Justice of Traian: between legend, law and art
Maciej Jońca
Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego Jana Pawła II
Justice of Traian: between legend, law and art*
Titolo in italiano: La giustizia di Traiano: tra legenda, diritto e arte
DOI: 10.26350/004084_000073
SOMMARIO: Introduction. – 2. Trajan as an exemplification of a good ruler in the middle ages. – 3. “Salvation” of Trajan’s soul. – 4. Exceptio Traianea. – 5. Traian as a good emperor in the visual arts. – 6. Conclusion.
1. Introduction.
In an interesting study devoted to the decorations of German and Italian town halls in the period of late Middle Ages, Ulrich Meier observes:
A considerable group is made up of painted exempla of fair judges. Initially a modest catalogue of persons headed by King Solomon was considerably expanded in the period of late Middle Ages and the Renaissance … Stories about the Emperor Trajan were also quite popular. He demonstrated exemplary justice towards a widow with regard to an undeserved death of her son. In one of the versions, he did it by offering her his own son who was the perpetrator of the crime. According to another version, the imperial son finally married the widow. This motif is, or was, present in the town hall in Cologne (c. 1349/90), Nuremberg (1521), Ulm (c. 1540), Basel (1st half of the 16th c.), Regensburg (c. 1573), Brescia (1591). Trajan might also appear himself as an example of a fair emperor[1].
It is understandable that in the Middle Ages the archetype of a ruler who passed his rulings under God’s inspiration was king Solomon[2]. However, a question arises: why was the role of ruler who in a perfect way fulfilled the order of the prophet Izaiah: “Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow”[3] associated with the pagan Emperor Trajan[4]? A contemporary researcher, trying to grasp the main threads of Trajan’s legal policy is faced with considerable difficulties. Indeed, it turns out that the source material is not only seriously limited, but also very biased[5]. It is true that the Trajan’s consilium included such eminent lawyers as L. Javolenus Priscus, L. Neratius Priscus or Ti. Aristo. However, none of his constitutions (his correspondence with Pliny the Younger implies that there must have been numerous ones)[6] was literally copied by Justinian compilers and is missing from the Digests, whereas the few rulings associated with Trajan are cited second-hand[7].
The choice of medieval masters evokes astonishment also due to another circumstance. It is beyond doubt that the Christian subjects of Trajan did not have many reasons to feel sympathy towards the ruler. Suffice it to say that the number of the beast (666) from St. John’s Apocalypse[8], which till this day evokes terror, probably refers to the Emperor Trajan himself[9]. The successor to the elderly Nerva, Trajan unquestionably established his name in the history of the Church as one of its persecutors. The letter from Pliny the Younger sent with regard to the Bithynian Christians and the reply which included the Emperor’s instructions had determined the criminal policy of the Roman State with regard to Christians for almost the next two centuries[10]. Thanks to Tertulian’s Apologeticus, in the Middle Ages it was known how devastating to the Christian community Trajan’s “Solomon’s judgement” proved to be[11].
2. Trajan as an exemplification of a good ruler in the middle ages.
People of the Middle Ages knew much less about Trajan than contemporary researchers. To tell the truth, it seems that they knew almost nothing, but even the little they knew was enough to make up their minds about him. Yet the ruler, just like on the courts of late-antique emperors … still enjoyed admiration and high esteem. This attitude was certainly influenced by the fact that during his reign the empire reached its maximum territorial spread. The buildings which he left behind in Rome (especially the forum)[12], in Italy and in the provinces[13] were still capable of evoking a considerable impression. Slightly coloured information about Trajan’s successes in investments was eagerly repeated in the literature of the time.
However, it was not the buildings that caused the rulers who would come to power in the Middle Ages to receive wishes that they should be “more fortunate than Augustus and better than Trajan”[14]. It was so due to a legend which legitimised the existence of the pagan imperator in the sphere of Christian culture[15]. Stories about Trajan’s noble deed can be divided into two groups. The first one concerns the Emperor setting out to war and a poor widow. It came to be deeply rooted on the British Isles, where its first version can be found in an anonymous life of St. Gregory (dated to 713), written by a monk of the monastery of Whitby[16]. It is thus possible that the text became an inspiration for Jacob the Deacon[17] and Paul the Deacon[18].
This history is also mentioned in Peter Abelard’s Christian Theology, while a fuller version was preserved in the writings of one of his disciples. In his work entitled Policraticus, John of Salisbury notes:
Setting out to war, Trajan was mounting his horse when a certain widow fell at his feet and weeping she begged him for justice with regard to those who unjustly brought death upon her son, who was an innocent and good youth. “You rule, Augustus – she said – and I have to bear such harm?” “I will see to your request – he said – when I come back.” “And what – she asked – if you don’t come back?” “My successor – Trajan responded – will see to your claim.” She replied: “What benefit will it be to you, if someone else will do me good? You owe me this, as you will be rewarded according to the measure of your deeds. It is deceit not to give someone their due. Your successor will answer for the injustice that will happen under his rule. You will not escape by delegating justice to be executed by someone else. It will be fair if your successor will see to his own responsibilities.” Moved by the widow’s words, the Emperor dismounted from his horse and immediately investigated the matter, then he made amends to the widow, which she fully deserved[19].
The above narrative was also preserved, amongst other places, in Dante Alighieri’s Divine Comedy, where the events were summarised in the following way:
I moved away from that place to observe
at closer range another story told
in whiteness just beyond the face of Michal.
Here was retold the magnanimity
of that great Prince of Rome whose excellence
moved Gregory to win his greatest fight:
there rode the noble Trajan, Emperor,
and clinging to his bridle as she wept
a wretched widow, carved in lines of grief.
The trampled space surrounding him was packed
with knights on horseback — eagles, flying high,
threaded in gold of banners in the wind.
That poor widow amid the mass of shapes
seemed to be saying: “Lord, avenge my son
who has been killed; my heart is cut with grief”.
