¹ Divjak, J. (ed.), Sancti Aurelii Augustini Opera. Epistœ ex duobus codicibus nuper in lucem prolalae, CSEL lxxxviii, esp. Epp. 11* and 12*, pp. 51–80.Google Scholar

² Chadwick, H., ‘New letters of St Augustine’, JTS, NS xxxiv (1983), 434, 436.Google Scholar

³ Consentius described himself and Fronto as famuli Christi: 11*. 1.2, 12.2; 12*. 2. 3, 14. 3. Frend, W. H. C., ‘The Divjak letters: new light on St Augustine's problems, 416-28’, this Journal xxxiv (1983), 510Google Scholar , calls both Consentius and Fronto presbyters, which is certainly incorrect since Consentius and Fronto were careful elsewhere to describe presbyters as such; Lof, L. J. Van der, ‘The threefold meaning of Servi Dei in the writings of Saint Augustine’, Auguslinian Studies xii (1981), 43–59Google Scholar , discusses a related term. Chadwick, art. cit. 434, 436, calls Fronto an ascetic who only acted like a monk. Whether sincere or not, Fronto did found a monastery at Tarragona (11*. 2.1), where there were already other monasteries, see Siricius, Ep. 1.7, 17, PL xiii. 1137, 1144-5.

⁴ The following analysis assumes the historical veracity of Fronto's deposition. Although it remains open to further argument, this assumption is not necessarily challenged by the self-serving interpretations of Fronto and Consentius; by Augustine's apparent disregard for the episode (note the possible scepticism in Contra mendacium iii. 4); and by some literary resemblances to hagiographical romances: see Moreau, M., ‘Lecture de la Lettre 11* de Consentius à Augustin. Un pastiche hagiographique?’, in Les Lettres de Saint Augustine decouvertes par Johannes Divjak. Communications présentées au collogue des 20 et 21 Septembre 1982 (hereinafter cited as Lettres), Paris 1983, 215–22Google Scholar.

⁵ Brown, Note P., The Making of Late Antiquity, Cambridge, Mass.-London 1978, 3Google Scholar : ‘The “face-to-face” community is the unit of Late Antique religious history.’

⁶ Cf. Severus of Minorca, Epistola de ludœis, PL xx. 733 a, explaining the absence of Jews in the Christian town on Minorca.

⁷ The adoption of a cognitive and expressive approach to religion does not imply any sociologically deterministic theory whereby religion is no more than a ‘reflection’ of social processes; hence it also allows us to sidestep the essentially reductionist problems of deciding whether unorthodox religious movements arose only from personal ambitions or were ‘really’ class or nationalistic movements: for the controversy, see Jones, A. H. M., ‘Were ancient heresies national or social movements in disguise?’, JTS, NS x (1959), 280–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar (repr. in The Roman Economy, ed. P. A. Brunt, Oxford 1974, 308-29).

⁸ As does Chadwick, ‘New letters’, 435-6. The statement of Frend, ‘Divjak letters’, 510, that ‘Priscillianism [was found] among the highest ecclesiastical and secular authorities in the province’, is also without warrant, because even Fronto conceded that Count Asterius was a Catholic (11*.8.1). But the hunt continues among modern historians. Cf. Thompson, E. A., ‘The conversion of the Spanish Suevi to Catholicism’, in Visigolhic Spain: new approaches, ed. James, E., Oxford 1980, 78Google Scholar , who concludes that a fifth-century bishop of Seville was a Priscillianist simply because a Catholic bishop disapproved of the method of his selection.

⁹ Douglas, M., in Witchcraft Confessions and Accusations, ed. Douglas, M., London 1970, p. xxv.Google Scholar

¹⁰ The second sequence might fit better with the chronology of the campaigns of Count Asterius, see n. 19.

