Fitz Jenő (szerk.): Religions and Cults in Pannonia. Exhibiton an Székesfehérvár, Csók István Gallery 15 May - 30 September 1996 – Szent István Király Múzeum közleményei: A. sorozat 33. (1998)

No data exist for a bishopric previous to this, as e.g. in Lyons5, but other data are lacking as well, resp. the written sources existing are not regarded as authentic ones. We have to consider, nevertheless, that in the city of Rome we have no archaeological finds earlier than the 3rd century, though we speak of a persecution of Christians under Nero. We have Tacitus as witness that Christians were executed under Nero6. On the other hand we learnt from Hieronymus that the disciples of the apostles appear in Illyricum for evangelizing as early as the 1st century.7 Research generally refuses that Christianity would be extant on the Danube region previous to the 3rd century.8 Against this general opinion I maintain a different view which I have recorded earlier. This can be summarized as follows: we should not refuse reports only because they are unique sources for Early Christianity. Using an adequate criticism we should register them all the same. Since then also others called the attention to a source evaluation and judgment given by the special state of the theme (WOLFF 1994, VII-XI). This implicated also not only the criticism of the use of sources but also the critics of the evaluation of archaeological finds, especially regarding the symbols (UBL 1994, 129-152). The essence of this latter is that it would be uncautious to regard all objects as Christians only because they display symbols which were used also by Christians. These symbols were namely not invented, only adopted by Christians. These and similar considerations incited me too to scrutinize all objects, presumably Christian ones, whether they really have any Christian relations at all.9 In the sign of fairness I stripped all articles and edifices whose non-Christian character was evident of the epithet Christian and the items whose Christian character was uncertain I classified among the controversial objects resp. immobilia.10

At the same time I scrutinized whether the items and objects neglected and thought to be "außenstehend"

11 have been really well filed. This work resulted in the following evaluation. b.) In several cases the use of a house church can be supposed.12

The case cannot be excluded, either, that existant houses, horrea, villas, or at least a part of them - were transformed in order to make them apt for liturgical use. From this point of view the area divided in two is important, making it possible for the catechumens to leave the church after the sermon. We cannot forget it, though, that the use of a building for a church could not be arbitrary, it had to suffice forthe purpose, i.e. the usus, in the present case for the form of the liturgy practised. As a matter of course - because of the metaphysical roots - in honouring God a certain decoration could not be renounced, fulfilling the requiremens of the pulcher. This means that a bipartited area was necessary, a place for gathering to pray, or where the agape was held. All these are buildings or part of buildings which must be archaeologically palpable. The presence of such bipartite areas in Pannónia can be proven from the early 2nd century to the early resp. mid-5th century. This means practically that we should not look for buildings with apses when we will identify Early Christian churches but also for such bipartite rooms whose prototypes can be may be found in the megara. In our area buildings with apses functioning as Early Christian basilicas cannot be expected previous to the turn of the 4th and 5th centuries. These buildings with apses can be named already basilicas according to their form which does not mean, though, that they were basilicas de iure. We cannot use therefore the denomination "basilica" for churches with different ground plans even in cases when they are functioned as Early Christian churches. The basilica - as an architectural term - did not receive its name from Christianity but after its structure. Which Early Christian churches can be named legally basilicas in Pannónia, we cannot say presently, there were no researches in this direction. There are no baptisteries in Pannónia, this is true. We cannot exclude, nevertheless, the possibility that baths were used for baptizing. This must be rendered probable so much the more that we find no baptisteries either in Pannónia 5 In 177 the bishop of Lyons was martyred. 6Tac.ann. XV, 44. 7 Hier. ер. 59. ad Marcellum (PL 22, 589)... erat (sc. Filius) igitur uno eodemque tempore cum Apostolis quadraginta diebus, et cum Angelis, et in Patre, et in extremis maris finibus erat; in omnibus locis versabatur: cum Thoma in India, cum Petro Romae, cum Paulo in Illyrico, cum Tito in Creta, cum Andrea in singulis cunctisque regionibus. 8 If we compare East and West in the pagan world, the West lags behind as for the use of written records. We have indirect data as for the languages spoken in the Western hemisphere but there is no literature extant in these languages. Why should this situation change after the adoption of Christianity? On the situation of Christian and pagan literature see KRAUSE 1958. 9 These investigations pertain to the monography written by me in this theme. The monograph is entitled: The first five centuries of Christian Pannónia. Finished in 1994. 10 This uncertainty comes from the circumstance that the area is not fully excavated as yet, or the small find material is not elaborated as yet, or else there was no authenticating excavation on the area. Their effectuation would settle the proper place of the object, whenever it would happen. 11 Terminology of J. Lortz. 12 The technical term "house church" is used by Tamás Guzsik for expressing domus Ecclesiae. GUZSIK 1994, 9, pi. Ill, lo, pi. IV: house churches from Dura Europos. It is an often mentioned topos used for a long time past that at the very beginnings the scene of the liturgy was laid in dwelling-houses. This solution is named by Guzsik house church. The question is rather whether the house served liturgie aims in its whole entity, as we can assume according to different activities or would it be partly inhabitated by the owners and only a part of it served as a church. (An example is for this given by the Jerusalem synod). In Pannónia we can perhaps count with the latter solution in the form that the house would be inhabited by one or two persons, resp. that travellers arriving there could be lodged in the rooms not used for the aims of celebrating the liturgy or for baptizing. 44