¹ Or. 37.3. For a translation of, and commentary upon, this text, see Cribiore, R., Between City and School: Selected Orations of Libanius (Liverpool, 2015), 42–62Google Scholar. This largely repeats Cribiore, R., ‘Defending Julian: Libanius and Or. 37’, in Lagarcherie, O. and Malosse, P.-L. (edd.), Libanios, le premier humaniste (Alessandria, 2011), 167–75Google Scholar. The doctor may be identifiable as Julian's friend and fellow-pagan Oribasius, who had accompanied him to Gaul in 355 (Julian, Ep. ad Ath. 277C) and remained at his side for most of the rest of his reign until his deathbed (Philostorgius, Hist. Eccl. 7.15).

² PLRE 1.712, s.v. Polycles.

³ Cribiore (n. 1 [2015]), 43 argues that the eunuchs rewarded in this way may have included Mardonius and Eutherius. However, the suggestion that Eutherius may have benefitted in this way rests upon a common misinterpretation of the nature of his relationship with Julian. See Woods, D., ‘Ammianus and Eutherius’, Acta Classica 41 (1998), 105–17Google Scholar, arguing that Eutherius is identifiable as the eunuch who had conspired against Julian immediately following his elevation at Paris in early 360 (Lib. Or. 18.102), and that he subsequently misrepresented his role in the events of this period to Ammianus when they met at Rome during the 380s. Pagans had traditionally made the same charge of over-generosity towards his friends against Julian's uncle Constantine I (Julian, Caes. 335B; Amm. Marc. 16.8.12;  Epit. de Caes. 41.16; Zos. HN 2.38.1).

⁴ Libanius is vague about the nature of these insinuations, but, given the use of eunuchs for sexual purposes, Polycles may have been hinting at a sexual relationship between Julian and these eunuchs. On the sexual use of eunuchs, see e.g. Kuefler, M., The Manly Eunuch: Masculinity, Gender Ambiguity, and Christian Ideology in Late Antiquity (Chicago, 2001), 99–102Google Scholar. In contrast, Julian's admirers praised his chastity (Amm. Marc. 25.4.2; Lib. Or. 18.179).

⁵ Foerster, R. (ed.), Libanii Opera III: Orationes XXVI–L (Leipzig, 1906), 240Google Scholar.

⁶ Transl. Cribiore (n. 1 [2015]), 52.

⁷ See e.g. Browning, R., The Emperor Julian (London, 1975), 111Google Scholar: ‘There were rumours that she had been poisoned, but they do not seem to have been widely believed’; Bowersock, G.W., Julian the Apostate (London, 1978), 15Google Scholar: ‘Some malicious tongues even alleged that he had engineered her death’; Murdoch, A., The Last Pagan: Julian the Apostate and the Death of the Ancient World (Stroud, 2003), 41Google Scholar: ‘there were rumours that she had been poisoned … they are unlikely to be true’.

⁸ Cribiore (n. 1 [2015]), 45 compares it to claims by e.g. Gregory of Nazianzus (Or. 4.92) and Theodoret (Hist. Eccl. 3.26–7) that Julian used to practise human sacrifice.

⁹ See PLRE 1.414, s.v. Helpidius 4. The fact that Cod. Theod. 11.24.1 (4 February 360) was addressed to him proves that Ammianus (21.6.9) is wrong to date his promotion to 361. On his replacement, see Amm. Marc. 22.3.1.

¹⁰ Libanius argues that Helpidius would not have remained silent had he really heard that Julian had murdered Helena, but would have rushed to denounce him to Constantius, the implication being that the public silence on this matter proved that Helpidius cannot have learned of this allegation at the time. However, Constantius may not have wished to publicize an allegation that could have reflected badly upon him as the instigator of this marriage (Julian, Or. 3.123D; Eutrop. Brev. 10.14; Zonar. 13.10.2). Furthermore, it might also have drawn unwanted attention to his state of childlessness. Libanius proceeds to criticize Helpidius for lying about Julian in this way, because it displayed a lack of gratitude to one whose tears had rescued him from an army angry at his unjust acts. However, if this refers to the manner in which the army had used the so-called commission of Chalcedon to avenge itself upon those senior civil administrators under Constantius (Amm. Marc. 22.3) believed to have disrespected it in some way, as seems likely, then Helpidius may have felt angry that it was Julian's establishment of this commission that had endangered his life in the first place.

¹¹ At Or. 37.6, Libanius imagines the command which Julian's accusers seem to believe that he gave to the doctor, including the phrase μισθὸς δέ σοι τὰ κοσμοῦντά μοί ποτε τὴν μητέρα ‘Your pay will be the jewels that once adorned my mother’. The sudden change from the singular τὸν κόσμον earlier to the plural τὰ κοσμοῦντά here is best treated as exaggeration for rhetorical effect. Aujoulat, N., ‘Eusébie, Hélène, et Julien, II: Le témoignage des historiens’, Byz 53 (1983), 421–52Google Scholar, at 449 translates the earlier phrase as ‘la parure de sa mère’.

¹² Cribiore (n. 1 [2015]), 45. Aujoulat (n. 11), 448–50 does little more than paraphrase Libanius’ text, and does not attempt to explore the significance of the alleged payment in this manner.