¹¹ Madec, G., ‘Du nouveau dans la correspondance augustinienne’, Revue dts Eludes Augustiniennes (hereinafter cited as REA) xxvii (1981), 61Google Scholar , doubts that Contra mendacium was a response to Ep. 11* because Consentius did not adequately describe his tactics in Ep. 11*. In fact, Consentius also sent other writings to Augustine.

¹² Contra mendacium i, for the delay, CSEL xli, 469-528.

¹³ For the date, see Schanz, M., Hosius, C., Krüger, G., Geschichte der römische Literatur bis Zum Gesetzgebungswerk des Kaisers Justinian, iv/2 (1920)Google Scholar , repr. Munich 1959, 440, 442 no. 2, and Bardenhewer, O., Geschichte der altkirchlichen Literatur iv (1924)Google Scholar , repr. Darmstadt 1962, 492, who all assume that Augustine listed his works in his Retractiones in chronological order. This assumption has been challenged again by Berrouard, M.-F., ‘L'activité littéraire de saint Augustin du 11 septembre au ler décembre 419 d'aprés la Lettre 23*A à Possidius de Calama’, in Lettres, 318–19.Google ScholarPerler, O., Les Voyages de saint Augustin, Paris 1969, 72, 356-7Google Scholar , argues that the carrier of Ep. 11* arrived in Hippo in spring 419 and that Augustine replied in spring 420.

¹⁴ Pietri, C., Roma Christiana. Recherches sur l'Eglise de Rome, son organisation, sa polilique, son ideologic de Miltiade à Sixte III (311-440), Paris 1976, 452Google Scholar , for Zosimus’ death; 1237-44, for his encyclical.

¹⁴ Wankenne, Although J., ‘La correspondance de Consentius avec saint Augustin’, in Lettres, 226–7, 233Google Scholar , dates Ep. 12* to 419 or later, insists that it is later than Ep. 11* and suggests that it may be a reply to Augustine, Ep. 205 (but see below, Appendix II). The suggestion of Divjak, in Lettres, 249, that Ep. 12* is a response to Augustine's Contra mendacium, is unlikely, since missing the point would then have to be added to Consentius’ shortcomings.

¹⁶ Bonnardiére, A.-M.La, ‘Du nouveau sur le priscillianisme (Ep. 11*)’, in Lettres, 206–7Google Scholar , reconstructs some of Consentius’ suggestions for feigning Priscillianism on the basis of the examples cited by Augustine, Contra mendacium, iii. 5, from the books sent to him by Consentius. These suggestions included: praise Dictinius (a supporter of the memory ofPriscillian) and his book entitled Libra; praise Priscillian; praise the doctrine of the divine origin of the soul.

Modern scholars have attempted to pigeonhole anonymous writings as Priscillianist or anti-Priscillianist on the basis of internal characteristics alone: see Vollmann, B., Studien zum Priszillianismus, St Ottilien 1965, 70–83Google Scholar , for lists. But Consentius’ admission that he wrote one of his books ‘under the guise of a heretic’ (11*. 1.5) fundamentally undermines these attempts at classification, since here an ‘anti-Priscillianist’ has written a ‘Priscillianist’ book.

¹⁷ But note also 11*.11.8, where Asterius stated that he was related to Severus and ‘the others’ (whoever they were) by ‘some sort of blood relationship’ (‘aliqua…consan guinitate’). Delmaire, in Letlres, 86, suggests that Severa was either the mother-in-law or the sister-in-law of Asterius, i.e. either that Asterius had married her daughter or that she had married Asterius’ brother. It is also possible that Asterius’ daughter had married Severa's nephew or grandson. Chadwick, ‘New Letters’, 435, wrongly identifies Severus as the father-in-law of Count Asterius and mistakenly describes Asterius’ daughter as the daughter of Severus.

¹⁸ Garnsey, P., ‘Religious toleration in classical antiquity’, in Persecution and Toleration, Studes in Church History xxi (1984), 26Google Scholar , is therefore misleading to claim that Priscillianism survived in Spain ‘with the connivance of secular as well as ecclesiastical officials’, because Count Asterius responded to the accusation against Severus as a relative, knew little of the dispute before his arrival in Tarragona and wanted to leave once he found out more.