He seemed to answer: “You will have to wait
for my return”. And she, like one impelled
by frantic grief: “But, oh, my lord, if you
should not return?”. And he: “Who takes my place
will do it for me”. She: “How can you let
another’s virtue take the place of yours?”.
Then he: “Take comfort, for I see I must
perform my duty, now, before I leave:
Justice so wills, and pity holds me here”.
That One for Whom no new thing can exist
fashioned this art of visible speech — so strange
to us who do not know it here on earth[20].
Over the centuries, the above story was copied on multiple occasions and since the second half of the 12th century it was also modified[21]. One of its numerous mutations found itself in Jacob de Voraigne’s Golden Legend, where the well-known pattern was enriched by additional details: “It is also said that on one occasion, while galloping ferociously through the city, Trajan’s son killed a widow’s son and when the woman, all in tears, told the Emperor about it, he gave her his own son in place of the one who had been killed and generously rewarded her”[22]. This motif was developed in the work Mirabilia urbis. Its author presents the woman’s dramatic appeal addressed to the Emperor:
When he was led [i.e. Trajan’s son] to death, a woman shouted loudly: “Give me this one, who is to die, in place of my son and let it be a compensation for my loss. Otherwise, I will never admit that justice has been done!” So it happened that way and the woman, amply rewarded, went away from the Emperor[23].
The history of the Emperor’s son was retrieved by Jacopo della Lana in his Comedy, where Trajan:
called for the widow and said: “Listen, I found that it was my son who committed murder. What is your wish? Should he die or should I give him to you as your son? You can be assured that he will be under your control and neither I will have anything to do with him, nor he with me and it will be as if he were born of you, as if you carried him under your heart.” The widow thought that her son was dead either way and that she would not gain anything when the other one would die too. Hence, she said that she would take him for a son and so it happened so that justice would triumph. Having repaired that harm, the Emperor rode on horseback further on his way[24].
With time, other versions of the story appeared, which radically differed from the original text. Thus, in the work of the Dutch author Jacob de Cessolis, Trajan’s 13-year-old son accidentally caused the death of his friend when they were both swimming in the Tyber. Asked to administer justice, the ruler sentenced him to the same fate – to be drowned in the river. The prayers of the witnesses of the execution, however, worked out a miracle. God’s angel appeared and brought both boys back to life[25].
The motif of Trajan accosted by a poor widow has permanently entered the court culture in the Middle Ages and early modern times. Some of the authors have gone so far as to completely ignore the legal reality of the time and presented the scene of the Emperor’s son being “adopted” by the widow or even granting him to her in place of the widow’s husband[26]. Abbreviated versions of the legend were in circulation in the form of an easily remembered rhymed verse[27].
3. “Salvation” of Trajan’s soul.
Different scholars point out to different sources of the legend of Trajan and a poor widow. What is particularly striking is the similarity between the medieval apocrypha and the story found among the writings of Cassius Dio: “One day, when Hadrian was in hurry somewhere, a woman called after him: “Emperor, Emperor, listen to me!” “I don’t have time” answered Hadrian. “Then stop being the Emperor!” At that moment he stopped and listened to her”[28]. Hadrian’s majesty, however, did not seem distinct enough for the medieval authors to elevate precisely this Emperor to the position of an example to imitate. Even though Hadrian was no less strategically talented than his predecessor and in the field of legislature was much more courageous[29], he could not eclipse Trajan as a passionate builder. It is also possible that in the Middle Ages it was still remembered that the Emperor had homosexual tendencies, which he did not attempt to hide[30]. Ensuring him pardon also for this “sin” might have been a task far beyond the capabilities of otherwise sensitive and emphatic Pope Gregory I.
The making of Trajan’s legend might have also been influenced by the visual remains of the imperial propaganda, which was emphasised, amongst others, by Dante, when he referred to a frieze from Trajan’s Forum[31]. Vicenzo di Beauvais in the work Speculum historiae states:
His statue (i.e. Trajan’s) was erected on Trajan’s Forum in such a way that it presents him at the moment when he offers amends to the widow before going to war. Later, this fact evoked compassion in St. Gregory. This is why, as they say, he cried so much over him that he managed to get his soul out of hell[32].
One can find a more detailed account of those events in the 15th century English work entitled Alphabetum narrationum:
Once Blessed Gregory was walking past Trajan’s residence when he remembered his gentleness, which was described amply above, and started crying and in tears prayed at the altar of St. Peter for such a long time that in his sleep he heard a voice. The voice told him that on account of his prayers, Trajan’s soul was released from punishment in hell, but that he should never again dare pray for any deceased pagan[33].
As can be seen, this time, unfortunately, the motif of the statue is missing.
The scene with a woman approaching the Emperor’s ferocious steed corresponds all too well with representations of the province paying homage to the Emperor. A telling example seems to be also a depiction from The Arch of Trajan in Benevento, showing the Emperor receiving homage from barbarian kings. It could be that artistic imagination might have also been stimulated by scenes praising the acts of charity carried out by the Emperor (institutio alimentaria) and his deeds depicted on the column by his name, as well as some antique sarcophagi illustrating the deeds of great warriors.
The motif of a judge yielding to the persistent widow is also present in the gospel according to St. Luke[34]. There are also possible references to stories created in the Middle Ages and very popular at that time, such as the story about St. John the Almsgiver, by St. Leontius, bishop of Neapolis or a fictitious episode from the life of the Greek philosopher Heraclitus, written down by the patriarch Nicephorus. Stories of a similar plot can also be found in the Persian and even Indian tradition[35].
