easy, however, to justify a new treatment of this
familiar problem. For Malcolm Errington has recently
demonstrated not only that Theodosius, whose father had
been put to death in the winter of 375/6, was recalled to
office before the Battle of Adrianople, probably already in

1. H. von Campenhausen, Ambrosius von Mailand als Kirchenpolitiker (Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte, 12), Berlin and
Leipzig, 1929, esp. p. 40-53; J.-R. Palanque, Saint Ambroise et
l'empire romain. Contribution l'histoire des rapports de
l'glise et de l'tat la fin du quatrime sicle, Paris, 1933,
p. 39-121; F. H. Dudden, The Life and Times of St. Ambrose,
Oxford, 1935, vol. 1, p. 189-206; A. Paredi, Ambrose. His Life
and Times, trans. M. J. Costelloe, Notre Dame, 1964, p. 175213; N. B. McLynn, Ambrose of Milan. Church and Court in a
Christian Capital, Berkeley, 1994, p. 79-157; D. W. Williams,
Ambrose of Milan and the End of the Arian-Nicene Conflicts,
Oxford, 1995, p. 128-153; C. Markschies, Ambrosius von
Mailand und die Trinittstheologie. Kirchen- und theologiegeschichtliche Studien zu Antiarianismus und Neuniznismus bei
Ambrosius und im lateinischen Westen (364-381 n. Chr.)
(Beitrge zur historischen Theologie, 90), Tbingen, 1995,
p. 165-212.

2. G. Gottlieb, Ambrosius von Mailand und Kaiser Gratian

(Hypomnemata, 40), Gttingen, 1973: among reviews, note
esp. A. M. Ritter, in Gnomon, 48, 1976, p. 818-820.
3. O. Faller, CSEL, 78, 1962, p. 5*-10*; H. Savon, Quelques
remarques sur la chronologie des oeuvres de Saint Ambroise, in
Studia Patristica, 10.1 (Texte und Untersuchungen, 107), Berlin,
1970, p. 156-160; P. Nautin, Les premires relations d'Ambroise
avec l'empereur Gratien: Le De Fide (livres I et II), in Ambroise
de Milan. XVIe Centenaire de son lection piscopale, Y.-M.
Duval (d.), Paris, 1974, p. 229-244; N. MacLynn, The
Apology of Palladius: Nature and Purpose, in Journal of
Theological Studies, N. S., 42, 1991, p. 52-76; D. H. Williams,
Polemics and Politics in Ambrose of Milan's De Fide, in Journal
of Theological Studies, N. S., 46, 1995, p. 519-531. Unfortunately, there does not seem to be anything of scholarly value in H.
Glaesener, L'Empereur Gratien et Saint Ambroise, in Revue de
l'histoire de l'glise, 52, 1957, p. 466-488.

166

TIMOTHY D. BARNES

AnTard, 7, 1999

377, not after the battle, as all had previously assumed, but
also that Justina and Valentinian II must be presumed
normally to have resided at or very near the court of
Gratian4. This transforms the terms of the traditional
problem. For, if Ambrose encountered opposition from
Justina when he went to Sirmium, as Paulinus asserts (Vita
Ambrosii 11.1), then the episode occurred when Gratian too
was in or near Sirmium. Similarly, if there was a sudden
increase in the number of homoeans in Milan between the
summer of 378 and the spring of 379, it cannot be explained
by a postulated arrival of the court of Valentinian II 5.
Furthermore, it will be argued below that the sequel to De
Fide I-II that Gratian requested and Ambrose promised to
write is not De Fide III-V, as has naturally been assumed,
but the separate work De Spiritu sancto: since this later
work can be dated very precisely, significant new
deductions may be drawn concerning the dealings between
the emperor and the bishop.
6
1. The movements of Gratian, 375-383
When, where and how many times did Ambrose meet
Gratian face to face ? The essential prerequisite to any
attempt to answer this question is an accurate knowledge
of Gratian's activities and movements during the relevant
years. Investigation must of course start from Otto
Seeck's incomparable Regesten der Kaiser und Ppste

375
376

377

summer
March 10-May 17
Aug. 15
Sept. 17
Jan. 4 - March 29

July 28
Sept. 17
Oct. 17
377 Nov. 30 - 378, April 20

Left at Trier by Valentinian

At Trier
At Trier
At Trier
At Trier
At Mainz
At Trier
At Koblenz
At Trier

4. R. M. Errington, The Accession of Theodosius I, in Klio, 78,

1996, p. 438-453, esp. p. 442.
5. As argued by Williams, Ambrose, 1995, p. 153.
6. For some important cases where Eusebius of Caesarea and
Ammianus Marcellinus have unjustly been accused of error on
the basis of Seeck's emendations, see Constantine and
Eusebius, Cambridge, Mass., 1981, p. 252, 270, 392 n. 74;
Cognitio Gestorum. The Historiographic Art of Ammianus
Marcellinus, J. den Boeft, D. den Hengst and H. C. Teitler (ed.)
(Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen:
Verhandelingen, Afd. Letterkunde, Nieuwe Reeks 148),
Amsterdam, 1992, p. 4-7; Ammianus Marcellinus and the
Representation of Historical Reality, Ithaca, 1998, p. 241-243.
7. The New Empire of Diocletian and Constantine, Cambridge,
Mass., 1982, p. 47-87; Athanasius and Constantius. Theology
and Politics in the Constantinian Empire, Cambridge, Mass.,
1993, p. 218-228; Ammianus, 1998, p. 247-254. In accordance

fr die Jahre 311 bis 476 n. Chr. Vorarbeit zu einer

Prosopographie der christlichen Kaiserzeit, published in
Stuttgart in 1919, but that indispensable work should
never be taken as completely authoritative. Even though
Seeck made very few careless mistakes, the nature of the
undertaking compelled him to resort freely to conjecture,
and his emendations and supplements to the dates and
places of issue of imperial constitutions transmitted in
the Theodosian Code are sometimes disproved by literary
texts - a category of evidence to which he did not accord
equal esteem6. Accordingly, I offer the following
imperial itinerary of Gratian, in the same format as I
have previously presented the residences and journeys of
all the legitimate emperors who reigned between 284 and
361 and of Valens (364-378)7.
Winter residences:
375-378
378/9
379-381
381/2
382/3

