Charles Freeman notes that the sarcophagus of the Roman aristocrat Junius Bassus depicts Jesus “entering Jerusalem as if he was an emperor entering a city, and above this image he is shown sitting in glory on an imperial throne set above a representation of heaven.” He cites Sabine MacCormack’s comment that “Once an image of majesty had been applied to Christ it was impossible to apply it again to the emperor,” and claims that this is an illustration of “the process by which Christ becomes integrated into the iconography of imperial government.”

Well, maybe. Given the misreadings I’ve found elsewhere in Freeman, I’m suspicious. I don’t have MacCormack’s book, but the quotation Freeman provides can be read in nearly the opposite way he suggests. Instead of being an example of coopting Jesus, it could be an illustration of the emperor’s submission to Jesus. Jesus, in short, is the new conqueror, the King above the Roman king. Perhaps the emperor won’t depict himself like Jesus anymore because he’s acknowledging that only Jesus fulfills the imperial role.