Ensuring that the suffering widow receives justice was not enough to make Trajan fully rehabilitated in the Christian world. Hence the second part of the legend, connected with the intervention of Pope Gregory I. John of Salisbury writes:
In order to make it easier to praise Trajan for those who tend to believe that others are better than him, it is written that his virtues were admired by the most holy Pope Gregory, who, having shed tears for him, saved him from the flames of hell: The Lord in his immense mercy rewarded the justice which Trajan had demonstrated to the crying widow … As the story goes, the most holy Pope cried over him for such a long time so that finally, during a revelation, he was told that Trajan was relieved from the tortures of hell, but on condition that the Pope would not dare to intercede to God for any pagan in the future.
The conclusion is obvious: “hence, he is deservedly put in front of others and his fairness impressed the saints to such a degree that due to their intercession he was relieved”[36].
In Dante’s Divine Comedy, a region on the threshold of hell (Limbo, Limbus) was created in order to save from the eternal fire, amongst others, all virtuous non-Christians living in the antiquity who could not have been baptised for various reasons[37]. An exception was made only for Trajan and Ripheus – a hero from the Trojan War, who was briefly mentioned in Virgil’s Aeneid[38]. They were both pardoned and taken to heaven[39]. Nevertheless, medieval authors were fully aware that it might pose a dangerous precedent that Pope Gregory interceded to God for a pagan ruler. That is why in the Golden Legend it stated that:
After some time had passed after Trajan’s death, St. Gregory was walking through Trajan’s Forum and then he remembered the justice and other good deeds of Trajan and how approachable he was as a judge. Then he went to St. Peter’s Basilica where he wept over his wrongdoings. Suddenly, he received an answer from the Heavens: “I have heard your prayer and I have spared Trajan his eternal punishment; but in other cases, be advised and do not intercede for any pagan”.
St. John of Damascus in one of his sermons says that St. Gregory, after he prayed at length for Trajan, heard God’s voice: “I heard your voice and I forgive my Countryman” … The story goes that then an angel appeared and said: “Because you prayed for the condemned, you have a choice of two things: either you will suffer two days in purgatory or till the end of your life you will be plagued by weakness and pain.” The Pope preferred to live the rest of his life in pain rather than to experience two days of purgatory pains. Hence, he continually suffered from fever, gout, bones aching or chronic abdominal pain ever after[40].
The Dominican Giovanni da Viterbo puts it even more succinctly: “The Pope had broken God’s law, but he remained not without punishment: stricken by an angel he limped afterwards and had marks all over his body”[41].
4. Exceptio Traianea.
The problem raised above motivated theologians who felt obliged to explain under which rule Trajan was granted the grace of salvation. John the Deacon argued that:
… it should be noted that it was not written that as a result of Gregory’s prayers Trajan’s soul was released from hell and taken to paradise, which seems improbable, given the words of the Scripture: “no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit (John 3:3), but it was simply said that his soul was relieved from the torments of hell. This seems by all means probable, as a soul can do well in hell and thanks to God’s mercy it does not have to feel the tortures of hell[42].
The synthesis of the discussion in this matter can be found in the Golden Legend.
The witness to what has been said above is the whole world, far and wide. Some said that Trajan was returned to life and then he received grace, earned forgiveness and having received the glory he was eventually saved from hell and eternal damnation. Some other people said that Trajan’s soul was not simply released from the punishment for the sin, but his punishment was suspended for some time, that is till the day of the judgement. Others said that the punishment as to the place and type of torture was executed conditionally until the moment when Gregory through Christ’s grace altered the punishment somehow as to its place and nature. Still others, like John the Deacon, who wrote down this story, claim that Gregory did not pray, but wept, and the Lord, touched by compassion often allows that even though the prayer done for somebody who is not allowed to be prayed for, his soul is not released from hell and placed in paradise but simply released from the hellish torment. Still others say that eternal damnation consists of two elements: the punishment regarding the senses and damnation consisting in not seeing God. (In the case of Trajan) eternal damnation was suspended with regard to the former, but kept with regard to the latter[43].
A decisive opinion in this matter turned out to be that of St. Thomas Aquinas, as it was the most influential one[44]. In his line of thought, he referred to legal arguments:
As it seems, in the case of Trajan it occurred that on account of the blessed Gregory’s prayers, he was returned to life and in this way, he received grace through which his sins were pardoned and, as a result, he avoided eternal damnation. This is what happens with all dead, who miraculously receive back their soul and who had been damned idolaters before. They all have to be described in a similar way that they were not eventually sent to hell, but judged according to their real merits. The cases of utmost importance had to be judged in a different way though, due to the reasons for which [the people] were awaken to life. It might be thus assumed, as some say, that Trajan’s soul was not released from eternal torment resulting from a punishment for sins, but that the punishment was suspended for some time, that is until the last judgement. However, it should not be believed that usual prayers bring about such an effect; the effects are different when general rules apply and when a specific case is given special privileges[45].
5. Traian as a good emperor in the visual arts.
A significant role in spreading the image of Trajan as a just ruler was played by visual arts. Having gained salvation through the Pope’s intercession, there were no more obstacles to including the Roman Emperor among the gallery of Christian icons of the legal world such as Jesus Christ as Judge of Mankind, King Solomon or the prophet Daniel.
Between the years 1320 and 1550, over 80 representations of the pagan ruler were created, narrating the legend of the Emperor who earned his own salvation by demonstrating a sense of empathy[46]. The sources of inspiration for the artists included the following: “learned” texts, tradition, as well as poetic works with Dante’s Divine Comedy in clear lead[47]. Numerous narratives like that decorated palace rooms and town halls. The story of Trajan was to remind the rulers and representatives of the judiciary who administered justice that in passing the judgement they were obliged to maintain the highest standards of objectivity and impartiality.
The imagination of the artists was especially stirred by the version of the story which accentuated the fatal role played in the tragedy of the poor widow by the Emperor’s son. His presence in the narrative turns the Emperor’s promise that justice will be measured out by “the one who will rule next” (ille, qui post me imperabit) into empty words. A penalty for the crime imposed upon one’s own child established Trajan’s position not only as an impartial ruler but also as a statesman, who is not to be influenced by the circumstances of a personal nature. His story joined a list of narratives, well-established in the antique sources, of true statesmen who did not hesitate to impose severe penalties for breaking the law even on their own sons. The most popular stories with this motif included the story of Seleuscus[48], Lucius Junius Brutus[49] and Titus Manlius Torquatus[50].