Trier
Sirmium
Trier
Milan and Aquileia
Milan

Attested movements8:

Ammianus 30.10.1
CTh 15.7.3; 16.5 (April 22); 16.2.23
CTh 8.5.31S ;11.10.2S
CTh 9.35.2
CTh 9.35.3; 1.32.2 (Jan. 8: month emended)9 ;
14.3.15 (Feb. 16) ; 8.5.34 (Feb. 27) ; 1.32.3
CTh 1.16.13
CTh 11.2.3
CTh 16.6.2S
CTh 9.40.12; 1.15.9S (Jan. 1) ; 9.20.1, 11.39.7
(Jan. 12) ; 11.30.37, 11.36.23-25 (Jan. 30);
8.5.35

7.
with convention, suprascript "S" indicates that I accept Seeck's
emendation of the date and/or place of issue in Regesten, 1919,
p. 246-262.
8. The anecdote about Ambrose in Sozomenus, HE 7.25.10-13,
locates Gratian in Milan, but is undatable.
9. Seeck, Regesten, 1919, p. 248, retained the transmitted date
of VIII <id(us)> Iul(ias) p(ost) c(onsulatum) Valentis V et
Val(entini)ani AA. But the constitution which immediately
follows is dated IIII kal(endas) April(es) Gratiano A. IIII et
Merobaude conss., which implies that the compilers of the
Theodosian Code dated it earlier than 29 March 377 (CTh
1.32.3), and the use of a postconsulate as late in the year as July
is anomalous: see R. A. Bagnall, Alan Cameron, S. Schein and
K. Worp, Consuls of the Later Roman Empire, Atlanta, 1987,
p. 79. Accordingly, I emend Iul(ias) to Ian(uarias).

AnTard, 7, 1999
378

AMBROSE AND GRATIAN

late spring / early Invades the territory of the Alamanni

summer
summer

167

Ammianus 31.10.11

Travels east to aid Valens via Arbor Felix, Ammianus 31.11.6 (specifying that Gratian
Lauriacum, Bononia and Sirmium to Cas- spent four days in Sirmium)

Aug.
autumn
378 Dec. 6 - 379, Feb. 24

tra Martis
Returns to Sirmium
?Leaves Sirmium to conduct a campaign
against the Goths11
At Sirmium

Socrates, HE 5.2.110

CTh 6.30.4 (Dec.6) ; Ausonius, Gratiarum

actio 9.42 (1 Jan.) ; Descriptio consulum
379.1; Chr. min. 1.297; 2.66 (Jan. 19) ; CTh

April 5
July 2-5
July 31
Aug. 3
Aug. 4
Sept. 14
379, Dec. 3 - 380, March 18

At Tricciana
At Aquileia
At Milan
At Milan
At Tres Tabernae
At Trier
At Trier

6.30.1
CTh 11.36.26S
CTh 7.18.2; 13.1.11
CTh 8.18.6; CJ 6.32.4
CTh 16.5.5
CTh 7.28.1S
CTh 13.3.12
CTh 11.31.7 ; 14.3.17S (Jan. 10) ; 13.5.16,

380

At Milan
At Aquileia
At Aquileia
?Campaign on the Danube
At Trier

13.9.3 (Feb. 6) ; 6.35.9 (Feb. 15); 11.16.12

CTh 15.7.4+5
CTh 10.20.10S
CTh 6.35.10
Descriptio consulum 380.212
CTh 4.22.2S; 15.7.6 (Feb. 22); 8.5.36

379

April 24
May 14
June 27

380, Oct. 14 - 381, Feb. 27

12
10 11

10. Seeck, Regesten, 1919, p. 250, also adduced CTh 16.5.5 (3

August 379), in which Gratian uses the words antiquato
rescripto quod apud Sirmium nuper emersit. But the rescript
annulled by Gratian need not have been issued by him: since
CTh 16.5.5 is directed primarily against the Donatists (see Gottlieb, Ambrosius, 1973, p. 52-82), the rescript rescinded in
August 379 may have been obtained by them from a praetorian
prefect residing in Sirmium. The verb emergere here has a
purely neutral sense (Thesaurus Linguae Latinae 5.2, col. 479).
Socrates, HE 5.2.1, appears to be the source of Theodoretus,
HE 5.2.1; Sozomenus, HE 7.1.3: on the context, intent and
effect of this law, see now The Collapse of the Homoeans in
the East, in Studia Patristica, 29, 1997, p. 1-16, at p. 13-16.
11. An inference from Ambrose, De Fide 2.136 (below, 3).
Early and unimpeachable evidence is lacking for Gratian's
movements between early August and December. Seeck,
Regesten, 1919, p. 250, registered a visit to Constantinople in
October or November 378 after a return to Sirmium in August/
September, and this reconstruction is accepted by G. Gottlieb,
in RAChr, 12 (1983), col. 725, while K. L. Noethlichs, Die
gesetzgeberischen Massnahmen der christlichen Kaiser des
vierten Jahrhunderts gegen Hretiker, Heiden und Juden, diss.
Cologne, 1971, p. 102/3, 298/9 n. 618, argues that Gratian
went to Constantinople in August and remained there for three
months during the autumn of 378 before returning to Sirmium.

12.
A visit of Gratian to Constantinople is both implausible on
historical and military grounds and disproved by the relevant
evidence. (1) John of Antioch, frag. 185 (Fragmenta
Historicorum Graecorum 4, p. 608) = Suda G 427 (1, p. 539
Adler) states that when Gratian learned of his uncle Valens'
death, he at once hurried to the eastern Rome, and, discovering
his uncle Valens' harshness towards the Christians, he quickly
recalled those exiled by him, restoring their property and
healing the harm <they had suffered> . (2) The silence about
such a visit in Ausonius' Gratiarum actio, though it
compliments Gratian as consultissimus because probat hoc tali
principe Oriens ordinatus, is decisive: if Gratian really had
gone to Constantinople in the autumn of 378, Ausonius'
panegyric of the following year would have made that clear.
(3) Neither Socrates, HE 5.1/2, who was well informed on
events in the city (Athanasius, 1993, p. 205, 212-217), nor any
other writer of the fifth century shows any awareness that
Gratian ever set foot in Constantinople.
12. The entry reads: his conss. victoriae nuntiatae sunt amborum
Augustorum. For the inference that Gratian conducted a summer campaign against the Goths, McLynn, Ambrose, 1994,
p. 116 n. 141, 182 n. 88. The transmitted date of CTh 14.3.17
locates Gratian in Trier on 12 July, but Seeck, Regesten, 1919,
p. 252, convincingly emended Iul(ias) to Ian(uarias) on the
grounds that Gratian was certainly in Trier on 10 January 380.