¹⁸ For his campaign against the Vandals, see , Hydatius. Chron. lxxivGoogle Scholar , MGH Auct. Ant. xi = Chronica Minora ii. 20, dated to 420 by Tranoy, A., Hydace. Chronique ii, SCHR. 219, Paris 1974, 55Google Scholar.

²⁰ , Frend, ‘Divjak letters’, 510Google Scholar , incorrectly states that Sagittius, after censoring the books, ‘passed on the rest, carefully conflated into a single codex’.

²¹ The see of Agapius is not identified in the letter. He had already served as a courier between Consentius and Fronto (11*. 2.1, 10. 3-10), and he subsequently died of a toothach e (11*. 22.2).

²² Animal categories as terms of abuse in late Antiquity would reward further research, see Courcelle, P., ‘Le serpent à face humaine dans la numismatique impériale du Ve siècle,’ in Mélanges d'archéologie et d'histoirc offerts à André Piganiol, ed. Chevallier, R., Paris 1966, i. 343–53Google Scholar ; and, in general, Leach, E., ‘Anthropological aspects of language: animal categories and verbal abuse’, in New Directions in the Study of Language, ed. Lenneberg, E. H., Cambridge, Mass. 1964, 23–63Google Scholar.

²³ See Dam, R. Van, Leadership and Community in Late Antique Gaul, Berkeley 1985, 78–106Google Scholar , for a similar use of accusations of Manichaeism in the affair of Priscillian and his supporters.

²⁴ Note Pacian, Epp. 1-2, PL xiii. 1051-63, for the importance of the label ‘Catholic’ in Spain.

²⁵ Bishop Patroclus of Aries attempted, apparently unsuccessfully, to convene a council at Beziers that included Spanish bishops (11*. 23. 2, 24.2); he and other Gallic bishops also considered referring the case to the imperial court (11*. 24.3).

² Cf. Macfarlane, A. D. J., Witchcraft in Tudor and Stuart England: a regional andcomparative study, New York 1970, 10CrossRefGoogle Scholar , for criticism of the theories of M. Murray about witch-cults: ’ She mistook what people believed to be happening for what actually did happen.’

⁸⁷ , Eutropius, De contemnenda haereditate, PL xxx. 45–50Google Scholar , for the daughters of Geruntius (perhaps to be identified with Gerontius, a general in Spain).

²⁸ , Eutropius, De vera circumcisione, iii, PL xxx. 191Google Scholar ; and Council of Saragossa an. 380, Can. 6, PL lxxxiv. 316, for clerics enchancing their prestige by becoming monks.

²⁹ Morin, G., ‘Pages inédites de deux pseudo-Jéromes des environs de I'an 400, II. Portion inedite de l'apocryphe hiéronymien De septem ordinibus ecclesiae’, Revue Benedictine xl (1928), 314Google Scholar . For a survey, see. Urbel, Perez de, ‘Le monachisme en Espagne au temps de saint Martin’, in Saint Martin et son temps, Studia Anselmiana xlvi (1961), 45–65Google Scholar.

³⁰ , Priscillian, Tractatus ii. 48–9Google Scholar , CSEL xviii, 39-40, for a dispute between the bishop and clerics of Merida over the intervention of Priscillian.

³¹ Innocent, Ep. 3. 1-4, PL xx. 486-9, on the aftermath of the Council of Toledo in 400.

³² De septem ordinibus ecclesiae, vi, PL xxx. 156.

³³ Ibid., v, loc. cit. 154.

³⁴ Thompson, E. A., Romans and Barbarians: the decline of the Western Empire, Madison 1982, 152–60.Google Scholar

³⁵ Identified by , Delmaire, in Lettres, 86Google Scholar , as Vandals; Visigoths are other strong candidates. Third-century, and not early fifth-century, barbarian invasions had left the ruins in Tarragona mentioned by Orosius, Historiae adversum paganos, vii. 22.8, CSEL v. 483.