As Jean Seznec points out: “The Musée Jacquemart-André possesses a painted ceiling on which Girolamo Mocetto has represented the Emperor amongst other »exemplary« figures, sacred or profane. The »Justice of Trajan« forms a counterpart to the »Judgment of Solomon«. In the Ashmolean Museum, there is a Quattrocento drawing in which Trajan somewhat resembles a St. Martin dividing his cloak. This drawing is in the style of Vincenzo Foppa, and some scholars have related it to the frescoes Foppa painted in the Medici Bank in Milan; Filarete and Vasari indeed inform us that these frescoes represented episodes from the story of Trajan. Similar episodes were depicted in the Loggetta of the Piazza Vecchia in Brescia, also by Foppa. The theme evidently enjoyed considerable popularity, especially in northern Italy, because ramifications of it are to be found in various other drawings and engravings, by Giovanni Maria da Brescia, Agostino Veneziano, Domenico Campagnola, and others. Moreover there is no doubt that the Renaissance, like the Middle Ages, told the story or illustrated it with a moral end in view. One of the engravings has below it the inscription: INCORRUPTAE JUSTICIAE SEMPITERNUM EXEMPLUM”[51].
The Justice of Trajan” also moved the imagination of later artists. Not so long ago in Saint Petersburg a painting was discovered and it is now associated with the school of Fontainebleau. It shows in an ingenious way the moment of the Emperor’s conversation with the sorrowful woman[52]. Noël Hallé attempted to recreate the same moment[53] but with an unsatisfactory outcome as his work was appreciated neither by Louis XVI[54], who ordered the painting to be removed from his residence, nor by Diderot, who levelled massive criticism at the painting[55].
Eugène Delacroix, who sought inspiration with The Divine Comedy, was definitely more fortunate[56]. His canvas, even though sometimes mocked as excessively pompous and created as if according to a template, has been enjoying a well-deserved renown until this day[57]. For the first time Delacroix exhibited his painting at the Salon in 1840. In 1855 it was shown again at a retrospective of his work at the Universal Expo in Paris. It is hard to say who drew his attention to this topic. It could be Frédéric Villot, conservator at the Louvre. It was immediately acquired by the French State to be sent to Bordeaux. However, on the special request of the artist, it was conserved in the Musée de Rouen.
Trajan was once more evoked as a role model for the judges in the 20th-century America. When Italian sculptors working in marble were looking for the right subject to decorate the Supreme Court in Washington in the 1930s, who was there to express the spirit of Roman justice better than Trajan[58]?
Despite the popularity of mass for the dead, called in Latin Gregoriana (in order to commemorate Gregory the Great, who established it), scenes showing the divine grace granted to Trajan through the intercession of Gregory the Great are relatively rare[59]. One of the best known examples of this kind comes from Tirol. The back of the “Altarpiece of the Church Fathers”, created in 1483 for Neustift Monastery by Michael Pacher, is divided into four sections. Each of them shows one of the four Great Doctors of the Western Church: Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, and Pope Gregory I. Gregory I is accompanied by emperor Trajan raised from the dead to be baptised by the merciful pope[60].
6. Conclusion.
“The Justice of Trajan” became an important motif of the European legal iconography. Naturally, it has nothing to do with the “pure” Roman law, whose image (sometimes quite discouraging) has been built throughout the ages by professors and law experts. Trajan was an autocrat, which was in line with the political climate of the of the turn of the 1st and 2nd century. The shape of the state under his rule was fundamentally different from the political concept referred to currently as the “rule of law.” Nevertheless, after the bloodbath that Rome experienced at the hands of Nero and Domitian, Trajan was praised for being much more predictable than others. Credit must also be given here to the imperial propaganda. It is worth pointing out that many of its numerous manifestations have survived till the present day in various forms. This is due to the fact that Trajan’s successors saw no reason to erase the memory of a man who knew how to rule.
The rest was added by human curiosity. A fictitious story of the Emperor moved by the fate of a suffering widow undoubtedly consolidated the myth of the good Roman law among those who had access to the courtly culture and the judiciary system. The knowledge of Roman law which was acquired by all who learned about the adventures of the soul of the Roman Emperor was in no way connected with tedious and time-consuming university studies, but with unsurpassed speed and accuracy it conveyed the following message to the addressee: “Trajan was a fair ruler and Rome under his rule could be seen as an embodiment of justice. This is an example to follow!” Putting such a message across must have occurred in a fraction of a second. It was enough to take a look at the wall with a painting or a fresco. The passing of the actual judgement, at that time, did not take a lot of time either.
The above processes, which are part and parcel of the broad presence of Roman law in art, can undoubtedly be included among the ways in which ius Romanum impacted the judiciary practice in both the Middle Ages and the modern era. It was much more effective in teaching the masses about some areas of Roman law (in a sometimes distorted manner, agreed). Such exempla were to illustrate a point and have an educational purpose. Scenes from the life of Christ and saints to be seen in church paintings were referred to as the Poor Man’s Bible (Biblia pauperum) for a reason. The representations of Trajan and other good Roman judges should therefore be called Pandectae pauperum. It has not happened as of yet. It seems that this form of conveying the message of Roman law has not been widely studied and probably this is why it still has not received enough appreciation.
Abstract: One of the most interesting legal motifs in the iconography of the Middle Ages is the scene showing the meeting between the Emperor Trajan and a poor widow. The Emperor, addressed by poor woman whose son has been unjustly slaughtered, decides to postpone his campaign and hear her case without delay. This story was popularised in various versions by medieval legends and caused a symbolic “redemption” of the pagan emperor. Consequently, the character of Trajan could serve as a personification of a fair judge. The pagan Trajan gained his place in both sacral and secular art and was represented near such powerful figures as Christ or king Solomon.
