Time in Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History

Q1 Arts and Humanities Studies in Late Antiquity Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.1525/sla.2021.5.4.580
David J. DeVore
{"title":"Time in Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History","authors":"David J. DeVore","doi":"10.1525/sla.2021.5.4.580","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History, a seminal late-antique historical narrative, features three periodizations of the church’s past. First, a soteriological periodization divides God’s relationship with humanity at Christ’s Incarnation, an event that Eusebius marks in Book 1 with detailed commentary on the gospels rather than narrative. Second, an ecclesiastical periodization divides pristine, heroic apostolic times from post-apostolic times. The divide between apostolic times and the post-apostolic periods is illustrated through a comparison of History 2.13–17, about Simon Magus, Peter, and Mark, and 6.12, on Serapion of Antioch. And third, an epistemological periodization distinguished earlier times from Eusebius’s lifetime, the latter marked by frequent references to “our time.” Eusebius changed numerous narrative features with his changes of period, including alternating between commentary, diachronic, and synchronic format for different time periods; changing protagonists’ fallibility, individuality, composition of texts, and citation of scripture; and providing notices of episcopal successions and quotation of sources. Moreover, Eusebius’s History changed periods not with the sharp breaks of many modern histories but with gradual transitions. He also underscored key continuities, including God’s intervention in human events and alternation between persecuting and protecting rulers—a continuity within which, contrary to scholarly assumptions, the History never inaugurates a new era with the emergence of Constantine. The case study of Eusebius’s periodization suggests an important limitation of the analytic usefulness of periodizations such as “Late Antiquity” for organizing intellectual history.","PeriodicalId":36675,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Late Antiquity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Late Antiquity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/sla.2021.5.4.580","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History, a seminal late-antique historical narrative, features three periodizations of the church’s past. First, a soteriological periodization divides God’s relationship with humanity at Christ’s Incarnation, an event that Eusebius marks in Book 1 with detailed commentary on the gospels rather than narrative. Second, an ecclesiastical periodization divides pristine, heroic apostolic times from post-apostolic times. The divide between apostolic times and the post-apostolic periods is illustrated through a comparison of History 2.13–17, about Simon Magus, Peter, and Mark, and 6.12, on Serapion of Antioch. And third, an epistemological periodization distinguished earlier times from Eusebius’s lifetime, the latter marked by frequent references to “our time.” Eusebius changed numerous narrative features with his changes of period, including alternating between commentary, diachronic, and synchronic format for different time periods; changing protagonists’ fallibility, individuality, composition of texts, and citation of scripture; and providing notices of episcopal successions and quotation of sources. Moreover, Eusebius’s History changed periods not with the sharp breaks of many modern histories but with gradual transitions. He also underscored key continuities, including God’s intervention in human events and alternation between persecuting and protecting rulers—a continuity within which, contrary to scholarly assumptions, the History never inaugurates a new era with the emergence of Constantine. The case study of Eusebius’s periodization suggests an important limitation of the analytic usefulness of periodizations such as “Late Antiquity” for organizing intellectual history.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
优西比乌斯教会史中的时间
优西比乌斯的《教会史》是一部影响深远的晚期历史叙事,以教会过去的三个分期为特色。首先,救赎论的分期划分了上帝与人类在基督道成肉身时的关系,优西比乌斯在第一卷中对这一事件进行了详细的注释,而不是叙述。第二,教会的分期区分了原始的、英雄的使徒时代和后使徒时代。使徒时代和后使徒时期之间的区别是通过历史2.13-17的比较来说明的,关于西门,彼得和马可,和6.12,关于安提阿的塞拉比翁。第三,认识论的分期化将早期时代与优西比乌斯的一生区分开来,后者以频繁提及“我们的时代”为标志优西比乌斯随着时间的变化改变了许多叙事特征,包括在不同的时间段内交替使用注释、历时和共时格式;改变主角的易错性、个性、文本组成和经文引用;并提供通知的主教继承和引用的来源。此外,优西比乌斯的《历史》并没有像许多现代历史那样出现急剧的中断,而是逐渐过渡。他还强调了关键的连续性,包括上帝对人类事件的干预,以及迫害和保护统治者之间的交替——在这种连续性中,与学术假设相反,《历史》从未开启君士坦丁出现的新时代。尤西比乌斯的分期的个案研究表明,分期分析的有用性,如“古代晚期”组织思想史的一个重要的局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Studies in Late Antiquity
Studies in Late Antiquity Arts and Humanities-Classics
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊最新文献
Review: The Mediterranean Diaspora in Late Antiquity: What Christianity Cost the Jews, by Ross Shepard Kraemer “No one who has been joined to a spouse will see the Kingdom of Heaven” Who Wrote Ritual Formularies from Egypt? A Study of P.Lond. I 121 (= PGM VII) and Its Possible Relationship with Scholarly Patronage in Late Antiquity National Borders and the Contours of Historical Knowledge Constantine and Eusebius in Antioch
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1