168

TIMOTHY D. BARNES

381

March 29
April 22
May 8
?

July 5
Dec. 26
382
April 3
May 10
June 14
June 20
382, Nov. 22 - 383, May 2

Antard, 7, 1999

At Milan
At Aquileia
At Aquileia
Approached by Palladius at Sirmium
At Viminacium
At Aquileia
At Milan
At Brixia
At Patavium
At Patavium
At Milan

CTh 6.22.5 + 26.2, cf. 6.10.2

CTh 15.10.2
CTh 17.7.7, 8
Gesta concilii Aquileiensis : Acta 8, 10 (CSEL
82.3.330, 331)13
CTh 1.10.1 ; 12.1.8914
CTh 11.1.18
CTh 8.4.13
CTh 12.12.9
CTh 6.26.3
CTh 14.1815
CTh 1.6.8; 11.6S (Dec. 26); 11.13.1 (Jan. 19);
5.1.3 (Feb. 19); 13.10.8 (March 5); 9.27.5

383

May 21-28
June 16

At Patavium
At Verona
On campaign in Raetia

(April 4); 12.1. 99 + 100 (April 18); 3.1.4

CTh 16.7.3; 9.1.14 (May 27); 2.19.5
CTh 1.3.1; 12.1.101S
Socrates, HE 5.11.2; Sozomenus, HE 7.13.1,

Deserted by his army at Paris

cf. Ambrose, Ep. 73 (18).21

Chr. min. 1, p. 461

13 14 15

This itinerary provides the historical framework for

Ambrose's dealings with Gratian. Three basic facts are
clear. First, the emperor either was or may have been in
Sirmium on four separate occasions after Ambrose was
consecrated bishop of Milan in 374, probably on 7
December16:
(1) in the summer of 378, Gratian passed quickly
through Sirmium on his way to aid Valens before the Battle
of Adrianople;
(2) he returned to Sirmium after the battle and resided
there for the winter of 378/9, perhaps conducting an autumn
campaign;
(3) he may have passed through Sirmium in the summer
of 380;
13. Seeck, Regesten, 1919, p. 254, dated this meeting to August
380. But at the Council of Aquileia on 3 September 381 Palladius asserted that Ipse imperator nobis dixit se Orientales [sc.
episcopos] iussisse venire (Acta 8), and when asked, Imperator
cum praesens esset Sirmio, tu illum interpellasti an ipse te
compulit ?, he replied Dixit mihi Vade. (Acta 10). Despite
McLynn, Ambrose, 1994, p. 112, this implies a date in the summer of 381, not a year earlier: see G. Gottlieb, Annuarium Historiae Conciliorum, 11, 1979, p. 293 n. 26.
14. Seeck, Regesten, 1919, p. 258, emended the consular year to
382: in favour of the transmitted date, R. M. Errington, Historia, 41, 1992, p. 458-459.
15. Errington, Historia, 41, 1992, p. 448-456, retains the transmitted date of CTh 9.40.13, whose date is traditionally
emended to 17 August 390 (Seeck, Regesten, 1919, p. 1, 92-93,
278) on the grounds that Sozomenus, HE 7.25.7 attributes it to
Theodosius. The corollary is that Gratian issued the law in
Verona on 17 August 382, which seems most implausible.

(4) in the summer and autumn of 381, he must have

passed through Sirmium twice on his journey from North
Italy to Viminacium and back.
Second, between 374 and the autumn of 381, when he
began to reside in North Italy, Gratian is known to have set
foot in Milan on no more than three occasions : in the
summer of 379, in the spring of 380, and in the spring of
381. Third, Gratian appears to have remained in Gaul
continuously from the summer of 375 to the summer of 378:
there is no good evidence that he visited Rome or even
North Italy in 37617. Since Ambrose normally resided in
Milan, the next stage in the present enquiry must be to
investigate the date of his known visit to Sirmium.
2. Ambrose in Rome and Sirmium
Paulinus' Vita Ambrosii records two journeys of the
bishop of Milan to distant cities in the early years of his
episcopate, without indicating a precise date for either. One
was to Rome (9.4-10.3), the other to Sirmium (11). In each
case Paulinus concentrates upon the miraculous and
probably legendary: in Rome, Ambrose healed a female
16. On the date, see O. Faller, La data della consecrazione vescovile di Sant' Ambrogio, in Ambrosiana. Scritti di storia,
archeologia ed arte pubblicati nel XVI centenario della nascit
di Sant' Ambrogio CCCXL - MCMXL, Milan, 1942, p. 97-112;
CSEL, 73 (1955), p. 81*-83*. Jerome, Chronicle 247e Helm,
certifies the consular year as 374; the evidence for the day,
though strong, is not conclusive.
17. A visit to Rome during the summer of 376 was deduced from
Themistius, Orat. 13 by O. Seeck, Die Briefe des Libanius
(Texte und Untersuchungen, 30), Leipzig, 1906, p. 303;