Key words: Trajan, justice of Trajan, legal iconography.
* The paper has been double peer reviewed.
[1] U. Meier, Vom Mythos der Republik. Formen und Funktionen spätmittelalterichen Rathausikonographie in Deutschland und in Italien, in A. Löther et al. (eds.), Mundus in imagine. Bildersprache und Lebenswelte im Mittelalter. Festgabe für Klaus Schreiner, München 1996, p. 539. What is interesting, this motif can be also seen on the richly decorated Italian dowry chests. See: Ch. Klapisch-Zuber, Les Noces Feintes: Sur quelques lectures de deux thèmes iconographiques dans les cassoniflorentins, in Tatti Studies in the Italian Renaissance 6 (1995), pp. 11-30.
[2] Cf. M. Mende, Das alte Nürnberger Rathaus. Baugeschichte und Ausstattung des großen Saales und der Ratstube, vol. 1, Nürnberg 1979, p. 416: “it was proven that Solomon’s judgement is the most popular motif in town halls with regard to justice”.
[3] Isai. 1.17-18: iudicate pupillo, defendite viduam.
[4] Cf. M. Cojoc, Le pape Grégoire le Grand at la tradition historique de l’empereur Trajan, in C.C. Petolescu - M. Galinier - F. Matei-Popescu(eds.), Divus Traianus. Travaux du Colloque International de Drobeta-Turnu Severin, 16-17 juin 2017, Bucureşti 2018, p. 218, 221.
[5] The main source for learning about Trajan is Pliny the Younger’s Panegyricus, which uncritically enumerates the virtues of our hero. On the other hand, the tenth book of his letters includes private and official correspondence he maintained with the Emperor. If it had not been for this source, all we would know about Trajan’s political virtues would come from four orations devoted to the ruler and written down by Dio Chrysostom. There is also book 68 of Historia Romana by Dio Cassius, written a century after Trajan’s death and based on the senatorial and imperial archives of the time. However, Dio rarely acknowledged the sources he relied upon and what is more, he was not always able to tell the difference between fact and gossip. Cf. J. Bennett, Trajan. Optimus princeps. Życie i czasy [Trajan. Optimus princeps. Life and times], transl. M.N. Faszcza, M. Baranowski, Oświęcim 2015, p. 14.
[6] Notes on the exchange of letters between the governor of Bithynia and Pontus and the Emperor Trajan – L. Vidman, Étude sur la correspondance de Pline le Jeune avec Trajan, Praha 1960, passim; F. Millar, Trajan: government by correspondence, in J. Gonzalez (ed.) Trajano Emperador de Roma, Roma, 2000, pp. 363-88.
[7] Cf. for instance, enigmatic references on the subject of regulations relating to the prohibition of maltreatment of sons by their fathers (D. 37.12.5) or the introduction of the soldier’s last will (D. 29.1.1 pr.). Pliny’s letters, like the one confirming the existence then of private alimony funds (Plin. Ep. 7.8) scarcely refer to the established practice and neither do they elaborate on the Emperor’s innovations in the area of law.
[8] Apocal. 13.18.
[9] A. Łukaszewicz, The Parthian Campaign of Trajan and the „Signs” (shmeia) of the Beast in the Apocalypse, in E. Dąbrowa - M. Dzielska - M. Salamon - S. Sprawski(eds.), Hortus historiae. Księga pamiątkowa ku czci profesora Józefa Wolskiego w setną rocznicę urodzin [Hortus historiae. Memorial book in honour of Professor Józef Wolski on the hundredth anniversary of his birth], Kraków 2010, pp. 358-365.
[10] Plin. Ep. X 96, 97. Cf. H. Musurillo, Acts of the Christian Martyrs, vol. 2, Oxford 2000, p. xiv.
[11] Plin. Ep. X 97: “You have done the right thing in handling the cases of those who were brought to you under the charge of being Christians. There is no one standard rule of behaviour for such cases. These people must not be searched out, but if they are brought before your court and the charge against them is proved, they must be punished. However, if anyone denies that he is a Christian and proves it by offering sacrifice to out gods, he should be granted forgiveness despite the burden of the prior accusation. However, information provided by anonymous informants cannot have any place in the court proceedings. This is an example of the worst practice, entirely not in keeping with our times” (Actum, quem debuisti, mi Secunde, in excutiendis causis eorum, qui Christiani ad te delati fuerant, secutus es. Neque enim in universum aliquid, quod quasi certam formam habeat, constitui potest. Conquirendi non sunt; si deferantur et arguantur, puniendi sunt, ita tamen, ut, qui negaverit se Christianum esse idque re ipsa manifestum fecerit, id est supplicando dis nostris, quamvis suspectus in praeteritum, veniam ex paenitentia impetret. Sine auctore vero propositi libelli in nullo crimine locum habere debent. Nam et pessimi exempli nec nostri saeculi est). See also: P. Lehmann, Tertullian im Mittelalter, in Hermes 87.2 (1959), p. 241.
[12] In this their approach was in keeping with the feelings of late antique authors. Ammianus Marcellinus noted that the Christian (sic!) Emperor Constantius II while visiting Trajan’s forum was to say: “the composition is very specific, as the world is far and wide” (Amm. Marc. 16.10: singularem sub omni caelo structura), while Cassiodorus was of the opinion that Trajan’s forum, regardless of the way it is looked upon, always looks splendid (var. 7.6).
[13] Cf. Aurel. Vict. De caes. 13.3-5.
