Chrysanthius of Sardis

Life and Historical Context

Chrysanthius of Sardis was a 4th‑century CE Neoplatonic philosopher and theurgist associated with the Iamblichean wing of late antique Platonism. Most of what is known about him derives from Eunapius of Sardis’s Lives of the Philosophers and Sophists, where Chrysanthius appears both as a local intellectual luminary and as a representative of the last great generation of pagan philosophers under the Roman Empire.

Born in Sardis, the ancient Lydian capital in Asia Minor, Chrysanthius studied in the circle of Iamblichus of Chalcis (d. c. 325 CE), either directly or through Iamblichus’ immediate successors. Under this influence he adopted a form of Neoplatonism that integrated metaphysical speculation with elaborate religious ritual and theurgy—ritual practices intended to unite the soul with the gods.

After returning to Sardis, Chrysanthius became an important civic and religious figure. He held priestly offices in the local pagan cults and was regarded as a man of exemplary piety and integrity. Unlike some contemporaries who taught in major imperial centers such as Athens or Constantinople, Chrysanthius remained rooted in his home city, where he appears to have acted as both a philosophical teacher and a guardian of traditional Hellenic religion.

His lifetime coincided with the accelerating Christianization of the Roman Empire, particularly under Constantine and his successors. Yet, according to Eunapius, Chrysanthius maintained cordial relations with Christians and avoided open confrontation. His reputation extended beyond Sardis, eventually reaching Emperor Julian (r. 361–363), the last openly pagan Roman emperor and a former student in other Neoplatonic schools.

Chrysanthius likely died toward the end of the 4th century, by which time imperial policy had already shifted decisively in favor of Christianity. Later pagan writers remembered him as one of the prudent and dignified defenders of the old religion, more notable for his balance and restraint than for speculative originality.

Philosophical Orientation and Theurgy

Chrysanthius’ philosophical orientation can be reconstructed only indirectly, primarily through Eunapius’s biographical narrative and its references to his piety and ritual expertise. He is consistently associated with the Iamblichean tradition in Neoplatonism.

Iamblichean Neoplatonism is characterized by:

• A highly stratified metaphysical hierarchy of realities, from the ineffable One, through Intellect and Soul, down to material beings.
• The view that rational contemplation alone is insufficient for complete union with the divine.
• The centrality of theurgy, understood as divinely sanctioned rituals, symbols, and invocations that allow the soul to participate in higher levels of being.

Chrysanthius is portrayed as a master of theurgic practices, capable of interpreting omens, oracles, and signs. He exemplified the belief that piety and ritual correctness are integral to philosophy itself. For him, the philosopher’s task was not merely to explain the structure of reality but to guide souls—individual and civic—into harmonious relation with the gods.

At the same time, Eunapius emphasizes Chrysanthius’s moderation. He is not depicted as a magician in a sensational sense, but as a sober priest‑philosopher who knows the limits of human knowledge and power. Rather than using theurgy to manipulate events, Chrysanthius appears to treat ritual as a way of discerning, accepting, and aligning with divine providence.

Philosophically, this stance reflects a blend of metaphysical ambition and ethical restraint:

• The soul can, in principle, ascend to the divine through ritual and virtue.
• Yet human political and historical circumstances must be read as signs of the divine will, not simply overcome by ritual power.

This perspective becomes especially evident in his dealings with Emperor Julian.

Relationship with Julian and Political Moderation

Chrysanthius is best known for his relationship with Emperor Julian, who sought to revive traditional polytheistic cults and to support Neoplatonic philosophy as a religious and cultural foundation for the empire.

According to Eunapius, Julian held Chrysanthius in high esteem and invited him to the imperial court, intending to entrust him with a leading role in the pagan restoration—possibly including high priesthood over Asia Minor. Chrysanthius, however, declined to participate fully in Julian’s ambitious program.

Two aspects stand out in the sources:

1. Deference to divine signs: Chrysanthius reportedly interpreted omens as signaling that the time was not favorable for a broad pagan revival. Rather than opposing Julian philosophically, he argued that the gods themselves indicated restraint. This appealed to a key Neoplatonic idea: historical processes are part of a larger providential order, and even theurgists must respect that order.

2. Prudence amid religious conflict: In the increasingly Christian empire, Chrysanthius appears to have favored peaceful coexistence over confrontation. His refusal to take up Julian’s offer can be read as a philosophical judgment about the dangers of forcing religious change through imperial power, especially when the broader historical tide seemed to favor Christianity.

Proponents of this interpretation view Chrysanthius as embodying a philosophical moderation that tempers religious zeal with political realism. He used his influence to preserve local pagan practices in Sardis without provoking persecution or civil strife.

Later historians and philosophers have interpreted his stance in different ways:

• Some portray him as an example of prudent adaptation, recognizing the limits of what Neoplatonism and paganism could achieve in the 4th‑century political landscape.
• Others see a tragic dimension in his caution, suggesting that a more vigorous engagement in Julian’s project might have prolonged or strengthened pagan intellectual life.
• A further line of interpretation emphasizes his loyalty to theoria (contemplation) over activism, reading his decisions as an attempt to keep philosophy above the struggles of imperial politics.

In any case, Chrysanthius became a symbolic figure in later pagan memory: a philosopher‑priest who combined deep commitment to traditional religion, allegiance to Iamblichean theurgy, and a distinctive political restraint that sought to safeguard both philosophy and civic peace in a time of profound religious transformation.