AnTard, 7, 1999
bath attendant who was suffering from paralysis in exactly
the same way as Jesus had healed the paralytic in the
gospels (10, cf. Matthew 9.2-8; Mark 2.3-12; Luke 5.17-26:
Jesus' words are not quoted from any of these passages, but
adapted from John 14.12); in Sirmium, divine punishment
struck down an Arian nun who assaulted him (11.1/2). Both
journeys can be dated with reasonable precision18.
The journey to Rome occurred some years after
Ambrose's consecration (9.4: igitur post annos aliquot
ordinationis suae ad urbem Romam etc.). The collection
that Michaela Zelzer calls the first corpus of the Epistulae
extra collectionem contains a relatio to the emperors from
a council of bishops held at Rome which both refers to an
imperial constitution of October 377 (Ep. extra coll. 7.7,
cf. CTh 16.6.2) and makes a series of requests which were
granted by Gratian before Theodosius was proclaimed
emperor (Collectio Avellana 13, CSEL 35, p. 54-58:
Gratianus et Valentinianus Augg. Aquilino vicario)19.
Although the Maurists did not include this relatio of the
Roman council of 378 in their edition of the letters of
Ambrose20, while Christoph Markschies appears to ignore
it entirely in his recent and otherwise thorough discussion
of the council21, there can be little doubt that Paolo Angelo

17.
Regesten, 1919, p. 248. In Harvard Studies in Classical
Philology, 79, 1975, p. 328-330, I restated Seeck's argument
and also adduced the explicit statement in the Parastaseis
Syntomoi Chronikai 50 (p. 178 Bonn = T. Preger, Scriptores
originum Constantinopolitanarum 1, Leipzig, 1901, p. 54). But
the testimony of so late and erratic a source cannot be trusted at
all: see Averil Cameron and J. Herrin, Constantinople in the
Eighth Century: The Parastaseis Syntomoi Chronikai
(Columbia Studies in the Classical Tradition 10), Leiden, 1984,
p. 239. The contemporary evidence of Themistius proves only
that an imperial visit to Rome was expected, planned or
contemplated: see now McLynn, Ambrose, 1994, p. 88 n. 37;
J. Vanderspoel, Themistius and the Imperial Court. Oratory,
Civic Duty, and Paideia from Constantius to Theodosius, Ann
Arbor, 1995, p. 180/181. Gottlieb, Ambrosius, 1973, p. 28,
argued that, though Gratian passed through Milan in 376 en
route to and from Rome, he did not meet Ambrose at this date.
18. Despite Markschies, Ambrosius, 1995, p. 109-115, 162 n.
437, who pronounces the date of Ambrose's visit to Sirmium
vllig offen (p. 111).
19. As M. Zelzer notes in her edition, CSEL, 82.3 (1982),
p. 191-197, cf. p. xci-xcv (quoting Collectio Avellana 13 in
full), several passages of Gratian's letter echo the wording of
the requests made by the Roman council, which is usually
dated to late 378: see C. Pietri, Roma Christiana. Recherches
sur l'glise de Rome, son organisation, sa politique, son idologie, de Miltiade Sixte III (311-440) (BFAR, 284), Rome,
1976, p. 741-748; Zelzer, CSEL, 82.3 (1982), p. xci. The Liber
Pontificalis 1.39 (p. 212 Duchesne = p. 84 Mommsen) reports
that Damasus was acquitted of a charge of adultery by a
council of forty four bishops, who instead condemned his accusers Concordius and Callistus.

AMBROSE AND GRATIAN

169

Ballerini, who edited Ambrose in the late nineteenth

century, was correct to attribute it to him22. Now the writer
of the relatio states that he had attended the council in Rome
(Ep. extra coll. 7.1: cum quaereremus quid pro ecclesiarum
statu poscendum esset a vobis). Hence it appears that
Ambrose visited Rome in 378: presumably, therefore, he
took the council's report and petition from Rome to the
imperial court and presented it to Gratian.
Ambrose's journey to Sirmium can also be dated by
another criterion23. According to Paulinus, Ambrose went
to Sirmium in order to ordain Anemius bishop. He carried
out his mission successfully, even though he was driven out
of a church by the power of Justina, who was at that time
empress, and a crowd which gathered together in order that
an Arian bishop might be consecrated in the same church,
not by him but by heretics (Vita Ambrosii 11.1: Sirmium
vero cum ad ordinandum episcopum Anemium perrexisset
ibique Iustinae tunc temporis reginae potentia et
multitudine coadunata de ecclesia pelleretur etc.)24.
Paulinus does not, as has recently been claimed,
insinuate that Ambrose went to Sirmium perhaps a year or
two after his consecration 25. On the contrary, the details
which he provides indicate a date of 378/9. The episcopal
election in which Ambrose participated must have occurred
before September 381, since the acta of the Council of
Aquileia, which met on 3 September 381, record two
interventions by Anemius: in the first, Anemius asserts that
caput Illyrici non est nisi civitas Sirmiensis, ego igitur
episcopus illius civitatis sum, while the second names the
speaker as Anemius episcopus Sirmiensis (CSEL 82.3,
p. 331.184/5; 359.718)26. On Paulinus' presentation, Justina
20. It was first published by J. Sirmond, Appendix Codicis Theodosiani, Paris, 1632, p. 78-90, and reedited by P. Coustant,
Epistulae Romanorum Pontificum, 1, Paris, 1721, p. 523-529,
who attributed it to Damasus. Although Migne reprinted Coustant's text in PL 13, col. 575-584, the letter appears to be omitted from both the second and the third editions of the Clavis
Patrum Latinorum, Steenbrugge, 1961; 1995.
21. Markchies, Ambrosius, 1995, p. 142-165, cf. P. Galtier, Le
"Tome de Damase: Date et origine, in Recherches de science
religieuse, 26, 1936, p. 385-418, 563-578.
22. P. A. Ballerini, Ambrosii Opera omnia, 5, Milan, 1881, col.
223-226, 235-238.
23. There is no reason to connect Ambrose's journey with the
large council in Illyricum which Theodoretus, HE 4.7.69.9, records as summoned by Valentinian, i. e., before November 375: see MacLynn, Journal of Theological Studies, N. S.,
42, 1991, p. 57-61; Markschies, Ambrosius, 1995, p. 109-133.
24. Errington, Klio, 78, 1996, p. 440 n. 24, mistakenly denies
that Paulinus' words locate Justina in Sirmium at the time of
the contested episcopal election described.
25. Williams, Ambrose, 1995, p. 123.
26. Apparently missed by Williams, Ambrose, 1995, p. 122-123,
who adduces only the list of bishops who are named without
their sees as subscribing the synodical letter of the council
(Gesta 1.4, CSEL, 82.3, p. 327).

