Rafal Toczko: Rome as the basis of argument in the so-called Pelagian controversy (415-418)

My paper considers the rhetoric of the so called Pelagian controversy. Its interest lies in a very specific category of arguments drawn from the place (argumenta a loco).

As we know, Pelagius was a resident of Rome for some time. The precise examination of our sources (especially Commonitoria of Marius Mercator and Augustine’s De gestis Pelagii) will be brought to question the opinio communis, which sustains that this newcomer from Britain was already in Rome in the early 380’s. It is undisputable though, that in the first decade of 5^th century Pelagius gained some respect for his ascetic authority and literary work.

During his controversy with Pelagius in the 415-418, Augustine on many occasions shows awareness of this inhabitancy and exaggerates its length and influence. He tries to convince his addressees that Pelagius is a bad heretic, and all the more so because his perversity was gaining on popularity in the saint city of Rome.  Innocent I, on his part,  provides us evidence against Pelagius popularity in Rome.

Zosimos, Innocent’s follower as a bishop of Rome, tells us that Pelagius’s faith is entirely Roman, and that people of Rome are happy to found the alleged heretic a sound Christian. He presents an argument structured quite contrary to that of Augustine:  Pelagius is not a heretic, precisely because of his popularity in the saint city of Rome.

The main outcome of my study is to weight arguments of Augustine, Innocent and Zosimos and thus to show how many rhetorical devices were used by these authors that make the task of finding the truth of a certain historical situation so immensely hard.