[14] Cf. Eutrop. 8.5.3: “until the modern times one can hear shouts in the senate to honour the ruler in no other way than »more fortunate than Augustus and better than Trajan«” (usque ad nostram aetatem non aliter in senatu principibus acclametur nisi: Felicior Augusto, melior Traiano). Almost identical words come from John of Salisbury: “until this very day princes are acclaimed in their councils by nothing else than »May you be luckier than Augustus and better than Trajan«” (Policraticus 5.8: usque ad nostram aetatem, in senatu, non aliter principibus acclametur, Felicior Augusto, melior sis Trajano!). Notes on the origin of this saying: F. Staehelin, Felicior Augusto, melior Traiano!, in Museum Helveticum 1 (1944), pp. 179-180.
[15] There is relatively ample literature on this subject. See: A. Graf, Roma nella memoria e nelle imaginazioni del medio evo, vol. 2, Torino 1883, pp. 1-45; M. Gaston Paris, La légende de Trajan, in Mélanges de l’école des hautes etudes 35 (1878), pp. 261-298; A. d’Ancona, Del Novellino e delle sue fonti, in Studi di critica e storia letteraria, Bologna 1912, pp. 128-129; G. Whatley, The Uses of Hagiography: The Legend of Pope Gregory and Emperor Trajan in the Middle Ages, in Viator 15 (1984), pp. 25-63; G.M.J. Bartlenik, Een middeleeuwse Trajanuslegende, in Kleio. Tijdschrift voor oude talen en antieke cultuur 10 (1980), pp. 36-46.
[16] Notes on the subject of this work: O. Limone, La vita di Gregorio Magno dell’Anonimo di Whitby, in Studi medievali 19.3 (1978), pp. 37-67. Further considerations on the reception of the legend in the tradition of the British Isles: J. Szövérffy, Die Trajan-Legende und die irische Überlieferung, in Irisches Erzählgut im Abendland: Studien zur vergleichenden Volkskunde und Mittelalterforschung, Berlin 1957, s. 48-86; P. Grandon, Trajanus redivivus: Another Look at Trajan in Piers Plowman, in D. Gray - E.G. Stanley(eds.), Middle English Studies Presented to Norman Davis in Honor of His Seventieth Birthday, Oxford 1983, pp. 93-114; G. Whatley, Heathens and Saints: St. Erkenwald in his Legendary Context, in Speculum 61 (1986), pp. 330-363.
[17] Notes on this work: C. Leonardi, La “Vita Gregorii” di Giovanni Diacono, in Renovatio 12 (1977), pp. 51-66.
[18] S. Gallen, Vita 29; Joh. Diac. Vita 2.44.
[19] Policraticus 5.8: Quum [Trajanus] jam equum adscendisset ad bellum profecturus, vidua, apprehenso pede illius, miserabiliter lugens sibi iustitiam fieri petiit de his qui filium eius, optimum et innocentissimum iuvenem, iniuste occiderant. Tu, inquit, Auguste, imperas, et ego tam atrocem iniuriam patior? – Ego, ait ille, satisfaciam tibi quum rediero. – Quid, inquit illa, si non redieris? – Successor meus, ait Trajanus, satisfaciet tibi. – Et illa: Quid tibi proderit si alius bene fecerit? Tu mihi debitor es, secundum opera tua mercedem recepturus. Fraus utique est nolle reddere quod debetur. Successor tuus injuriam patientibus pro se tenebitur. Te non liberabit iustitia aliena. Bene agetur cum successore tuo si liberavit se ipsum. His verbis motus imperator descendit de equo et causam praesentialiter examinavit et condigna satisfactione viduam consolatus est.
[20] Dante, Purg. 10.73-93 (English version after: Penguin Classics).
[21] See, for instance: M. Barbi, La legenda di Traiano nei volgarizzamenti del “Breviloqium de virtutibus” di fra Giovanni Gallese, Firenze 1895, passim.
[22] Fertur quoque, quod cum quidam filius Traiani per urbem equitando nimis lascive discurreret, filium cuiusdam viduae interemit, quod cum vidua Traiano lacrimabiliter exponeret, ipse filium suum, qui hoc fecerat, viduae loco filii sui defuncti tradidit et magnifice ipsam dotavit. Citate after: M. Gaston Paris, La légende de Trajan, cit., p. 271.
[23] Qui cum duceretur ad mortem mulier ingemuit voce magna: «Reddatur mihi iste moriturus in loco filii mei, et sic erit recompensatio, alioquin numquam me fateor plenum ius accepisse!». Quod et factum est, et dotata multum ab imperatore recessit. Quoted after: B. de Montfaucon, Diarium Italicum. Sive monumentorum veterum, bibliothecarum, musaeorum. Notitiae singulares in itinerario Italico collectae. Additis schematibus ac figuris, Parisiis 1702, p. 285.
[24] “Chiamò la vedovella, e disse: »Or vedi, costui che è mio figliuolo, è quello che ha commesso l’omicidio. Qual vuoi tu innanzi, o ch’ello mora, o ch’io tel dìa per tuo figliuolo? E sappi certamente ch’io il ti darò sì libero, ch’io non avrò pìu a fare in lui, nè elli in me, e sarà così tuo suddito, come se tu l’avessi portato nel tuo corpo«. Pensato la vedovella che ‘l suo figliuolo morto non risuscitava perchè questo morisse, disse che lo voleva per suo figliuolo, e così l’ebbe, e possiedenlo da quell'ora innanzi. Fatta questa vendetta, lo imperadore cavalcò a suo viaggio.” Quoted after: Comedia di Dante degli Allighieri col commento di Jacopo della Lana Bolognese, vol. 2, Bologna 1866, p. 75.
[25] S. Settis, Traiano a Hearst Castle: Due cassoni estensi, in I Tatti Studies in the Italian Renaissance 6 (1995), p. 47.
[26] S. Settis, Traiano a Hearst Castle, cit.,pp. 47-48.