170

TIMOTHY D. BARNES

was in Sirmium: if she normally resided at court, as ought

to be assumed, then Gratian too must have been in or near
Sirmium at the time. Hence Ambrose's visit occurred
between the summer of 378, when Gratian passed through
Sirmium before the Battle of Adrianople, and late February
or March 379, when he left Illyricum for Gaul after residing
in Sirmium for the winter27.
3. The date of De fide I-II
The successive discussions by Faller, Savon, Gottlieb
and Nautin have done much to elucidate what can and what
cannot be deduced from Ambrose's references to Gratian
and to contemporary events in the preface to the first book
of De Fide, in the peroration which concludes Book II, and
in the preface to the third book28. But, if it is established both
that Ambrose went to the imperial court in 378 and that he
visited Sirmium between the summer of 378 and the spring
of 379, then their conclusions need to be reassessed on this
basis.
Ambrose begins the preface to De Fide with two
precedents from the Old Testament which put him in a
flattering light. The Queen of Sheba came to hear the
wisdom of Solomon (1 Kings 10.1-13: Ambrose quotes
Matthew 12.42), while Hiram, the king of Tyre, sent to
Solomon to make his acquaintance (1 Kings 5.1). Now
Gratian, in imitation of the ancient Jewish king, has
expressed a wish to hear Ambrose's faith. But the present
situation differs from the biblical precedents : sed non ego
Solomon, cuius mirere sapientiam; neque tu unius gentis,
sed totius orbis Augustus fidem libello exprimi censuisti,
non ut disceres, sed probares. Gratian made his request
when about to set off on a military campaign : petis a me
fidei libellum, sancte imperator, profecturus ad proelium.
nosti enim fide magis imperatoris quam virtute militum
quaeri solere victoriam... et tu vincere paras, qui fidem
vindicas, cuius a me libellum petisti. Despite the present
tense of petis, the subsequent petisti confirms what is
obvious from a priori considerations : Ambrose refers to a
request made by Gratian before he commenced the
composition of De Fide I-II, not to the later occasion when
he presented the emperor with the finished treatise.
27. The summer of 380, when Gratian may have passed through
Sirmium, seems too late for the election of Anemius in place of
Germinius, who had become bishop of Sirmium in 351 when
the Council of Sirmium deposed Photinus and who is last attested as active in 366 or 367: on his career, see still J. Zeiller,
Les origines chrtiennes dans les provinces danubiennes de
l'Empire romain, Paris, 1918, p. 144-145, 276-278, 288-297,
304-305; for his intellectual significance, D. H. Williams, Another Exception to Later Fourth-Century Arian Typologies:
The Case of Germinius of Sirmium, in Journal of Early Christian Studies, 4, 1996, p. 335-357.
28. Faller, CSEL, 78, 1962, p. 6*-8*; Savon, Studia Patristica,
10.1, 1970, p. 158-160; Gottlieb, Ambrosius, 1973, p. 26-38;
Nautin, Ambroise de Milan, 1974, p. 231-238.

AnTard, 7, 1999
The phrase totius orbis Augustus does not in itself prove
that Valens was already dead or that Gratian had not yet
proclaimed Theodosius as his imperial colleague. For any
Augustus could be saluted as an emperor of the whole world
in virtue of the fact that, as a legitimate member of the
imperial college, he was recognised throughout the Roman
Empire: Savon aptly adduced an inscription from Furni in
proconsular Africa where Valentinian is styled totius
o[rbis] Aug(ustus) between 366 and 368, although his
brother Valens ruled independently as Augustus in the East
(Dessau 763)29, and Gottlieb added three more clear
examples of the phenomenon30. Nor does the phrase
profecturus ad proelium yield a precise date, since it too
could have been written either before or after the Battle of
Adrianople.
The peroration to Book II, in contrast, does contain
historical allusions which can be identified precisely.
Ambrose excuses the two books as too brief and lacking the
polish of a proper elaboration of the subject (129). But to
write more might distract Gratian from his military
undertakings : neque vero te, imperator, pluribus tenere
debeo bello intentum et victricia de barbaris tropaea
meditantem. (136). Ezekiel had prophesied the ravaging of
Roman territory and war against the Goths. For the Gog of
Ezekiel is the Goth whom we now see to have come
forth and over whom a future victory is promised (138,
with quotation of Ezekiel 39.10-12). Confessors have
suffered death, torture and exile, impious men have become
bishops, traitors have been rewarded; the whole frontier of
Pannonia from Thrace through Dacia Ripensis and Moesia
to Valeria shudders because of sacrilegious utterances and
barbarian disturbances (140). Ambrose twice alludes
unambiguously to the catastrophic Roman defeat of 9
August 378 : nec ambiguum, sancte imperator, quod, qui
perfidiae alienae poenam excipimus, fidei catholicae in te
vigentis habituri sumus auxilium (139)... Sed iam satis
superque, omnipotens deus, nostro exitio nostroque
sanguine confessorum neces, exilia sacerdotum et nefas
tantae impietatis eluimus. satis claruit eos, qui violaverint
fidem, tutos esse non posse (141). In the second passage, all
editors before Faller in 1962 printed the badly attested and
inferior reading nostro exilio31: they thus not only obscured
Ambrose's meaning, but also encouraged historians from
Baronius and Tillemont to Campenhausen and Palanque to
believe that Ambrose wrote De Fide I-II in the spring or

29. Savon, Studia Patristica, 10.1, 1970, p. 159-160: the date is

deduced from the fact that Julius Festus is named as proconsul
of Africa, cf. Phoenix, 39, 1985, p. 150, 273.
30. Gottlieb, Ambrosius (1973), p. 34: Ammianus 29.5.46
(Valentinian); Ausonius, Praefatio 1.34 (Gratian); Dissertatio
Maximini 73 (Theodosius).
31. Thus both Amerbach (Basle, 1492) and the Maurists (Paris,
1690), whose text is reprinted in PL 16, col. 613-614 (noting
the variant but arguing for nostro exilio).