¹³ Rolfe, J.C. (ed. and transl.), Ammianus Marcellinus II (Cambridge, MA, 1940), 92–3Google Scholar.

¹⁴ Zonaras (13.11.2) also reports that some say that Helena died while giving birth to a child by Julian. He further notes that others say that Julian had cast her out before her death. Given his respectful treatment of her remains, the fact that he had them buried with those of her sister Constantina, who had been married to his own brother Gallus, this seems unlikely. Furthermore, the fact that none of the plentiful and relatively early sources for his reign mention this, despite the fact that it was the sort of public event that could not easily be concealed had it really occurred, also tells against this charge.

¹⁵ See e.g. Lancellotti, M.G., ‘Médicine et religion dans les gemmes magiques’, RHR 218 (2001), 427–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dasen, V., ‘Magic and medicine: gems and the power of seals’, in Entwistle, C. and Adams, N. (edd.), Gems of Heaven: Recent Research on Engraved Gemstones in Late Antiquity (British Museum Research Papers no. 179) (London, 2011), 50–61Google Scholar; Nagy, A.M., ‘Daktylios pharmakites. Magical healing gems and rings in the Graeco-Roman world’, in Csepregi, I. and Burnett, C. (edd.), Ritual Healing. Magic, Ritual and Medical Therapy from Antiquity until the Early Modern Period (Florence, 2012), 71–106Google Scholar; Dasen, V., ‘Healing images. Gems and medicine’, OJA 33 (2014), 177–91Google Scholar.

¹⁶ See Tomlin, R.S.O., ‘A Graeco-Roman gold amulet for healthy childbirth’, ZPE 167 (2008), 219–24Google Scholar.

¹⁷ Hanson, A.E., ‘A long-lived “quick-birther” (okytokion)’, in Dasen, V. (ed.), Naissance et petite enfance dans l'Antiquité (Göttingen, 2004), 265–80Google Scholar. This is small subgroup within the much larger group of so-called uterine amulets. See e.g. Aubert, J.-J., ‘Threatened wombs: aspects of ancient uterine medicine’, GRBS 30 (1989), 421–49Google Scholar; Hanson, A.E., ‘Uterine amulets and Greek uterine medicine’, Medicina nei secoli 7 (1995), 281–99Google ScholarPubMed.

¹⁸ Faraone, C.A., ‘Notes on some Greek magical gems in New England’, GRBS 53 (2013), 326–49Google Scholar, at 336–8.

¹⁹ Zonaras (13.10.3) reports that Basilina delivered Julian quickly and without pain following a dream that she was carrying Achilles. Julian (Mis. 352B) reports that she died only a few months after having given birth. However, the claim that Basilina delivered without pain may have been invented in order to reflect on the virtues of her son, excellent in this as in so much else. One may compare his alleged birth in this manner to that of Christ, traditionally believed to have caused no labour pain in fulfilment of Isaiah 66:7. In general, see Glancy, J.A., Corporal Knowledge: Early Christian Bodies (Oxford, 2010), 81–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²⁰ Julian confirmed the immunities enjoyed by doctors in an edict dated May 362 (Cod. Theod. 13.3.4), so the death of his wife does not seem to have embittered him against the profession.

²¹ The fact that he had still not remarried by the time of his death in June 363 proves that, for whatever reason, he had taken a deliberate decision not to do so. Libanius (Or. 18.177) emphasizes his continence both before and after his marriage.

²² Ammianus Marcellinus (16.10.19) reports that a midwife had been bribed to cut the umbilical cord too short and so kill the newborn child. He also claims that, when Eusebia, the wife of Constantius II, met Helena at Rome in spring 357, she gave a potion to Helena in order to cause her to miscarry whenever pregnant. This suggests that Helena suffered a miscarriage between 357 and her death in 360, unless it refers to the circumstances of her death even. In general, see Girotti, B., ‘Sull'aborto e la sterilità di Eusebia e Costanzo: riflessioni a partire da Ammiano, 16.10.18–19’, in Neri, V. and Girotti, B. (edd.), La famiglia tardoantica. Società, diritto, religione (Milan, 2016), 171–88Google Scholar.

²³ Jer. V. Hilar. 14.

²⁴ During the fourth century Christian authorities regularly attacked the use of traditional amulets, and extolled the heroic virtues of those who refused to use them, but the practice continued nevertheless. See e.g. Trzcionka, S., Magic and the Supernatural in Fourth-Century Syria (Abingdon, 2007), 121–41Google Scholar. In time, however, amulets were Christianized through the use of Christian symbols or legends, although some traditional pagan elements did persist. See e.g. Vikan, G., ‘Art, medicine, and magic in Early Byzantium’, DOP 38 (1984), 65–86Google Scholar, esp. 74–84; H. Björklund, Protecting Against Child-Killing Demons: Uterus Amulets in the Late Antique and Byzantine Magical World (Diss., Helsinki, 2017).

²⁵ In general, see Elm, S., Sons of Hellenism, Fathers of the Church: Emperor Julian, Gregory of Nazianzus, and the Vision of Rome (Berkeley, 2012), 336–77Google Scholar.