[27] One of them is preserved on a stained glass which is now an exhibit at the London’s Victoria and Albert Museum: P. Boesch, “Kaiser Traian und die Witwe” auf schweizerischen Glasgemälde, in Zeitschrift für schweizerische Archäologie und Kunstgeschichte 12.4 (1951), p. 219.
[28] Dio Cass. 59.6.3.
[29] Suffice it to say that it was on this ruler’s order that a uniform version of the praetors’ edict was created (the so-called edictum perpetum, also referred to by the name of its author edictum Salviani). An attempt at reconstruction: O. Lenel, Das Edictum Perpetuum: ein Versuch zu dessen Wiederherstellung, Leipzig 1927.
[30] Notes on the relation between Hadrian and Antinous: C.A. Williams, Roman Homosexuality, Oxford 2010, pp. 64-66.
[31] Attempts to find the scene described in the work on the narrative frieze preserved on the Trajan’s Column: N. Vickers, Seeing is Believing: Gregory, Trajan and Dante’s Art, in Dante Studies 101 (1983), pp. 67-85.
[32] Speculum Historiae 10.68: Statua eius (i.e. Traiani) in foro Traiani in hoc habitu posita est, representans quomodo in expeditione positus viduam liberavit. Quod beatum Gregorium postea monit ad compassionem. Unde et pro eo tam plorasse dicitur, ut animam eius ab interno obtinaverit liberam. An unknown monument to Trajan is also mentioned, amongst others, in a collection of stories from Tuscany from the late 12th century entitled Novellino. In accordance with the story, the Pope went to the monument in order to pray (Novella 69: La guistizia di Traiano).
[33] Alphabetum narrationum 606, rubr. Oratione: Beatus Gregorius cum quodam tempore ante palatia Traiani transiret, recordatus clemenciam eius, ut plenius vide licet superius enarratum est, amarissime coepit fere et pro eo tamdiu ante altare Sancti Petri flens oravit, donec vox ad eum dormientem dixit Traianum precibus eius a penibus infernalibus liberatum, sed de cetero caveret, ne pro aliquo infideli defuncto orare presumeret.
[34] Luc. 18.1-8: “Then Jesus told his disciples a parable to show them that they should always pray and not give up. He said: In a certain town there was a judge who neither feared God nor cared what people thought. And there was a widow in that town who kept coming to him with the plea, »Grant me justice against my adversary«. For some time he refused. But finally he said to himself, »Even though I don’t fear God or care what people think, yet because this widow keeps bothering me, I will see that she gets justice, so that she won’t eventually come and attack me!«”. See also: T. Stickler, Trajan in der Spätantike, in Traian inE. Schallmayer(ed.), Germanien. Traian im Reich. Bericht des dritten Saalburgkolloquiums, Bad Homburg 1999, pp. 110-111.
[35] S. Settis, Traiano a Hearst Castle, cit., p. 39.
[36] Policraticus 5.8: Ut vero in laude Trajani facilius acquieseant, qui alios ei preferendos opinantur, virtutes eius legitur commendasse sanctissimus papa Gregorius, et fusis pro eo lachrymis, inferorum compescuisse incedia, Domino remunerante in misericordia uberi iustitiam, quam viduae flenti exhibuerat Traianus. … Fertur autem beatissimus Gregorius Papa tamdiu pro eo fudisse lachrymas, donec ei inrevelatione nuntiatum sit Traianum a poenis inferni liberatum, sub ea tamen conditione, ne ulterius pro aliquo infideli Deum sollicitare praesumeret. Unde et merito praefertur aliis, cuius virtus prae caeteris ita sanctis placuit, ut eorum meritis, solus sit liberates.
[37] On the subject of saving “noble” pagans by Dante: G. Rizzo, Dante and the Virtuous Pagans, in W. de Sua - G. Rizzo(eds.), A Dante Symposium. In Commemoration of the 700th Anniversary of the Poet’s Birth (1265-1965), Chapel Hill 1965, pp. 115-140; F. Ruffini, Dante e il problema della salvezza degl’infideli, in Studi danteschi 14 (1930), pp. 79-92.
[38] Aen. 2.426-427: Cadit et Ripheus, iustissimus unus / Qui fuit in Teucris, et servantissimus aequi. Virgil himself was not given a similar honour.
[39] Dante, Parad. 20.106-117.
[40] Legenda Aurea 46.173: Dum igitur quadam vice diu iam defuncto Traiano, Gregorius per forum Traiani transiret, et huius mansuetudinem iudicis recordatus fuisset, ad sancii Petri basilicam pervenit, et ibidem pro eius errore amarissime flevit. Tunc sibi divinitus est responsum: ecce petitionem complevi et Traiano poenam aeternam peperci, de cetero autem diligentissime caveas, ne pro damnato aliquo preces fundas. Damascenus autem in quodam suo sermone narrat, quod Gregorius pro Traiano orationem fundens audivit vocem sibi divinitus illatam: vocem tuam audivi et veniam Traiano do... Fertur quoque, quia et angelus istud adiecerit: quia enim pro damnato rogasti, duorum tibi datur optio: aut enim in purgatorio duobus diebus cruciaberis, aut certe toto tempore vitae tuae infirmitatibus et doloribus fatigaberis. Qui praeelegit toto tempore vitae suae doloribus concuti, quam duobus diebus in purgatorio cruciari. Unde factum est, quod semper deinceps aut febribus laboravit, aut podagrae molestia pressus fuit, aut validis doloribus conquassatus, aut dolore stomachi mirabiliter cruciatus.
[41] Excessit papa, set non permansit inultum: Angelico pulsu femur eius tempore multo claudicavit, et pene corpore signa tenet. Quoted after: F.J.E. Raby, A History of Christian-Latin Poetry: From the Beginnings to the Close of the Middle Ages, Oxford 1927, p. 292.