AnTard, 7, 1999
early summer of 37832. Faller printed nostro exitio, which
has far better manuscript attestation, and recognised the
obvious allusion to the Battle of Adrianople33. Ambrose
presents the Roman defeat on 9 August 378 as a divine
punishment for the impiety of Valens, who persecuted true
religion34, but he asserts that there is still hope of ultimate
success from Gratian, in whom the catholic faith is alive and
vigorous. The peroration concludes with a prayer to Lord
Jesus, who defended Italy before from a barbarian enemy
and has now avenged her35, to show proof of his majesty so
that Gratian, believing in him and relying on the aid of his
majesty, may win the trophies of his faith (143).
The opening of the third book of De Fide describes the
circumstances in which Ambrose wrote the first two books
in greater detail : Quoniam, clementissime imperator,
instruendi tui gratia aliqua de fide me scribenda
mandaveras et verecundantem coram etiam ipse fueras
adhortatus, ideo quasi in procinctu positus duos tantum
conscripsi libellos, quibus vias quasdam fidei et semitas
demonstrarem. There can be little doubt what Ambrose is
saying about Gratian's request that he write. The emperor
had requested him to write (mandaveras): when the bishop
expressed reluctance (verecundantem), the emperor urged
him again to do so, this time in a personal interview (coram
etiam ipse fueras adhortatus). Ambrose then wrote as if
on active service (quasi in procinctu positus). If this
phrase is to be given any factual content at all36, Ambrose
must be saying not merely that he received the emperor's
request to compose De Fide I-II elsewhere than in Milan,
where he normally resided, but that he wrote them
elsewhere than in Milan. Although that supposition might
appear to be contradicted by the large scale of the work37,
32. See Palanque, Ambroise, 1933, p. 498-499.
33. Faller, CSEL, 78, 1962, p. 7*-8*. H. Savon, Ambroise de
Milan, Paris, 1997, p. 89, has recently asserted that Seule la
datation traditionnelle s'accorde tout naturellement avec les
donnes du texte : he does not, however, explain what
Ambrose might have meant by the words nostro exitio before
the Battle of Adrianople.
34. The idea rapidly became a commonplace: Rufinus, HE 11.13
(p. 1019.15-1020.5 Mommsen). Theodoretus, HE 4.34, and
Sozomenus, HE 6.40, tell the story of how the monk Isaac told
Valens as he passed through Constantinople in June 378 that he
would assuredly defeat the Goths if he stopped persecuting
upholders of the Nicene creed.
35. Faller, CSEL, 78, 1962, p. 107, cf. 73, 1955, p. 86*-88*,
identifies the two occasions as Gratian's victory over the Alamanni in the spring of 378 and the Battle of Adrianople.
36. For the strong meaning of procinctus, see Cicero, De Oratore 1.228: tamquam in procinctu testamentum faceret sine
libra et tabulis ; Ulpian, Dig. 37.13.1; Ausonius, Gratiarum
Actio 11.52: loricatus de toga mea tractas, in procinctu et cum
maxime dimicaturus palmatae vestis meae ornamenta
disponis ; G. Viansino, Ammiani Marcellini rerum gestarum
Lexicon, Hildesheim / Zrich / New York, 1985, 2, p. 364.
37. McLynn, Ambrose, 1994, p. 102.

AMBROSE AND GRATIAN

171

Ambrose could surely have penned De Fide I-II within the

space of a few weeks.
The implications of the three passages quoted and
analysed separately can now be combined. The peroration
of De Fide II alludes clearly to the Battle of Adrianople, but
Ambrose is unaware that Gratian has yet achieved any
military success against the Goths or that there is an
orthodox emperor of the East. It follows that Ambrose
wrote De Fide I-II in response to a request which Gratian
made as he passed through Sirmium in the summer of 378
and that he presented De Fide I-II to the emperor when he
returned to Sirmium after the Battle of Adrianople. In the
late summer or autumn of 378, it was believed that Gratian
was about to conduct a campaign against the Goths which
is not attested apart from the allusions made by Ambrose
and which may therefore in the event not have taken place38.
4. Ambrose's avoidance of Gratian
Besides meeting, the emperor and the bishop exchanged
letters. A letter from Gratian to Ambrose is transmitted in
some manuscripts of De Spiritu sancto as if it were a preface
to the work (CSEL, 79, p. 3/4). Ambrose's prompt reply is
preserved in the second corpus of Epistulae extra
collectionem (12 = 1 Maur.). This exchange of letters needs
careful exegesis. Gratian sent a personal letter, not dictated,
as was usual with official business, but written in his own
hand39. He urged Ambrose to come to court and instruct him
in true doctrine (festina igitur ad me, religiose dei sacerdos,
ut doceas doctrinam veram credentem). And he asked
Ambrose to present him in person with an expanded version
of the treatise which he had presented to him before. The
new version should, he specified, say more about the Holy
Spirit : rogo te, ut mihi des ipsum tractatum, quem dederas:
augendo illic de sancto spiritu fidelem disputationem
scripturis atque argumentis deum esse convince. It is clear
from its content that Gratian wrote this letter far from
Milan, presumably in Trier40.

38. Gottlieb, Ambrosius, 1973, p. 31-32, 35-36, correctly noted

the implication of Ambrose's words, but proceeded to argue
mistakenly that, since Gratian's campaign is otherwise unattested, Ambrose cannot have been writing in autumn 378. Gottlieb therefore dated the composition of De Fide I-II to 379-380,
and his conclusions are accepted, with only slight modifications, by McLynn, Journal of Theological Studies, N. S., 42,
1991, p. 55 n. 5; Ambrose, 1994, p. 102, who argues that
Ambrose presented the two books to the emperor when Gratian returned to Milan in March 380 .
39. On the tone (and sincerity) of this letter, McLynn, Ambrose,
1994, p. 115-116.
40. J.-R. Palanque, Un pisode des rapports entre Gratien et
Saint Ambroise. propos de la Lettre I de saint Ambroise, in
REA, 30, 1928, p. 291-301. This inference is logically independent of Palanque's dating of Gratian's letter to January 380 and
Ambrose's reply to the second half of March 380 (p. 301).