³⁶ Dam, Van, Leadership and Community, 148.Google Scholar

³⁷ , Possidius, Vita Augustini, xxx, PL xxxii. 61Google Scholar = Augustine, Ep. 228. 5. One refugee cleric was Orosius: see , Orosius, Historiae adversum paganos, iii. 20. 6–7, CSEL v. 183Google Scholar.

³⁸ , Hydatius, Chron., cxxx, cxxxviiiGoogle Scholar (Chron. Min., ii. 24-5), and , Turibius, Epistola, PL liv. 693–5Google Scholar ; with Chadwick, H., Priscillian of Avila: the occult and the charismatic in the early Church, Oxford 1976, 208–17,Google Scholar and Dam, Van, op. cit. 112–13Google Scholar.

³⁹ Dam, Van, op. cit. 150–2.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ The Vandals finally raided the Balearics in 425: see , Hydatius, Chron., lxxxviGoogle Scholar(Chron. Min., ii. 21), with , Tranoy, Hydace, ii. 61Google Scholar.

⁴¹ Consentius ha d acquired the Confessions ‘about twelve years earlier’, and had begun reading them ‘about four years ago’ (12*. 1. 1, 3).

⁴² , Augustine, Retractiones, ii. 6, P L xxxii. 632Google Scholar , with Courcelle, P., Les Confessions de saint Augustin dans la tradition littéraire. Antécédents et postérité, Paris 1963, 201–34Google Scholar.

⁴³ Courcelle, P., Recherches sur les ‘Confessions’ de Saint Augustin, new edn, Paris 1968, 235–47.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ , Augustine, De dono perseveranliae, xx. 53, PL xlv. 1026Google Scholar , with Martinetto, G., ‘Les premières réactions antiaugustiniennes de Pélage’, REA xvii (1971), 83–117Google Scholar.

⁴⁶ On his first attempt, Consentius ha d read ‘no more than two or three folios of the first book’ (12*.1. 3).

⁴⁶ See Marrou, H.-I, Moycikoc Anhp: Étude sur Us scènes de la vie inlellectuelle figurant sur les monuments funeraires romains, rev. edn, Rome 1964Google Scholar ; and Matthews, J., Western Aristocracies and Imperial Court A.D. 364-425, Oxford 1975, 1–7Google Scholar , for excellent discussions of aristocratic otium.

⁴⁷ Note 12*. 4. 1: ‘I always wholly rejected the study of doctrine, because I saw it was very difficult.’

⁴⁸ , Wankenne, in Lettres, 229–31.Google ScholarMarti, H., ‘Citations de Térence. Problémes et signification des exemples de la Lettre 12* de Consentius à Augustin’, in Lettres, 243–9,Google Scholar suggests that Ep. 12* has the same structure as a comedy by Terence.

⁴⁸ , Augustine, Confessiones, iv. 16. 28,Google Scholared. Gibb, J. and Montgomery, W., The Confessions of Augustine, Cambridge 1908, 103Google Scholar.

⁵⁰ Cf. Dutoit, E., ‘Remarques philologiques et critiques,’ in Lettres, 37Google Scholar : Ep. 12* ‘allie l'impertinence, sinon l'insolence, au pédantisme et à la grandiloquence’.

⁵¹ Severus of Minorca, Epistola de ludœis, PL xx. 732d, ‘omnium terrarum…postrema’.

⁵² Ibid. PL xx. 739ab, 740b

⁵³ Ibid. PL xx. 734a, 743c; cf. 740c, for his brother's estate.

⁵⁴ Ibid. PL xx. 735d.

⁵⁵ 12*. 5. 2, duo volumina ridenda. Consentius ha d been motivated earlier to write ‘against the presbyter Leontius, now deceased’, and against a problem once discussed by Augustine (12*. 3. 1). Neither Leontius nor the problem was identified.