[42] Vita Greg. 2.44: Et notandum quia non legitur Gregorii precibus Traiani anima ab infero liberata, et in paradiso reposita, quod omnino incredibile videtur propter illud quod scriptum est: Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua et spiritu sancto non intrabit in regnum coelorum (Joann. iii, 3); sed simplicitur dicitur, ab inferni solummodo cruciatibus liberata. Quod videlicet potest videri credibile quippe cum ita valeat anima in inferno existere, et inferni cruciatus per Dei misericordiam non sentire.
[43] Legenda Aurea 46.11: Cuius rei (ut ibidem dicit) testis est oriens omnis et occidens. Super hoc dixerunt quidam, quod Trajanus revocatus fuit ad vitam, ubi gratiam consecutus veniam meruit et sic gloriam obtinuit nec erat in inferno finaliter deputatus nec sententia definitiva damnatus. Alii dixerunt, quod anima Traiani non fuit simpliciter a reatu poenae aeternae absoluta, sed eius poena usque ad tempus, scilicet usque ad diem iudicii fuit suspensa. Alii, quod poena quo ad locum vel modum aliquem tormenti sub conditione fuit taxata, donec orante Gregorio per Christi gratiam locus vel modus aliquis mutaretur. Alii ut Iohannes dyaconus, qui hanc legendam compilavit, quod non legitur orasse, sed flevisse; et frequenter dominus misertus concedit, quod homo quamvis desiderans petere non praesumit, et quod eius anima non est ab inferno liberata et in paradiso reposita, sed simpliciter ab inferni cruciatibus liberata. Valet enim (ut dicit) anima et in inferno existere et inferni cruciatus per Dei misericordiam non sentire. Alii, quod poena aeterna consistit in duobus, scilicet in poena sensus et in poena damni, quod est carentia visionis divinae. Poena igitur aeterna quantum ad primum est sibi dimissa, sed quantum ad secundum retenta.
[44] Cfr. M. Cojoc, Le pape Grégoire le Grand, cit., p. 218.
[45] De facto Traiani hoc modo potest probabiliter aestimari, quo precibus B. Gregorii ad vitam fuerit revocatus, et ita gratiam consecutus sit, per quam remissionem peccatorum habuit, et per consequens immunitetem a poena; sicut etiam apparet in omnibus illis qui fuerunt miraculose a mortus suscitati, quorum plures constat idolatras et damnatos fuisse. De omnibus talibus enim similiter dici oportet quod non erant in inferno finaliter deputati, sed secundum praesentem proprium meritorum iustitiam: secundum autem superiores causas, quibus praevidebantur ad vitam revocandi, erat aliter de eis disponendum. Vel dicendum, secundum quosdam, quod anima Traiani non fuit simpliciter a reatu poenae aeternae absoluta; sed eius poena fuit suspensa ad tempus, scilicet usque ad diem iudicii. Nec tamen oportet quod hoc fiat communiter per suffragia; quia alia sunt quae lege communi accidunt, et alia quae singulariter ex privilegio aliquibus conceduntur. Quoted after: S. Thomasso d’Aquino, Commento alle Sentenze di Pietro Lombardo, vol. 10, Bologna, 2002, pp. 320-322.
[46] J. Kohl, Fama und Virtus. Bartolomeo Colleonis Grabkapelle, Berlin 2004, p. 157.
[47] Cf. P. Schubring, Illustrationen zu Dantes Göttliche Komödie. Italien, 14. Bis 16. Jahrhundert, Zürich-Leipzig-Wien 1931, tav. 217.
[48] Val. Max. 6.5.3 ext.
[49] Liv. 2.3-4.
[50] Val. Max. 2.7.6.
[51] J. Seznec, Diderot and “Justice of Trajan”, in Journal of Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 20.1/2 (1957), p. 107.
[52] E. Sharnova, A Newly Discovered “Justice of Trajan” from the Second School of Fontainebleau, in The Burlington Magazine 142.1166 (2000), pp. 288-291.
[53] J. Seznec, Diderot and “Justice of Trajan”, cit., p. 107: “It seems surprising at first to find this edifying theme revived in France in the middle of the eighteenth century; Trajan and the widow reappear, in fact, in 1765, in the Salon du Louvre. Significantly, they reappear in the company of Augustus and Marcus Aurelius, who are also shown in the act of performing good deeds; Augustus orders the gates of the Temple of to be closed closed (thus announcing the return of peace), and Marcus Aurelius is having bread distributed to the famine”.
[54] According to Jean Locquin the king was much more interested in nude Nymps and Graces. He disliked moralizing subjects. J. Locquin, La peinture d'histoire en France de 1747 à 1785, Paris 1912, p. 25.
[55] D. Diderot, Salons: Salon de 1759, Salon de 1761, Salon de 1763, Salon de 1765, in J. Assézat - M. Tourneux(eds.), Oeuvres completes, vol. X, , Paris, 1876, p. 264-267.
[56] In the pages of the La Revue des Deux Mondes Gustave Planche wrote: “this is the most beautiful painting of the Salon!”.
[57] Boudleaire’s opinion: “Justice of Trajan is a painting so overfilled with light and air, so full of noise and pomp! The Emperor is so handsome and the people so moved when they rush between the columns or stop in front of the curtain; the weeping widow is so dramatic!” Quoted after: J. Seznec, Diderot and “Justice of Trajan”, cit., p. 111.
[58] J. Bennett, Trajan. Optimus princeps, cit., p. 22.
[59] This rather strange coincidence ignores – M. Cojoc, Le pape Grégoire le Grand, cit., p. 217-233. More often one can find prises of the Gregorian miracle in the medieval hymns in honour of Saint Gregory. Cfr. M. Kathleen, An analysis of the medievallatin hymns in honor of Saint Gregory, Louisville, 1962, p. 130-134.
[60] O. Doering, Michael Pacher und die Seinen: eine tiroler Künstlergruppe am Ende des Mittelalters, Mönchen-Gladbach 1913, p. 62.
Jonca Maciej
Download:
3 Jonca.pdf