172

TIMOTHY D. BARNES

Ambrose begins his reply with a profuse apology in

which he professes great affection for the emperor despite
his failure to meet and pay his respects to him when he
might justly have been expected to do so : Non mihi affectus
defuit, Christianissime principum, - nihil enim habeo quod
hoc verius et gloriosius dicam, - non, inquam, mihi affectus
defuit, sed affectum verecundia retardavit, quominus
clementiae tuae occurrerem. revertenti tamen si non
occurri vestigio, occurri animo, occurri voto, in quo
maiora sunt officia sacerdotis. occurri dico. quando enim
abfui, quem toto sequebar affectu, cui sensu ac mentibus
inhaerebam? et certe maior animorum praesentia est. tuum
cottidianum iter legebam, nocte ac die in tuis castris cura
et sensu locatus orationum excubias praetendebam, etsi
invalidus merito, sed affectu sedulus (Ep. extra coll. 12.1).
What occasion or occasions are in question? The crucial
words revertenti tamen make it clear that Ambrose refers to
two separate occasions. On the first, he states, he did not
meet Gratian through modesty, not lack of affection. On the
second, he did not meet Gratian as he returned, though he
followed his every move and kept watch night and day since
his care and senses transported him to the emperor's camp.
It has been traditional to see here a reference to a journey of
Gratian as he returned from Illyricum to Trier for the winter,
either in the autumn of 379 or a year later: Zelzer, for
example, states that Gratian was returning ex Illyrico
Augustam Treverorum ut videtur41. Palanque correctly
pronounced this implausible on linguistic and logical
grounds42. Ambrose must surely refer to two visits of
Gratian to Milan - on neither of which he entered the
emperor's presence.
5. The two sequels to De fide I-II
Towards the end of his reply to Gratian's letter, Ambrose
promises to come to the emperor, but only at some
indefinite time in the future (veniam plane et festinabo ut
iubes, ut haec praesens audiam, ut haec praesens legam,
cum ex tuo ore procedunt). In the meantime, he can send
Gratian the requested copy of De Fide I-II, and he promises
to write about the Holy Spirit, if he is allowed a little more
time : Misi autem duos libellos, quorum iam quia tuae
clementiae sunt probati periculum non verebor. De spiritu
sancto interim veniam scriptioni peto, quoniam quem
iudicem mei sim sermonis habiturus agnovi... Si dominus
faverit huic etiam clementiae tuae satisfaciam voluntati, ut
cuius accepisti gratiam, eum plane in dei gloria
praeminentem suo nomine aestimes honorandum (Ep.
extra coll. 12.7). After writing this letter, however,
Ambrose produced a new version of De Fide in five books,
rapidly adapting sermons which he had given in Milan since
composing the first two books.
41. Zelzer, CSEL, 82.3, 1982, p. 219, cf. Gottlieb, Ambrosius,
1973, p. 39-40; McLynn, Ambrose, 1994, p. 115, 116 n. 141.
42. Palanque, REA, 30, 1928, p. 295-297.

AnTard, 7, 1999
The final three books of De Fide show clear traces of
their adaptation from previously delivered sermons or
homilies43. Ambrose refers more than once to the scriptural
reading of the day which the congregation whom he is
addressing has just heard (3.142: ferias hodierni sermonis
habeamus ; 4.11: considerate quid lectum sit hodie).
Moreover, although formal invocations of the emperor
occur throughout the text (3.1, 108; 4.1, 77; 5.89), they
appear to have been added as an afterthought. Ambrose
invokes his fratres (5.11) and often uses the second person
plural as if he is speaking to a live audience (5.60:
considerate ; 65: agnoscatis ; 77: ponite ; 171: videte ; 214:
quaeritis ; 223: advertitis). But, if De Fide III-V are an
adaptation of sermons delivered orally in Milan, then they
were not originally composed in response to Gratian's
request, even though they form a continuation or
supplement to the first two books. It is wrong, however, to
conclude from this that Ambrose fulfilled the first part of
the request which Gratian made, but not the second 44. For
the sequel to De Fide I-II requested by Gratian is De Spiritu
sancto, which Ambrose composed very shortly after
completing De Fide and which refers back to it as
superiores libri (Spir. 1.63, 121)45. The De Spiritu sancto
provides the full treatment of the Holy Spirit that Gratian
had requested, and it declares itself to be the work that
Ambrose had promised in answer to this request by echoing
the emperor's letter to him : de eo (sc. the Holy Spirit)
quoniam ita plene de dei filio, clementissime imperator,
instructus es ut ipse doceas cupientem et exigentem
audire aliquid expressius non morabor (Spir. 1.19)46.
External evidence confirms the implications of the text:
Gratian's letter survives because Ambrose prefixed it to De
Spiritu sancto, thus advertising the book as the response
to an imperial commission and bolstering its arguments
with Gratian's imprimatur 47.
6. Historical allusions in De spiritu sancto
The date of De Spiritu sancto can be established with
unusual precision48. A passage which states that it is spoken
or written on Easter Day (tu nobis, domine Iesu, hos hodie
mille mundasti) refers to the reception of Athanaric in
Constantinople on 13 January 381 and to his death there
twelve days later49: (sc. Constantinople) hostem ipsum,
43. Williams, Journal of Theological Studies, N. S., 46, 1995,
p. 528-529.
44. Williams, Ambrose, 1995, p. 151 n. 103.
45. Likewise the De Spiritu sancto is promised in De Fide 5.7,
34: see Faller, CSEL, 79, 1964, p. 15*.
46. The Epistula Gratiani begins : cupio valde ... festina igitur
ad me, religiose dei sacerdos, ut doceas doctrinam veram credentem.
47. McLynn, Ambrose, 1994, p. 115-116, cf. Faller, CSEL, 79,
1964, p. 5*.
48. Faller, CSEL, 79, 1964, p. 15*-17*.
49. Descriptio consulum 381.1, 2; Chr. min. 1, p. 461; 2, p. 61.