⁵⁶ On Augustine, Epp. 119-120, 205, correspondence with (another?) Consentius, see Appendixes I and II; for the chronology, see n. 41.

⁵⁷ Probably a parody of Conf. v. 13. 23, and therefore perhaps a better indication of how far Consentius had read in the Confessions.

⁵⁸ This conrivalis (12*. 9. 2, 13. 3) was certainly not Augustine, as Chadwick, ‘New letters’, 437, suggests, because in his letter Consentius addressed Augustine in the second person. Severus, Epistola de Iudteis, PL xx. 733bc, also did not mention Orosius by name.

⁵⁹ Brox, N., ‘Consentius über Origenes’, Vigiliae Christianae xxxvi (1982), 141–4Google Scholar . Orosius had previously served as an important source for Augustine's knowledge of Origen: see Bonnardière, A.-M. La, ‘Jérōme “informateur” d'Augustin au sujet d'Origéne’, REA xx (1974), 42–54Google Scholar ; and O'Connell, R. J., ‘St Augustine's criticism of Origen in the AdOrosium’, REA xxx (1984), 84–99Google Scholar . Note, too, that Jerome had already identified Origenism and Pelagianism: see Evans, R. F., Pelagius. Inquiries and reappraisals, New York 1968, 6–25.Google Scholar Consentius was probably familiar with Jerome by way of Orosius; and eventually he would become concerned with Pelagianism also.

⁸⁰ Both here and in the case of Fronto Consentius avoided direct involvement. But his passive nature clearly responded to Fronto's ‘blazing flames of faithful zeal’ (11*. I. 2), and to that ‘burning desire’ of Orosius that has been stressed both by Augustine, Ep. 166. 2, CSEL xliv. 547, and by Hunt, E. D., ‘St Stephen in Minorca: an episode in Jewish-Christian relations in the early 5th century A.D.’, JTS, NS xxxiii (1982), 106–23,CrossRefGoogle Scholar especially p. 119: ‘the presence of Orosius spelt the end of religious peace’.

⁶¹ See , Wankenne, in Lettres, 229Google Scholar . In his Epistola de Iudtris, PL xx. 732c, 738b, Severus claimed that ‘overpowering eloquence’ could obscure the great deeds of Christ and that he instead preferred accuracy and a ‘truthful style’ -perhaps an implicit criticism of Consentius’ first draft?

⁶² Bishop Severus also published a Commonitorium that offered justification for his campaign against the Jews, PL xx. 734bc; perhaps in it he used Consentius’ Capitula. For a possible identification, see the references in Blumenkranz, B., Les Auteurs Chrétiens latins du Moyen Age sur les juifs et lejudaïsme, Paris 1963, 39–42Google Scholar.

⁶³ Davids, J. A., De Orosio et Sancto Augustino Priscillianistarum adversariis commentatio historica et philologica, The Hague 1930.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ , Zosimus, Ep. 4.3, PL xx. 664Google Scholar = Epistolae Arelaltnscs ii, MGH Epistolae iii. 7-8, with , Pietri, Roma Christiana, 1011–14Google Scholar.

⁶⁵ Consentius suggested that use of his books would ‘expose the many bands of Priscillianists who hide in that city especially’. His hint of the presence of Priscillianists in Hippo was surely incorrect and was perhaps derived from a misunderstanding of Augustine's writings against the Priscillianists, which had in fact been based upon information from Orosius and other Spanish informants, not on first-hand experience.

⁶⁶ It is not obvious why Consentius calls this tract his ‘fourth book’ (12*. 13. 2). For the reputation of the papacy in the Balearic Islands, see Pietri, C., ‘Les lettres nouvelles et leurs temoignages sur l'histoire de l'Église romaine et de ses relations avec l'Afrique’, in Lettres, 350–2Google Scholar.

