Zalai Múzeum 11. Kereszténység Pannóniában az első évezredben (Zalaegerszeg, 2002)

Migotti, Branka: Early Christianity in Aquac Iasae

Early Christianity in Aquae lasae (Varazdinske Toplice) and lovia (Ludbreg) in Pannónia Savia 55 Poetovio-Mursa, and one on the Sopianae-Brigetio road. Only one of them, Iovia/Botivo, 37-39 Roman miles south-east of Poetovio, was in the Jerusalem itinerary and by implication in the Ravennate Cosmography recorded as a civitas.

29 This, however, is a slightly simplified picture dependent on the itineraries, and one that needs to be commented upon, so I will return to this question later. Leaving it aside for the moment, it appears necessary at this point to bring to mind the fact that the ecclesiastical administrative organization followed in broad outline that of the previous civil division, generally resulting in the establishment of bishoprics in coloniae and municipia, or, for that matter, civitates?® According to this axiom of Roman administration, only a settlement with a civic rank was likely to become a bishopric. If, therefore, the see of lovia is a historical fact, it should be identified with civitas lovia of the Itinerarium Hierosolymitanum. Although its position on the place of present-day Ludbreg on the Bednja, a tributary of the Drava river in northwestern Croatia, has not yet been confirmed epigraphically, the archaeological record from Ludbreg strongly supports such an identification.

31 If now we take these hypotheses as true, it transpires that the two components of Iovia's late Roman status: civitas and bishopric, were mutually related, or rather, contingent. It would normally be expected that a civitas comes first to prepare the way for a bishopric. However, given that lovia had not been mentioned as a civitas before the beginning of the 4th century, it is also possible that this settlement's promotion to a civic rank was the result of a need for a new bishopric in the territory of Pannónia Savia, since Poetovio had, through Diocletian's administrative reforms, been assigned to Noricum. This, however, is also only a hypothesis, as for a possibility of Iovia's mention as a civitas before the 4th century we have to depend on the Antonine Itinerary, which displays status of places only sporadically and also inconsistently32 In other words, the fact that lovia was not marked as a civitas in the Antonine Itinerary does not necessarily mean that it did not have a civic rank at the beginning of the 3rd century. Whatever the case, the situation of Iovia/Botivo on the route of the itinerary which, following the course of the Drava river, carried pilgrims from the western parts of the Roman empire to the holy places in the Holy Land, is also possibly indicative of the history of Christianity there. It has been mentioned already that scholars do not agree on the issue of lovia, primarily as concerns its topographic identification. Hungarian archaeologists, beginning with Harmattá in 1970, are of a more or less unanimous opinion that the see of lovia is to be found on the Roman and early Christian site of Alsóheténypuszta. A large fortified settlement which yielded an abundance of early Christian architecture and small finds was discovered there, which indeed could have been a civitas in the late Roman sense.

33 I will make a short digression at this point to explain what my initial intentions were when submitting a paper for this conference. Naming it "Early Christianity in Aquae lasae and lovia" I had in mind first to present the early Christian remains at Varazdinske Toplice in a new light, and second, to bring arguments for the see of lovia at Ludbreg. I must admit now that while searching for the proofs of the latter, I, if a little unwillingly, found myself supportive of the opposite, that is, of the location of the questionable bishopric at Alsóheténypuszta rather than Ludbreg. My initial inclination towards Ludbreg as the site of the see of lovia was the result of leaning too heavily on Egger's statement that, while the lovia southeast of Poetovio was a civitas, the other two Pannonian Iovias were einfache Strassenstationen und als solchefür einen Bischofsitz nicht geeignet?

4 While extremely perceptious and convincing in putting foreward a hypothesis for a north-Italian bishop meddling in the ecclesiastical matters of a region belonging to another archbishopric, that of Sirmium, Egger appears to have been somewhat superficial and a little incautious with the itinerary data. He did not pay attention to the fact that the lovia of the Sopianae-Brigetio road, which is tentatively located on the site of Alsóheténypuszta, is recorded in the section of the Antonine itinerary with settlement status omitted altogether, which is not the case throughout this document. For instance, the lovia of the Poetovio-Mursa road is encompassed within the section which specifies each place's civic rank, but leaves lovia without any meaning possibly, though not necessarily, that it was not yet a civitas at that time.

35 Therefore, even if the lovia situated in Pannónia Valeria was a settlement with civic status, this would not have necessarily been recorded in the Antonine Itinerary. Another tentative argument to contest the civic rank of the northern-Pannonian lovia would be its omission from the Ravennate Cosmography, which otherwise enumerates the civitates of the Empire. However, neither this argument holds: the Cosmography mentions only selected places, as is specifically stated throughout the text, and no settlement on the road Sopianae-Brigetio is recorded there. Equally, historical circumstances relative to the creation of the Ravenna Cosmography explicitly show that many other existing settlements do not appear in this otherwise highly relevant document for the political geography of the ancient world.

36 The majority of scholars have accepted Egger's hypothesis that the missionary activity of the bishop Amantius was directed towards the mixed barbarian tribes headed by two leaders: Alatheus and Saphrac. Although the literary sources are not explicit on the precise location of their settlement within the province of Pannónia, it is generally agreed that it should have been in Pannónia Savia or Secunda.

37 However, there is no definite proof that Amantius' barbarians have been exactly those of Alatheus and Saphrac, while it is a