AnTard, 7, 1999
iudicem regem, quem semper tremere consueverat, deditum vidit, supplicem recepit, morientem obruit, sepultum
possedit (1.17). And the next sentence but one refers both to
Peter, bishop of Alexandria, and to Gregory, bishop of Constantinople, as still in possession of their sees. Since Peter
died before the Council of Constantinople, which convened
in May 381, while Gregory resigned his see during the
council50, this passage must have been composed or delivered on 28 March 381. Ambrose, therefore, composed the
De Spiritu sancto in the late winter or spring of 381.
Two corollaries follow from this date. First, Gratian's
extant letter to Ambrose must belong to the autumn of 380
and Ambrose's reply, with which he despatched a second
copy of De Fide I-II, to the late autumn of 380 or the winter
of 380/1. Second, the restoration to the Catholics in Milan
of the basilica, which Gratian had previously allowed the
homoeans to use, must also belong to the winter of 380/1:
the first book of De Spiritu sancto compliments the emperor
on suddenly and unexpectedly restoring the basilica, which
he had temporarily impounded (1.19-21: ignorantibus
omnibus subito basilicam reddidisti ... basilicam
sequestrasti ut fidem probares)51. Since Ambrose's letter to
Gratian does not mention the restoration, it presumably
occurred after he wrote that letter52.

7. Conclusions
The preceding discussion has yielded the following
conclusions about the personal contacts between Ambrose
and Gratian before the latter took up residence in North
Italy in the autumn of 381 :

50. G. Rauschen, Jahrbcher der christlichen Kirche unter dem

Kaiser Theodosius dem Grossen, Freiburg-im-Breisgau, 1897,
p. 95-101, 116-117 n. 8.
51. A. Berger, Encyclopedic Dictionary of Roman Law (Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, N. S. 43.2),
Philadelphia, 1953, p. 701, glosses the rare verb sequestrare,
which Ambrose uses three times, as to deposit a controversial
thing with a third person as a sequester .
52. For a date in the early months of 381, see Gottlieb, Ambrose,
1973, p. 40-51; D. W. Williams, Studia Patristica, 24, 1993, p.
209-215; Ambrose, 1995, p. 154-156, 166-169. Against the
consensus of scholarship since Tillemont, Gottlieb and
Williams correctly argue that Ep. extra coll. 12.2 (reddidisti
enim mihi quietem ecclesiae, perfidorum ora atque utinam et
corda clausisti) does not refer to the return of the basilica.

AMBROSE AND GRATIAN

173

378, summer Ambrose attends a Council at Rome and takes a

relatio from it to the emperor, whom he finds at
Sirmium.
378, autumn Gratian gives a favourable response to the relatio
of the Roman council.
While both are still in Sirmium, Gratian asks
Ambrose for a statement of his theological
beliefs.
378, autumn Ambrose presents De Fide I-II to Gratian in Sirmium.
? early 379 Gratian permits the homoeans to use one of the
basilicas in Milan.
379, July
Gratian visits Milan.
380, spring Gratian visits Milan.
380, autumn Gratian returns to Trier and writes to Ambrose
inviting him to come to court.
380/1, winter Ambrose replies and sends Gratian a second copy
of De Fide I-II together with his letter.
Ambrose composes De Fide III-V.
381, early
Gratian returns the homoeans' basilica in Milan to
the catholic church.
381, spring Ambrose completes De Spiritu sancto and sends
a copy to Gratian.

This reconstruction implies two conclusions of farreaching significance. First, the assumption that Ambrose
composed De Fide I-II in Milan and was therefore writing
with his eye mainly on the ecclesiastical situation in that
city, on which recent explicitly revisionist interpretations of Ambrose's relationship with Gratian have
been based53, is mistaken. For it was in Sirmium that
Gratian requested such a work from Ambrose, and
Ambrose wrote De Fide I-II when he was absent from
Milan - which implies that he probably composed these two
books in Sirmium. Hence the composition of De Fide I-II
is more relevant to the balance of ecclesiastical parties at the
court of Gratian than in Milan54. Second, Ambrose avoided
meeting Gratian when he came to Milan in 379 and in 38055.
Why such rudeness? Presumably because Gratian was
allowing the homoeans of the city to use a Christian basilica
for worship. Ambrose only dropped his frosty attitude when
Gratian restored the basilica to the catholic church of Milan.
Whether or not that restoration was a direct result of
Ambrose's deliberate and ostentatious boycott of the
imperial visits, the pattern of Ambrose's behaviour is
familiar from later, more famous episodes. Ambrose based
his conduct towards Gratian while he was in Milan on the
same principle as underlies his subsequent dealings with

53. McLynn, Ambrose, 1994, p. 102-105; Williams, Ambrose,

1995, p. 128-153, esp. 129-130, 140 ( Gratian wrote to
Ambrose requesting a libellum [sic] explaining his faith ).
54. Dudden, Ambrose, 1935, 189.
55. Despite McLynn, Ambrose, 1994, p. 79, who simply assumes
that Ambrose must have welcomed Gratian to the city in 379.

174

TIMOTHY D. BARNES

Theodosius and Eugenius: he refused to associate with any

emperor who involved himself in sacrilege, whether by
providing money for pagan cults or by ordering a bishop to
rebuild a Jewish synagogue - or by allowing heretics to
use a church in Milan for non-catholic worship56.

AnTard, 7, 1999
Unfortunately, neither Ambrose himself when he edited his
letters in the 390s nor his biographer (writing in 412/3)
chose to include the dealings with Gratian that set the
precedent for the disdainful treatment that he later meted
out in turn to Valentinian and Theodosius57.

Department of Classics
University of Toronto

56. Ambrose stated the principle clearly when writing to

Theodosius after the defeat of Eugenius: non enim ego ecclesiam
Mediolanensem dereliqueram domini mihi iudicio commissam,
sed eius vitabam praesentiam qui sese sacrilegio miscuisset
(Ep. extra coll. 2.2, CSEL, 82.3, p. 178.10-13).

57. This paper originated in a graduate class taught in Toronto in

early 1997: I am most grateful to the students who listened to
my inchoate ideas and helped me to refine them, especially to
Laurence Pittenger who read and commented on my subsequent written draft.