⁶⁷ Although Wankenne, in Lettres, 226, finds Consentius ‘une figure attachante’.

⁶⁸ The classic case is the man who thought homoousios was a person rather than a theological term, see Augustine, Ep. 238. 4, CSEL lvii. 535-6.

⁶⁹ In particular, note the argument of Consentius (12*. 12. 1) that posterity might eventually evaluate even the ‘blameless writings’ of Augustine, like the works of Origen, as heretical. Might this rather unpolitic hint perhaps reflect an early ‘semi-Pelagian’ reaction to Augustine's position on Pelagianism?

⁷⁰ , Augustine, Contra mendacium, xvii.Google Scholar

⁷¹ Contra mendacium, xi-xii, with Maisonneuve, H., ‘Croyance religieuse et contrainte: la doctrine de saint Augustin’, Melanges de Science Religieuse xix (1962), 49–68Google Scholar.

⁷² Some of Augustine's comments repeated earlier arguments against circumstantial and deliberate lying, cf. Contra mendacium, 26, with Auvray, P., ‘Saint Jérôme et saint Augustin. La controverse au sujet de l'incident d'Antioche’, Recherchcs de Science Religieuse xxix (1939), 594–610Google Scholar , and Cole-Turner, R. S., ‘Anti-heretical issues and the debate over Galatians 2: 11-14in the letters of St Augustine to St Jerome’ Augustinian Studies xi (1980), 155–66Google Scholar.

⁷³ , Orosius, Commonitorium de errore Priscillianistarum et Origenistarum ii, CSEL xviii. 153–5.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ , Augustine, Ad Orosium contra Priscillianistas et Origenistas, i, iv, PL xlii. 669, 671Google Scholar , with Veer, A. C. de, ‘Aux origines du De natura et origine animae de saint Augustin’, REA xix (1973). 121–57Google Scholar.

⁷⁴ , Augustine, Contra mendacium, iii.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Vollmann, B., ‘Priscillianus’, in RE Suppl. xiv (1974), 542–3Google Scholar , and , Chadwick, Priscillian, 190–206Google Scholar.

⁷⁷ CSEL xxxiv. 2. 698-722.

⁷⁸ Perhaps from Horace: , Wankenne, in Lettres, 229–30Google Scholar.

⁷⁹ See Bonnardiére, A.-M. La, Recherches de chronologic augustinienne, Paris 1965, 165–77Google Scholar , for the chronolog y of the composition of De trinitate.

⁸⁰ Note that the conventional date for Ep. 119 rests upon attributing Augustine's rural retirement to an illness he suffered during the winter of 410/11, see Goldbacher, A., in CSEL lviii. 33–4Google Scholar . If the chronology extracted above from Ep. 12* is correct, then Consentius 1 is immediately excluded, since he initiated contact with Augustine only in c. 415. In fact, however, Ep. 119. 1 gives no specific reason for Augustine's retirement: see , Perler, Voyages, 280–6Google Scholar.

⁸¹ The analysis of vocabulary, syntax and style by , Wankenne, in Lettres, 233–41,Google Scholar demonstrates as many differences as similarities between Epp. 119-120 and 11–12*.

⁸² As does , Wankenne, in Lettres, 226.Google Scholar

⁸³ Sulpicius Severus, Vita S. Martini, vi. 5-6, CSEL i. 116-17.

⁸⁴ Namatianus, Rutilius, De reditu suo i. 439-52, 515–26Google Scholar , ed. Duff, J. W. and Duff, A. M., , LoebMinor Latin Poets, Cambridge, Mass. 1934, 802–4, 810Google Scholar.

⁸⁶ John Cassian, Collaliones xi. prof.; xviii. prof., PL xlix. 848, 1089.

⁸⁶ Cf. Gregory of Tours, In gloria confessorum xii, MGH, Scr. Rer. Merov. i. 755.

⁸⁷ CSEL lvii. 323-39.